Meat for Millar (revised and/or explained)

If you want to convinced mee you're going to have to show me some peer modderated academic papers by reputable academics and show me some that make the counter claim.

(Did you not catch Dan's comments on the original thread? Honestly, I was having a hard time containing myself, too!)

Ed, if you have not seen any facts, you won't see any facts with 2 viewpoints of the same problem (impartial science vs. paid for by meat industry). Diet For A New America has the ins and outs of these cases as well as a long list of footnotes and references.

enough is enough

and as for being a fascist, fuX0r you.

So cut down on the chargrilling eat meat as rare as possible and no cheap salami, then.

See, now here it's a news item in a scientific journal... so, I'm confused as to what to do. I've posted it, anyway.

Call me all the names you like, but you're the one who's being a rude cunt here.

You're not listening and you're assuming we're a bunch of uneducated morons. You go so far as to start yet ANOTHER thread about the exact same stuff because "no one understands your point" despite all evidence to the contrary. And you manage to start a thread about veganism that puts off most of the vegetarians and vegans on the board (including myself). And therefore we make fun of you. You have made yourself into a caricature and it has become sport to see how many ways we can poke you into being that caricature. It's a cruel sport, maybe, but it's also one that most of us have found ourselves at the receiving end at one point or another; it's important to realize when it's happening and what it means, but that's probably a completely different thread. (Hmm...)

You're being an asshole, so go away now, asshole.

Obviously, you still don't. The point was not to preach veganism, but back up my claims, which I've done and am doing still. Either post something relavant or keep on acting like a child.

So, why is it that I'm hearing that this is all obvious, old news and yet there is also the prevailing attitude that this is not true? It's obvious, everyone here knows it, but then again, apparantly, most of you here don't believe it.

SC, actual life expectancy is much of a muchness across the industrialised world. You say America comes way down the list, but the difference is only a year or two (for men at least, American women are way up at the top) so a) why worry, and b) why make over-dramatic assumptions about discrepancies which are likely the result of a million&one different factors (I notice that German men come nearer the top, and they aren't exactly renowned for their fat-free diet).

Also, now that I reread it:

I can't remember the last time I heard a radio
spot for vegetables

Those avocado billboards are everywhere, around here; I don't know if they have radio spots or not. I feel certain that there's another vegetable or fruit ad campaign that I'm not remembering right now...

Yes eating meat exposes you to toxins that you would not otherwise expose yourself too if you didn't but you have failed to provide any evidence that the increased risks from these toxins exist let alone are significant (estrogens aside). You ahve made no mention of the fact that one would be exposed to a lot of these toxins in a similar way if you failed to wash your vegetables properly.

All in all you have failed to provide a convincing well reasoned argument. It's very hard to respond properly when you are throwing unverified facts and figures about many of which hindewr rather than help your argument.

I put forward my thoughts on the other thread, where this conversation should be carried out, instead you decide to start a fresh thread and basically start again, jeez.

I won't be posting on any of these threads again that's for sure, especially when people such as yourselves with your thoughts on rails will just keep spurting out facts that you've read parrot fashion all the way through. Hope you're happy.

I've provided 2, one of which is a culmination of various reports and studies (but that book is not available as an HTML document). I could provide more given more time, yet look what happens! I get called an asshole for providing any! The fact that cholesterol is linked to so many diseases alone is proof that meat eating is less healthy, so extensive meat-eating is much less healthy.

Yes eating meat exposes you to toxins that you would not otherwise expose yourself too if you didn't but you have failed to provide any evidence that the increased risks from these toxins exist let alone are significant (estrogens aside). You ahve made no mention of the fact that one would be exposed to a lot of these toxins in a similar way if you failed to wash your vegetables properly.

Ah, so I've failed to prove that toxins which last for decades and, in some cases, hundreds of years, accumulate and are therefore more concentrated in top-feeders? I've also failed to provide an HTML resource that proves these toxins are stored in fatty tissues, I guess. And I suppose I've failed to provide proof that organic vegetables are likely toxin-free, while organic meat is fed with sprayed grains and toxic fish. Well, give me some time and I'll have it for you, then.

All in all you have failed to provide a convincing well reasoned argument. It's very hard to respond properly when you are throwing unverified facts and figures about many of which hindewr rather than help your argument.

I will find sources for these issues for you then, as you seem to be interested. If you already know these things to be true, and this is a Jedi lesson in proper argumentation procedures, that's pretty dorky, but I'll take the bait.

If organic meat is fed with dprayed grains then it is not organic. I've never seen any evidence to suggest that this is the case.

that meat eating is less healthy, so extensive meat-eating is much less healthy.

cholesterol causes diseases yes but this is an argument for moderation not for abstinence, and an increase in omega-3 oils (which help to break down cholesterol) from walnuts oily fish, etc.

would you have a convincing argument with HTML documents lined up? Could you pull it out of your ass in 2 weekdays? Would you even realize you would be expected to at the start of it? I sure didn't think I would be hearing simultaneously,

I assumed that since you were so keen on this subject you would have a few references to back up your claims.

Keep in mind, if you were trying to prove, let's say, the opposite: that top-feeders were just as riddled with pesticides as your average salad, and that cholesterol was not linked to so many diseases

Again it does not follow that just because these toxins are present in meat we should stop eating meat, we shoul stop using the toxins to produce artifically cheap meat (and for that matter vegetables).

Cholesterol only becomes a major problem if you live a sendantry lifestyle. Exercise is much more important than diet in staying healthy. Moderation in everything.

* - "I am right, you are wrong" (it's a fact!)

Meanwhile, my opening argument was, "Do you
have any idea how meat & dairy is produced? It is the root cause of most of western society's vast array of new sickness epidemics since WWII." That would be referring to nonorganic meat, obviously, for one thing. For another, in order to deal with the unnecessary cholesterol in your system, you need to limit the amount of meat you eat and exercise. Meanwhile, you can eat all the raw fruits and veggies you want all day long, with great big helpings of nuts and beans and you're never going to have dangerous levels of cholesterol. And you would have to eat A LOT to get fat on a diet like this. While you eat like this, you're also filling your body with fuel that actually makes you much less sedentary than a helping of meat, not to mention all the water, vitamins, minerals, antioxidants and fiber you're getting.

Cultures can go entirely without meat, but you can't go entirely without fruits and vegetables for too long before you develop some serious deficiencies.

But, anyway, I'm in the process of searching for a few things for both you and Oops about different cultures and large groups of people who were on and off meat for different reasons and the correllation to numerous diseases and death rates... These events are actually what got people looking into vegetarianism... So, let me get back to that search.

Even if this is true, it's impossible to prove--no matter how many tables you paste for us.

This is crazy talk. You might as well say that the root cause of western society's vast array of new sickness epidemics since WWII is proseperity, progress, health care, or the fact that people are living longer. Just because two things correlate does not mean that they are dependant.

this is just the kind of wild claim that you need to provide strong evidence for.

Er..

When I get a chance, I'll post some more stuff (stuff I've been looking for online for only a half-hour or so before I had to sleep, wake up and work).