[roadtonowhere08]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatto /img/forum/go_quote.gif Do you know anything about body design in nature when it comes to plant eaters vs meat eaters? pretty much everything in our design says we are made to eat plants. Just because humans like meat and choose to eat it doesn't mean nature intended for us to.

Clearly not. If I make one mistake, I must be ignorant on the whole subject, right? I was mistaken; you make those, right?

Edit: Upon further research, I might not be so wrong after all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatto /img/forum/go_quote.gif Either way I don't mind when people eat meat but don't jump on a high horse and insist you're better then other meat eaters because you found a package that says free range on it. Also just because you don't support one part of the industry directly doesn't mean you don't support it. If a person does not eat veal but consumes dairy they are supporting veal, because milk cows give birth to the babies who are used for veal. Basically it's all connected, even if what you're buying says free range or cage free or humane or whatever it says that doesn't mean that the company who made it doesn't also have regular factory farms for the less concerned consumer.

You are correct in that until people actually care about the subject, nothing will change. I refuse to give up meat, but I am not against paying more for meat that was obtained in a more humane manner. With all the thing we blow our money on, this expenditure would actually matter to more than just the spender.

 

[Gatto]

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadtonowhere08 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Clearly not. If I make one mistake, I must be ignorant on the whole subject, right? I was mistaken; you make those, right? You are correct in that until people actually care about the subject, nothing will change. I refuse to give up meat, but I am not against paying more for meat that was obtained in a more humane manner. With all the thing we blow our money on, this expenditure would actually matter to more than just the spender.

Sorry! I didn't mean it like that.... I type the way I talk and it comes out more sarcastic in text. Either way, our bodies are actually designed like plant eaters and not meat eaters. I do make mistakes too, all the time actually. I understand many meat eaters would pay more for more humanely handled meat but the point is, even things they are currently being paraded around as humane really aren't. If I remember correctly, chickens can be called cage free if packed into large pens instead of cages and given access to the outdoors for 10 minutes per day. The problem is those chickens can be just as crammed in and filthy and gross as caged chickens, only with no cage roof. They are also still likely to have had their beaks seared off with a hot knife. Unless you're supporting local farmers the odds of you finding truly humanely handled animals is rare. Especially if you're buying anything that comes in a styrofoam container wrapped in plastic wrap.

 

[dazzer1975]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatto /img/forum/go_quote.gif lol enjoy your little imaginary cage free, humane killing bubble....

you honestly and truthfully are quite clueless.

Furthermore, to suggest that physiologically, we are not omnivorous is further evidence that you need to do some research, or at the very least, more and better research.

 

[roadtonowhere08]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatto /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sorry! I didn't mean it like that.... I type the way I talk and it comes out more sarcastic in text. Either way, our bodies are actually designed like plant eaters and not meat eaters. I do make mistakes too, all the time actually.

I am guilty of the same thing, so no worries. I am curious though: if we were not meant to eat at least some meat, why do we have canines? Mine are very pointy. Maybe that is why I like meat

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatto /img/forum/go_quote.gif I understand many meat eaters would pay more for more humanely handled meat but the point is, even things they are currently being paraded around as humane really aren't. If I remember correctly, chickens can be called cage free if packed into large pens instead of cages and given access to the outdoors for 10 minutes per day. The problem is those chickens can be just as crammed in and filthy and gross as caged chickens, only with no cage roof. They are also still likely to have had their beaks seared off with a hot knife. Unless you're supporting local farmers the odds of you finding truly humanely handled animals is rare. Especially if you're buying anything that comes in a styrofoam container wrapped in plastic wrap.

Agreed. It really disgusts me that in our search for cheaper, easier, faster, people in the meat packing industry have to stoop to such levels. If they cared one shred for anything other than humans, they would kill humanely throughout the industry (sounds like an oxymorum, but it is what it is), and pass the costs onto the consumer. We would either have to go vegetarian or suck it up and forgo that sissy ass latte.

 

[Gatto]

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadtonowhere08 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am guilty of the same thing, so no worries. I am curious though: if we were not meant to eat meat, why do we have canines? Agreed. It really disgusts me that in our search for cheaper, easier, faster, people in the meat packing industry have to stoop to such levels. If they cared one shred for anything other than humans, they would kill humanely throughout the industry (sounds like an oxymorum, but it is what it is), and pass the costs onto the consumer. We would either have to go vegetarian or suck it up and forgo that sissy ass latte.

yup, it's just frustrating which is why I am a vegan... as a meat eater there are still things you can do, PETA is always running letter campaigns about more humane practices in the fast food industry, shelters, pretty much everywhere. It can't hurt to see what they're up to. Also not using animals in other ways that are less impactful on your personal life always makes a difference, things like not using animal products in your personal care items, shoes, clothes, not buying things that were tested on animals (aside from medication of course), not going to circuses... stuff like that. My only gripe is when people think because they bought food that says cage free or humane that they are instantly saints out to save all the animals. The only thing that will make change is telling our government and big business that things need to change. The best way to do that in my opinion is to cut off their money...

The new technology floating around is making things better too, now employees who are horrified can snap a quick video on their camera phone of workers beating turkeys with metal pipes and send that off to the proper channels and the company will have to answer for the BS going on behind their closed doors.


Quote:

Originally Posted by roadtonowhere08 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am guilty of the same thing, so no worries. I am curious though: if we were not meant to eat at least some meat, why do we have canines? Mine are very pointy. Maybe that is why I like meat

I will admit I actually don't know the answer to why we have canines but that is pretty much the only physical evidence of any type of potential meat eating abilities, just about everything else points to us being plant eaters. If you're really curious I can look it up and see what I can come up with, I'm kind of curious now myself.

