Some semi-newbish biological and nutritional interrogations

[Chill of Eons]

Hello to all. I am wanting to know many things that I do not know, so therefore I dare to ask them, many as they are. No one person is going to know the answer to all of them, but that's fine. I'll try to be as specific as I can.

1. Supplements. I notice that almost without exception they have percentages in the thousands of the daily value of whatever nutrients. Why so much? I don't suppose the body absorbs more than a small fraction of that, right? And if it did, wouldn't it be overwhelmed and intoxicated?

2. Another thing about supplements: Are they generally fresh until visibly spoiled? If they are spoiled somewhat, does that generally affect the smell, if there is one? The reason I ask this is because I got some B12 from Trader Joe's like half a year ago and have barely used them simply because I didn't see any difference in energy levels after a week, but now I want to try them again. They look and smell the same to me. Concerning expiration dates, does it mean before or after the bottle is opened? Because one supplement I take, 5-HTP, says it has no preservatives, but the expiration date isn't until 2011. How could it last that long with no preservatives, even if it means only before opening the bottle?

3. Veganism: I've been 98% vegan as of 12/31/08. Every couple months I end up eating some fish, and now and then (probably no more than once a month) a couple cookies. What I'm wondering is, does that make any remotely significant difference in the supposed effectiveness of veganism? I really haven't noticed any improvement in mood, energy level or cognitive function from eliminating animal products. By avoiding animal products, does that ever decrease the body's ability to assimilate them, since it gets used to their absence? I've had no bad effects after eating the fish or cookies, so probably not.

4. Unused aminos are stored in the liver. Do they rot/wither/die if left there long enough? And what happens if it gets too full of them, does it reject new ones?

5. Serotonin: Why does eating carbs increase its production but protein inhibit production? Why are serotonin levels usually lowest late in the day? Is serotonin produced in the brain only when you're asleep? If so, is that also the only time when it's released? That one's doubtful.

6. Protein: Someone told me recently that protein from something like, say, black beans, can only be absorbed if you eat it with something like whole grain or soy, to make a complete protein. If this is true, why?

7. Fortified nutrients: Let's take for example sugary cereal, which I'm sure many people consider unhealthy. I look on the back of a box of Cinnamon Toast Crunch and it says it has 50% DV of iron. How genuine and absorbable is that? This also goes for juices, from concentrate, like say Trader Joe's Dynamo Plus Calcium that has 100% DV for the following: Vitamin A, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B12, C, D, E, biotin and folate, in just 8 ounces of the liquid. Is any of it anywhere near as effective as getting it from actual produce, or is it all synthetic and potentially harmful?

This is a sufficient start. I'll surely have more questions generated from the answers I get. Thanks for your input. Be as technical as you care to be!

[Brutha]

1. Supplements. I notice that almost without exception they have percentages in the thousands of the daily value of whatever nutrients. Why so much? I don't suppose the body absorbs more than a small fraction of that, right? And if it did, wouldn't it be overwhelmed and intoxicated?

The daily value is just a number that the FDA made up.
There are no studies that really provide you with accurate number that tell you how much of that stuff you need.

Most thinks in nutrition are just guesses. No one has completely figured out how the human body works.

6. Protein: Someone told me recently that protein from something like, say, black beans, can only be absorbed if you eat it with something like whole grain or soy, to make a complete protein. If this is true, why?

Proteins are aminoacids that are arranged in a certain formation.
The human body has to break down the proteins you eat into animoacids to afterwards make his own protein.
Humans mainly use 20 different amino acids to make protein (in some case a additional protein is used).
Black beans alone won't give you enough of all 20 different animo acids to make your proteins. Black beans will use some animo acids more than they are used in humans and some less and maybe even don't use some of the 20 that are used in humans at all.

[Andrew Gubb]

6. Protein: Someone told me recently that protein from something like, say, black beans, can only be absorbed if you eat it with something like whole grain or soy, to make a complete protein. If this is true, why?

I understand you DON'T need to "balance" your aminos in one meal. Generally I'm suspicious of any diet concept which a caveman couldn't understand. How are animals supposed to know what to eat if they need to "balance" their meals?

As for supplements, I hear they are basically useless and even counterproductive as they come in the wrong balance (being artificially concentrated) and the body needs to use other nutrients to balance them out.

