Hi ya'll! Well, I am into health and fitness, so why not, I thought, make a topic about vegetarianism. I have tried raw foodism and veganism too. Who else here is interested in these topics?

Before someone wants to make a stupid remark about it, check this site here (http://www.vegetarisme.be/index.html?menu=eng).

Regards,
RA

Eat healthy and produce sustainably. The philosophy shouldn't run any deeper than that.

Hi ya'll! Well, I am into health and fitness, so why not, I thought, make a topic about vegetarianism. I have tried raw foodism and veganism too. Who else here is interested in these topics?

Before someone wants to make a stupid remark about it, check this site here (http://www.vegetarisme.be/index.html?menu=eng).

Regards,
RA

I'm into health and fitness too. That's why I eat meat. I need a source of protein that doesn't raise estrogen levels and have links to prostate cancer and sexual disfunction like soy does. I like to cook my meat in order to render it digestable, kill bacteria, and increase protein synthesis.

A bumper sticker:

"VEGETARIANISM IS A BOLSHEVIK PLOT TO KEEP PEOPLE WEAK AND SICKLY"


Petr

Vegans should go try to convince wild lions that veganism is a great idea. :p

I have come to the conclusion that it's not meat that people should reduce in their regular diets, but refined sugars.

While I can understand vegetarinism veganism is fucking stupid.

I tried vegetarianism once, that is, until I noticed I was leaning toward whatever direction from which light was coming.

I have come to the conclusion that it's not meat that people should reduce in their regular diets, but refined sugars.

Sugars and overly processed carbs act quite similarly on the body. That's another one you can put on your list. I find that one can pretty much eliminate bad foods in their diet by cutting out anything that required a machine to make it.

To put it simplisctically, vegetarianism and veanism are GAY.

Look at any vegan/vegetarian...Do they look healthy to you?

Anybody with an open mind who has actually researched diet will find that an all meat diet is far better for you than anything based on plants. Just look at eskimoes or people who have survived in extreme cold climates. Look at the Atkinson Diet.

Human body needs meat, we evolved as omnivores, not herbivores.

To put it simplisctically, vegetarianism and veanism are GAY.

Look at any vegan/vegetarian...Do they look healthy to you?

Anybody with an open mind who has actually researched diet will find that an all meat diet is far better for you than anything based on plants. Just look at eskimoes or people who have survived in extreme cold climates. Look at the Atkinson Diet.

You won't find a bigger carnivore than me, but an all-meat diet is just as dumb as an all vegetable diet. We need vitamins other than iron to survive. As well, fibre, much to my dismay, does not come in steak form.

Johnny Reb,
This site has a lot of long, really boring accounts on various meat-diets:
http://www.biblelife.org/stefansson1.htm

I personally don't eat meat alone (too expensive), but try to base my meals around foods like turkey and chicken.
I've heard of accounts where sailors have been stranded in the Arctic and survived on seal meat alone. At first, they hated it, but then they're bodies adjusted to it and we're actually healthier than before they were stranded. They even had "better" bowel movement without any fiber.
Hey, I'm no doc, just sayin'...

Well, I am a vegetarian, because of spiritual, health, ethical, philosophical, economic and environmental reasons. I learnt that from a very smart Bolshevik...

I once learnt a beautiful sentence from a woman I admire;

'Animals are our wealth.'


Erzsébet Báthory: One reason to explain veganism is that one does not kill without a legitimate survival purpose. Lions have a legitimate reason to kill, hence they are vegans :eek:

Edana: Yes, refined sugar is bad.

Napoleon Bonaparte: Humans are most often described as “omnivores.” This classification is based on the “observation” that humans generally eat a wide variety of plant and animal foods. While most humans are clearly “behavioral” omnivores, the question still remains as to whether humans are anatomically suited for a diet that includes animal as well as plant foods. The tables below summarise the comparison between the body structures and functions of carnivores, omnivores, herbivores, and humans.
Highlights of summary:

Humans do not have the nails, mouths and teeth suited for a carnivorous diet.

Carnivores and omnivores swallow their food whole; while herbivores and humans have to chew their food extensively.