 

[roadtonowhere08]

Gatto: can you provide me your evidence as to why we are herbivores?

I am reading more about this since you called me on my assertion, and the evidence out there is quite convoluted.

Some say we are herbivores based on our longer intestines, adverse effects of cholesterol due to meat, lack of claws, etc.

Some say we are omnivores based on our presence of canines and molars, intestines of a length that is in between some omnivores and herbivores, absence of ability to successfully deal with cellulose, etc.

What do you think?

 

[Gatto]

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadtonowhere08 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Gatto: can you provide me your evidence as to why we are herbivores? I am reading more about this since you called me on my assertion, and the evidence out there is quite convoluted. Some say we are herbivores based on our longer intestines, adverse effects of cholesterol due to meat, lack of claws, etc. Some say we are omnivores based on our presence of canines and molars, intestines of a length that is in between some omnivores and herbivores, absence of ability to successfully deal with cellulose, etc. What do you think?

I will admit the more I think about it the more I see that it's quite possible to twist things in whatever direction you want depending on your argument. *sigh* I had a really good article but I forgot where I found it. I'm going to keep looking ... Honestly I am starting to feel like since I didn't do this research I can't really rely on it, as people tend to be attempting to further their personal agendas on a topic like this one. Even if I did my own I'm sure it would be biased

 

[ericj]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatto /img/forum/go_quote.gif Do you know anything about body design in nature when it comes to plant eaters vs meat eaters? pretty much everything in our design says we are made to eat plants.

Whaaa? My stomach only has one chamber! I have teeth that can tear flesh! I need protein to live! Where do you get this idea?

I'm pretty sure I'm an omnivore.

 

[atothex]

^ Correct.

 

[dazzer1975]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatto /img/forum/go_quote.gif I will admit the more I think about it the more I see that it's quite possible to twist things in whatever direction you want depending on your argument.

Thats one way of putting it.

Another would be that there is evidence that could be used to support both viewpoints and we, after taking on board all relevant information, settle on the stance that best answers our questions and satisfies our curiosities with what we deem to be the most compelling evidence and arguments.

A few areas of interest which will throw up associated ideas and evidence for omnivorous humans is: The Taenia tapeworm in humans and the dating of such re pre, convergent, or post animal domestication and agriculture; carbon and nitrogen isotope values for humans and neanderthals from the palaeolithic highlighting dietary breadth; comparing social group and behaviour of carnivorous animals and early humans amongst other things.

If you want the references, ask and I'll give you the details.

We also don't produce cellulase, our jaws don't move in an orbital fashion to grind down plant matter, as ericj states our teeth feature incissors and canines designed to rip and tear flesh, and the 5 a day mantra is an invention of the american agricultural industry.

 

[Gatto]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dazzer1975 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thats one way of putting it. Another would be that there is evidence that could be used to support both viewpoints and we, after taking on board all relevant information, settle on the stance that best answers our questions and satisfies our curiosities with what we deem to be the most compelling evidence and arguments.

awesome job of saying the exact same thing you just quoted me saying

 

[dazzer1975]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatto /img/forum/go_quote.gif awesome job of saying the exact same thing you just quoted me saying

except you stated categorically that the argument was somehow being twisted and twisted to conform to people's "agendas" whatever that meant.

I presented what you should have wrote, indeed, what most people do when they are really interested in learning things from an unbiased perspective.

Awesome job of having an open mind and taking on board a wide range of evidence to better educate yourself.

Like I say, if you want the references so you can read and explore for yourself some of the other arguments and evidence put forward to support our evolution as omnivores then just ask, otherwise keep it up with the smart arse, yet ignorant comments.

 

[Gatto]

lmao where did I say I am not open to other facts? hell I already admitted I'm often good at being wrong. Although once again you and your obnoxious high horse just make me want to ignore you. I also noticed you did a good job of keeping quiet until you could pop back in and attempt to sound intelligent. Either way I have class in the morning so I'm done for tonight.

 

[dazzer1975]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatto /img/forum/go_quote.gif lmao where did I say I am not open to other facts?

Where you begrudgingly accepted there were other facts to consider but wrote them off as simply ways of being able to twist things so as they conform to personal agendas.

Quote:

hell I already admitted I'm often good at being wrong.

we are in agreement.

Quote:

Although once again you and your obnoxious high horse just make me want to ignore you. I also noticed you did a good job of keeping quiet until you could pop back in and attempt to sound intelligent. Either way I have class in the morning so I'm done for tonight.

You note I did a good job of keeping quiet until I could pop back in?

What does that even mean? Am I under the impression that I have to stay rooted to this discussion constantly refreshing the page so as to check when a new post has been made that I can immediately make a reply to?

I hope you pay more attention in class than you do in reading the subtle (or not so subtle) nuances of one's arguments.

I take it you are not interested in reading more widely around the area of human diet incase it fails to conform to your personal agenda and you don't find a way to twist the evidence to support your viewpoint?

Note, most people's viewpoints come post evidence, or at least, are able to be altered once they have encountered compelling evidence. Here's a little tip for you, don't try and make the evidence conform to your existing views.

 

[Sherwood]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dazzer1975 /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you could produce the same meat and meat products while ensuring it was produced following a duty of care and responsibility towards that animal, (Because they can, and they do) then why would you not?

Big "if". I'm unaware of any method of producing foie gras that falls under your definition of humane. If there is one, do let me know, though.

Personally, I'm not inclined to place the greatest desire of a goose above the smallest desire of myself. You may well find that detestable, but so be it. As humans, our wills and desires are superior in every way to those of animals. I only care about animal kindness insofar as it brings me pleasure.