|
dupree
Dec 17, 2002, 10:18 PM
Post #26 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 15, 2002
Posts: 108
|
Funktimonious,
I fail to see how being able to produce more vegetables on land now used for producing meat is a "pro." First, since when has volume been the defining characteristic of value? Second, if the resources "wasted" on producing meat had a more valuable use, then they would likely already have been put to that use.
|
|
|
|
|
funktimonious
Dec 17, 2002, 10:31 PM
Post #27 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 18, 2002
Posts: 330
|
The caloric value from the corn used to feed just the cows of the U.S. is many times more than the caloric value of all the beef produced. In addition, the increased yield from carrots, corn, tomatoes or the like, raised on land used for cattle grazing would be MUCH greater than the comparativley small beef yield.
--Peace.
|
|
|
|
|
tanner
Dec 17, 2002, 10:36 PM
Post #28 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2002
Posts: 491
|
Just eat well. Give you body what it needs and you will be happy. Raw fruits and vegtables are the most important(imo)
There are alot of misconseptions about diet out there. So do some research.
The best thing I've found is somthing called Juice PLUS+ and eathing fresh food, lean meats and fish and lots of vegtables.
|
|
|
|
|
dupree
Dec 17, 2002, 10:38 PM
Post #29 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 15, 2002
Posts: 108
|
Responding to Funktimonious: Assuming that all of that is true, it still doesn't answer the question of why volume (whether measured in lbs., calories, etc.) is a useful measure of value. I would argue that perhaps the land in question is used for meat and not vegetables because people do not place a greater value on using it for more vegetables than they do on using it for meat. The market seems to have spoken...
[ This Message was edited by: dupree on 2002-12-17 14:39 ]
|
|
|
|
|
funktimonious
Dec 17, 2002, 10:43 PM
Post #30 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 18, 2002
Posts: 330
|
You're saying calories aren't a usefull measure of value? Of course it is. That's how you measure the value for your body (in regards to energy) that food has. A calorie is a measure of nutritional energy.
--Peace.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Dec 17, 2002, 10:44 PM
Post #31 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
Quote:
JT512 and Leaverbiner, you guys are banking on nothing more than personal opinion and "a body of research" which I guarantee doesn't exist. IF you were to actually research as I have, rather than merely pull made up facts out of your ass, you'd realize you both are way off base.
Actually, funcktimonious, not only have I done the research, I do the research. I am a published researcher in a university nutrition department, who studies, among other subjects, vegetarian nutrition. I have made several presentations at the International Congress on Vegetarian Nutrition, one of which will be published shortly in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, and have been invited to write a book chapter on health aspects of vegetarian diets. I am also currently collaborating on a study of the environmental impact of vegetarian diets (results are not yet in). I can guarantee you that I have read more original research on vegetarian nutrition than you have.
Unfortunately, few of the authors of popular books on vegetarian nutrition have sufficient training in nutrition and epidemiology to properly interpret the scientific literature on the subject. Combined with their own biases, they frequently misinterpret the literature, which results in grossly exaggerated health claims in their books. One important exception would be the Messinas, whose book The Vegetarian Way, presents clearly and honestly the advantages and disadvantages of vegetarianism and veganism. I highly recommend their book.
-Jay
[ This Message was edited by: jt512 on 2002-12-17 14:45 ]
|
|
|
|
|
funktimonious
Dec 17, 2002, 11:02 PM
Post #32 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 18, 2002
Posts: 330
|
Jay,
It's difficult to determine the validity of your training/background since so many people oppose what you say: http://forum.lowcarber.org/t52291.html , http://forum.lowcarber.org/t48864-2.html ,
You seem to be controversial with everyone just for the thrill of being controversial. I think you've got some problems beyond the apparent.
--Peace.
|
|
|
|
|
climbtheruins
Dec 17, 2002, 11:05 PM
Post #33 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2002
Posts: 30
|
I will be VEGAN till the end and I still have plenty of strength and stamina. BTW if you eat meat "sometimes" then you are not a vegetarian.
|
|
|
|
|
tanner
Dec 17, 2002, 11:15 PM
Post #34 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2002
Posts: 491
|
Meat is good, fresh rare beef steak with nothing more than montreal Steak spice!!! raw Salmon with wasobi and soy souce. Lamb with greek salid. sushi of all kinds. and a big plate of fresh fruits and veggies!! Thats all I need to eat!!
