rao@utcsstat.UUCP (Eli Posner) (01/01/84)
Why don't you people eat meat ?? I hope it's not relgious reasons, cause just the opposite is true. In Judaism the eating of meat is necessary.
mason@utcsrgv.UUCP (Dave Mason) (01/02/84)
Just because one religion (no matter how correct it may be) requires the
eating of meat does not mean that someone else cannot have religious reasons
for not eating it! Some reasons:
1) Religious - feel not right to kill other animals
2) Health - less concentration of chemicals lower in the food chain
- more fiber, less fat > almost provably healthier
3) Social/Moral - Meat is very expensive protein from a world energy
flow viewpoint. One kilo of beef protein requires ?20
kilos of plant protein. Pigs & Chickens are more
efficient, but still >5:1
I am not currently a vegetarian, but I have friends who are and have a
lot of sympathy for the reasons. If you are interested, there is an
excellent book called: "Diet for a Small Planet" by Francis Moore Lappe'
which gives a good explanation of the social/moral reasons mentioned above,
and also a variety of excellent recipes with "balanced" complete protein.
--
-- Dave Mason, U. Toronto CSRG,
{utzoo,linus,cornell,watmath,ihnp4,allegra,floyd,decwrl,
decvax,uw-beaver,ubc-vision}!utcsrgv!masonjgb@linus.UUCP (Jonathan G. Bressel) (01/03/84)
In response to the statement that in Judaism eating meat is necessary. In Judaism, eating meat is certainly not required on a daily basis. However, some sages have made the interpretation that on certain days, the "pleasure" of eating meat is required, in order to show that one is truly enjoying G-d's bounty (a simcha). I assume this is what Mr. Posner is referring to. A sizable number of Orthodox rabbis argue against this interpretation! In Judaism and Vegetarianism, Exposition Press, Smithtown, New York, 1982, Richard H. Schwartz addresses this question on page 68. He cites several references of Orthodox rabbis who interpret the relevant passages differently. Mr. Posner should also be aware that there are several vegetarian, Orthodox rabbis. I recommend this book highly. It discusses this and other questions regarding Judaism and Vegetarianism. Also good is: Berman, Louis, Vegetarianism and Jewish Tradition, Ktav Publishing House, New York, 1981.
ariels@orca.UUCP (Ariel Shattan) (01/03/84)
Eli, What ARE you talking about. It is NOT a requirement to eat meat in Judaism. Even back in temple days, sacrifices could be grain and fruit. And it certainly isn't a requirement in modern Judaism, even for the most religious (you don't EAT the shank bone that's on the Seder Plate). PLEASE don't insult Jewish vegetablearians. Ariel Shattan decvax!tektronix!tekecs!ariels
luigi@hplabsc.UUCP (Luigi Semenzato) (01/04/84)
I have always wondered if a totally vegetarian diet is completely healthy. I agree it's probably better than a very meaty and fatty diet, but aren't there some proteins (or other types of compunds) that only meat can supply? Since homo sapiens has been eating meat for quite a long time, it would seem more natural to keep a little of it in our diets. From a religious point of view, I must agree: it's not nice to kill any kind of animal. However, I also dislike any form of unnecessary violence to vegetables. They are fine forms of life. Moreover, they are totally incapable of defending themselves against the attacks of homo sapiens or other animals. The latters, at least in some circumstances, can attempt to run away. It's true that meat is very expensive from an agricultural/energetic viewpoint. However, we are at a point in which plants are already too expensive. Expansion of agricultural land destroys forests, brings animal species to extinction, and creates lots of other problems. The only long-term solution is worldwide birth control. If we don't practice it, the natural one will be a lot more painful (and it already is, in several countries). Luigi Semenzato
jlg@lanl-a.UUCP (01/04/84)
The reasons given in a previous note require some additional comment.
1. Religious: well, not much to say here. I would rather kill a trout for
food than kill a tree for firewood.
