Are You a Vegetarian? | Poll & Discussion

[Evo]

Although I consume dairy, I disagree. I am sure humans were always herbivores. Look at our teeth, intestines, stomach acid, etc. All matches a herbivore.

Humans and pre-humans have been eating meat for millions of years. We are omnivores. But with the modern availability and abundance of a varied non-meat diet, a vegetarian diet is naturally sustainable and healthy.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/02/0218_050218_human_diet.html

 

[ViewsofMars]

Humans and pre-humans have been eating meat for millions of years. We are omnivores. But with the modern availability and abundance of a varied non-meat diet, a vegetarian diet is naturally sustainable and healthy.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/02/0218_050218_human_diet.html

Thanks Evo. I noted that the National Geographic article stated:

Some early humans may have started eating meat as a way to survive within their own ecological niche.

Competition from other species may be a key element of natural selection that has molded anatomy and behavior, according to Craig B. Stanford, an ecologist at the University of Southern California (USC).

Stanford has spent years visiting the Bwindi Impenetrable Forest National Park in Uganda, Africa, studying the relationship between mountain gorillas and chimpanzees.

I do recall back in 2005 an article that I read from the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The February 18 2005 article, Mush, Meat and Atkins: Exploring the Evolution of the Human Diet, by Ginger Pinholster:

Early humans living alongside great apes millions of years ago may have gained a competitive evolutionary advantage by embracing a primitive version of the Atkins Diet, according to new research discussed today at the 2005 AAAS Annual Meeting.

But Craig B. Stanford of the University of Southern California hastens to add that our earliest ancestors weren't "buying cartons of eggs from the market," and probably ate many more raw vegetables, fruits and lean meats than today's heavy-protein advocates.

Stanford concedes that studying our ancestors' lifestyles may not provide concrete diet tips for today's weight-conscious humans. But, he said, we may gain fundamental insights to our origins, and thus, our behaviors, by investigating the fossil record.

The results of a nine-year field study of mountain gorillas living with chimps in Uganda offer intriguing new clues to the evolution of the modern human diet, Stanford said. The late Dian Fossey's studies of "gorillas in the mist" may have left many laypeople with the impression that gorillas are docile, cow-like creatures who favor leaves, while meaty foods are left to high-energy chimps. Fossey's gorillas, however, lived in a cold, wet, volcanic region of Africa and had little access to meat, Stanford explained. In more typical environments, he said, gorillas compete aggressively with chimps for available meat sources, and offer useful clues to the dietary adaptations of our early hominid ancestors.

Increased meat consumption triggered genetic changes that allowed early humans to eat more fatty foods without developing heart disease, according to work by Stanford and gerontologist Caleb Finch of USC.

Please read on . . .
http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2005/0218gorillateeth.shtml

 

[glb_lub]

I used to eat meat till I was 23 years old. I am 27 now. And only eat vegetarian food , including eggs.Actually I am an Indian, and India has got a high proportion of vegetarians. Most do it for religious reasons. I am doing it simply for weight-loss. Plus Indian cuisine is pretty rich when it comes to vegetarian food. For me it's mostly a psychological thing. I know I haven't had any meat since past 3-4 years so I can easily stick to a vegetarian diet. In case, I taste blood even once, I'll get meat cravings frequently.

I eat an Indian cottage cheese namely 'Paneer' on a regular basis. I find it to be a good substitute, tastewise, of meat. Then there are also mushrooms and tofu.

Speaking of Vitamin B12 I read in a wikipedia article that wheat grass juice contains Vitamin B12. How reliable is that information ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheatgrass#Health_claims

 

[Monique]

Speaking of Vitamin B12 I read in a wikipedia article that wheat grass juice contains Vitamin B12. How reliable is that information ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheatgrass#Health_claims

It could be that the vitamin B12 producing bacteria are present on the plant, but you shouldn't count on it. It hasn't been extensively tested that all available wheatgrass juice contains vitamin B12, so indeed unreliable information.

