new research shows sea levels could rise 60 feet

[KovalainenFanBoy]

There's no arguing over at most recent burger thread

[LimpyLoo]

I'm not going ot argue about it. I've done my research.

 

When I'm 135 and you're dead I won't be upset that I ate animals.

If some super-intelligent alien species came to earth and wanted to start eating humans, would you have any moral objections to that?

 

Either the pain, suffering and death of sentient beings is of moral concern to you, or it's not. (Some people try to draw the 'moral significance' line right below humans, but hopefully we can all see how suspiciously convenient that is...)

 

P.S. What sorts of research have you done? Because there's TONS of different aspects, from animal psychology to diet to economics to (human) cognitive dissonance to sociology to game theory to moral philosophy...

[BCM]

There's no arguing over at most recent burger thread

FACT

[Adieu]

 

Lol I'm reading some research on Indian vegetarian diets and they consume milk, cheese, and eggs. You can't even maintain a moral high ground if you are consuming dairy products. Honestly, you are as culpable for the death of that animal as someone who chooses to eat their meat.

you make very profound and elaborate research.

 

And logically, someone who dont eat meat but do consume dairy product is "better" then someone who consume both.

 

nobody mention about anyone being culpable. but since you bring it up, do you feel culpable eating meat? I personally sure did and why I stopped eating meat.

 

 

You realize that dairy livestock is forcibly inseminated for their entire lifespan and often killed after a few seasons, because they are unable to meet production demands, right?

 

Dairy helps you meet some of the nutrient requirements that would otherwise be missing on a vegetarian diet. It has vitamin K2 and Vitamin A. Chicken eggs are totally cool imo though. One of natures gifts to us. A guilt-free and amazing food source.

 

The entire argument is culpability. Are you responsible for death or not? The truth is, if you are eating food you are responsible for death.

 

I don't like purchasing meat. I hope one day that I no longer am required to. I want to kill what I eat. I've been begging people to take me hunting. I'm buying a bow in the near future to practice on when I move next month. In the meantime, I will buy 100% grassfed & 100% free-range and continue to be selective about the supplier I use.

 

Like I said before, livestock is part of the ecosystem within which we operate.

 

 

I'm not going ot argue about it. I've done my research.

 

When I'm 135 and you're dead I won't be upset that I ate animals.

If some super-intelligent alien species came to earth and wanted to start eating humans, would you have any moral objections to that?

 

Either the pain, suffering and death of sentient beings is of moral concern to you, or it's not. (Some people try to draw the 'moral significance' line right below humans, but hopefully we can all see how suspiciously convenient that is...)

 

P.S. What sorts of research have you done? Because there's TONS of different aspects, from animal psychology to diet to economics to (human) cognitive dissonance to sociology to game theory to moral philosophy...

 

 

Well, I'm of the mind that it's immoral to suggest that we should put ourselves at a deficit from a health standpoint in order to maintain some shaky moral philosophy concerning our food. What I mean is, to suggest that living less than optimally as a human being in order to protect the lives of animals that I believe are our food, and I believe this, because they provide us with NECESSARY nutrients for our health, and they also function in our ecosystem symbiotically with us as the consumers of them. If we weren't supposed to eat animal products then they wouldn't offer us things our body requires that we can't get other places.

 

As far as your hypothetical question, no, we should kill them and protect our species. I don't think morality comes into play really. We have a predator now, if we want to live we overcome it; otherwise we die. That's not a moral question to me.

 

I don't think death = pain and suffering. I think if done properly there is a beautiful and natural element to taking the life of the organism you are consuming. I look at this universe, and I don't see some great overarching morality. I see humans as having manifested a moral system and that's great. I don't disagree with it, but the universe as a whole is very uncaring. It's life and death. It's stars exploding and galaxies imploding. It's black holes crushing everything around it into nothingness. So, the idea that I shouldn't operate within what I believe are the rules the universe has laid out for me seems counter-intuitive and unnatural. Death is as beautiful as life I think. I think you can take a life in a very caring and moral way. But requiring that another take a life for me, that I have no connection to that sacrifice, it feels immoral to me. I don't like it, or approve of it.