2. Health: I know several people who are vegetarians. Without exception they
have health problems and are advised by their physicians to take
SOME meat (or poultry, fish, etc.). Note: I just met some more
people who are vegetarians and I don't know wether 'Without
exception' is still true, the point is that many vegetarians
have dietary problems. This should be no surprise after several
million years of evolution with a diet including meat.
3. Social/Moral: Of course, cattle, pigs, deer, fish, etc; can metabolize
foods that humans can't; can live in environments that
aren't suited for agriculture; and provide a much more
concentrated form of nutrition than their vegetable
counterparts.
I am not against vegetarians. It's just that any unsupported claims, on any
subject, tend to bother me. Most of the vegetarians I know, despite their
moralizing, don't eat meat because they don't like it. Just that simple.
Why they think they need a further excuse is beyond me.pellegri@ittral.UUCP (Admiral Sidetone) (01/04/84)
I know of several people who are vegetarians. Without exception they are
perfectly healthy. After years of vegetarian dieting they have no health
problems. It is a matter of knowing what the nutritional needs of the human
body are, then eating the foods that meet those needs. One of the main
concerns for a non-meat eater is replacing the protein that is contained in
animal meat. This is not a problem, though. There are several vegetables
that are complete proteins. Among them are corn, mushrooms and soy beans
(and soy products). There are many, many vegetables that are incomplete
proteins, meaning they only contain some of the eleven amino acids found in
animal protein. These vegetables, including (but not exclusively) many members
of the bean and grain families, can be eaten together, in the same meal,
in a supplementary manner so that all eleven amino acids are consumed and
simultaneously processed by the digestive system. If it isn't a protein
deficiency that the people you mention are suffering from, perhaps it is
some other dietary deficiency that can be remedied by eating the appropriate
foods. I suggest they read some of the abundance of books and magazines that
deal with the nutritional aspects of vegetarianism. Even meat eaters can
have dietary deficiencies.
I beleive that if you continue to monitor net.veg you will find many sound
reasons for not eating meat besides simply not liking it.
Dan Pellegrino
ittvax!ittral!pellegriburris@ihopa.UUCP (David Burris) (01/04/84)
One can indeed get protein from other than meat. It does require a little more planning in your diet, but then how many of us could not use a little better planning of our diets? I would also recommend "Diet for a Small Planet". It supplies a very good explanation of protein balance, protein efficiency in food sources, and combinations of legumes and grains which achieve a very good protein balance. I believe that it discusses the fact that meat actually is a good source of protein but the protein conversion is less efficient because of the number of steps in the food chain adding to the protein loss. The author believes that in a world where a large portion of the population is starving, such a protein waste is intolerable. The author also states that if animals were allowed to graze rather than fed high-protein grains, they would actually be protein factories and the grain could be used to feed a much larger proportion of the world population rather than to fatten the animals. This book is good reading for anyone who believes that vegetarians must have strange moralities. -- Dave Burris ..!ihnp4!ihopa!burris AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, Il.
jgb@linus.UUCP (Jonathan G. Bressel) (01/05/84)
I am responding to the comments made below. The original is left intact,
indented so that my interspersed additions can be easily distinguished.
What begins on the left-most margin is mine. All else is the original. I
occasionally note that references are available on request -- lest it be
claimed that my arguments are "unsupported".
The reasons given in a previous note require some additional comment.
1. Religious: well, not much to say here. I would rather kill a
trout for food than kill a tree for firewood.
Perhaps, but since when are vegetarians proposing killing trees for
firewood? The argument is about avoiding killing animals. Killing trees is
an independent issue, albeit an important one. I agree with the author's
concern over the occasional misuse of trees for firewood.
2. Health: I know several people who are vegetarians. Without
exception they have health problems and are advised
by their physicians to take SOME meat (or poultry,
fish, etc.). Note: I just met some more people who
are vegetarians and I don't know wether 'Without
exception' is still true, the point is that many
vegetarians have dietary problems. This should be
I too know several vegetarians, and have read the testimonies (references
available) of scores more who have remained healthy when switching to a
vegetarian diet. While an extremely enthused, but nutritionally ignorant,
neophyte vegetarian can easily endanger his health, it is quite possible to
become vegetarian with no sacrifice to one's health -- in fact for many,
health improves with the transition.