 

[PAllen]

I used to eat meat till I was 23 years old. I am 27 now. And only eat vegetarian food , including eggs.Actually I am an Indian, and India has got a high proportion of vegetarians. Most do it for religious reasons. I am doing it simply for weight-loss. Plus Indian cuisine is pretty rich when it comes to vegetarian food. For me it's mostly a psychological thing. I know I haven't had any meat since past 3-4 years so I can easily stick to a vegetarian diet. In case, I taste blood even once, I'll get meat cravings frequently.

I eat an Indian cottage cheese namely 'Paneer' on a regular basis. I find it to be a good substitute, tastewise, of meat. Then there are also mushrooms and tofu.

Speaking of Vitamin B12 I read in a wikipedia article that wheat grass juice contains Vitamin B12. How reliable is that information ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheatgrass#Health_claims

If you eat paneer and raita (let alone eggs) you should have no problem getting B12. If you want to be vegan, just supplement (also IMO eat flax seed for Omega's if you rule out fish or fish based supplements).

 

[glb_lub]

If you eat paneer and raita (let alone eggs) you should have no problem getting B12. If you want to be vegan, just supplement (also IMO eat flax seed for Omega's if you rule out fish or fish based supplements).

Will do so. But in what form should one eat flaxseed ? Will flaxseed oil work ? In India , it is used in some dishes, but very rarely. Mostly it is groundnut oil and in recent times, soybean oil is gaining popularity. Is soy-milk a good source of omega acids ? I saw on wikipedia that Soybean has omega acids but couldn't see the same for soy-milk.And since we are discussing supplements, I wonder what is the best source of calcium for vegetarians ? How is cow's milk on that front. I am mostly worried about calcium intake and that's what keeps me from going vegan.

 

[Pkruse]

I grew up eating a massive amount of meat and thought it impossible to do otherwise. Now that I'm much older I find myself eating much less meat. I'm considering giving it up completely as an experiment. If I do, i would probably find it preferable. I see no health or moral reasons for doing that. I would still be the one likely to shoot a hog and prepare a BBQ when my friends schedule one. I would still enjoy doing that for my friends, but I'm becoming less and less likely to eat it myself. Only real reason is that I've found so many non-meat things that I like better.

 

[Monique]

And since we are discussing supplements, I wonder what is the best source of calcium for vegetarians ? How is cow's milk on that front. I am mostly worried about calcium intake and that's what keeps me from going vegan.

See the calcium paragraph in: Position of the American Dietetic Association: Vegetarian Diets

Calcium intakes of lacto-ovo-vegetarians are similar to, or higher than, those of nonvegetarians (12), whereas intakes of vegans tend to be lower than both groups and may fall below recommended intakes (12)[..]

Low-oxalate greens (eg, bok choy, broccoli, Chinese cabbage, collards, and kale) and fruit juices fortified with calcium citrate malate are good sources of highly bioavailable calcium (50% to 60% and 40% to 50%, respectively), while calcium-set tofu, and cow’s milk have good bioavailability of calcium (about 30% to 35%), and sesame seeds, almonds, and dried beans have a lower bioavailability (21% to 27%) (39).

 

[glb_lub]

See the calcium paragraph in: Position of the American Dietetic Association: Vegetarian Diets

Thanks.

 

[Kholdstare]

Humans and pre-humans have been eating meat for millions of years.

I second that.

India has got a high proportion of vegetarians. Most do it for religious reasons.

This page tells me its a gross misconception.

 

[Monique]

This page tells me its a gross misconception.

Based on what do you make that conclusion?

 

[glb_lub]

This page tells me its a gross misconception.

The number of meat eaters are on the rise as standards of living are increasing.
When I said a high proportion of Indians don't eat meat, I meant a substantial population.(The link you provide says 40% are vegetarians, isn't 40% in a country of 1.2 billion a large number ?)
The per capita consumption of meat in the country is very low as compared to other countries. (This could be due to high levels of poverty and a high population.)

http://www.allcountries.org/uscensus/1370_per_capita_consumption_of_meat_and.html

I am not totally sure how reliable above site is. And also the stats are a 12 years old so can't tell what current stats are.Further a large number of meat eaters in the country consume meat only on special occasions. When I used to eat meat it would be 2-3 times a month on an average. Most of the people I know are like that. (I am not making a statistical assertion, just sharing anecdotal experience). So what I mean to say is that though there may not be many 'strictly' vegetarian people(though the link you provide says it is 40%), still a sizable population is 'predominantly' vegetarian for most part of the year.

