Why can't PETA and all these militant groups just be normal for a change?

[DuchessOfDork]

Originally Posted by jaimek

I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with the food the Europeans brought over, but the quick-easy-cheap stuff is jammed with so much *crap* to cut costs.

Well as an example of something that doesn't work out too well, when some Natives were put on reservations they lost access to their food sources. The Europeans (American settlers) gave them sugar, salt, and wheat flour because that's what they were used to eating. What did the Natives make out of it? Fry bread! What happened? Diabetes!

Not the Europeans fault, everything in moderation of course. But it's been proven that the Native American's diet before European occupation was very healthy (for them) and drastically changing it is responsible for the huge amount of Natives with diabetes. Of course, a lot of this is due to fillers, as you mentioned, but what do we use for fillers most of the time? Bread bread bread.

So yeah, no bread or sugar for me. Suddenly I drop 60lbs and feel great. I ain't complainin'.

[TheLongshot]

Originally Posted by dcowboys311

However, you're delusional if you think that the fast-food/couch potato culture permeating America isn't largely responsible for the major increase in obesity these days.

Not my point. My point is that a vegetarian diet doesn't automatically make one skinny.

Also, not all diets are equal for all people, as people have said above. Personally, I'd probably be worse off if I went veg, since there aren't that many vegetables that I like. I'd probably eat a lot more cheese as well.

[dcowboys311]

Originally Posted by TheLongshot

Not my point. My point is that a vegetarian diet doesn't automatically make one skinny.

Also, not all diets are equal for all people, as people have said above. Personally, I'd probably be worse off if I went veg, since there aren't that many vegetables that I like. I'd probably eat a lot more cheese as well.

Oh. Gotcha. Misunderstanding then -- I wasn't advocating a vegetarian/vegan diet at all. I eat lbs of meat a day lmao.

[AeonicSlumber]

Originally Posted by TheLongshot

Course, you are assuming that people like that continue to have a poor diet and refuse to exercise. My wife has been a vegetarian since high school and tries to get exercise when she can while being a full time mom. But, she's always has been heavy, and probably always will be. She works at it, but it isn't easy to take off weight and keep it off.

BTW, combine the ad above with all the "naked" ads they do, and they'd give any normal woman a complex.



Part of the reason why my wife is the size that she is is because she had some serious depression issues when she was a kid.

Even more to the point - I know vegetarians that weigh over 250 pounds in fat. The most fattening components in our diets most certainly are not meat. In fact, meat is much less fattening (if it's not pork or duck and you buy it lean) than most things that vegetarians eat, like grains and dairy. Again, PETA doesn't care what kind of message they put out, no matter how stupid it is.

[AeonicSlumber]

Originally Posted by jaimek

As far as I'm concerned, veganism (and PeTA) is first-world silliness borne of anthropomorphizing critters. We didn't evolve not to partake in any animal products; that's not how the food chain works. We certainly need to be a lot more *responsible* about how we treat animals, but herbivores are there to be consumed. If they are not consumed (or otherwise removed), the population gets out of control, and then they die of starvation and/or disease. I am totally okay with hunting for the purpose of putting food on the table, and if the hide and bones are put to use, so much the better. Responsibility is key, and not being wasteful.

OH MY GOD WHAT IS THE MIND READING DEVICE THAT YOU ARE IN POSSESSION OF, AND WHERE CAN I GET ONE???

[TheLongshot]

Originally Posted by AeonicSlumber

Even more to the point - I know vegetarians that weigh over 250 pounds in fat. The most fattening components in our diets most certainly are not meat. In fact, meat is much less fattening (if it's not pork or duck and you buy it lean) than most things that vegetarians eat, like grains and dairy. Again, PETA doesn't care what kind of message they put out, no matter how stupid it is.

My wife went veg primarily because her Cholesterol dropped 200 points when she switched.

[Cheiron]

Freakchylde and Jamie both put forth the 'we were meant to eat meat' argument. There's seemingly as much evidence in support of it as against it. Certainly, the evidence does suggest that in early man-times we ate very little meat, if any. Our meat intake might have been through scavenging, or running animals to exhaustion. However, our caloric intake was primarily through gathering, and we can currently live healthily while being on exclusive harvested diets. So why kill animals if we don't need to?