Objective studies (references available) indicate that vegetarians suffer
much less than non-vegetarians from diseases such as hardening of the
arteries, cancer of the colon, heart disease, etc. This is often attributed
to vegetarians' reduced intake of cholesterol and other fats. Since their
food source is lower on the food chain, vegetarians ingest far less of the
pesticides and toxens recently found in increasing amounts in many food
sources in recent few years (references available). Furthermore,
vegetarians AS A GROUP are less overweight, and are more aware of the
nutritional needs of their bodies (mostly because they have to be). In
response to the claim that many "vegetarians have dietary problems", these
studies indicate that many more non-vegetarians (as a percentage of the
population) have grave dietary problems.
Furthermore, to be blunt, most physicians don't know anything about
vegetarianism or vegetarian diets. It is not a subject taught at medical
schools. Since they were themselves raised on meat, physicians tend to view
it as nutritionally necessary. More can be learned about nutritional needs
and the vegetarian diet by reading one of the fine books on vegetarianism
(references available) than by asking most doctors.
no surprise after several million years of evolution
with a diet including meat.
I am always suspicious of arguments which make appeals to the theory of
evolution. Anatomical analysis of the human body and comparison to the
teeth, jaws, and digestive systems of animal carnivores and herbivores
(references available) show that man shows no similarities to carnivores,
and that he possesses all of the characteristics of herbivores -- a jaw which
can move sideways to grind vegetable matter, large molars for grinding, no
true incisors, a long digestive track for digesting a fiber rich diet as
opposed to a short one for digesting meat, etc.
3. Social/Moral:Of course, cattle, pigs, deer, fish, etc; can
metabolize foods that humans can't; can live in
environments that aren't suited for agriculture; and
provide a much more concentrated form of nutrition
than their vegetable counterparts.
This is true, but modern factory-farming does not utilize animals which have
been allowed to graze on foods we can't metabolize. Today, cows, pigs,
chickens, are fed protein-rich corn and other grains which humans are good
at digesting (references available). The protein being used by livestock
could feed approximately twenty times as many humans as could the protein we
get from these animals, because the latter are poor protein synthesizers.
It takes twenty times as much protein to make a cow as is found in the meat
a cow provides (references available).
I am not against vegetarians. It's just that any unsupported
I am not against non-vegetarians.
claims, on any subject, tend to bother me. Most of the vegetarians
Several of the author's claims are unsupported as well.
I know, despite their moralizing, don't eat meat because they don't
like it. Just that simple. Why they think they need a further
excuse is beyond me.
I don't eat meat because I believe animals should not be harmed. I was
raised on meat, and to this day would love to sink my teeth into a tasty
hamburger. Call it what you will, but I am vegetarian out of ethics, not
out of dislike for meat. There are several organizations in this country
which publish books, and magazines describing vegetarian ethics (references
available).
Jonathan G. Bressel
--
ARPA: linus!jgb@mitre-bedford
UUCP: ...{decvax,utzoo,philabs,security,allegra,genrad}!linus!jgbjgb@linus.UUCP (Jonathan G. Bressel) (01/05/84)
What's indented is Luigi Semenzato's original, and what's at the left-most
margin are my comments.
I have always wondered if a totally vegetarian diet is completely
healthy. I agree it's probably better than a very meaty and fatty
diet, but aren't there some proteins (or other types of compunds)
that only meat can supply? Since homo sapiens has been eating meat
for quite a long time, it would seem more natural to keep a little
of it in our diets.
There are eight (it used to be thought to be eleven, but technology
progresses) essential amino acids in the production of protein in the human
body. All of these are available in vegetable sources. Other essential
vitamins and minerals can also be obtained from vegetable sources
(references available). I can't argue as for what is "natural."
