Comments on: Are humans meant to be vegetarian?

By: art

art — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 11:44:38 +0000

This is one of the more responsible explanations a vegetarian has produced. However, it is not entirely accurate. For example, there are ways to eat meat w/o the need for the animals to suffer like so many like to point out. Meat eating can also be done in an environmentally friendly way as well.

Because we are biological omnivores I would argue it is very natural for us to eat meat. Why wouldn’t a prehistoric human have eaten a raw kidney scavenged from a freshly killed mammal (killed by lions or whatever)? What about a hand full of grubs they may have found? Eating a humanely raised/butchered steak a couple times a week sure is more natural than taking pills.

All things considered, even as a happy and healthy meat eater, I would say moderation is the key.

By: omnivore1

omnivore1 — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 14:02:06 +0000

I get raged on all the time for eating meat, like the post says “we are like pigs”, so we can choose to eat meat or vegetables. So doest that mean all the native Americans were wrong for eating meat, grains, vegetables? They were doing just fine for couple thousand years along with others. I mean I guess it’s up to what ever you choose to do, but to be moderate and not to be a “”pig”" I might be wrong, but I guess we all are humans can’t live with them can’t stop being one.

By: Katinka Hesselink - All Considering

Katinka Hesselink - All Considering — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 06:33:32 +0000

Interesting. I look forward to further results along that line of research. But there is a definite disclaimer at the bottom there:

“these results are preliminary and were obtained from analysis of only three individuals.”

“Large-scale population studies would be needed to prove if this molecule has any role in human disease including cancer.”

By: Andras Nagy

Andras Nagy — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 02:50:13 +0000

Katinka,
There is a scientific evidence of eating red meat causes cancer. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3149062.stm

By: katinka - spiritual

katinka - spiritual — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 17:10:39 +0000

I do think eating meat means desensitizing yourself to the fact that an animal was killed for your consumption – and their suffering. I would not go so far as to say there’s a chemical result to that and causes cancer.

By: Andras Nagy

Andras Nagy — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 17:02:59 +0000

Red meat contains a substance called “imperil”, for a lack of better words – it is the contamination of nerve endings of the animal that instinctively knows of being slaughtered. This is a poisonous substance and will cause problems in the consumer. These problems are varied and manifest in cancer and other diseases. If you must eat meat, eat it in moderation and avoid red meat.

By: Marmite - Deerwood

Marmite - Deerwood — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 14:41:38 +0000

[...] Are humans meant to be vegetarian? (allconsidering.com) [...]

By: Katinka - spirituality

Katinka - spirituality — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 08:59:41 +0000

The new lines get cut off by my blogtheme. I’m working on a new one which will display comments WAY better than this one. For now you’ll have to live with it as it is.

You’re right about the fact that anything that’s a bit off is likely to have B12. The main criterion is whether the bacteria that get it to be off create B12. Yeast bacteria do, so anything with living yeast is likely to have B12.

As for beans: they need to be combined with rice for an optimum blend of aminoacids. But for most people in the west getting enough protein is hardly a problem – vegans included.

You are right about the fats and oils: going to the other extreme of eliminating fat altogether isn’t a good idea either. The same is true for eliminating sugar or fiber etc.

By: David Melik

David Melik — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:20:55 +0000

Sorry my comment is displayed long: newlines must have been ignored. I should try html newlines or spaces. These were paragraph places:

‘Your recommendations…’
‘This page mentions “natural,…”‘
‘Pedalled…’
‘Most computers are [not] (electro)mechanical…’ (also, omit that 1st not.)

By: David Melik

David Melik — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:14:31 +0000

You mentioned meat substitutes… in US supermarkets they are mostly packaged, and health food stores/co-ops often have those (expensive,) but also similar dry mixes, and there are recipes for all that: mostly legumes/beans & spices, and usually glutinous grain/flour for cohesion. It is said people need only 5% protein, and either sometimes more, or legumes do not usually add up to that much, since they are partly starch/carbohydrate, and because of that composition they are not considered great by Natural Hygienists, who recommend use enough nuts/seeds and avocadoes, and (maybe, or recommended for avoidance or moderation,) if one needs fats (which one needs more than people think who were on SAD diet and think ‘eliminate it,’) then olives–which have mainly/only good fats, like most nuts/seeds. Good recipes include blending fruits, nuts/seeds of simliar PH.

Your recommendations say b12 is in “rice that is off.” It is likely in several “off” foods: spoiled or poorly washed, especially dug up, and it is in certain torula yeast (AFAIK,) maybe purslane (or it has ω-acids or both,) and ‘fortified’ processed foods (soy-based or simlar.) AFAIK, non-vegans need not pay much attention to b12, but should for ω-acids (vegans must.) However, dirty or processed food are as unreliable to the extent they are hard to use consistently and keep track of, which they mostly are verily, and they can be unhealthy. Many b12 tablets are vegan; most may have a little bit of excipients, but if they are even slightly harmful, they are better than inconsistent use and can be counteracted.

This page mentions ‘natural,’ which the rest of my comment is off-topic on. I think some toilets, bikes, computers are relatively natural (otherwise supernatural, sub-natural, or otherwise unnatural, which probably still refers to ‘natural.’) They use no nuclear force; they might not use electromagnetism; maybe they use gravity–primitive simple mechanics, which all animals use; plants, maybe even minerals, react to gravity. Flush toilets were used by an ancient Cretan civilization–the Minoans (IIRC likely one of the 2 – 3 most natural civilizations (top or 2nd in Eurasia-Africa, besides India, equal in different ways,) and many/most other primates in civilization use drained toilets; maybe some other animals use them or latrines. If those include the recently invented composting toilets, people could switch back.

Pedalled vehicles may be more natural than animal-drawn ones; bikes are certainly more natural than cars: they contain metal, but, like its production, need only primitive machines, most/all of which some animals apply, except to ignite, but some animals are used to humans’ fire and results. The control of mind & body, classical elements, physics forces are only progressively less natural (and animals use part of all listed.) I could explain better in-depth, but not perfectly. Rational animals may not always be afraid of natural forces or humans’ usage. Particles are in atoms, which HPB calls souls, so discarnate beings may be more used to souls & parts, such as (ideal) forms, which along with kosmic nature (all the above) is natural, i.e. understood, for adepts, so it should become so for humans, despite & because of ‘human nature.’

Most computers are not (electro)mechanical, not electronic. The quadrivium uses computers: arithmetic uses abaci, slide-rules, hands; geometry uses those & other (still used) simple mathematical instruments, music uses arithmetic & time-based instruments (and tools for instruments,) astronomy uses some combined from quadrivium 1 – 3, and post-quadrivium is similar. Relatively recently computers were electromechanical (and electromagnetism includes magnetism, of somwhat old use.) many machines are: anything industrial pre-electronic. Any computer that is (one was) like a loom or uses punch cards could work from simple mechanics, though power by organisms’ mechanics starts from at least electromagnetism (nerves.)