Jamie's argument is that 'if we don't eat the animals they'll overpopulate and all kinds of issues.' If true, that means we should be eating people as well. There is no moral argument in favor of killing another animal to eat, other than that without doing so you would starve to death.

The overpopulation of animals in areas is primarily due to man's deforestation of land, as well as man's elimination of natural predators. The solution is not to replace the wolf with man.

[OrbWeaver]

Originally Posted by AeonicSlumber

Even more to the point - I know vegetarians that weigh over 250 pounds in fat. The most fattening components in our diets most certainly are not meat.

True. I love Morningstar's buffalo wings, but I also know that they are NOT healthy. There is a LOT of salt in those suckers. I've known overweight vegetarians. If your diet consists of McDonald's French fries, popcorn, candy, and bread, you aren't likely to be healthy, or within a healthy weight range.

I advocate eating a HEALTHY diet - heavy on fruits and veggies, whole grains, and reasonable portions of meat protein and dairy. In this day and age we tend to eat way more meat than we actually need. Especially in America. I LOVE meat, but I've definitely been trying to watch just how much I eat, and made a conscious effort to eat more fruits and vegetables.

[AeonicSlumber]

Originally Posted by Cheiron

Freakchylde and Jamie both put forth the 'we were meant to eat meat' argument. There's seemingly as much evidence in support of it as against it. Certainly, the evidence does suggest that in early man-times we ate very little meat, if any. Our meat intake might have been through scavenging, or running animals to exhaustion. However, our caloric intake was primarily through gathering, and we can currently live healthily while being on exclusive harvested diets. So why kill animals if we don't need to?

I agree with you that we probably came from an omnivorous pre-evolutionary ancestor that did not exclusively eat meat and we are not pure meat eaters biologically (which is why our stomachs have trouble digesting certain meats and dairy products) - but we have eyes in front of our face and canine incisors to be able to eat meat, not to mention the fact that we CAN digest it at all. It all adds up to the facts that we are in SOME capacity designed to eat meat. After all, hunter-gatherers were called ****HUNTER****-gatherers for a reason.

Jamie's argument is that 'if we don't eat the animals they'll overpopulate and all kinds of issues.' If true, that means we should be eating people as well. There is no moral argument in favor of killing another animal to eat, other than that without doing so you would starve to death.

We don't eat people because we have a society that demands that of us. However, there most certainly were people that ate people in cannibalistic tribes. In fact, our meat is called "long-pork" for a reason by many cannibalistic tribes. We're supposedly delicious!

I agree that there is no moral argument in favor of killing another animal to eat other than starvation - but the problem is that morals are subjective. You can't claim to never have killed an animal, nor can you claim even now to not killing animals in some capacity. You're not omnipotent or omnipresent, which is what your argument requires in order to be successful.

[freakchylde]

Originally Posted by Cheiron

Freakchylde and Jamie both put forth the 'we were meant to eat meat' argument. There's seemingly as much evidence in support of it as against it. Certainly, the evidence does suggest that in early man-times we ate very little meat, if any. Our meat intake might have been through scavenging, or running animals to exhaustion. However, our caloric intake was primarily through gathering, and we can currently live healthily while being on exclusive harvested diets. So why kill animals if we don't need to?

Jamie's argument is that 'if we don't eat the animals they'll overpopulate and all kinds of issues.' If true, that means we should be eating people as well. There is no moral argument in favor of killing another animal to eat, other than that without doing so you would starve to death.

The overpopulation of animals in areas is primarily due to man's deforestation of land, as well as man's elimination of natural predators. The solution is not to replace the wolf with man.

Dude, meat has never been a primary source of food for humans. Americans are the ones that screwed that one up with our "meat as the centerpiece" meal planning. In other countries, if you see that set-up, it's for a special occasion. As AS said, hunter was a part of that gatherer set-up. You ate more meat in the winter, when it was easier to acquire and more veggies+ in the summer, when it was easier to acquire. Can't speak for the neanderthals and pre-history folks, but the myths and legends tell of great feasts....with meat.