>From a religious point of view, I must agree: it's not nice to kill
any kind of animal. However, I also dislike any form of unnecessary
violence to vegetables. They are fine forms of life. Moreover, they
are totally incapable of defending themselves against the attacks of
homo sapiens or other animals. The latters, at least in some
circumstances, can attempt to run away.
Assuming we are trying to minimize the pain we cause other life forms, as it
stands now we can avoid eating animals, but to try to go much further, the
remaining choice is between eating plants and dying. I would rather live.
I doubt anyone could effectively argue that a plant feels MORE pain than an
animal, and in fact, it's pretty obvious that it feels less (if it feels
anything at all). Plants benefit from having their fruit eaten. Perhaps
you could argue, however, against eating the roots of plants (e.g. potatoes,
onions, etc.). If you feel so strongly about plants, perhaps some day we'll
be able to synthesize all our nutrients from the basic elements. Until
then, let's stop the pain we KNOW we're causing, and then worry about the
pain we MIGHT be causing.
It's true that meat is very expensive from an agricultural/energetic
viewpoint. However, we are at a point in which plants are already
too expensive. Expansion of agricultural land destroys forests,
brings animal species to extinction, and creates lots of other
problems. The only long-term solution is worldwide birth control.
If we don't practice it, the natural one will be a lot more painful
(and it already is, in several countries).
MORE AGRICULTURAL LAND GOES INTO FEEDING THE ANIMALS WE EAT THAN THE LAND
WHICH WOULD GO TO PRODUCE THE SAME AMOUNT OF PROTEIN IN PLANT FORM. If we
were to stop eating animals, we would need less land for agriculture. Once
again, a cow requires twenty times the plant protein for every unit of
animal protein it produces (references available). I disagree with your
feelings about birth control, but I'm not sure my thoughts on that subject
are relevant.
Jonathan G. Bressel
--
ARPA: linus!jgb@mitre-bedford
UUCP: ...{decvax,utzoo,philabs,security,allegra,genrad}!linus!jgbmason@utcsrgv.UUCP (Dave Mason) (01/05/84)
Someone said that all the vegetarians that they know have health problems.
(presumably related to not eating meat, although a doctor suggesting that
they eat meat proves nothing, what most doctors know about (or don't know)
nutrition is depressing) If someone is a TOTAL vegetarian, no milk, cheese,
then it is challenging to eat a correct diet, but milk and/or eggs makes
a substantial improvement, and simple attention to balancing proteins is
all that is required. Many people who are VERY hard/demanding on their
bodies are vegetarians: many marathoners, and the (I believe) current
record holder in the Ironman competitions, as well as a fair number of
other track & field atheletes.
--
Dave Mason, U. Toronto CSRG,
{utzoo,linus,cornell,watmath,ihnp4,allegra,floyd,decwrl,
decvax,uw-beaver,ubc-vision}!utcsrgv!masonseifert@ihuxl.UUCP (D.A. Seifert) (01/05/84)
One can be completely healthy eating little or no meat, or
eating meat only. (there are examples of both)
Meat, and dairy products contain "complete" protein. This means
they contain all the 'essential' amino acids. Vegatables are
"incomplete", they don't contain *all* the essential amino acids.
This lead to vegatables being known as 'unable to support life',
which is true if you only eat one single vegatable. However,
some veggies contain the amino acids that others lack, so that
if you eat the right combination you'll get all eight essential
amino acids.
The magic combination is to eat about 2/3 grain, and 1/3 legumes.