Stomach acidity, with food inside, for humans is pH 4 to 5; while carnivores and omnivores have pH less than 1, which is necessary for proper digestion of carnivorous diet.

Carnivores and omnivores have much shorter lengths of small intestine compared to herbivores and humans.

Carnivores and omnivores have short, smooth and straight colon, which is necessary for quick transition before toxins from decayed flesh cause problems for their body; herbivores and humans have long, winding and sacculated colon.

"Stomach type" is not conclusive that humans are not herbivores, as not all herbivores have multiple chambers like that of cow.

From: WWW (http://www.google.nl/search?q=cache:fBeblTZA8UgJ:www.vegetarian-society.org/others.htm+human+body+omnivores+herbivores&hl=nl)

Humans are omnivores. If we weren't suited for eating meat, almost all humans worldwide wouldn't have evolved eating meat. Obviously, we have adapted to eating meat. Humans are good at adapting. This is a good thing, or our ancestors would have died out when the snow came and fruits and veggies were scarce.

Humans are omnivores. If we weren't suited for eating meat, almost all humans worldwide wouldn't have evolved eating meat. Obviously, we have adapted to eating meat. Humans are good at adapting. This is a good thing, or our ancestors would have died out when the snow came and fruits and veggies were scarce.

Further to that, there is some speculation that humans only started developing our big brains once we began eating animal meat and seafood, leaving our chimp relatives behind.

Ben Klassen wrote about the benefits of the raw fruitarian diet in The White Man's Bible and Salubrious Living. Here is the chapter that I first read several years ago, although I disagreed with it at the time:

http://www.overthrow.com/creator/wmb/credo06.asp

Here is a good site about the fruitarian diet, and it's not racialist-oriented.

www.fruitarian.com

I've eaten a all-raw food fruitarian diet for 2 and a half years now, and I never plan on going back. Eating cooked food leads to toxemia. I am healthy enough to get a pretty good rating at hotornot.com, and I can do more one-arm pushups than 99.9% of the population.

The American Breakfast: An Undertaker's Delight (http://holocost.cjb.net/AmericanBreakfast1.html)

I like vegetables but I also eat meat.

-k0nsl

Eating cooked food leads to toxemia.

Then why doesn't the entire world, including all of our ancestors, have toxemia?

cooking foods izt a modern luxury!

i want info on raw food, meat and seafood!

i have inner craving!

Then why doesn't the entire world, including all of our ancestors, have toxemia?
They do. Most fatal illnesses, just as cancer, as caused by toxemia. Some have it worse than others. The more raw fruit and vegetables you have in your diet, the better your chances are of fighting toxemia.

Can you bring forth evidence that the entire world, including all of our ancestors, have toxemia?

Can you also provide proof that a lack of fruit and vegetables causes cancer?

The anthropologist Vilhjalmur Stefansson lived with the Eskimos on an all meat diet for roughly five years.

Link (http://www.biblelife.org/stefansson1.htm)

You can actually get enough vitamin C (ascorbic acid) from eating raw fish to prevent scurvy.

god damn! :mad:

its logic..

where we made to eat cooked food? -no

will cooked food fuck us up? -yes

its reaaaal simple..

were animals with clothes on, sometimes we need to take off those clothes and be true to our own nature in order to stay healthy - and in a greater perspective - in order to stay alive..

wake up!!

:222

where we made to eat cooked food? -no

The human body adapts. Apparently, it has adapted around the globe to eat cooked meat.

will cooked food fuck us up? -yes

Where is the evidence of this? Around the world, everyone eats cooked food and meat. Our ancestors have been eating cooked food for countless generations. Yet suddenly, Western fringe food cultists with a lot of time on their hands and the benefits of modern food growth and storage suddenly "discover" that cooked food is not meant for human consumption.

To be honest, I don't like cooked meat that much. I don't eat it raw of course, but I prefer my meat grilled. Loses less flavour that way.

Grilling is cooking.

Grilling is cooking.
nuh uhuh

cook P Pronunciation Key (kk)
v. cooked, cook·ing, cooks
v. tr.
To prepare (food) for eating by applying heat.