 

[Danger]

Yes I am pure vegetarian.

You have my pity. You haven't lived until you've had a rack of garlic ribs.

 

[Kholdstare]

When I said a high proportion of Indians don't eat meat, I meant a substantial population.

If the population has roughly 60% non-veg and 40% veg, I'd rather say a high proportion of population eat non-veg.

http://www.allcountries.org/uscensus..._meat_and.html

This site does not give the statistics for fish and seafood consumption.

Further a large number of meat eaters in the country consume meat only on special occasions. When I used to eat meat it would be 2-3 times a month on an average. Most of the people I know are like that. (I am not making a statistical assertion, just sharing anecdotal experience). So what I mean to say is that though there may not be many 'strictly' vegetarian people(though the link you provide says it is 40%), still a sizable population is 'predominantly' vegetarian for most part of the year.

IMO, a person is non-vegetarian as long as he has no problem eating non-veg foods. It does not matter how often he eats non-veg food. (However, I discount those who stopped eating or just tasted it once.) I guess the point of this poll is to get how many are non-veg or veg. Not how much non-veg food a person consumes.

 

[TheWire247]

I love meat!

 

[Illuminerdi]

I'm a vegan, but I'm <i>very</i> far from the anti-vaccination, all raw-food-eating, hippie type.

I actually became a vegetarian around age 7 or 8 because I simply cannot be around animal flesh. I cannot watch medical television or violent films, and, similarly, I cannot be anywhere near meat that physically resembles animal flesh. It fazes me too much. I became vegan around 16, while running track and field. I noticed that, days where I had a glass of milk in the morning, I would suffer from terrible stomach pain running in the afternoon. After I gave up dairy, entirely, I realized my stomach felt better, in general.* Nearly half the world is lactose intolerant. This doesn't mean that much, though, since half the world is also asian. I suppose I inherited this from my mongolian rapist ancestors.

*Not that it's not still in terrible pain, seeing as I am stuck with Jewish DNA.

On the veganism issue, I'm not lacking in compassion for animals, but sometimes I find it hard to reconcile this with my deterministic view of the universe that has no fundamental separation between the living and nonliving. I believe mostly what Nikola Tesla believed on these issues (though Tesla, himself, was a vegetarian).

Do I actually think that I'm healthier for not consuming meat? Sometimes. I'm definitely healthier for not consuming ground beef or any sort of fast food, but, can I actually find a health reason to not eat tuna fish? Of course not.

 

[Monique]

can I actually find a health reason to not eat tuna fish? Of course not.

There are clear health reasons to limit the intake though: Dutch government advises to not eat more than 600 g (21 oz) fatty fish (tuna) a week, women with a wish to get pregnant (or those who are pregnant) are advised to not eat more than 300 g a week. This advice is given due to the presence of dioxins and heavy metals. It is also advised to eat fish with low-nitrate vegetables, the combination with lettuce or spinach could result in the production of harmful chemicals (reference).

 

[Curious3141]

If the population has roughly 60% non-veg and 40% veg, I'd rather say a high proportion of population eat non-veg.

I'm sorry, but that's not logical. It's clear that when glb_lub was talking about India having a high proportion of vegetarians, he was talking about India in comparison with the rest of the world. And that's perfectly true, India is universally acknowledged to be the country with the highest proportion of (lacto)vegetarians.

It doesn't matter that the proportion is less than 50%. It *would* have mattered if glb_lub's claim was that *most* Indians were vegetarian. But that wasn't his claim at all. In this case, it only matters that India has a higher proportion of vegetarians than any other country. Far higher in fact - no other country even comes kinda close.