 

That being said, I'm 100% down for people creating appropriate substitutes for the animal products we require. I'm on-board with that concept, but I don't think as of right now we have other options available.

 

My research is mostly concerning my physical health and longevity. If I saw data that suggested vegetarianism was better for me in that regard, and also functioned well for me as I applied it to myself, then I would have already adopted it. For instance, the Okinawa Diet, which is the diet of the longest average lifespan culture of any humans on the planet contains animal products.

 

Even the Indian vegetarian diet that Ayya suggested contains dairy products. Also, buddhist monks often eat meat as well btw.

 

I'd love to not feel that this diet was superior to vegetarianism, but unfortunately it does very much seem to be.

 

This goes as deep as analyzing the energy pathways that are used when you consume glucose vs fat. Fat is more efficient, it degrades your body less, and it cures a lot of illness when properly applied. It should also require less total calories which improves longevity. There is a lot more to it, but obviously I'm not going to go into citing research and discussing everything I've been learning over the last 3+ years. I made a thread about this when I first started btw. A lot of people were very skeptical of it, but I think the results speak for themselves.

[maitake]

 

 

yeah, you can survivve just well a vegetarian diet if you take B12 supplement which is often added into soy milk.

 

hundred of milllions of Indian do it.

 

 

 

 

 

I'll be sure to tell shame my cat for being immoral as soon as I get home.

 

the cruelty/awful conditions of factory farming are the problem, not the basic concept of carnivorousness. the natural world does not have these "morals". the only reason I would stop eating meat would be to stand against farming practices, not because I think eating meat is fundamentally wrong.

Yeah, industrial farming is terrible.

 

I wont take the <<natural world>> as a example for the basis of my morality. I think that choosing to feed yourself without hurting other living beings is worthwhile and for the better

 

I dont see how killing can be morally justifiable since its not needed in order to survive: we can survive well without meat. And the truth is, people eat meat cause meat taste good, not to survive. if meat tasted terrible, people would seek other way to feed themselves.

 

the natural world like lions dont get to choose and ponder on the impact of their actions, they either die of hunger or kill to survive. its incomparable.

 

 

I would love to just kill the animals I eat with my own hands. It's a long term goal. The immoral thing is counting on other people to treat the animal with the respect and dignity it deserves before you consume it. There is too little care for this part of the process. I want to take the life, clean the animal and process it, and I want to suffer through any moments of discomfort I might experience. Then I want to cook the animals in the most delicious way I can imagine, because that's the moral thing to do.

 

All life results in death for other creatures.

 

Veganism or vegetarianism does not exclude you from this fact as it pertains to food. Pesticides are used in all farming even organic. It results in loss of life. Farms result in loss of habitat which also results in loss of life. Animals are directly killed during the process of farming fruits and vegetables. It all results in death. The lengthy process that is required for you to get food from a farm to your plate results in loss of life. Furthermore, plants are alive. They are aware that you want to eat them. They do not want to die, and their reactions to danger and death are measurable. They also have anti-nutrients and toxins in them to deter being eaten. Most are too weak to hurt you, but the poisons in fruits and vegetables causes a hormetic healing effect in your body due to the biological response mechanisms.

 

The real truth is that you cannot get all the nutrients your body requires from just plants. You can get a lot of them. You can certainly be healthier than a lot of people, but you cannot get everything your body needs. Also, many of the plant based nutrients that people suggest can be converted into the appropriate nutrients your body needs are very poorly converted, and results in nutrient deficiencies due the inefficient process. This is exacerbated by gene polymorphisms that alter the mechanisms by which people absorb nutrients. Modern plants are also greatly reduced in the nutrients that they provide, because a lot of it is very sensitive and unstable and is actually missing from the plants by the time you are consuming them.

 

The science is all there and it's very clear.

 

You, me, livestock, plants, the earth. It's all works symbiotically. Good luck feeding the entire world on veggies that contain zero nutrients, because they were grown on infertile soil due to zero livestock.

 

Who said vegetarian means only eating vegetable? I feed myself with lentils, quinoa, rice, veggies, fruits, nuts, hemp seeds, soya and all sort of natural protein.

I understand and agree about some of your points. we do kill tons of animals, insects while cultivating veggies, lentils, rice ect. Sad fact.

