"ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:c7nMb.30581$qC.2133@bignews3.bellsouth.net...

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:bts1tk$a0e$1@kermit.esat.net...
"ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:JVeMb.25287$qC.14648@bignews3.bellsouth.net...

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:btrst1$863$1@kermit.esat.net...
"Michael Saunby" <msaunby@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:btrrsj$39d$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk...

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:btrqdt$765$1@kermit.esat.net...
..
Meat-eating will contribute to, if not directly cause, both
hypertension
(high blood-pressure) and diabetes.

So what is it that drives veg*ns to argue for changes to a meat
free diet
when there are bigger issues to worry about, if global life
expectancy is
what you are seeking to improve?

Meat-eating is directly associated with many of those bigger
issues.

Is it meat eating in general, or *excessive* meat eating? Are there
statistics or studies that reference the life spans of people who
eat
moderate amounts of eat, as opposed to those that eat at McDs 5
times a
week? I would imagine the key factor in determining longevity and
health
would be the amount of meat one consumes. For example, if I ate one
lean
steak and 2 chicken breasts, 3 broiled fish, and a handful of eggs
and
glasses of milk per week (and the rest a healthy veggie diet), I
would
imagine the negative health consequences to be minimal (although tbh
I don't
know for certain).

Again-

Why do say "Again"? I don't see this information posted anywhere else in
this thread.

I didn't mean that in a mean way, ta.

But I've posted it so many times
to aaev.

Thought you were reading aaev. .. Maybe not, or maybe
you must have missed it. Just as well I repost and repost I guess.

'The Cornell-China-Oxford Project is a massive survey of more
than 10,000 families in mainland China and Taiwan designed to
study diet, lifestyle and disease across the far reaches of China.
By investigating simultaneously more diseases and more dietary
characteristics than any other study to date, the project has
generated the most comprehensive database in the world on the
multiple causes of disease. Much of the research behind the
pyramid is based on the China project's research findings.
..
"This pyramid reflects the growing body of research that suggests
that Americans will not reduce their rate of cancers, cardiovascular
disease and other chronic, degenerative diseases until they shift
their diets away from animal-based foods to plant-based foods,"
Campbell said. "Evidence suggests that eating even small amounts
of animal- based foods is linked at least for many individuals to
significantly higher rates of cancers and cardiovascular diseases
typically found in the United States." Further, he reported last year,
merely eating some low-fat foods or complying with current U.S.
dietary recommendations is unlikely to prevent much disease.
The dietary recommendations, Campbell said, do not go far
enough in reducing the total fat content of the diet, or, more to
the point, in advocating the exchange of foods of animal origin for
foods of plant origin.
..
"The nutrient composition of the traditional rural Asian diet is very
similar to the Mediterranean diet in that both are largely plant-based
and both pyramids recommend that meat be consumed no more
than once a month or more often in very small amounts," said
T. Colin Campbell, Cornell professor of nutritional biochemistry,
co-chair of the conference and director of the Cornell-China-Oxford
Project. "However, the Asian diet, which is significantly lower in
total fat, may prove to be an even more healthful diet," he added. '
http://www.news.cornell.edu/general/Dec95/asianpyramid.ssl.html

"The Asian Diet Pyramid emphasizes a wide base of rice, rice products,
noodles, breads and grains, preferably whole grain and minimally
processed
foods, topped by another large band of fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts
and
seeds. Daily physical exercise, a small amount of vegetable oil and a
moderate consumption of plant-based beverages, including tea (especially
black and green), sake, beer and wine also are recommended daily. Small
daily servings of dairy products (low fat) or fish are optional; sweets,
eggs and poultry are recommended no more than weekly, and red meat no
more
than monthly."

So moderate amounts of animal products are not necessarily deadly then,
right?

Why do you think it is recommended that animal-based foods be eaten
no more than sparingly?

Obviously not because such foods are healthful!