(Also, while it's tangential to this particular argument, because of India's huge population, it's estimated that more than 70% of the world's vegetarian population are Indians. Don't hold me to this one, though, it's just a figure I found somewhere on the Internet.)

The vegetarian culture in India so entrenched that in many places, it's almost impossible to find restaurants serving meat. In fact, in these areas, restaurants that serve meat dishes have to be specifically labelled as such, and an unsigned restaurant is, by default, a vegetarian one.

This culture is heavily rooted in the predominant religion, Hinduism. Apart from many Hindus, Jains are also vegetarians - in fact, Jains are even stricter vegetarians than most Hindu Brahmins. It is likely India would've had an even higher proportion of vegetarians today if not for incursions by the Muslim and Christian colonial powers.

The Indian diaspora also tend to cling onto their ancestral dietary practices, wherever feasible (although this is by no means a rule). For example, I'm a Brahmin by birth. Even though I'm a second generation Singaporean (my father and I were both born in Singapore - a largely non-vegetarian country with a Chinese majority), my entire family has been lactovegetarian from birth. And while I don't really consider myself "Brahmin" any more since I've stopped being a practising Hindu (I'm an atheist now), I still retain a vegetarian diet. This is partly for humane reasons, but also because my upbringing has conditioned me simply not to crave meat (and in fact, to be averse to it). So I simply don't miss it - in fact, the thought of eating meat or fish actually revolts me. Thankfully, it's very, very easy to find restaurants serving only vegetarian fare in Singapore.

 

[Kholdstare]

he was talking about India in comparison with the rest of the world.

It's also not logical. He did not explicitly mention among which population he is making the comparison when he said "India having a high proportion of vegetarians".

 

[Curious3141]

It's also not logical. He did not explicitly mention among which population he is making the comparison when he said "India having a high proportion of vegetarians".

I thought that was implicit. It's the most logical conclusion.

And now, I'll stop sounding like Spock.

 

[dimension10]

I'm a vegan, but I'm <i>very</i> far from the anti-vaccination, all raw-food-eating, hippie type.

I actually became a vegetarian around age 7 or 8 because I simply cannot be around animal flesh. I cannot watch medical television or violent films, and, similarly, I cannot be anywhere near meat that physically resembles animal flesh. It fazes me too much. I became vegan around 16, while running track and field. I noticed that, days where I had a glass of milk in the morning, I would suffer from terrible stomach pain running in the afternoon. After I gave up dairy, entirely, I realized my stomach felt better, in general.* Nearly half the world is lactose intolerant. This doesn't mean that much, though, since half the world is also asian. I suppose I inherited this from my mongolian rapist ancestors.

*Not that it's not still in terrible pain, seeing as I am stuck with Jewish DNA.

On the veganism issue, I'm not lacking in compassion for animals, but sometimes I find it hard to reconcile this with my deterministic view of the universe that has no fundamental separation between the living and nonliving. I believe mostly what Nikola Tesla believed on these issues (though Tesla, himself, was a vegetarian).

Do I actually think that I'm healthier for not consuming meat? Sometimes. I'm definitely healthier for not consuming ground beef or any sort of fast food, but, can I actually find a health reason to not eat tuna fish? Of course not.

I too believe in the deterministic view of the universe and that there is no fundamental separation between living and non-living. And I am also vegetarian, because I believe that pain and suffering do exist! Which is why I do not believe in the "plants live too!" argument since plants don't feel pain, so they have no rights. Because then, would come the "Bacteria live too!" argument which would not permit me to wash my hands.

 

[Kholdstare]

I too believe in the deterministic view of the universe and that there is no fundamental separation between living and non-living. And I am also vegetarian, because I believe that pain and suffering do exist! Which is why I do not believe in the "plants live too!" argument since plants don't feel pain, so they have no rights. Because then, would come the "Bacteria live too!" argument which would not permit me to wash my hands.

What exactly are you trying to say? Animals feel pain and suffering, while plants do not. Yet there is no fundamental separation between living and non-living!