 

comparing killling a plant vs killing a animal is not comparable physiologically. The nerves systems in plants cannot be compared to animals in response to pain. Sure a plant have a response and possibly feel some kind of pain, nothing like a pig or cow screaming in response to being cut piece by piece.

 

You can survive without eatiing meat. millions of indians have been doing that for centuries for example.

 

Sure, death is part of life amd trying to protect and preserve life and reduce suffering as much as possible is also part of life.

 

people ( I mean us relatively rich people who get to choose what we eat) eat meat cause it taste good. if it tasted like shit, people would not eat meat or much less. Eating meat is not for survival, its for greed and sensuous reasons.

 

I actually prefer dying a bit younger due to having lack nutrients if that have been able to reduce suffering of many animals as a result.

 

 

It's not just protein. It's very necessary vitamins like K2, B12, Iron, Vitamin A which is poorly converted from beta-carotene, EPA & DHA which are very poorly converted from ALA. These things are not insignificant. They don't just result in shorter lifespan. They result in mental illness, brain damage, chronic illness, behavioral problems, etc. You also have to take into account, modern foods are lower in nutritional value, but high quality meat and dairy products are extremely nutrient dense. Furthermore, grains and starches cause immune reactions for a large portion of the population. Some of them very low level, but still measurable and responsible for reducing the quality of life for the individuals consuming them. There is a large body of work specifically pointing to the fact that many people's bodies function better on high amounts of fat, moderate levels of protein, and near complete reduction of carbohydrates, something very difficult to attain as a vegetarian. Most people's bodies function better at increased levels of fat intake and reduced levels of sugar intake, because fat fuels mitochondrial cells very well and is more efficient as an energy source.

 

Leave it to a vegetarian to want to quantify the value of a life though. Very interesting. You're saying, because you cannot recognize the response a plant has to fear and pain readily that it's response is insignificant. It's all life. You are ending it by being a part of this ecosystem.

 

Your argument about it tasting good is silly. It has nutrients our bodies need to function properly. It's evolutionarily designed to taste good to us. Many people get a large portion of the calories necessary for them to survive from meat.

 

It's not just about dying younger. It's about disease, birth defects, the expression of your genes. It affects more than just your life too. It's has species wide consequences. Indian cultures have been consuming the same diet for a very long time. Their response to a specific diet is different than people from other cultures, because their gene expression is different. You cannot expect the entire world to adopt an Indian style diet and for it to be functional.

 

The argument is not, should we or should we not eat meat? The question is, can we make a suitable substitute to animal products? Right now we don't have them.

 

Most of it is false and honestly sounds like pro meat propaganda

 

 

It's so easy just to walk in here and shout "propoganda"..

Or even worse, people love to post that nutritionfacts.org website that's ran by a militant vegan hack of a doctor. The guy is obsessed with picking around to find studies in his favor.

 

Low-carbohydrate diet models have really excelled lately in labs and in human trials, given that the model diet is not rich in seed oil polyunsaturated fats. These fats were sold to consumers as "furniture polish". This shit is notorious in rodent model studies and a lot of them fail to realize that oxidative damage is strongly correlated with their consumption and NOT palmitic acid, myristic acid, lauric acid, etc found in the LARD research diets..

 

Something went wrong and now what used to be furniture polish (because of it's tendency to oxidize rapidly) is now used in just about every commercial fryer in the first-world. Corn oil, soybean oil, etc.. It was so clever of the food industry to adopt a waste product and re purpose it as food!

 

But hey I guess you sit around all day reading about this stuff right? Or do you get your facts from the same bullshit sources and Google queries like everyone else? Dr Gregor!!!! He's sounds to so intelligent, he must be right?!

 

Or did you fill your mind with the shit the other gurus say? They sell books and DVDs you know.. Some of them even have Dr in their name and went to medical school. This makes them the authority..

 

who talked about dr. gregor?

 

Fact is, you can live a healthy life without eating meat.