The impromptu example I gave aboves was a "largely plant-based" diet.
Just change "one lean steak a week" to "one lean steak a month".

Meat is deadly to the animal you're eating.

Flesh is putrefactive. Toxic by-products are produced which
are a burden to our system, even when consumed sparingly.

Animal product consumption and mortality because of all
causes combined, coronary heart disease, stroke, diabetes,
and cancer in Seventh-day Adventists.
Snowdon DA.
Division of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University
of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
This report reviews, contrasts, and illustrates previously published
findings from a cohort of 27,529 California Seventh-day Adventist
adults who completed questionnaires in 1960 and were followed
for mortality between 1960 and 1980. Within this population, meat
consumption was positively associated with mortality because of all
causes of death combined (in males), coronary heart disease (in
males and females), and diabetes (in males). Egg consumption was
positively associated with mortality because of all causes combined
(in females), coronary heart disease (in females), and cancers of the
colon (in males and females combined) and ovary. Milk consumption
was positively associated with only prostate cancer mortality, and
cheese consumption did not have a clear relationship with any cause
of death. The consumption of meat, eggs, milk, and cheese did not
have negative associations with any of the causes of death
investigated.
PMID: 3046303 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE

"If you step back and look at the data, the optimum amount
of red meat you eat should be zero."
-- Walter Willett, M.D., of Brigham and Women's Hospital,
director of a study that found a close correlation between
red meat consumption and colon cancer.

"Willett advocates the "Mediterranean diet" of the trim, hardy peoples
of
southern Italy and Greece. The Mediterranean diet includes plenty of
tomatoes and other fruits and vegetables, whole grains and olive oil,
with
most dairy products consumed moderately in fermented form like yogurt or
cheese."

http://www.umich.edu/~newsinfo/MT/96/Fall96/mta1f96.html

The Mediterranean diet does advocate small amounts of meat, fish, and
dairy,
as in my example above.

"However, the Asian diet, which is significantly lower in
total fat, may prove to be an even more healthful diet," he added. '
http://www.news.cornell.edu/general/Dec95/asianpyramid.ssl.html

Willett also said; "If you step back and look at the data, the
optimum amount of red meat you eat should be zero."

"All foods from animal sources, especially red meat as illustrated on
the
pyramid was used sparingly. Total red meat and poultry consumed was
about 15
oz per week. Fish intake varied between countries but overall was
slightly
higher, about 5-15 oz per week
Although the available data can not be definitive, there is evidence
that
suggests red meat is associated with colon cancer, prostate cancer and
heart
disease . We can not assume the risk is due solely to the fat content,
but
possibly the carcinogens formed from cooking. Further more, animal
products
contain no fiber or antioxidants and may displace plant based foods that
do
contain these important elements."

http://www.cheshire-med.com/services/dietary/nutrinew/mediter.html

See; http://www.iol.ie/~creature/BiologicalAdaptations.htm .

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
..
Meat-eating is directly associated with many of those bigger issues.