 

[Curious3141]

I've always thought the most humane diet would consist of using genetically modified bacteria to produce and excrete high-grade proteins and all the vitamins essential for human health. The bacteria + nutrient mix would then be filtered through a micropore filter that would allow the nutrient macromolecules through, but hold the living bacteria back. The completely inanimate nutrient mix is then processed and packed, and people can subsist on it.

While this is as "humane" as it gets (no living things are eaten or intentionally killed to get the food), it's also immensely impractical and exceedingly expensive. One's "daily allowance" may cost at least a few hundred bucks to produce.

So that's a no-go. Pragmatically speaking, we all have to draw the line somewhere when it comes to deciding what we eat. How much suffering are we willing to abide for our nutritive needs? Killing higher animals (mammals and maybe avians)? Or just lower vertebrates (fish)? How about invertebrates only?

Is lacto-ovo-vegetarianism OK? What's so humane about animal products like dairy and eggs? The former involves pumping cows full of antibiotics and tearing a calf away from its mother. The latter involves sacrificing a HUGE number of male chicks which are just tossed into blenders while still fully conscious. This applies even to many "free range" farm products, which "humane"-conscious shoppers buy exclusively (and obliviously). That's just sick, isn't it?

Is veganism completely humane? Because many vegans still eat root vegetables, the harvesting of which involves killing the entire plant. What about fruitarians? Is it a subversion of the order of nature to eat the fruit but not disperse the seed?

And if one follows all these "-ism"s, is adequate nutrition guaranteed? Even if adults may choose to follow such diets, is it fair to "inflict" this upon young children, who have stringent needs, are unable to make an informed choice and are highly dependent on their caregivers?

Finally, are people who follow the most stringent dietary practices also abstaining from taking any medication, even for life-threatening conditions? Because EVERY drug has been tested on animals at some point, and that means that animal life, usually of the cute, furry and cuddly kind, has been taken in the process of developing and testing the medicine. While one may choose to avoid cosmetics and hygiene products that have been animal-tested, how can one avoid medication if one is sick?

The point of my post is to show that there's no black and white when it comes to humane arguments for or against some form of diet. While I'm lacto-ovo-vegetarian myself, I am no longer strident in decrying meat-eating. I no longer harangue others and extol the virtues of vegetarianism. I'm sticking with my form of vegetarianism because I've been conditioned to be happy with this diet, and I still figure it's more humane than an all-out meat-eating diet. But I won't fault anyone for choosing to eat meat.

 

[dimension10]

What exactly are you trying to say? Animals feel pain and suffering, while plants do not. Yet there is no fundamental separation between living and non-living!

I'm saying that everything works mechanically, except quantum mechanical corrections, that is. Pain is also a mechanical process, but I don't want to cause it because it is not something one would want to encounter. Aargh, this is getting a little philosophical.

 

[dimension10]

I've always thought the most humane diet would consist of using genetically modified bacteria to produce and excrete high-grade proteins and all the vitamins essential for human health. The bacteria + nutrient mix would then be filtered through a micropore filter that would allow the nutrient macromolecules through, but hold the living bacteria back. The completely inanimate nutrient mix is then processed and packed, and people can subsist on it.

While this is as "humane" as it gets (no living things are eaten or intentionally killed to get the food), it's also immensely impractical and exceedingly expensive. One's "daily allowance" may cost at least a few hundred bucks to produce.

So that's a no-go. Pragmatically speaking, we all have to draw the line somewhere when it comes to deciding what we eat. How much suffering are we willing to abide for our nutritive needs? Killing higher animals (mammals and maybe avians)? Or just lower vertebrates (fish)? How about invertebrates only?

Is lacto-ovo-vegetarianism OK? What's so humane about animal products like dairy and eggs? The former involves pumping cows full of antibiotics and tearing a calf away from its mother. The latter involves sacrificing a HUGE number of male chicks which are just tossed into blenders while still fully conscious. This applies even to many "free range" farm products, which "humane"-conscious shoppers buy exclusively (and obliviously). That's just sick, isn't it?