 

 

I won't dispute a vegetarian diet as long as eggs or dairy are staples. This in my eyes is a very well rounded diet and is likely why indians thrive on it. I myself personally, though I go through phases of eating lots of meat, end up eating vegetarian out of habit sometimes. My concerns are with vegan diet models and people convinced that they are a gateway to dazzling health. "You just need B12 capsules!!" types.. This is ridiculously naive and most of them haven't a fucking clue how the body actually treats the food they guzzle. Plants are so perfect!

 

I bring up Dr. Gregor pre-emptively because he's a massive thorn in my ass when it comes to talking nutrition with people. His website is so palatable I guess, and it inspires people to go out and talk about it. Woo, plants are perfect innocuous things and CLEARLY they are superior to the meat demon.

 

Dietary cholesterol and serum cholesterol

Postprandial IGF-1 and growth factor spikes (cancer..)

Saturated fat increases in reactive oxygen species

Systemic inflammation

Atherosclerosis

 

^ These are areas where meat is often implicated (gregor you fuck) to cause problems, but strangely these markers (depending on the study) either significantly improve or significantly get worse depending on the study.. It is not always so cut and dry.

 

So I spend a lot of time trying to isolate exactly what is going on here.. How can a low carb diet in one study cause a trainwreck of mitochondrial damage and oxidative stress, while in another similar study reduce on all fronts?

 

IMO it's a lack of controls and willingness to group fatty acids together. A "high fat diet" can be both rich in polyunsaturates or devoid of them.. It's funny when you read a rodent model study where the rats were fed the infamous LARD model diet again. Their hearts fail, they get fat, inflammation makes them sick and cirrhotic.

 

But the LARD diet, despite it's name, actually uses a blend of fatty acids that are not the same as lard itself or any other animal fat. Whatever reaches the conclusion they want...

 

Anyway, it's not meat propaganda.. I get that it is really hard for some of you cope with eating animals ethically, and commercial farming is a problem for sure. Also (pet peeve) I wish people did only eat meat for the nutrition it provides and not be so wasteful about it..

 

I eat meat very specifically for it's nutrient density and what it provides that plants DO NOT. Until someone convinces me that my layman biochemical analysis just doesn't make any sense I will continue to eat this way and thrive. I probably consume 10x the butter that any average American does.

[Audioblysk]

(posts infowars videos to prove point)

 

[Braintree]

^ Vitamin K2 is found in natto (fermented beans) ^

 

Lol I'm reading some research on Indian vegetarian diets and they consume milk, cheese, and eggs. You can't even maintain a moral high ground if you are consuming dairy products. Honestly, you are as culpable for the death of that animal as someone who chooses to eat their meat.

 

 

Just biked in to say that eating eggs gives you the rest of the nutrients you would get out of milk and cheese (basically the same thing) and you don't have to make anything suffer in order to get them (although the factory system certainly does).

 

Also, in response to your "plants know they're being eaten" argument: They don't suffer. Life is programmed to live, but limiting suffering is the most important part.

 

Also also, it's definitely clear that the environment at large suffers from factory farming and overconsumption of an unnecessary source of nutrition.

[Adieu]

^ Vitamin K2 is found in natto (fermented beans) ^

 

Lol I'm reading some research on Indian vegetarian diets and they consume milk, cheese, and eggs. You can't even maintain a moral high ground if you are consuming dairy products. Honestly, you are as culpable for the death of that animal as someone who chooses to eat their meat.

 

 

Just biked in to say that eating eggs gives you the rest of the nutrients you would get out of milk and cheese (basically the same thing) and you don't have to make anything suffer in order to get them (although the factory system certainly does).

 

Also, in response to your "plants know they're being eaten" argument: They don't suffer. Life is programmed to live, but limiting suffering is the most important part.

 

Also also, it's definitely clear that the environment at large suffers from factory farming and overconsumption of an unnecessary source of nutrition.

 

Cool, I forgot about natto.

 

I agree the farming system is not functioning appropriately. I don't even believe people are eating the correct amounts of meat. I eat a ton of vegetables and some fruits, but even if everyone transitioned to a strictly vegetarian diet that would also have global environmental implications and it presents its own hurdles to overcome.

 

Where are you getting your EPA and DHA from, because you're definitely not converting it from ALA?

[maitake]

Natto does not contain MK4 menaquinone... Sorry.