I could be a vegitarian but I like meat. But I don't eat meat often.
The best thing in the world is vegitarian chili!!!
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Dec 17, 2002, 11:17 PM
Post #35 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
Quote:
Jay,
It's difficult to determine the validity of your training/background since so many people oppose what you say: http://forum.lowcarber.org/t52291.html , http://forum.lowcarber.org/t48864-2.html ,
First of all there is no relation between having arguments on the internet and kowledge of nutrition (as, indeed, the present argument demonstrates). The people involved in those posts you refer to range from PhD nutritionits to notoriously stupid and persistent internet twits. It is difficult for you to deduce who in those discussions knows what they are talking about and who doesn't because you lack the technical training to understand the content of the discussion. To someone with professional-level nutritional training it is obvious.
Quote:
You seem to be controversial with everyone just for the thrill of being controversial. I think you've got some problems beyond the apparent.
Nothing in those posts you refer to or anything I've posted in this thread lead logically to that conclusion. If anything, it is me who has taken the conservative stance. You're the one making wild claims about "all vegetarains" living longer and making completely incorrect statements about fats being turned to carbohydrates in the body.
-Jay
[ This Message was edited by: jt512 on 2002-12-17 16:09 ]
|
|
|
|
|
meataxe
Dec 17, 2002, 11:22 PM
Post #36 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 23, 2002
Posts: 1162
|
alwaysforward:
Quote:
1 pound of porn = 4 pounds of grain
1 pound of beef = 8 pounds of grain
thats from national geographic
For the sake of the planet I guess I should really cut down on the porn.
|
|
|
|
|
funktimonious
Dec 17, 2002, 11:24 PM
Post #37 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 18, 2002
Posts: 330
|
Jay,
If you're as great as you humbly have drawn attention to, why not just put a link to some of the papers you've written. That's the only way you'll convince me of all your accomplishments you personally laude.
--Peace.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Dec 17, 2002, 11:25 PM
Post #38 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
Quote:
For the sake of the planet I guess I should really cut down on the porn.
You've misinterpreted the numbers. They imply that more porn would be good for the planet. Who am I to argue?
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
vulgarian
Dec 17, 2002, 11:27 PM
Post #39 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 381
|
Funk are you trained as a psychological linguist?
Scientists argue.
Children call names.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Dec 17, 2002, 11:31 PM
Post #40 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
This is stupid.
Funk, I do believe that your tendency toward picking fights (with educated people, which to my understanding you are not among) over inane topics like vegetarianism and Mad Rock shoes says way more about your love for being controversial.
I think you've got some problems beyond the apparent...
Now, take your high school essay (link it if you would be so kind) on why we should all eat beans, lace up your Bufo shoes and start a thread on the merits of the sliding X or why we should bolt cracks. Those work out much nicer.
oh, and for goodness sake, could you quit signing your flames with "peace?"
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Dec 17, 2002, 11:39 PM
Post #41 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
Quote:
If you're as great as you humbly have drawn attention to, why not just put a link to some of the papers you've written. That's the only way you'll convince me of all your accomplishments you personally laude.
Funk, I can see you have all the earmarkings to be the next great spokesperson for the vegetarian religion. You can exaggerate, misrepresent, misinterpret, and misinform with the best of them. I haven't claimed any accomplishments, really, just training and competency in the field, and the only reason I mentioned any of that was in defense of your accusation that I was making up lies, rather than basing my statements on published research and knowledge.
There are no links to things I have published, as far as I know. They're not on the internet. If you're really intersted, you can get a hold of a copy of the FASEB proceedings for 2000 and 2001. I have several abstracts published in those proceedings. Any university medical or science library should have them in their collections. Additionally, one of my presentations on vegetarian diets will be published very soon in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, though I don't know exactly when it will appear. Several other papers are in various stages of completion, submission, and review. Hopefully, they'll be published within the next year.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
funktimonious
Dec 17, 2002, 11:49 PM
Post #42 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 18, 2002
Posts: 330
|
Yeah, you're right, sorry for getting carried away on a tangent...as I tend to do. I don't really care about anyone's credentials. All I'm saying is that I think being vegetarian is better for the earth and one's health in the long run, if done correctly...that's all.