Is veganism completely humane? Because many vegans still eat root vegetables, the harvesting of which involves killing the entire plant. What about fruitarians? Is it a subversion of the order of nature to eat the fruit but not disperse the seed?

And if one follows all these "-ism"s, is adequate nutrition guaranteed? Even if adults may choose to follow such diets, is it fair to "inflict" this upon young children, who have stringent needs, are unable to make an informed choice and are highly dependent on their caregivers?

Finally, are people who follow the most stringent dietary practices also abstaining from taking any medication, even for life-threatening conditions? Because EVERY drug has been tested on animals at some point, and that means that animal life, usually of the cute, furry and cuddly kind, has been taken in the process of developing and testing the medicine. While one may choose to avoid cosmetics and hygiene products that have been animal-tested, how can one avoid medication if one is sick?

The point of my post is to show that there's no black and white when it comes to humane arguments for or against some form of diet. While I'm lacto-ovo-vegetarian myself, I am no longer strident in decrying meat-eating. I no longer harangue others and extol the virtues of vegetarianism. I'm sticking with my form of vegetarianism because I've been conditioned to be happy with this diet, and I still figure it's more humane than an all-out meat-eating diet. But I won't fault anyone for choosing to eat meat.

I am lacto-vegetarian. I stopped eating eggs after watching one of PeTA's videos. Some dairy farms are ok, they don't tear calves away from their mothers nor make them veal.

 

[Evo]

Eat what you want, don't eat what you don't want. Just be aware that your choices could be harmful to your health. Don't go by fad sites (like a raw food diet, paleo diet) get real scientific/medical advice on what constitutes a healthy, balanced diet. If you still want to go on a dangerous/unhealthy fad diet, well, we warned you.

 

[GladScientist]

I am not a vegetarian, and I find it extremely difficult to morally justify my position as a meat eater. In some sense, I'm open about the fact that eating meat is probably wrong but I refuse to stop because I love it.

 

[Curious3141]

I am lacto-vegetarian. I stopped eating eggs after watching one of PeTA's videos. Some dairy farms are ok, they don't tear calves away from their mothers nor make them veal.

What happens to the old cows after they've stopped giving milk?

 

[Danger]

What happens to the old cows after they've stopped giving milk?

They marry us and make our lives miserable.

 

[Curious3141]

They marry us and make our lives miserable.

 

[daveb]

I no longer harangue others and extol the virtues of vegetarianism. I'm sticking with my form of vegetarianism because I've been conditioned to be happy with this diet, and I still figure it's more humane than an all-out meat-eating diet. But I won't fault anyone for choosing to eat meat.

I'm the same way (though vegan). I call the types of people that try to force others into veganism vegangelicals.

 

[glb_lub]

I used to eat non-vegetarian but I am an ovo-lacto-vegetarian as of now.
But recently I watched the following video :-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6GimGZz6a8

And would love to give a break to my vegetarianism exclusively to try out these locusts.
Some of you may have watched that TED talk.

I don't know whether this has been already discussed. But what are you people's views on insect diet ? A lot of people here are not eating non-vegetarian food for humane reasons. That is quite understandable.

But would you consider eating insects as inhumane ? I mean , a locust (most probably) does not have the same amount of emotional range like a cow. Similarly, would you say eating animals such as oysters inhumane ? Of course , eating locusts/oysters would count as non-vegetarian diet but would you say it is less inhumane than eating cows/lambs ?

 

[micromass]

But would you consider eating insects as inhumane ? I mean , a locust (most probably) does not have the same amount of emotional range like a cow. Similarly, would you say eating animals such as oysters inhumane ? Of course , eating locusts/oysters would count as non-vegetarian diet but would you say it is less inhumane than eating cows/lambs ?

It's a tough question. I'm vegetarian because suffering and pain of animals bother me. But I don't think that insects or locus can even feel pain (although I'm not sure).

However, I want to draw a line somewhere between what I don't eat and what I do eat. That line is necessarily arbitrary. So I choose to draw the line between plants and animals. I don't think I would have any problems right now with eating insects, but I just choose not to.