(the exact ratio depends on the particular ones involved)
Look at a traditional Indian or Chinese meal and guess what ratio
of grain-to-legume you will find?
yet another meat-eater in net.veg,
--
_____
/_____\ from the flying doghouse of
/_______\ Snoopy
|___|
____|___|_____ ihnp4!ihuxl!seifertjhh@ihldt.UUCP (John Haller) (01/06/84)
It never ceases to amaze me the number of vegetarians who substitute tobacco and alcohol for meat. Especially the ones who are vegetarian `for their health.'
jlg@lanl-a.UUCP (01/06/84)
I live in cattle growing country and I have NEVER seen a cow eat anything that I could metabolize. This includes grass, sagebrush, several types of (what most people would call) weeds. Furthermore, the land that supports these cattle could not support any form of agriculture without large amounts of irrigation. I'm sure that these cattle are feed other foods to fatten them up before marketing, but this is a brief phase of their lives and is done in feed lots. Feeding grain to cattle would not be done at all if it was not economically feasible. Feeding the starving people on this planet is an economic problem and (not yet) a physical one. When it becomes physically impossible for people to live on a complete omnivorous diet, the planet will be too crowded to live on anyway. I think it would be a terrible shame to turn the grazing land of this country over to agriculture. The grasslands and forests (yes, cattle do graze in forrested land) deserve better than to be leveled (for irrigation efficiency) and layed out in dull rows of cabbage.
rao@utcsstat.UUCP (Eli Posner) (01/07/84)
Ariel (and everybody else who's been flaming me), All I know is that I am required to eat meat (or fish) on Shabbat. In addition, certain offerings (Korbonot) of meat were required to be eaten (in the time of the Temples) ; this is specifically mentioned numerous times in the Bible. I'm not insulting vegetarians, and I hope I didn't offend anyone, Eli Posner decvax!utzoo!utcsstat!rao
bhaskar@fluke.UUCP (K.S. Bhaskar) (01/07/84)
It seems there is some misunderstanding about vegetarianism and killing. ALL
eating by humans involves killing -- who is to say that a carrot does not
scream when it is pulled out of the ground just because we can't hear it?
But, most of us draw the line somewhere -- some people won't eat dead humans,
others won't eat dead dogs or cats and yet others of us say we make a decision
that we do not have to kill an animal to eat. But, if killing were
unavoidable for my survival, I would kill, in spite of being a vegetarian. If
I were a diabetic, I would use insulin from an animal in the absence of
synthetic insulin.
K.S. Bhaskar
{allegra,lbl-csam,microsoft,sb1,uw-beaver}!fluke!bhaskarstuart@inmet.UUCP (01/08/84)
#R:utcsstat:-160100:inmet:20800002:000:442 inmet!stuart Jan 6 18:17:00 1984 Why and when is the eating of meat necessary in Judaism? I have never heard of such an obligation, but I do know that there are religious Jewish vegetarians. It seems as though the obligation would be contrary to the laws of Kashrut. To be kosher, an animal must be killed instantly and painlessly, by slitting its throat with a very sharp knife. (Is someone on the net once again writing on a subject which she/he knows nothing?)
dave@utcsrgv.UUCP (Dave Sherman) (01/08/84)
In Judaism, there is an obligation to eat meat and fish on the
Sabbath. This stems from the idea that meat and fish are inherently
more enjoyable than other foods, and thus, to celebrate the Sabbath,
one should go out of one's way to spend the money for these luxuries.
We have neighbours who are extremely committed Lubavitcher Jews.
They are also vegetarians, basically because they don't like meat. On
the Sabbath (and Jewish holy days) they do eat chicken and fish at
the festive meals, however.
The alternative approach, which I understand some people take, is to
rationalize away the need for meat by saying they don't like it anyway,
and therefore that it would not be a "celebration" of the Sabbath for
them to eat meat. I don't know the exact halachic status of such an
argument, but I'm sure that different Orthodox rabbis will give different
answers. Under the definition of Jewish law, what is permissible
is determined by the answer given by the rabbi you ask, assuming
the rabbi is a competent Orthodox rabbi. (That answer may be different
depending on who does the asking.)
Dave Sherman
Toronto
--
{allegra,cornell,decvax,ihnp4,linus,utzoo}!utcsrgv!davemason@utcsrgv.UUCP (Dave Mason) (01/09/84)
When they get to the feed lots they will be fed a LOT of grain, soybean,
(& in some places fish meal & milk) which adds about 1/3 of the protien
at a HUGE cost in vegetable protein. Cows are EXCELLENT at converting
things that people won't/can't eat into protein, but then we turn around
and feed them lots of things we can/will eat to make them fit our 'ideal'.