--PEACE.
|
|
|
|
|
vulgarian
Dec 17, 2002, 11:53 PM
Post #43 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 381
|
Did I hear porn?
|
|
|
|
|
polarwid
Dec 17, 2002, 11:57 PM
Post #44 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 22, 2001
Posts: 3608
|
[small]This topic was moved to the Technique & Training forum by polarwid[/small]
|
|
|
|
|
jhump
Dec 18, 2002, 12:19 AM
Post #45 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 7, 2002
Posts: 602
|
"1 pound of porn = 4 pounds of grain"
I would rather have the pound of porn.
|
|
|
|
|
ooievaar
Dec 18, 2002, 12:37 AM
Post #46 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 5, 2002
Posts: 7
|
Just had to put in my $.02. I was going kinda nuts studying for my medicine shelf, so I took a break to read the forums. I just did a quick medline search to see what recent research had been done on this and I was surprised not to find a whole lot. Here's one study that had some good data to it, & a link to the abstract:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12001975&dopt=Abstract
Basically, it's saying that longevity is longer for both vegetarians and comparable (similar health habits and lifestyles) non-vegetarians than for the general pop. of McDonald's eating couch potatoes, and no difference was noted between veggies and omnivores.
People get really wound up on both sides of this topic, but the important thing is to eat healthily whichever way you go - all you really need is the food pyramid. Lots of carbs, veggies, fruits, some dairy and meat, avoid too much red meat and saturated fat, exercise, and don't smoke, and you'll be ok.
Most of us who take reasonable care of ourselves are going to live to be about 75 or 80 regardless of whether we eat chicken or not, drink milk from cows that got extra growth hormone, or had a steak every once in a while for a treat. We don't live for ever, and something is going to kill you, whether you like it or not. Just keep everything in moderation and simmer down a bit. That said, if you think you feel better without meat, don't eat it. If you like it and think it helps you stronger, go ahead.
That's it, sorry for the length. Now it's back to the books. Peace out, -B
"hard work good, and hard work fine, but first take care of head" -Brad Nowell
|
|
|
|
|
moabbeth
Dec 18, 2002, 12:51 AM
Post #47 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 1786
|
I've been a vegetarian since the age of four, much to the chagrin of my non-vegetarian family. I hated the taste and texture of meat ever since I could eat.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Dec 18, 2002, 12:53 AM
Post #48 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
Quote:
I just did a quick medline search to see what recent research had been done on this and I was surprised not to find a whole lot.
You're right. There are few studies on the effect of vegetarian diet on longevity.
Quote:
Here's one study that had some good data to it, & a link to the abstract:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12001975&dopt=Abstract
Basically, it's saying that longevity is longer for both vegetarians and comparable (similar health habits and lifestyles) non-vegetarians than for the general pop. of McDonald's eating couch potatoes, and no difference was noted between veggies and omnivores.
I agree with your interpretation of the study; unfortunately, the study (with which I am familiar) itself is invalid. The study is a pooled analysis of two obsrvational studies. The pooled analysis is invalid because one of the pooled studies, the Health Food Shoppers Study, is invalid. In that study (and possibly the other as well), vegetarian status was not properly ascertained. Subjects were simply asked whether or not they were vegetarians. We know now that the majority of people who classify themselves as vegetarians actually eat substantial amounts of meat, and that valid assessment of vegetarian status must be made using more sophisticated dietary assessment techniques. Furthermore, there was no control, or statistical adjustment, for lifestyle factors that could contaminate the effect of diet on longevity. For these reasons and others results from the Health Food Shoppers Study, and hence the pooled analysis, are invalid.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
petsfed
Dec 18, 2002, 1:43 AM
Post #49 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 8599
|
I can honestly say that I've never felt like I'd eaten 4 pounds of grain after going through 1 pound of porn. Of course, this begs the question, which is more beneficial? Computer porn or tangible porn.
I think they were going for 1 pound of corn = 4 pounds grain.
|
|
|
|
|
daggerx
Dec 18, 2002, 2:44 AM
Post #50 of 51
(2901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 16, 2001
Posts: 761
|
Im a semi I eat fish, and stuff that smells like it.
DaggerX
|
|
|
|
|
|