As for killing humans, not sure I'd want to eat some of them, as much as I would like to see some folks cease.

At this point, yes, we are the factor that has created the problem, over the long-term. One solution is management, which is the whole point of hunting seasons. Native American populations figured that out, when the buffalo ran out. Ceasing to eat them is not going to solve the problem, so much as it's going to throw out another eco-system as a result of overpopulation.

[jaimek]

Originally Posted by Cheiron

However, our caloric intake was primarily through gathering, and we can currently live healthily while being on exclusive harvested diets. So why kill animals if we don't need to?

There are nutrients in animal products that cannot be substituted, or not substituted *adequately*. If it works for you, great, but don't delude yourself that this is how all of humanity should operate, because it's still privileged first-world temperate-climate silliness. Imagine trying to tell the Inuit/Eskimos they don't need to rely on animals or animal products to survive in a frozen tundra with a minimal or nonexistent growing season.

Jaime's argument is that 'if we don't eat the animals they'll overpopulate and all kinds of issues.'

This doesn't apply just to humans eating animals, this applies to carnivores/omnivores overall. You ever see a wolf decide to forsake a nice dinner of rabbit, or a lion give up antelope?

And, as AS pointed out, teeth and eyes are evolutionary proof that humanity was meant to eat meat. If we weren't, we'd look more like horses - all big flat molars.

[Cheiron]

Originally Posted by jaimek

There are nutrients in animal products that cannot be substituted, or not substituted *adequately*. If it works for you, great, but don't delude yourself that this is how all of humanity should operate, because it's still privileged first-world temperate-climate silliness. Imagine trying to tell the Inuit/Eskimos they don't need to rely on animals or animal products to survive in a frozen tundra with a minimal or nonexistent growing season.



This doesn't apply just to humans eating animals, this applies to carnivores/omnivores overall. You ever see a wolf decide to forsake a nice dinner of rabbit, or a lion give up antelope?

And, as AS pointed out, teeth and eyes are evolutionary proof that humanity was meant to eat meat. If we weren't, we'd look more like horses - all big flat molars.

I'm assuming dietarily you are talking about vitamin B12?

Are you an Eskimo?

Are you a wolf or a lion?

Apes have canines too. They very rarely eat meat. Chimps eat meat. As for eye position, again, think about Apes. There's evolutionary reasons beyond 'predator versus prey'.

[AeonicSlumber]

Originally Posted by Cheiron

Apes have canines too. They very rarely eat meat. Chimps eat meat. As for eye position, again, think about Apes. There's evolutionary reasons beyond 'predator versus prey'.

Apes also cannibalize eachother... Non-aggressive apes such as Gorillas and Bonobos eat insects which is something most vegans are also against as well.

[DuchessOfDork]

Originally Posted by Cheiron

Are you an Eskimo?

I dunno about that guy, but I'm 1/2 Pipil native from Central America. I'm gonna say this as the 1/2 Native part of me, because I've learned through trial and error that eating like a Pipil works better for me.

Traditionally, my ancestors ate off of the land. Corn, beans, fish, and lots of land animals like turkeys, wild pigs, and large forest dwelling rodents. We also eat iguanas, snakes, and other reptiles. My dad always told me he'd eat my pet iguana as a joke, and I half believed him because I saw this dude clean a deer he hit with his truck using a machete in our back yard. We'd been eating this way and being really healthy for a long time before the Europeans came and screwed it up for us (and being half European myself, I'm not mad at them), and after attempting both a vegan and vegetarian diet I've discovered that eating closer to the way my dad's ancestors ate keeps me healthy and makes me lose excess fat faster than anything else.

So yeah, I'm not on board with vegetarianism or veganism as the be-all end-all answer to healthiness for everyone. I get very sick when I go vegetarian, and I gain weight. Quite frankly, as a Native, I'm kind of sick of other people telling me/us that our way of living is wrong. We've been getting that since the Europeans first got here (like my mom.. >_>), and now, despite all of the evidence otherwise, we're STILL being told we shouldn't eat how we traditionally ate because apparently vegetarians and vegans know better. Thanks, but no thanks. I appreciate the concern, but there's a reason why Native Americans have a huge diabetes problem and it's not because they're eating meat.