 

[Infinitum]

But I don't think that insects or locus can even feel pain (although I'm not sure).

http://www.utilitarian-essays.com/insect-pain.html

Yes, they do!

 

[glb_lub]

Anyways in case some of there are ex-meat eaters here who are missing the taste of meat, there are few vegetarian substitutes which somewhat simulate the texture of meat.
We had discussed 'Paneer' i.e cottage cheese a few posts back. It is a good substitute for meat. Some people may say that so is mushroom. Not to mention tofu.

In India, we have dishes made from a fruit called Jackfruit.

The unripe fruit tastes similar to chicken.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackfruit#Young_fruit

I'm not sure whether it is available everywhere around the world. How many of you have tasted it ?

 

[Danger]

The unripe fruit tastes similar to chicken.

Is there anything that doesn't taste like chicken? Rattlesnakes, worms, lizards, anything found in a meteorite crater... If anybody wants you to try something inedible, they say that it tastes like chicken. The only thing that I haven't heard it said about is chicken.
I have no objection in principle to eating insects. On the other hand, I have a morbid bug phobia. I can't even pick up a dead one without pliers or tweezers. It doesn't bother me that I suck in the occasional gnat or fruit fly, but the thought of something like a beetle or grasshopper entering my system send shivers up my spine.

 

[CAC1001]

Not a vegan, but I do make sure to eat lots of fresh raw produce. Every day I munch on raw baby carrots and raw spinach. I have a "daily vegetable requirement" so as to make sure I am always consuming veggies to get the nutrition. I figure a combination at least of raw carrots and spinach is a very good balance nutrition-wise. I eat other vegetables and lots of fruit as well.

 

[Evo]

Not a vegan, but I do make sure to eat lots of fresh raw produce. Every day I munch on raw baby carrots and raw spinach. I have a "daily vegetable requirement" so as to make sure I am always consuming veggies to get the nutrition. I figure a combination at least of raw carrots and spinach is a very good balance nutrition-wise. I eat other vegetables and lots of fruit as well.

Just be aware that raw vegetables are not always as nutritious as cooked vegetables. You really need to look up the nutritive values of each vegetable cooked and uncooked. A good place for this is http://nutritiondata.self.com/

 

[micromass]

Just be aware that raw vegetables are not always as nutritious as cooked vegetables. You really need to look up the nutritive values of each vegetable cooked and uncooked. A good place for this is http://nutritiondata.self.com/

Wow, that is a great site! Thanks!

 

[Kholdstare]

I have this simple philosophy behind eating vegetables, meat etc. I don't eat living things which show human-like emotions. Rest, I eat (if edible and tasty). Compare dog vs. cow. A dog will follow me everywhere and be a company. A cow will just stand there and ...

 

[jairosomethin]

I'm not a Vegetarian but I do try to incorporate as many vegetables as I can in my diet. Most of the time I'll cook dishes that are prepared with vegetables.

 

[Curious3141]

I have this simple philosophy behind eating vegetables, meat etc. I don't eat living things which show human-like emotions. Rest, I eat (if edible and tasty). Compare dog vs. cow. A dog will follow me everywhere and be a company. A cow will just stand there and ...

A cow is a slow moving, placid mammal. Its physical limitations preclude its being able to follow you around, puppy-dog like.

I'm willing to bet that a calf, if it imprinted on you as a juvenile, would also follow you around doggedly, pun intended.

Dogs exhibit that "companion" behaviour toward you only because of similar imprinting. Generally, the relationship between a dog and its master is considered similar to that between a wild dog and the alpha male of its pack. A stray (feral) dog wouldn't give you the time of day, let alone follow you around devotedly, so why not eat that?

 

[Kholdstare]

A cow is a slow moving, placid mammal. Its physical limitations preclude its being able to follow you around, puppy-dog like.

Wrong! It can. But it wont.

I'm willing to bet that a calf, if it imprinted on you as a juvenile, would also follow you around doggedly, pun intended.

Probably, only to get some food. No emotional attachment.

Dogs exhibit that "companion" behaviour toward you only because of similar imprinting. Generally, the relationship between a dog and its master is considered similar to that between a wild dog and the alpha male of its pack.