Is it meat eating in general, or *excessive* meat eating? Are there
statistics or studies that reference the life spans of people who eat
moderate amounts of eat, as opposed to those that eat at McDs 5 times a
week? I would imagine the key factor in determining longevity and health
would be the amount of meat one consumes. For example, if I ate one lean
steak and 2 chicken breasts, 3 broiled fish, and a handful of eggs and
glasses of milk per week (and the rest a healthy veggie diet), I would
imagine the negative health consequences to be minimal (although tbh I don't
know for certain).
..
'The Cornell-China-Oxford Project is a massive survey of more
than 10,000 families in mainland China and Taiwan designed to
study diet, lifestyle and disease across the far reaches of China.
By investigating simultaneously more diseases and more dietary
characteristics than any other study to date, the project has
generated the most comprehensive database in the world on the
multiple causes of disease. Much of the research behind the
pyramid is based on the China project's research findings.
..
"This pyramid reflects the growing body of research that suggests
that Americans will not reduce their rate of cancers, cardiovascular
disease and other chronic, degenerative diseases until they shift
their diets away from animal-based foods to plant-based foods,"
Campbell said. "Evidence suggests that eating even small amounts
of animal- based foods is linked at least for many individuals to
significantly higher rates of cancers and cardiovascular diseases
typically found in the United States." Further, he reported last year,
merely eating some low-fat foods or complying with current U.S.
dietary recommendations is unlikely to prevent much disease.
The dietary recommendations, Campbell said, do not go far
enough in reducing the total fat content of the diet, or, more to
the point, in advocating the exchange of foods of animal origin for
foods of plant origin.
..
"The nutrient composition of the traditional rural Asian diet is very
similar to the Mediterranean diet in that both are largely plant-based
and both pyramids recommend that meat be consumed no more
than once a month or more often in very small amounts," said
T. Colin Campbell, Cornell professor of nutritional biochemistry,
co-chair of the conference and director of the Cornell-China-Oxford
Project. "However, the Asian diet, which is significantly lower in
total fat, may prove to be an even more healthful diet," he added. '
http://www.news.cornell.edu/general/Dec95/asianpyramid.ssl.html

"The Asian Diet Pyramid emphasizes a wide base of rice, rice products,
noodles, breads and grains, preferably whole grain and minimally processed
foods, topped by another large band of fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts and
seeds. Daily physical exercise, a small amount of vegetable oil and a
moderate consumption of plant-based beverages, including tea (especially
black and green), sake, beer and wine also are recommended daily. Small
daily servings of dairy products (low fat) or fish are optional; sweets,
eggs and poultry are recommended no more than weekly, and red meat no more
than monthly."

So moderate amounts of animal products are not necessarily deadly then,
right?

Why do you think it is recommended that animal-based foods be eaten
no more than sparingly?

Because eating animal-based foods more than sparingly has negative health
consequences, but eating them sparingly necessarily does not.

Obviously not because such foods are healthful!

Personally, I don't eat animal products at all, as you know, but by the same
token, I think we should be brutally honest about the true nature of meat
eating.

The bottom line to me, regardless of my personal choices and
philosophical views, is that meat eating per se is not inherently unhealthy.

The "western diet" most certainly is, but I'm quite convinced that there are
other factors far more relevant to overall health than the occasional
consumption of animal products. Even primitive foraging cultures gobbled up
the occasional lizard or egg or animal carcass to survive, despite their
overwhelmingly plant-based diet.

The impromptu example I gave aboves was a "largely plant-based" diet.
Just change "one lean steak a week" to "one lean steak a month".

Meat is deadly to the animal you're eating.

Absolutely, but that's another argument entirely.

Flesh is putrefactive. Toxic by-products are produced which
are a burden to our system, even when consumed sparingly.

True, but the effects are not entirely negative (to only point out the
negative is not fair). In my *opinion*, the negatives far outweigh the
positive, and there is absolutely no reason to eat meat in modern western
society, but to argue that even minimal amounts of animal products are
deadly sounds too much like dogma to me, without solid scientific evidence
that that is indeed the case.

I think we can effectively argue that a strictly non-animal based diet is
the *ideal* diet, but eating moderate amounts of meat is not deadly.

Why
would anyone not eat the ideal diet? Because our eating habits are dictated
primarily by our culture, and our culture says its OK to use animals as
food, and just as importantly, meat tastes good, and that's a hard thing for
people to change.