So how do you grill without applying heat? Is there some special practice of ice-grilling in your foreign and exotic homeland?

Boiling something is putting it in water, then heating the water. Everyone knows that.

You are drunk.

We were talking about cooking. There are many methods of cooking, which means to prepare for eating using heat. You can BBQ, boil, roast, or grill. Grilling is cooking. It involves applying heat.

I am dead sober and at work thank you very much.

I didn't know you work.

We can't all do nothing all day. :p

But everyone knows that all of you Euros live on cradle to grave welfare with 11 months mandatory vacation.

the beeing able to adapt to cooked food is bogus.. (natural selection takes thousands of years)

you think your family has eaten cooked foods for generations? - im not so sure..

and now, if your kids turn out turn out to be allergic and feeble, then you can come talk to me..

ill give you the right kind of beef.. :D

the beeing able to adapt to cooked food is bogus.. (natural selection takes thousands of years)

Then explain why humans around the world have been able to happily digest cooked foods for countless generations.

you think your family has eaten cooked foods for generations? - im not so sure..

Yes, they have. See, man figured out how to use this thing called "fire" and we took off from there.

But everyone knows that all of you Euros live on cradle to grave welfare with 11 months mandatory vacation.
Nope, that's just Loki's precious Swedes. :D

im not getting into any argument with you edina ;)

im only pointing out, yes someone down your genetic encestry may have invented fire..

still the same people where sensetive enough to experience that raw foods, in general gave them more energy with wich to run about..

and as for only a couple of generations back in time.. firewood where pretty scarce and inconvenient, exept for ludvig 14 and such..

..AND DO YOU WANT TO KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT HIS HEALTH SITUATION?!

..and thats why some scientists point out that this overcooking (crazy!!) of nutrients may let itself be exposed in allready the coming generations of newborns - with funny features.

you dont have to fuck a negro to have a funny looking child - just fry your food!

the aristocratic ideal of machiavelli vas for a nobleban-warriour to live in and from nature. to become tough and at home in it..

and the victorious families learned this lesson, and still practice.

have a snail, my dear :)

Edana's grandma invented fire.

"Different scholars and popular writers have argued that human beings have "evolved" to be carnivores, herbivores, frugivores, or omnivores, but anthropologist Richard Wrangham says we are "cookivores," grinning at the neologism. "We evolved to eat cooked foods," he declares. "Raw food eating is never practiced systematically anywhere in the world."

Wrangham spent fours years trying to disprove that last statement in a global investigation of current and historical cultures. He looked for the most extreme examples of people eating a pure raw-food diet, but failed to find any, "except for people in urban settings who were philosophically committed to raw food," he says. One researcher studied several hundred German raw-foodists, who had access to food of "astonishingly high quality" relative to wild raw foods, says Wrangham. Nonetheless, 25 percent of this group was chronically underweight, and 50 percent of the females "were so low in energy that they stopped having menstrual periods," he says. So even under exceptionally good conditions of superb year-round food availability, people had low energy and were "biologically incapable of appropriate reproduction, " says Wrangham. From an evolutionary point of view, sterility gets you bounced from the gene pool.

The genus Homo appeared about two million years ago, and even "the most skeptical archaeologist" will agree that fire was being controlled in southern Europe between 300,000 and 400,000 years ago, says Wrangham. Sound evidence of fireplaces dating from 380,000 years ago exists, for example, at Terra Amata in France, near Nice; other sites have earth ovens dug into cave floors. "Many regard this as the first evidence of cooking," he says, "but to me, this is rather sophisticated stuff, and is probably the earliest evidence we have of something that very likely was going on before."

Wrangham takes an extreme position: he postulates that cooking food over fires began by about 1.6 million years ago, and was an innovation so important that it allowed the evolution of Homo erectus, the earliest hominid to resemble modern humans (see "Primal Kitchens," November-December 2000, page 13). "Cooking enabled these animals—the very earliest erectus—to acquire their food more efficiently and to get more of it," he says. "A principal reason was that it made food softer."