[RagsToRiches]

3. Veganism: I've been 98% vegan as of 12/31/08. Every couple months I end up eating some fish, and now and then (probably no more than once a month) a couple cookies. What I'm wondering is, does that make any remotely significant difference in the supposed effectiveness of veganism? I really haven't noticed any improvement in mood, energy level or cognitive function from eliminating animal products. By avoiding animal products, does that ever decrease the body's ability to assimilate them, since it gets used to their absence? I've had no bad effects after eating the fish or cookies, so probably not.

Veganism is terrible for your health. Unless you have serious moral or health reasons why you'd follow this diet - I would personally recommend strongly against it.

Obviously it is much more healthy than your average joe eating big mac and fries every weekend (as many studies will testify), but compare it to a good diet of quality meat, fish, dairy etc and you will find vegans come up limp.

For more info - Plant Poisons and Rotten Stuff - The Blog

[SaySay]

Originally Posted by RagsToRiches

Veganism is terrible for your health. Unless you have serious moral or health reasons why you'd follow this diet - I would personally recommend strongly against it.

Obviously it is much more healthy than your average joe eating big mac and fries every weekend (as many studies will testify), but compare it to a good diet of quality meat, fish, dairy etc and you will find vegans come up limp.

For more info - Plant Poisons and Rotten Stuff - The Blog

Care to back up those crazy claims, with perhaps some facts? I went to your website and couldn't find anything but personal diatribe there . . .

[liamona]

Originally Posted by SaySay

Care to back up those crazy claims, with perhaps some facts? I went to your website and couldn't find anything but personal diatribe there . . .

Really? Did you poke around the site to the information about the Failsafe Diet? This blog is about the many chemicals in foods, like salicylates, that people are sensitive to.

Although I don't agree with all of Emma's views, I think she's very intelligent (in fact, quite science-minded) and writes very well.

She also owns this site:

Plant Poisons and Rotten Stuff

[ginkgo]

1. It depends on units used. Which is more-- 1 gram or 1 million (1,000,000) micrograms or 1,000 milligrams? They are the same amount. People need hundreds of thousands of mcg of magnesium daily (300 mg or 300,000 mcg), but they only need 6 mcg of B-12 daily. Also a percentage means divided by 100. So which is more-- 10 or 1,000%? They are the same.

2. Vitamins are not foods. They do not grow on trees or exist in nature alone. The vitamins in supplements are chemicals. Chemicals break down but do not spoil. The saying is that if you hit foods with a stick they will not spoil. Or is that kids? You need 300 mg of magnesium daily. Too much vitamin D at one time will kill you. B-12 is different. 500 mg of B-12 is enough for 100 years. Your body can store years of B-12 without you becoming deficient in it.

3. Actually convert your example to money. Say that you put $50 in the bank every day for a year. You have the natural log of the square root of pi times 0. Then add 365 times $50 and you have $18,250. Say you skip doing that 1 day a month. You will only have $17,650 (600 less). Not much of a difference. 98% means 98/100. 98% of $18,250 is $17,885.

4. The body destroys excess amino acids (protein) and this causes health problems like heart attacks and strokes (first and third leading cause of death). The American Dietetic Association says that vegans eat twice the protein that they need. That is 2 times or 200%. That is bad for health. See article about protein on Health Related Articles.

5. First question is like why is grass green and the sky blue. Why is a bear Catholic and the Pope defacates in the woods? Seratonin is not to be worried about. Worry causes insomnia. Seratonin is supposed to help you sleep at night but most Americans have trouble sleeping. Get plenty of sunlight during day to help sleep at night with more seratonin. I had to drive all night so my friend could sleep and drive all day the next day to get from Miami to Philadelphia in 1 day. I had some carbs and started falling asleep right at the start. Then I ate some protein and drove all night.

6. The above article on protein gives you the actual numbers of amino acids so that you can see that that is a myth about combining foods.

7. This article on Nutrition tells why vitamin supplements are bad for you to take and why whole food supplements are good to take. I take B-12 supplements. My rule is that all rules have exceptions, except some. Here is an example from site above. "The FDA does not allow a supplement to contain more than 99 mg of potassium, a mineral. If you go to a nutritionist doctor, they will never give you more than 200 mg of potassium since they know that you may need to be rushed to a hospital. Yet it is okay to eat 2 avocadoes which contain 2,400 mg of potassium, 3 potatoes that have 2,100 mg of potassium or 3 bananas that contain 1,200 mg of potassium."