Animal product consumption and mortality because of all
causes combined, coronary heart disease, stroke, diabetes,
and cancer in Seventh-day Adventists.
Snowdon DA.
Division of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University
of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
This report reviews, contrasts, and illustrates previously published
findings from a cohort of 27,529 California Seventh-day Adventist
adults who completed questionnaires in 1960 and were followed
for mortality between 1960 and 1980. Within this population, meat
consumption was positively associated with mortality because of all
causes of death combined (in males), coronary heart disease (in
males and females), and diabetes (in males). Egg consumption was
positively associated with mortality because of all causes combined
(in females), coronary heart disease (in females), and cancers of the
colon (in males and females combined) and ovary. Milk consumption
was positively associated with only prostate cancer mortality, and
cheese consumption did not have a clear relationship with any cause
of death. The consumption of meat, eggs, milk, and cheese did not
have negative associations with any of the causes of death
investigated.
PMID: 3046303 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE

"If you step back and look at the data, the optimum amount
of red meat you eat should be zero."
-- Walter Willett, M.D., of Brigham and Women's Hospital,
director of a study that found a close correlation between
red meat consumption and colon cancer.

"Willett advocates the "Mediterranean diet" of the trim, hardy peoples of
southern Italy and Greece. The Mediterranean diet includes plenty of
tomatoes and other fruits and vegetables, whole grains and olive oil, with
most dairy products consumed moderately in fermented form like yogurt or
cheese."

http://www.umich.edu/~newsinfo/MT/96/Fall96/mta1f96.html

The Mediterranean diet does advocate small amounts of meat, fish, and dairy,
as in my example above.

"However, the Asian diet, which is significantly lower in
total fat, may prove to be an even more healthful diet," he added. '
http://www.news.cornell.edu/general/Dec95/asianpyramid.ssl.html

But which also includes small, optional amounts of animal products.

Willett also said; "If you step back and look at the data, the
optimum amount of red meat you eat should be zero."

I agree with his interpretation of the data, but it is an interpretation
nonetheless. My point is that we should acknowledge that meat-centric diets
are terribly unhealthy, and also acknowledge that small amounts of meat are
not terribly unhealthy. At this point, then we have to move to other
arguments (ethical, environmental etc.). Advocating a vegan diet and
acknowledging the (few) benefits of meat eating are not contradictory imo.

You and I might have different values than meat eaters, but that does not
alter the fact that eating meat, as a matter of rule, is not inherently
deadly.

"All foods from animal sources, especially red meat as illustrated on the
pyramid was used sparingly. Total red meat and poultry consumed was about 15
oz per week. Fish intake varied between countries but overall was slightly
higher, about 5-15 oz per week

Although the available data can not be definitive, there is evidence that
suggests red meat is associated with colon cancer, prostate cancer and heart
disease . We can not assume the risk is due solely to the fat content, but
possibly the carcinogens formed from cooking. Further more, animal products
contain no fiber or antioxidants and may displace plant based foods that do
contain these important elements."

http://www.cheshire-med.com/services/dietary/nutrinew/mediter.html

See; http://www.iol.ie/~creature/BiologicalAdaptations.htm .

The "western diet" most certainly is, but I'm quite convinced that
there are
other factors far more relevant to overall health than the occasional
consumption of animal products. Even primitive foraging cultures
gobbled up
the occasional lizard or egg or animal carcass to survive, despite
their
overwhelmingly plant-based diet.

To augment their diet if needed, to survive. As a fall-back food, which
while providing for a nutritional need, cannot be regarded as optimal.

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:btuf8f$3ia$1@kermit.esat.net...

...

The "western diet" most certainly is, but I'm quite convinced that
there are
other factors far more relevant to overall health than the occasional
consumption of animal products. Even primitive foraging cultures
gobbled up
the occasional lizard or egg or animal carcass to survive, despite
their
overwhelmingly plant-based diet.

To augment their diet if needed, to survive. As a fall-back food, which
while providing for a nutritional need, cannot be regarded as optimal.
... nor healthful.

What about prisoners then, what should they eat if western vegetarian diets
aren't provided?

See http://www.madison.com/captimes/news/stories/64943.php

"Jailed vegetarian can't get the food she's willing to eat..."