--
Dave Mason, U. Toronto CSRG,
{utzoo,linus,cornell,watmath,ihnp4,allegra,floyd,decwrl,
decvax,uw-beaver,ubc-vision}!utcsrgv!masonhxe@rayssd.UUCP (01/10/84)
PLEASE STOP IT!!!!!
Just as in net.motss, the purpose of this newsgroup is to discuss
issues that are relevent to vegetarians, NOT to discuss whether
or not it is natural to BE a vegetarian! I am simply fed up with
people who seem to have waited their whole lives to meet a vege-
tarian just so they can announce smugly, "You know, plants are
alive too!"
I was really hoping that this group could be a forum for vegetarians
to discuss, among themselves, the various problems and issues that
apply to vegetarians. As in net.motss or net.women.only, I assumed
that non-vegetarians would just read the group or ask an occasional
question. I do not want to have to refute age-old defensive claims
from meat-eaters and will unsubscribe if this group turns into that
sort of thing.
As for the comment from a non-vegetarian that all of his vegetarian
acquaintances have health problems (and the implied extension of
that theory to all vegetarians): I get a discount on my life insur-
ance because I am a vegetarian and it is assumed that I will live a
long and healthy life. Believe me, life insurance companies are ONLY
in it for the money, so when they grant a discount they mean it.
Signing off from my first (and, I hope, last) flame,
Heather Emanuel
{allegra, decvax!brunix, ccieng5, linus} rayssd!hxetower@inmet.UUCP (01/10/84)
#R:utcsrgv:-301600:inmet:20800003:000:379 inmet!tower Jan 8 12:27:00 1984 ***** inmet:net.veg / ihldt!jhh / 10:28 am Jan 6, 1984 It never ceases to amaze me the number of vegetarians who substitute tobacco and alcohol for meat. Especially the ones who are vegetarian `for their health.' ---------- Sir: could we see some statisitics please!! Or a reference to a statistically sound study?? -len tower harpo!inmet!tower Cambridge, MA
tower@inmet.UUCP (01/10/84)
#R:utcsrgv:-301600:inmet:20800004:000:982 inmet!tower Jan 8 12:36:00 1984 I have another reason for being a vegetarian, beyond the reasons mentioned so far: Most animals raised for meat are not raise in the barnyard of the small family owned farm, or on the wide open spaces of the vast western ranges. The raising of meat in this country is big business. Most of these animals are raised in feedlots and buildings (factories), using modern manufacturing techniques, to minimize the cost and maximize the return. The animals are not treated well, they are treated as objects. Drugs (e.g. steroids) are often added to their feed to optimize the product. (Note that even the range feed cattle are usually fatten for markets off the range.) This conversion of an animal into object is very disrespectful of the animal in particular and life in general. I prefer to respect life, feeling it is a very healthy attitude, that will help to make the world a beeter place for me and others to live in. -len tower harpo!inmet!tower Cambridge, MA
ken@hp-pcd.UUCP (ken) (01/22/84)
#R:utcsstat:-160100:hp-cvd:1800001:000:715 hp-cvd!ken Jan 4 16:45:00 1984 Judaism does not necessitate eating meat! I am jewish and my vegetarian habits greatly simplify keeping kosher. There are many varied reasons for vegetarianism. Not wanting to attempt an exhaustive list, I'll try to give a few simple reasons. . Eat lower on the food chain, (as we pollute our planet, the poisons tend to concentrate in the high end of the food chain). . Non killing ethic. . Political. It takes more than 10 lbs. of grains to create a lb. of beef. So there is more food for all if we moderate our supposed need for meat. . Nutritional. I suggest reading 'Laurels Kitchen', an excellant source of nutritional information. -Ken Bronstein hp-pcd!ken