[funchy]

Originally Posted by RagsToRiches

Veganism is terrible for your health. Unless you have serious moral or health reasons why you'd follow this diet - I would personally recommend strongly against it.

How can it be terrible for one's health but still be ok to follow for health reasons?

What is your proof? I am going to have to respectfully disagree with your opinion on this.

Obviously it is much more healthy than your average joe eating big mac and fries every weekend (as many studies will testify), but compare it to a good diet of quality meat, fish, dairy etc and you will find vegans come up limp.

The only "good diet" of meat, fish, and dairy is one with little or none. The top causes of non-accidental death in the US are things like heart disease, stroke, and cancer. Guess what meat and dairy are strongly linked to?

Understand that the vast majority of meat available is produced on high-density farms ("factory farms"). In addition to just the animal flesh, you're getting an ample dose of pathogens, antibiotics, drug residues, BGH, steroids, pesticide residues, and other toxins. Fish comes with doses of PCBs, mercury, and pharmaceutical drug residues. The higher up on the food chain one eats, the more concentrated environmental contaminants are -- so given the choice between a plant-based diet and eating the animals which eat the plants, it seems logical the plant-based one is better.

[funchy]

Originally Posted by ginkgo

The saying is that if you hit foods with a stick they will not spoil. Or is that kids?

heh

[funchy]

Let me throw in my 2 cents worth...

Originally Posted by Chill of Eons

1. Supplements. I notice that almost without exception they have percentages in the thousands of the daily value of whatever nutrients. Why so much? I don't suppose the body absorbs more than a small fraction of that, right? And if it did, wouldn't it be overwhelmed and intoxicated?

The % is based on a government RDA which is just their best guess on what the average person needs.

It depends on the supplement: excessive doses of things like vit C won't hurt you -- you'll just excrete it. Very large doses of things like A or iron -- not so good.

As a general rule, I don't think you need to have 200% or 300% of the RDA. If you're supplementing your diet, look at your diet and see what you're missing. That's the whole idea of supplementing -- it's meant to fill in the gaps, not replace entire food types.

Try putting what you eat in a nutrition calculator for a few days and see what your diet is lacking. Ideally try to fill in the gaps first by adjusting what you eat.... then you can supplement the difference.

Nutrition facts, calories in food, labels, nutritional information and analysis – NutritionData.com

2. Another thing about supplements: Are they generally fresh until visibly spoiled?

Depends on the supplement! If the expiration date passed a year or two ago, I'd discard it. If it was stored improperly, that will shorten shelf life. It may not last as long once the seal is broken. If in doubt, throw it out.

Because one supplement I take, 5-HTP, says it has no preservatives, but the expiration date isn't until 2011. How could it last that long with no preservatives, even if it means only before opening the bottle?

For something to spoil, that implies it degrades. Perhaps this amino acid does not degrade quickly, especially if you're keeping it in a sealed container, away from humidity and light.

5-HTP is supposed to be a precusor to serotonin. It's not conclusive that taking it orally (1) helps your body make extra serotonin or (2) fixes problems low serotonin might be causing. If you're not sure about supplements, this is one I'd probably not bother with.

3. Veganism: I've been 98% vegan as of 12/31/08. Every couple months I end up eating some fish, and now and then (probably no more than once a month) a couple cookies. What I'm wondering is, does that make any remotely significant difference in the supposed effectiveness of veganism?

First off, good for you for going vegan! Its important health benefits aren't just immediate, but long term: lower risk of serious diseases such as cancer or heart attacks. Lower blood pressure, lower body fat, lower exposure to contaminants, etc. What you're doing will pay off years down the line.

I'm no doctor, but if I had to guess in minuscule amounts meat or sugar won't wreck your diet. I know when I stopped eating meat, I lost a taste for it. Give yourself enough time without the fish and I bet you'll lose any interest in eating it. I can send you some info on the contaminants in fish which, probably ruining your appetite.

By avoiding animal products, does that ever decrease the body's ability to assimilate them, since it gets used to their absence?

Supposedly I am told your gut loses its ability to digest animal flesh easily, and you may have a bellyache if you start suddenly eating lots of it. But I don't think that's worth worrying about. If you're going vegan, who cares if your body can handle a large cheesesteak or not?