Michael Saunby

"Michael Saunby" <msaunby@despammed.com> wrote in message news:btufu3$sqv$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
See http://www.madison.com/captimes/news/stories/64943.php

"Jailed vegetarian can't get the food she's willing to eat..."

Doesn't such treatment fall into the category 'cruel and unusual punishment'?

Hopefully, the highlighting of this travesty of justice in the media
will bring about a change in the prison policy.

"Michael Saunby" <msaunby@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:btufu3$sqv$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:btuf8f$3ia$1@kermit.esat.net...

...

The "western diet" most certainly is, but I'm quite convinced that
there are
other factors far more relevant to overall health than the
occasional
consumption of animal products. Even primitive foraging cultures
gobbled up
the occasional lizard or egg or animal carcass to survive, despite
their
overwhelmingly plant-based diet.

To augment their diet if needed, to survive. As a fall-back food,
which
while providing for a nutritional need, cannot be regarded as
optimal.
.. nor healthful.

What about prisoners then, what should they eat if western vegetarian
diets
aren't provided?

Why the hell aren't vegetarian diets provided? Surely witholding choice
in something as fundamental as diet is a violation of the basic
human-right
to self-defend and maintain one's bodily, mental and emotional health.

See http://www.madison.com/captimes/news/stories/64943.php

"Jailed vegetarian can't get the food she's willing to eat..."

Doesn't such treatment fall into the category 'cruel and unusual
punishment'?

Hopefully, the highlighting of this travesty of justice in the media
will bring about a change in the prison policy.

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 20:07:30 -0000, "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie
wrote:

"Michael Saunby" <msaunby@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:btufu3$sqv$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
See http://www.madison.com/captimes/news/stories/64943.php

"Jailed vegetarian can't get the food she's willing to eat..."

Doesn't such treatment fall into the category 'cruel and unusual
punishment'?

Hopefully, the highlighting of this travesty of justice in the media
will bring about a change in the prison policy.

What I noticed was, that medical and religious reasons both are
considered valid reasons to claim vegetarian food , according to
prison policy. Considering what you have been posting lately on the
well-documented harmful effects of a non-vegetarian diet, I can't see
why the inmate cannot demand vegetarian food for medical reasons??

Another thought I had, is preminced beefandwhatevergoes the only
thing one can normally get in an American prison? One should have
thought there would be ways in which she could at least get something
like a semivegetarian diet out of picking from the output from the
prison kitchen -- (oughta be better than to go on just peanuts, while
she is waiting for prison rules to take effect

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 20:07:30 -0000, "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie
wrote:

"Michael Saunby" <msaunby@despammed.com> wrote in message news:btufu3$sqv$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
See http://www.madison.com/captimes/news/stories/64943.php

"Jailed vegetarian can't get the food she's willing to eat..."

Doesn't such treatment fall into the category 'cruel and unusual punishment'?

Hopefully, the highlighting of this travesty of justice in the media
will bring about a change in the prison policy.

What I noticed was, that medical and religious reasons both are
considered valid reasons to claim vegetarian food , according to
prison policy. Considering what you have been posting lately on the
well-documented harmful effects of a non-vegetarian diet, I can't see
why the inmate cannot demand vegetarian food for medical reasons??

Another thought I had, is preminced beefandwhatevergoes the only
thing one can normally get in an American prison? One should have
thought there would be ways in which she could at least get something
like a semivegetarian diet out of picking from the output from the
prison kitchen -- (oughta be better than to go on just peanuts, while
she is waiting for prison rules to take effect

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:btuush$90g$1@kermit.esat.net...
"Michael Saunby" <msaunby@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:btufu3$sqv$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
..
To be honest I'm not sure if the general public would care too much about
whether convicted criminals get a a selection of healthy and nutritious
meals to choose from.

If it were up to me I'd be with your bunch on this one. I know of no
religious group that can't eat a meat free diet so why not feed them all on
organic vegetarian food? The only risk I see is if you are actually
correct and they end up stronger and healthier and living longer - but I'd
say with drug habits and the rest, the risk is small.

