Pork versus Goat !

[Jayhawker Soule]

Perhaps you read wrongly as I was simply pointing out your direction of pork to being Jewish related where its a peoples thing . I do not feel we should stereotype meat to any specific culture !

Again: I don't eat pork -- it's a Jewish thing, or

my not eating pork is a Jewish thing, or ...

my not eating pork is a result of me being Jewish, or ...
​

Shabbat Shalom.

 

[Augustus]

There actually is quite a lot of evidence that breastmilk being more nutritionally beneficial to infants than formula is more myth than fact, too.

There's also a lot of evidence that humans vastly overstate the extent of their knowledge in fields like this and are frequently proven wrong.

Is this where we break out the myths like canines indicate meat eating (the largest canine to head ratio on a primate is a vegetarian) or that front facing eyes indicate (this is a primate trait, not a meat eating one) or gut flora indicates meat eating (quite the opposite. Our intestines are longer and contain less necessary enzymes for meat processing than any other 'omnivore'. That's why we started cooking meat.) Or that our big brains need meat eating? (Our brains seek fat, not meat. We would have been better off with avocados like every Californian hipster. Fat, Not Meat, May Have Led to Bigger Hominin Brains)

What in that article do you think supports your argument that it is settled science that humans don't need meat/dead animal nutrients? It mentions disagreements, scavenging, bone marrow, etc.

As regards 'myths', diet affects all aspects of the body and there is good reason to assume that animals that ate other animals evolved to eat other animals. The body is far more complex than teeth and eyes.

Genomic signatures of diet-related shifts during human origins
There are numerous anthropological analyses concerning the importance of diet during human evolution. Diet is thought to have had a profound influence on the human phenotype, and dietary differences have been hypothesized to contribute to the dramatic morphological changes seen in modern humans as compared with non-human primates. Here, we attempt to integrate the results of new genomic studies within this well-developed anthropological context. We then review the current evidence for adaptation related to diet, both at the level of sequence changes and gene expression. Finally, we propose some ways in which new technologies can help identify specific genomic adaptations that have resulted in metabolic and morphological differences between humans and non-human primates.
Genomic signatures of diet-related shifts during human origins


Given there is so much we do not understand about the human body, and that our track record is not great in understanding its complexities, what makes you so confident that a significant change to the human diet re: meat eating is harmless to the point where it is not even debatable?

 

[Kenny]

Cloverfield,

Would you judge this?

Luke 10:8 And into whatsoever city ye enter, and they receive you, eat such things as are set before you

HOWEVER, I would probably say "I'm full right now" if they were offering a human sacrifice

 

[Cloverfield]

Again: I don't eat pork -- it's a Jewish thing, or

my not eating pork is a Jewish thing, or ...

my not eating pork is a result of me being Jewish, or ...
​

Shabbat Shalom.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

There's also a lot of evidence that humans vastly overstate the extent of their knowledge in fields like this and are frequently proven wrong.

Or keep to traditionally held beliefs even after without ever considering that it could be wrong.

What in that article do you think supports your argument that it is settled science that humans don't need meat/dead animal nutrients?

That isn't my argument. But if it's your argument that humans need meat to be healthy, I'd say you'd need a lot more articles.

there is good reason to assume that animals that ate other animals evolved to eat other animals.

No there isn't. Not the least which because opportunistic carnivory exists even in obligate herbivores under specific circumstances. But, again, that's not how evolution works. We didn't evolve to eat meat any more than we did not evolve to eat legumes just because our ancestors did not have access to them. What was and wasn't available doesn't translate to what was the most efficient, nutritious diet possible.
We evolved lactose tolerence to drink milk but that doesn't change that milk is still not very healthy for adults, overall.

The body is far more complex than teeth and eyes.

That doesn't change that there are a lot of myths that that people reach for to try and set meat eating as a sort of biological imperative which uses inaccurate biological claims that meat eating is 'in our DNA.'

 

[Father Heathen]

This always seems to come up on these debates. So here's my view:
There are a number of reasons why we don't judge the dietary behavior of non-human animals. First among them is that they arguably do not have the logical means of processing the decision to eat or not eat certain types of food based on broad ethical evaluation. A dog, which is an omnivore, does not look between the rabbit and beans and think 'I could get all the nutrients I need from the latter without utilizing the former.' Humans can. Some animals, like cats and snakes and weasels, are obligate carnivores and depend on meat to stay healthy. Humans do not.