5. Serotonin: Why does eating carbs increase its production but protein inhibit production? Why are serotonin levels usually lowest late in the day?

That is a complicated answer that a neurophysiologist could answer better than I could. The chemistry of the brain is a complex thing, and even the experts are learning new things about it all the time.

From a practical standpoint, I'd say it's irrelevant unless you are having a brain chemistry imbalance. If that is the case, I'd suggest talking to a psychiatrist or other doctor for proper diagnosis before trying to self medicate with help from a message board.

What makes you think you lack serotonin?

6. Protein: Someone told me recently that protein from something like, say, black beans, can only be absorbed if you eat it with something like whole grain or soy, to make a complete protein. If this is true, why?

That's an old idea of how proteins work.

Here's a quick overview: amino acids are building blocks, used to make the huge variety of proteins your body needs to function. You can make all but 9 of them from smaller building blocks. The missing 9 are "essential proteins". The (old outdated) idea was that if you didn't eat several groups in the same meal, they thought the body couldn't hold onto the amino acids and the complete proteins wouldn't get made. The newer outlook is that your body can hold onto the amino acids throughout the day, so as long as you're eating a variety of foods, you're getting the different essential amino acids.

There was also the old idea that if you didn't eat meat, you MUST go out of your way to eat "protein" foods such as beans. The reality is that all foods have amino acids. Even fruit or veggies have it. And calorie for calorie, vegetables can be just as rich in amino acids as "protein" type foods (you just need a larger volume of the veggies since it's less calorie dense).

7. Fortified nutrients: Let's take for example sugary cereal, which I'm sure many people consider unhealthy.

My first thought when I see "fortified" foods, I have to wonder why the food is so crappy they had to go to the trouble of adding vitamins? "Fortified" white bread is still over processed starch with little nutritional value, except for the additional added vitamins. I don't see the need for sugar cereals, except maybe in smaller amounts as a dessert/treat.

[SaySay]

Originally Posted by liamona

Really? Did you poke around the site to the information about the Failsafe Diet? This blog is about the many chemicals in foods, like salicylates, that people are sensitive to.

Although I don't agree with all of Emma's views, I think she's very intelligent (in fact, quite science-minded) and writes very well.

She also owns this site:

Plant Poisons and Rotten Stuff

The Plant Poison site is the one I visited. There WAS a lot of information there, about autism, chemicals in food, all sorts of stuff - granted I did not poke around for long, so I can't confirm or deny the accuracy or research corroborating any such claims. I was looking specifically for information proving that veganism is evil and unhealthy. Of which I found . . . NONE. Just a personal diatribe by someone who quite obviously was attempting to construct faulty moral arguments in order to support their desire to continue eating meat.

[liamona]

Originally Posted by funchy

The only "good diet" of meat, fish, and dairy is one with little or none. The top causes of non-accidental death in the US are things like heart disease, stroke, and cancer. Guess what meat and dairy are strongly linked to?

Just keep in mind that correlation doesn't equal causation.

Also a lot of the studies show that eating meat AND processed meats cause health problems. Really? No!

The higher up on the food chain one eats, the more concentrated environmental contaminants are -- so given the choice between a plant-based diet and eating the animals which eat the plants, it seems logical the plant-based one is better.

Yes, most animals raised for meat are done so under poor conditions. But since animal foods contain a lot of nutrients that are lacking from a plant-based diet a more reasonable solution is to clean up the environment and hold corporations accountable.

[liamona]

Originally Posted by funchy

y first thought when I see "fortified" foods, I have to wonder why the food is so crappy they had to go to the trouble of adding vitamins? "Fortified" white bread is still over processed starch with little nutritional value, except for the additional added vitamins. I don't see the need for sugar cereals, except maybe in smaller amounts as a dessert/treat.

No kidding. I think packaged cereals of any kind (and I include the dieter's favorite: rice cakes) is one of the worst "foods" anyone can eat. They are extremely processed.

Old-fashioned porridge is the way to go, if you can tolerate grains.

[liamona]

Originally Posted by SaySay

The Plant Poison site is the one I visited. There WAS a lot of information there, about autism, chemicals in food, all sorts of stuff - granted I did not poke around for long, so I can't confirm or deny the accuracy or research corroborating any such claims. I was looking specifically for information proving that veganism is evil and unhealthy.