And plants are a shit source of EFA. Maybe try drinking flaxseed oil (furniture polish lol).

Also while eggs are fantastic it still is not the same as dairy. Take a gander at the USDA data..

 

https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/112 - Eggs

https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/70 - Milk

 

You eating eggshells?

[watmmisdead]

problem with eggs and diary product is how they are treated. Life of chicks are terrible.

 

 

 

Lol I'm reading some research on Indian vegetarian diets and they consume milk, cheese, and eggs. You can't even maintain a moral high ground if you are consuming dairy products. Honestly, you are as culpable for the death of that animal as someone who chooses to eat their meat.

you make very profound and elaborate research.

 

And logically, someone who dont eat meat but do consume dairy product is "better" then someone who consume both.

 

nobody mention about anyone being culpable. but since you bring it up, do you feel culpable eating meat? I personally sure did and why I stopped eating meat.

 

 

You realize that dairy livestock is forcibly inseminated for their entire lifespan and often killed after a few seasons, because they are unable to meet production demands, right?

 

Dairy helps you meet some of the nutrient requirements that would otherwise be missing on a vegetarian diet. It has vitamin K2 and Vitamin A. Chicken eggs are totally cool imo though. One of natures gifts to us. A guilt-free and amazing food source.

 

The entire argument is culpability. Are you responsible for death or not? The truth is, if you are eating food you are responsible for death.

 

I don't like purchasing meat. I hope one day that I no longer am required to. I want to kill what I eat. I've been begging people to take me hunting. I'm buying a bow in the near future to practice on when I move next month. In the meantime, I will buy 100% grassfed & 100% free-range and continue to be selective about the supplier I use.

 

Like I said before, livestock is part of the ecosystem within which we operate.

 

 

I'm not going ot argue about it. I've done my research.

When I'm 135 and you're dead I won't be upset that I ate animals.

If some super-intelligent alien species came to earth and wanted to start eating humans, would you have any moral objections to that?

Either the pain, suffering and death of sentient beings is of moral concern to you, or it's not. (Some people try to draw the 'moral significance' line right below humans, but hopefully we can all see how suspiciously convenient that is...)

P.S. What sorts of research have you done? Because there's TONS of different aspects, from animal psychology to diet to economics to (human) cognitive dissonance to sociology to game theory to moral philosophy...

 

 

Well, I'm of the mind that it's immoral to suggest that we should put ourselves at a deficit from a health standpoint in order to maintain some shaky moral philosophy concerning our food. What I mean is, to suggest that living less than optimally as a human being in order to protect the lives of animals that I believe are our food, and I believe this, because they provide us with NECESSARY nutrients for our health, and they also function in our ecosystem symbiotically with us as the consumers of them. If we weren't supposed to eat animal products then they wouldn't offer us things our body requires that we can't get other places.

 

As far as your hypothetical question, no, we should kill them and protect our species. I don't think morality comes into play really. We have a predator now, if we want to live we overcome it; otherwise we die. That's not a moral question to me.

 

I don't think death = pain and suffering. I think if done properly there is a beautiful and natural element to taking the life of the organism you are consuming. I look at this universe, and I don't see some great overarching morality. I see humans as having manifested a moral system and that's great. I don't disagree with it, but the universe as a whole is very uncaring. It's life and death. It's stars exploding and galaxies imploding. It's black holes crushing everything around it into nothingness. So, the idea that I shouldn't operate within what I believe are the rules the universe has laid out for me seems counter-intuitive and unnatural. Death is as beautiful as life I think. I think you can take a life in a very caring and moral way. But requiring that another take a life for me, that I have no connection to that sacrifice, it feels immoral to me. I don't like it, or approve of it.

 

That being said, I'm 100% down for people creating appropriate substitutes for the animal products we require. I'm on-board with that concept, but I don't think as of right now we have other options available.

 

My research is mostly concerning my physical health and longevity. If I saw data that suggested vegetarianism was better for me in that regard, and also functioned well for me as I applied it to myself, then I would have already adopted it. For instance, the Okinawa Diet, which is the diet of the longest average lifespan culture of any humans on the planet contains animal products.

Also, buddhist monks often eat meat as well btw.