Humans do not need meat to be healthy, if anything we only tolerate mostly processed (re: cooked) meats. We do it purely for enjoyment. Which means that, by it's very nature, human carnivory is causing unnecessary suffering. Especially considering the advanced capacity for animals to feel pain compared to plants, and fungi.

And I'm speaking as someone who is not a vegetarian. But I understand and accept that my carnivory doesn't just cause suffering but unnecessary suffering.

Hey, I get it. I was just playing devil's advocate.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Hey, I get it. I was just playing devil's advocate.

Me too, really. Since I'm not vegetarian.

 

[Shiranui117]

I eat pork , I don't or have never eaten goat. Now some people say pork is bad where I feel goat is bad .
What we eat is just dinner and can't see any reason why anyone can object to what others eat as long as we are not eating each other . Now I know this may seem strange to some people but in true reflection of the subject , I am objectively correct and it is rather silly to have any sorts of hate over what others eat . Some people eat insects etc , we eat what we have in resources and do try to survive the best way we can .
So do you think all religions who I personally always associate common ground that we are all people , should forget about any sort of food fights ?
Now I don't like to see hate over stupid silly little things such as what we eat , do any of you disagree with my wisdom that I have stated in this post ?

Anyone who puts pineapple on pizza is objectively the Antichrist and you cannot prove me wrong.

Also anyone who dips their fries in their milkshake. Or anyone who likes ranch. Or anyone who pours orange juice into their cereal.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Anyone who puts pineapple on pizza is objectively the Antichrist and you cannot prove me wrong.

Also anyone who dips their fries in their milkshake. Or anyone who likes ranch. Or anyone who pours orange juice into their cereal.

Though ranch is not my favorite dressing I do not see it as a major sin. If not for that I would have given it a winner.

And this should make you happy:

Sam Panopoulos, inventor of Hawaiian pizza, dies aged 83

He was a Canadian. I should have known.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I entirely agree with you that suffering, in general, is a necessary part of all life. Human or otherwise. I just can't see any way to conclude that the suffering caused by meat farming could be construed as necessary. Which is why I believe meat eating causes unnecessary suffering.

I'm also not a human exceptionalism and do not believe human life has more value than other life. But I don't think that factors into my conclusion. Unless someone concludes that humans, by nature of having the capacity to process suffering to a deeper extent than other animals means humans deserve to cause them more suffering for something we don't need. I certainly don't believe so.

I think I agree with you.

 

[SomeRandom]

How did he know I was thinking about Eden and Adiam



Why is Goat bad ? Because I am not accustomed to eating Goat . Not bad as in a sense that others eating Goat is bad . I could not care less what people do or do not eat as long as we do not eat each other . If the crunch ever comes to shove , we must all volunteer mass suicide before we would eat each other.

Why then use quantifiers like “bad” in the first place then? If you wish to pull down barriers between people, then why use such language?

 

[danieldemol]

Killing on purpose (for human beings that is) is seen as a negative act. Because we can not know if the animal we kill once was a human being (reincarnation)

But if we can’t know if the animal we kill was once a human being, how can we know the plant we kill wasn’t once a human being (reincarnation)?

 

[Spirit of Light]

But if we can’t know if the animal we kill was once a human being, how can we know the plant we kill wasn’t once a human being (reincarnation)?

Human beings have to eat something since the Bigu technique is not for everyone, and it is extremely difficult to master it. And even buddha eat food. But yes it will create karma.
The animals are seen still as sentient beings, and could technically reincarnate up toward the human realm again, And to kill a sentient being is seen as immoral.
Plants can't do that according to Buddhist teachings

 

[Augustus]

Or keep to traditionally held beliefs even after without ever considering that it could be wrong.

You're the one expressing the idea that we understand enough about the complexities of the human body to make definitive pronouncements even though scientific experts in numerous fields acknowledge that we don't really understand many of the workings of the human body.