Both a dog and a human can understand that they are different species. Similar imprinting does not work.

A stray (feral) dog wouldn't give you the time of day, let alone follow you around devotedly, so why not eat that?

Its an example of intelligent predator. I don't eat intelligent predators.

 

[Danger]

Wrong! It can. But it wont...

...Its an example of intelligent predator. I don't eat intelligent predators.

You consider a dog to be intelligent? Pigs are a hell of a lot brighter, but nobody seems to think of pork and bacon as off-limits.
My pet cow would, in fact, follow me around until she got bored.

 

[Curious3141]

You consider a dog to be intelligent? Pigs are a hell of a lot brighter, but nobody seems to think of pork and bacon as off-limits.
My pet cow would, in fact, follow me around until she got bored.

Exactly. We're all prone to anthropomorphising. The key is to recognise the tendency, and see that all we're engaging in is arbitrary rationalisation of dietary behaviours we would've had in any case.

So eat what you want - but recognise that any justifications you can come up with for not eating what some other fellow is eating are likely to be subjective, irrational and convincing only to yourself.

 

[glb_lub]

Is there anything that doesn't taste like chicken? Rattlesnakes, worms, lizards, anything found in a meteorite crater... If anybody wants you to try something inedible, they say that it tastes like chicken. The only thing that I haven't heard it said about is chicken.

Ya. In the show "Man vs Wild" the anchor once compared the taste of a snake to fish+chicken.

Well, but jackfruit is not that inedible. I guess at least not as inedible as worms and lizards. It is similar to breadfruit. I remember reading a lot about breadfruit in the novel "Mutiny on HMS Bounty". Though never got a chance to taste it.

I have no objection in principle to eating insects. On the other hand, I have a morbid bug phobia. I can't even pick up a dead one without pliers or tweezers. It doesn't bother me that I suck in the occasional gnat or fruit fly, but the thought of something like a beetle or grasshopper entering my system send shivers up my spine.

I fear cockroaches the most. Whenever I look at two cockroaches engaged in conversation I get the feeling that they are plotting a conspiracy.
But I have not the same aversion to grasshoppers. They seem pretty innocent.
Ever since I heard the 'ant and grasshopper' fable, they have my sympathies.

Exactly. We're all prone to anthropomorphising. The key is to recognise the tendency, and see that all we're engaging in is arbitrary rationalisation of dietary behaviours we would've had in any case.

So eat what you want - but recognise that any justifications you can come up with for not eating what some other fellow is eating are likely to be subjective, irrational and convincing only to yourself.

Well said.

 

[Danger]

I have not the same aversion to grasshoppers. They seem pretty innocent.

You obviously have never had one jumping around inside your pants.

That's not a joke, by the bye. When you have a couple of hundred of those things per square metre, hopping and/or flying in every direction, they get into everything. Their rear (jumping) legs are like little saw blades, and it hurts like hell when one is trying to escape your clothing.

edit: They also spit all over you like a cowboy with a chin full of tobacco.

 

[glb_lub]

That's not a joke, by the bye. When you have a couple of hundred of those things per square metre, hopping and/or flying in every direction,

Wow, I have never seen so many at once.

they get into everything. Their rear (jumping) legs are like little saw blades, and it hurts like hell when one is trying to escape your clothing.

It's just not cricket.(pun intended)

 

[Monique]

So eat what you want - but recognise that any justifications you can come up with for not eating what some other fellow is eating are likely to be subjective, irrational and convincing only to yourself.

Uh? Telling the population that they should eat what they want without educating themselves about the consequences makes absolutely no sense at all. There's no need to bother people with every bite they take, but disregarding every food science argument as subjective and irrational is unconvincing in itself.

 

[SHISHKABOB]

So eat what you want - but recognise that any justifications you can come up with for not eating what some other fellow is eating are likely to be subjective, irrational and convincing only to yourself.

that's not entirely true: if I tell you that eating dirt is not a good idea compared to eating real food, that's not subjective at all