 

 

 

 

In theravada buddhist, monks have rules surrounding what you can accept as food.

 

problem with eggs and diary is how terrible the living condition of animals.

Ideally, wed all have our little farms where we can take care of our animals.

 

anyways, nice discussion!

[Hugh Mughnus]

Natto does not contain MK4 menaquinone... Sorry.

 

And plants are a shit source of EFA. Maybe try drinking flaxseed oil (furniture polish lol).

 

Also while eggs are fantastic it still is not the same as dairy. Take a gander at the USDA data..

 

https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/112 - Eggs

https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/70 - Milk

 

You eating eggshells?

Not a loaded question really as I don't know shit about this topic in general, but can you trust the USDA?

 

I mean in general, would you consider the USDA a trustworthy, unbiased source of info.

[watmmisdead]

 

Natto does not contain MK4 menaquinone... Sorry.

 

And plants are a shit source of EFA. Maybe try drinking flaxseed oil (furniture polish lol).

 

Also while eggs are fantastic it still is not the same as dairy. Take a gander at the USDA data..

 

https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/112 - Eggs

https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/70 - Milk

 

You eating eggshells?

Not a loaded question really as I don't know shit about this topic in general, but can you trust the USDA?

 

I mean in general, would you consider the USDA a trustworthy, unbiased source of info.

 

 

when it comes to such profit making product of consommation like health system and medication, food, ect, you really have to be careful about who to trust.

Id for sure not trust any government studies.

[maitake]

The USDA is a very large. Their old pyramid used to be a joke.

 

I put faith in their data though, like many others. I do not however abide by their recommendations.

[usagi]

yeah that was a bit sassy of me, soz. it's true, reduced livestock PRODUCTION would contribute to lower greenhouse gas emissions. but a few people eating a few less steaks...not gonna help. i'm probably in the minority here but i think we really need a heavier-handed top-down solution if we want things to change. ("ECO FASCIST!!" they'll say)..

 

bah I wrote like three versions of this post trying to lay out my thoughts on market sea changes that need to happen, but each time it has come out shit. i may be back later after a cup of coffee.

 

but it's easier to just say that cow farts killed the world. fucking cows, we shoulda ate 'em all. *fires dual six-shooters in the air*

 

When I'm 135 and you're dead I won't be upset that I ate animals.

 

lol. I do not hold these views.

[Hugh Mughnus]

The USDA is a very large. Their old pyramid used to be a joke.

 

I put faith in their data though, like many others. I do not however abide by their recommendations.

Thanks for the response.

 

Do you think they'd have any interest in skewing their data to run parallel some of their recommendations?

 

I'm not the conspiracy type, but it seems on the surface like they would have an economic interest in slanting their data (nutritional and otherwise). That said, we have to get our data from somewhere. =/

 

edit: and I'm sure that lots of their nutritional data has been independently verified by other bodies, so there's that.

[caze]

When I'm 135 and you're dead I won't be upset that I ate animals.

 

lol. I'll try and remember to download myself into a scout drone from my singularity meta cluster and go look you up,

[Audioblysk]

I'll sum this thread up real quick like...

 

 

WE. ARE. ALL. FUCKED.

 

I personally look forward to my assimilation back into the cosmos and grand cycle of energy. My body will do more feeding a tree than I ever did working for monetary interests. It's depressing, but paradoxically, it's the only thing that gets me through my day sometimes when Audioblysk gets the 'human experience' blues. We have the keys to heaven and hell as humans and are so much better than what is projected. We are still children when it comes to understanding anything, really... who knows if or when humanity will ever grow up.

[cwmbrancity]

what do you hippies think of parasites, like wasps that lay eggs in caterpillars?

 

life feeds on life - the only answer to this "noooooooo,,,,,,,,", is to actually say "yes"

 

humanity's had its chance & its collective short-sighted incompetence is all nature needs to remove us as a species from the equation permanently

[usagi]

I'll sum this thread up real quick like...

 

 

WE. ARE. ALL. FUCKED.