We don't even really understand something as well studied as cholesterol, yet you are highly confident we understand the complex, dynamic interactions of countless aspects of human biology as impacted by something as fundamental as diet.

Humans: We have been consistently wrong in pronouncements regarding this complex system that we still don't really understand.
Also humans: This time we've cracked it! There's no chance we are wrong this time. Anyone who says otherwise is anti-progress!

No there isn't. Not the least which because opportunistic carnivory exists even in obligate herbivores under specific circumstances. But, again, that's not how evolution works. We didn't evolve to eat meat any more than we did not evolve to eat legumes just because our ancestors did not have access to them. What was and wasn't available doesn't translate to what was the most efficient, nutritious diet possible.

Why are you so certain about this when scientists are not?

Meat and Nicotinamide: A Causal Role in Human Evolution, History, and Demographics

Better diet with more meat/nicotinamide closer to our evolutionary norm helps cognition... Being in denial about our need for animal products and not accepting that ‘meat hunger’ is biological and not a matter of taste, or cultural history, or perversity, or to signal status/wealth/masculinity or our war-like nature does not help.

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Human adaptations to meat eating

This may point to significant meat ingestion as part of an omnivorous diet already in robust australopithecines and early Homo. Therefore we may postulate that physiological, anatomical and behavioural adaptations to habitual reliance on meat eating occurred in the hominid lineage at the australopithecine stage.

Human adaptations to meat eating

 

[Nimos]

I eat pork , I don't or have never eaten goat. Now some people say pork is bad where I feel goat is bad .

There is only one word, that is necessary here and that will cause the goat to flee in terror.

BACON!!!
​

 

[Cooky]

Duck is downright fowl
(Can't believe someone else didn't do that yet)

Nobody can disagree with that.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Eat what you like, fish, goat, pork, beef. All good, but don't overdo it. Though I am non-veg., I agree that veg. is better for digestion.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Why are you so certain about this when scientists are not?

Meat and Nicotinamide: A Causal Role in Human Evolution, History, and Demographics

Better diet with more meat/nicotinamide closer to our evolutionary norm helps cognition... Being in denial about our need for animal products and not accepting that ‘meat hunger’ is biological and not a matter of taste, or cultural history, or perversity, or to signal status/wealth/masculinity or our war-like nature does not help.

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Human adaptations to meat eating

This may point to significant meat ingestion as part of an omnivorous diet already in robust australopithecines and early Homo. Therefore we may postulate that physiological, anatomical and behavioural adaptations to habitual reliance on meat eating occurred in the hominid lineage at the australopithecine stage.

Human adaptations to meat eating

Extrapolating nutritional values for humans based on what our ancestors ate is problematic, given that diet is varied based on environmental factors and how our bodies (including gut microbes) continually adapt to dietary conditions.

What we can do is look at the best evidence of what a human body typically needs and adapt to the lifestyle and conditions of that person.

Given that a vegetarian diet rich in diverse plant foods contributes a variety of nutritional contents (a possibility for modern humans no longer sequestered to a single location) with only vitamin B12 being left out without animal products, it would seem that focusing on eating a lot of different plant foods with occasional animal products (or B12 supplements) is wise based on our best science.

 

[whirlingmerc]

I eat pork , I don't or have never eaten goat. Now some people say pork is bad where I feel goat is bad .
What we eat is just dinner and can't see any reason why anyone can object to what others eat as long as we are not eating each other . Now I know this may seem strange to some people but in true reflection of the subject , I am objectively correct and it is rather silly to have any sorts of hate over what others eat . Some people eat insects etc , we eat what we have in resources and do try to survive the best way we can .
So do you think all religions who I personally always associate common ground that we are all people , should forget about any sort of food fights ?
Now I don't like to see hate over stupid silly little things such as what we eat , do any of you disagree with my wisdom that I have stated in this post ?

Goat thinks he is GREATEST OF ALL TIME but Lamb is LOVED AND MUCH BLESSED

 

[Cloverfield]

Goat thinks he is GREATEST OF ALL TIME but Lamb is LOVED AND MUCH BLESSED

But I have set them free now from my mind , they no longer need to fear God as God is

BLESS ALL THE PEOPLE OF THE WORLD