Oh, I get it—I took your original comment to mean that you didn't find anything at all.

Just a personal diatribe by someone who quite obviously was attempting to construct faulty moral arguments in order to support their desire to continue eating meat.

It may seem like moral arguments, but remember, the site is mostly about the chemicals contained in fruits and vegetables.

She's extremely sensitive to a lot of them, and has come to find, through painful trial and error (she used to be a vegetarian), that a high fat, moderate protein diet works best for her.

She goes into her diet journey in her post, "What’s Your Story?":

"At some point I made the connection. The vegetables. I had been avoiding some of them because I felt they were ’sulphurous’ - the crucifer family. Before Christmas I had been avoiding all green vegetables because, to be frank, I was tired of pushing myself to ‘eat healthily’ and I had got into a mindset that if I didn’t like it, I wouldn’t damn well eat it.

I rallied and rounded my sights on vegetables. What really amazed me was how many people wrote vile things to me about the article at the above link. I only got one positive comment. Everyone is really brainwashed into thinking that vegetables are ‘good for you’. It’s no wonder people like me suffer for so long. No one even considers that vegetables might be a bad idea. I remember talking to someone about my eczema as I ate a plate of salad, saying “at least there’s nothing in this that I’ll react to.” More fool me!"

She explains some more of her problems in "Why kids don’t eat their greens":

Bitter Almonds

Cyanide is another interesting chemical that some of us can or cannot smell and taste. It is bitter in flavour and has an almond-like odour. About forty percent of the population can’t smell cyanide at all because they lack the gene to do so. Certain bacteria, fungi, and algae produce cyanide compounds that serve as a defence against being eaten by animals.

Why Don’t I Like Salads?
J. and I are also “supertasters.” A supertaster can taste two chemicals, phenylthiocarbamide (PTC) and 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP). About 25% of people taste these chemicals as a very bitter taste. Another 50% can taste them mildly, and the last 25% can’t taste them at all. Supertasters can taste a bitter substance in the following foods:

[long list of stuff]

Picky Eating
It’s a well-known universal truth that children hate eating their greens, and not without foundation. I can taste the bitterness in PTU/PROP containing foods; it’s why as a child and teenager I disliked tea, coffee, beer and wine, salads, all of the green vegetables listed, and I found olives and grapefruit downright revolting. As a vegetarian teenager I found soy products to be beyond disgusting and pleaded with my mother for her not to buy them for me.


But there was more to my dislike of foods than bitter tastes. I also disliked fruit intensely, yet curiously I never had any problems eating a sugar-loaded breakfast cereal. Bread (which contains soy and yeast), was only made edible with the addition of jam (seedless, the seeds were chewy and bitter); I refused the crusts because they tasted burnt, and wholemeal was completely inedible. I always gagged at the sick-smell and taste of both meat pies and cheese and tomato lasagna.

[...]

I think that the big clue in my relationship with my Mum over food, is that one day my family all sat down to a dessert of grapefruit, and my Mum was the only one who could actually eat it. We all declared it bitter, but I actually reacted very violently, gagging and spitting mine out and declaring it (rather precociously) to taste like cat’s piss. If only we had known about supertasting, maybe my childhood mealtimes would have been less of a battleground.

[funchy]

Originally Posted by liamona

Just keep in mind that correlation doesn't equal causation.

I agree, which is why I said linked and not caused.

But when you see study after study saying the same thing, maybe they're onto something. And science is starting to identify the biological mechanisms that explain the strong correlation.

since animal foods contain a lot of nutrients that are lacking from a plant-based diet....

Name me ONE nutrient that you can't get in a plant based diet and that your body can't make on its own.

The best people come up with is B12, which comes from bacteria not meat anyway. And the more I see what the average person eats, I don't believe the SAD meat-eater could get enough to meet the RDA anyway.

a more reasonable solution is to clean up the environment and hold corporations accountable.

If consumers paid what it really cost to produce a pound of meat, nobody would be willing to pay $15 or $20/lb. Would you pay $20/lb for pork chops at the grocery store?

They get environmental regulations that no other industry can get around. Example: Did you know pigs produce about the same amount/potency of feces of day. A town of 5,000 people by law must have a sewage treatment facility. A factory farm of 5000 pigs needs nothing except perhaps a holding pond where the foul mess rots until it's sprayed on fields. Even a cottage where 1 person might only occasionally visit needs a septic system. Why don't livestock farms need to treat their waste?