 

I personally look forward to my assimilation back into the cosmos and grand cycle of energy. My body will do more feeding a tree than I ever did working for monetary interests. It's depressing, but paradoxically, it's the only thing that gets me through my day sometimes when Audioblysk gets the 'human experience' blues. We have the keys to heaven and hell as humans and are so much better than what is projected. We are still children when it comes to understanding anything, really... who knows if or when humanity will ever grow up.

 

yes.

[LimpyLoo]

@StephenG -- fuck the USDA...remember how milk, orange juice and cereal were on their 'healthy breakfast' pyramid? Those things are not healthy lol

 

@Blysk -- if all else fails, humanity has a couple tricks up its sleeve to mitigate climate change...like, you know, spraying a nauseating amount of aerosol into the atmosphere to block UVrays etc ... (There's a couple other such proposals out there, all equally Futurama-esque IIRC)

[usagi]

oh shit, how could I have forgotten... p-values will save us!

[maitake]

 

The USDA is a very large. Their old pyramid used to be a joke.

 

I put faith in their data though, like many others. I do not however abide by their recommendations.

Thanks for the response.

 

Do you think they'd have any interest in skewing their data to run parallel some of their recommendations?

 

I'm not the conspiracy type, but it seems on the surface like they would have an economic interest in slanting their data (nutritional and otherwise). That said, we have to get our data from somewhere. =/

 

edit: and I'm sure that lots of their nutritional data has been independently verified by other bodies, so there's that.

 

 

I do not think it's a conspiracy at all. I want to give credit where it's due, and the new MyPlate thing with the recommendations it makes really does a good job these days of conveying what a sensible diet should look like. That they ran with the old pyramid for years is telling of what was happening during that time. Nutrition is so insanely complex and during that time period I think the mainstream advice was based on misguided research attempting to seal the lid on the case against lipids. Today, the USDA recommendations a lot more sensible and more accurately reflect our incredible human metabolic flexibility. '

 

THAT SAID: It is not secret knowledge that the food industry (corporations mainly) had a HUGE role to play in the mess that conventional nutrition advice was then. They made great attempts to get the public to consume their cheap, non-perishable packaged foods especially.

 

I think a lot of honest scientists were barking up the wrong tree and for whatever reason the public just eats epidemiological shit up like "x is linked to y" and "x increases the rate of y by %13!!!!!"... People rarely realize that correlations can pop out of a research team's asshole all day and all night. The golden standard is CONTROLLED and DOUBLE BLIND if at all possible. Second best is having lots of clinical data I guess, the realm of biochemists and molecular biologists and blah blah... Well controlled trials are costly and a giant pain in the ass so they don't come around much.

 

I can't seem to access the latest recommendations site, but here is the one from USDA in 2010: http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/sites/default/files/dietary_guidelines_for_americans/PolicyDoc.pdf

 

As you can see, it is not horrible at all

[LimpyLoo]

oh shit, how could I have forgotten... p-values will save us!

I'm surprised to see you take an interest in science after your parents brainwashed you into believing in angels and flying horses and a violent delusional Santa Claus.

 

 

 

 

If you're gonna continue to be a dick to me, I'm happy to play along.

[maitake]

Where I live there is a lot of pasture raised cattle, both slaughtered for meat and milked to dairy. They, from what i've seen, typically just run freely and eat and hang out together. I wouldn't call it suffering at all..

 

I don't have a gripe with killing them at age, but doing it in a torturous way no.. Sever a main artery, or spike the spiral cord, guillotine, etc.. I would prefer someone give me a good slice across my main pipe instead of let me suffer someday..

 

We were born into this weird planet where everything eats each other. Try as you might, at least one of something else is going to eat you too. I'm trying to just live my life as nicely as I can then get the fuck out of here. If some space alien wants me for dinner when i'm bigger and fatter and more delicious (before decline) then by all means i'm okay with that.

 

I say hello to the cattle when I walk my dog sometimes.. they follow me around and wag their tails.

 

OH YEAH, the whole point. commercial farming sux.. i'd rather see people eat meat because they need it and farming can scale back to it's roots. Let the cattle run around and play all day.

[Adieu]

 

When I'm 135 and you're dead I won't be upset that I ate animals.

 

lol. I'll try and remember to download myself into a scout drone from my singularity meta cluster and go look you up,

 

 

cool, see you there.