Also, this is a really cool article for anyone who's interested in reading.

Guts and Grease: The Diet of Native Americans By Sally Fallon and Mary G. Enig, PhD

[jaimek]

Originally Posted by Cheiron

Are you an Eskimo?

Are you a wolf or a lion?

I'm simply making the point that humans are the only species that decides "oh hey, I'm going to go against evolution because herbivores are cute and we shouldn't cut their throats and roast them over fire and eat them anymore!" You only get to make that change over many generations due to overwhelming environmental pressures, if you'll recall from seventh grade science. And as Lara and AS have pointed out, meat is not the primary focus, but you *did* evolve to consume it as part of a balanced diet.

(separate argument from "I don't want to consume meat that's stuffed with unnatural preservatives and whatnot.")

[AeonicSlumber]

I just want to say overall how much of a great thread this turned out to be, and Cherion I hope you aren't put off at all by any of this, your opinions are great here! Hope this discussion can continue further! <333

[Cheiron]

I'll post more later this. Been busy with some projects, and these conversations wear me out a bit (though I enjoy listening and considering other people's point of view).

[spag]

Originally Posted by TheLongshot

My wife went veg primarily because her Cholesterol dropped 200 points when she switched.

That isn't really surprising given what is sold as meat in the US. The crap they feed most animals in mass lots would kill them if they didn't make it to slaughter when they do. Tons of fat in it. Grass feed beef for example, has something like a tenth of the fat in it, but costs $$$. Worth it though.

I'm all for paying more for meat if I know the animals are treated better, fed better, etc. That said, I'd prefer to see PETA-morons die in a fire somewhere. I still remember some of their shock ads over the years, campaigns to have all the cockroaches in a building "live trapped" rather than exterminated, etc.

I'm sure there is someone in the PETA org that is laughing all the way to the bank.

[Purveyor Of Evil]

I'm all for animals not being abused. Always. But, save the whales, don't eat meat, don't wear fur. But...allow the slaughter of millions of unborn babies every year by abortion. Hypocritical off the charts.

[AeonicSlumber]

Okay this topic is SPECIFICALLY about animal welfare (read: non-human welfare) ethics. As much as I like Purveyor of Evil, I please ask everyone to ignore his post and not derail this thread. It's not that I don't value the importance of the topic he brought up, it's that we should stay on topic... Purveyor, please start a separate thread on the subject if you wish.

[Magius]

Well, since PETA kills over 95% of animals in it's care, I'd call them kooks and hypocrites.

[AeonicSlumber]

Originally Posted by Magius

Well, since PETA kills over 95% of animals in it's care, I'd call them kooks and hypocrites.

For sure. That being said though (devil's advocate here), aren't they against pets so technically it suits with their philosophy since domesticated animals can't survive in the wild?

[Purveyor Of Evil]

Originally Posted by AeonicSlumber

Okay this topic is SPECIFICALLY about animal welfare (read: non-human welfare) ethics. As much as I like Purveyor of Evil, I please ask everyone to ignore his post and not derail this thread. It's not that I don't value the importance of the topic he brought up, it's that we should stay on topic... Purveyor, please start a separate thread on the subject if you wish.

Sorry, dude, I wasn't trying to derail it. I'm serious. I was just a bit miffed at what I see as hypocrisy. That's all, man. And thank you for your kind words.

[Magius]

Originally Posted by AeonicSlumber

For sure. That being said though (devil's advocate here), aren't they against pets so technically it suits with their philosophy since domesticated animals can't survive in the wild?

We're does slaughter fit into the philosophy of Ethical Treatment?
By that standard they should have no problem with the slaughter of livestock, since those animals can't survive in the wild either.

PETA, like so many other organizations, exists to make it's founders and upper echelon officers rich.
They appeal to the emotions of sheeple who donate their time, money, and freedom to funnel cash into the big wigs' bank accounts.

Having people run around naked in public raises "awareness," which increases membership and cash flow. You won't find any of the top management of PETA being arrested for public nudity, though.

[AeonicSlumber]

Yeah I guess at the end of the day, those actions cannot be justified at all... and I totally agree with your economic assessment of that organization.