Softer food has many implications. Imagine what a nonhuman, raw-food-eating primate like a chimpanzee consumes in one day. "It's a great big pile of leaves, seeds, and roots," Wrangham explains, gesturing with his hands to suggest a mound the size of a small shrub. Humans, with generally larger bodies, nonetheless fuel themselves with a far smaller volume of food. "Compared with other primates, we are evolved to eat foods of high caloric density—meats, roots, seeds," he says. Cooking makes this possible by changing the brittleness of collagen fiber, softening it and making meat far easier to chew. "People who think that meat dominated the diet of early Homo may well be right," he says, "but they would have to have spent five hours a day just chewing. Raw meat is very hard to chew, and presumably raw wild meat is even harder."

Consider again the chimpanzees, who spend as much time eating as one would expect for primates of their size and weight (100 to 120 pounds). "In primates, there's a nice relation between body weight and the amount of time spent eating," Wrangham explains. Chimps spend about six hours a day chewing. Humans, who typically weigh more than chimpanzees, should theoretically eat more and spend even more time at it. Instead, data from 15 cross-cultural studies indicate that on average, human beings spend about one hour a day chewing food.

Chimps' jaws and teeth are bigger than ours, and they like to eat meat—they will work hard to get it—"but they can't chew meat at all fast," Wrangham says. "The rate at which they chew and swallow meat is equivalent to the way they eat fruits: 300 to 400 calories per hour." In contrast, humans eating cooked, softened food of high caloric density can take in 2,000 calories during their daily hour of chewing and swallowing.

Cooking might be considered the first food-processing technology, and like its successors, it has had profound effects on the human body, as in the growth of bones. Various signals influence human growth; some come from genes, and others come from the environment, particularly for the musculo-skeletal system, whose job is engaging with the environment. Less chewing of cooked food, for example, has altered the anatomy of our skulls, jaws, faces, and teeth. "Chewing is a major activity that involves muscular forces," says skeletal biologist Daniel Lieberman. "It has incredible effects on how the skull grows." Chewing can transform anatomy rather quickly; in one study, in which Lieberman fed pigs a diet of softened food, in a matter of months their skulls developed shorter and narrower dimensions and their snouts developed thinner bones than those of pigs eating a hard-food diet.

The same thing happens with human beings. "Since the beginning of the fossil record, humans have become much more gracile," Lieberman says. "Our bones have become thinner, our faces smaller, and our teeth smaller—especially permanent teeth—although we have the same number of teeth. More recently, with the Industrial Revolution, people have become more sedentary; they interact with their environment in a less forceful way. We load our bones less and the bones become thinner. Osteoporosis is a disease of industrialism."

In today's world, where we not only cook but eat a great deal of processed food that has been ground up before it reaches our mouths, we don't generate as much force when chewing. In fact, for millennia human food has been growing less tough, fibrous, and hard. "The size of the human face has gotten about 12 percent smaller since the Paleolithic," Lieberman says, "particularly around the oral cavity, due to the effects of mechanical loading on the size of the face. Fourteen thousand years ago, a much larger proportion of the face was between the bottom of the jaw and the nostrils." The size of teeth has not decreased as fast (genetic factors control more of their variation); hence, modern teeth are actually too big for our mouths—wisdom teeth become impacted and require extraction.

http://www.harvard-magazine.com/on-line/050465.html

The rest of the article just deals with obesity. This is the best part.

yeah? ive been informed that nordic stone age men where extremely vital, and well fed. exept their teeth was grinded down. hell, so are mine, its cool.

so they cooked theire christmas turkey! so what, it tasted good. but in general they would pick much foods directly from nature. naturally!

cooked food is sterile and thats poison to the intestine flora..

prove me wrong, go cook everything - see what happends..

damn artzy modern food experts.. dang do they know?!

Panzer is the best pothead this board ever had since Noddy.

whos noddy and whys he better than me?!

i dont eat neither raw nor cooked or smoked pot - thankyou..

but im aware of different effects some of the plants that grow abundently around us have - and thats interesting enough, cause id never drink coffee or such..

in general i would never do a recreational drug that isent naturally growing around me, and i would never do a recreational drug whos name ANYBODY ever has heard of - exept for the really nerdy experts.. ;)

now go tell noddy!