"Torsten Brinch" <iaotb@inet.uni2.dk> wrote in message
news:o8160013nj70atbn99tjma17r9ntdog84m@4ax.com...
What I noticed was, that medical and religious reasons both are
considered valid reasons to claim vegetarian food , according to
prison policy. Considering what you have been posting lately on the
well-documented harmful effects of a non-vegetarian diet, I can't see
why the inmate cannot demand vegetarian food for medical reasons??

Another thought I had, is preminced beefandwhatevergoes the only
thing one can normally get in an American prison? One should have
thought there would be ways in which she could at least get something
like a semivegetarian diet out of picking from the output from the
prison kitchen -- (oughta be better than to go on just peanuts, while
she is waiting for prison rules to take effect :-)

To my knowledge prison meals in North American prisons are generally
comprised of a main course with potatoes or rice and a vegetable. She could
just leave the main course and eat the rest.

She could undoubtedly trade her
veal cutlet for extra veggies with another inmate. There's no reason at all
for her to be buying crackers at the tuck. This reeks of "slow day at the
newsroom" syndrome.

'The prison meals cost, on average, 80 to 90 cents. Vegetarian
diets are accommodated. Last October, the U.S. Bureau of
Prisons declared that prisoners have a right to vegetarian and
vegan meals, resulting in huge financial savings as some prison
departments cut meat consumption by nearly 50 percent by
substituting the healthier textured soy protein alternative for meat.

"We are happy to meet individuals' religious or medical needs
in terms of food," says captain Jeffery Newton.'
http://www.portlandphoenix.com/archive/features/01/07/20/feat_lunch.html

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:09:02 -0800, "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" <iaotb@inet.uni2.dk> wrote in message
news:o8160013nj70atbn99tjma17r9ntdog84m@4ax.com...
..
Another thought I had, is preminced beefandwhatevergoes the only
thing one can normally get in an American prison? One should have
thought there would be ways in which she could at least get something
like a semivegetarian diet out of picking from the output from the
prison kitchen -- (oughta be better than to go on just peanuts, while
she is waiting for prison rules to take effect :-)

To my knowledge prison meals in North American prisons are generally
comprised of a main course with potatoes or rice and a vegetable. She could
just leave the main course and eat the rest.

Yes that was what I thought might be the case (not being able to claim
inside knowledge)

She could undoubtedly trade her
veal cutlet for extra veggies with another inmate. There's no reason at all
for her to be buying crackers at the tuck. This reeks of "slow day at the
newsroom" syndrome.

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 23:18:06 -0000, "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie
wrote:

'The prison meals cost, on average, 80 to 90 cents. Vegetarian
diets are accommodated. Last October, the U.S. Bureau of
Prisons declared that prisoners have a right to vegetarian and
vegan meals, resulting in huge financial savings as some prison
departments cut meat consumption by nearly 50 percent by
substituting the healthier textured soy protein alternative for meat.

Now, I am really not much to soy, but it is a good point nonetheless.

Meat does not give you best value for your dollar.

"Torsten Brinch" <iaotb@inet.uni2.dk> wrote in message news:7ad600d5pstjeq96tvs4l2jsr0a1s9l7eg@4ax.com...
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:09:02 -0800, "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:

To my knowledge prison meals in North American prisons are generally
comprised of a main course with potatoes or rice and a vegetable. She could
just leave the main course and eat the rest.

Yes that was what I thought might be the case (not being able to claim
inside knowledge) :-)

'Last July the jail cut back on food costs by serving cold cuts for lunches
and on Saturday nights instead of hot meals, which Anderson said made
her situation more difficult because the jail used to serve a vegetable with
lunch. The move sparked a "mini-riot" by unhappy inmates at two housing
units. '
http://www.madison.com/captimes/news/stories/64943.php