When there is a heavy rain, these manure lagoons overfill and mix into drinking water. When manure is applied improperly, it ends up contaminating streams and wells. Taxpayers pay to clean that up.

And the entire industry is heavily subsidized, while most of fruits/veggies are not. A good example is the US Farm Bill. Taxpayers pay to keep beef cheap while families struggle to afford fresh fruits and vegetables (?!)

Someone besides the pork farmer pays when the reside of all those antibiotics, steroids, and other chemicals the pigs excreted ends up absorbed by our produce or in our drinking water. One of the reasons why we have these big scares with Swine Flu is because of overuse of antibiotics in livestock animals + overcrowding/sick conditions.

But meat eaters want their meat. And the meat producers and processors are a multi-billion dollar industry who are good at lobbying Congress for laws to make their supposedly healthy products more affordable. Until the public wakes up about the true cost of factory farming, nothing will change.

[liamona]

Originally Posted by funchy

I agree, which is why I said linked and not caused.
But when you see study after study saying the same thing, maybe they're onto something. And science is starting to identify the biological mechanisms that explain the strong correlation.

Like the ones that "studied" the link with meat and processed meats?

These studies are sometimes revealing, but they don't explain interesting things like how native groups of people have been able to be perfectly healthy on all-meat or mostly-meat diets. I wonder why scientists like Campbell and Keys conveniently overlook these people in making their claims about diet?

Name me ONE nutrient that you can't get in a plant based diet and that your body can't make on its own. The best people come up with is B12, which comes from bacteria not meat anyway.

I take this to mean you haven't read my zillion other posts on this very subject. :..(.

Sure, healthy young people without problems like diabetes can convert ALA to small amounts of DHA and EPA, and beta-carotene to vitamin A. But what about babies or those who are old or have health issues that interfere with the conversions?

Also keep in mind that the nutrients in plant foods are bound up in fiber, but the ones in meat are directly digested and absorbed.

Hands-down, meat is the richest source of B vitamins like B6, B12, and folic acid (in organ meats), carnitine, creatine carnosine, taurine, iron, zinc and CLA (plant foods have virtually none of this nutrient).

If consumers paid what it really cost to produce a pound of meat, nobody would be willing to pay $15 or $20/lb. Would you pay $20/lb for pork chops at the grocery store?

Its expense is a separate issue from what's good for the body.

They get environmental regulations that no other industry can get around.

Again, a separate issue, whose answer is: make the industry more responsible.

But meat eaters want their meat. [...] Until the public wakes up about the true cost of factory farming, nothing will change.

Yes, meat eaters certainly do want them, so it sure would be helpful if knowledgeable people would point them to alternative sources of it, instead of just beating them over the head with how bad the factory farmed-food they eat is.

People get angry at the Weston Price Foundation because of its pro-meat information, but they are practically the only nutrition organization that promotes local farmers. They've even set up the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund so that small farmers (especially raw dairy ones) can finally have decent legal representation.

[Brutha]

It depends on the supplement: excessive doses of things like vit C won't hurt you -- you'll just excrete it. Very large doses of things like A or iron -- not so good.

Not everything that vit C does is good either.

[liamona]

Originally Posted by funchy

If consumers paid what it really cost to produce a pound of meat, nobody would be willing to pay $15 or $20/lb. Would you pay $20/lb for pork chops at the grocery store?

[...]

Until the public wakes up about the true cost of factory farming, nothing will change.

Yeah, that's what I thought too. But I was just on another forum discussing meat-eating, and although its (conservative) member views may not reflect all American's, I was disheartened to see the many shallow-thinking comments.

If these people are to be believed, their pocketbooks come first (never mind the environmental problems), and they don't care if animals suffer as long as they get to eat them. *Sigh*

Which reminds me of a memory I've suppressed until now: years ago when I was a little more outspoken, I was at an in-law's house for the holidays.

Silly me, I was shocked to see her pull out some 1% milk from the grocery store. "I don't drink it, but I keep it around for the kids," she said. I couldn't help but blurt out, "Don't you know that regular store milk contains puss and other contaminants?!"

"Oh, yeah, but I'd rather not think about it." was the genius response.

It's been my observation that people like this (who'd rather not think about where their food comes from), strangely enough keep the largest stockpiles of cleaning products at home. They may not blink at drinking puss, but damn if their counters aren't sparkling clean and sterile.

[SaySay]

Originally Posted by liamona

It's been my observation that people like this (who'd rather not think about where their food comes from), strangely enough keep the largest stockpiles of cleaning products at home. They may not blink at drinking puss, but damn if their counters aren't sparkling clean and sterile.

HAHA! That's SO true!

[funchy]

Originally Posted by liamona

I take this to mean you haven't read my zillion other posts on this very subject. :..(.

Sometimes I get busy and can visit this site as often, so perhaps I missed them?

Sure, healthy young people without problems like diabetes can convert ALA to small amounts of DHA and EPA, and beta-carotene to vitamin A. But what about babies or those who are old or have health issues that interfere with the conversions?

Odd that there are old vegans out there then? Shouldn't they be dead? And I know vegans often raise their children to go meat-free. Why don't any of my vegan friends & their kids suffer from malnutrition? I think throwing in the "health issues" thing is a scare tactic.

One could argue that "elderly" and "those with health issues" are less likely to survive a bout of illness from E Coli, a common meat-based pathogen. Isn't it true elderly, babies, and those with weak immune systems can't eat undercooked meats? If meat is so good for them, why would it kill someone?

Also keep in mind that the nutrients in plant foods are bound up in fiber, but the ones in meat are directly digested and absorbed.

Much of what we call fiber is cellulose, which makes up the outside of the cells. The nutrients are inside the cell wall. When you chew, cook, blend, digest, and/or cook plants, you break open those cells.

Hands-down, meat is the richest source of B vitamins like B6, B12, and folic acid (in organ meats), carnitine, creatine carnosine, taurine, iron, zinc and CLA (plant foods have virtually none of this nutrient).

I disagree again. I can't speak for other cultures or coutries, but here everyone eats the SAD diet: commercially produced meats, usually red meat, chicken (mainly whitemeat), some turkey, ham, and a few popular seafoods. I can't think of a single person I know who eats organ meats. I know someone somewhere does, but organmeat and meat are not synonymous. When I see McDonald's offering a McLiver sandwich, then I'll reconsider. So when we speak of "meat" I feel it's important to speak of what's consumed in the real world.

Let's pick on B12 since that's usually the first vitamin pro-meat people cite as a reason we "must" eat meat. Right now most of my friends are really big into chicken since the fad is it's (supposedly) healthier than beef. B12 content in chicken: 'One half chicken breast provides some .3 µg per serving or 6.0% of one's daily value (DV)'. So one would have to have SEVENTEEN servings of chicken to meet the RDA. Is this really a perfect food? Are you sure by eating meat, you don't need to supplement b12 too?

Carnitine: present in nuts, seeds, plant products. Prove to me a vegan cannot get enough without supplementation. "natural sources of carnitine include nuts and seeds (e.g., pumpkin, sunflower, sesame), legumes or pulses (beans, peas, lentils, peanuts), vegetables (artichokes, asparagus, beet greens, broccoli, brussels sprouts, collard greens, garlic, mustard greens, okra, parsley, kale), fruits (apricots, bananas), cereals (buckwheat, corn, millet, oatmeal, rice bran, rye, whole wheat, wheat bran, wheat germ) and other 'health' foods (bee pollen, brewer's yeast, carob"

creatine: your body makes it and is easily stored in skeletal muscle. No proof is shown a vegan will get sick without supplementing creatine.

carnosine: while meat does contain it, it's not proven that we suffer ill effects with lower amounts of it. Seems to be very controversial. Goolging it came up with a bazillion links to supplement sellers who claims it does everything from cure autism to making people young, and I can't find any real science on it.

taurine: we make it ourselves in the pancreas. You don't need to eat it. Supplemental taurine doesn't seem to have any effect.

iron: It's a myth you need meat for this. Vegans are shown not to have any lower iron levels than others.
Iron in the Vegan Diet -- The Vegetarian Resource Group

zinc: present in legumes, nuts, grains. No proof vegans are suffering from a zinc deficiency.

CLA: available in mushrooms. But the big question is do we even need to seek it out in our diet? The jury is still out. Some show concern that adding CLA supplements to an overweight person is linked to Insulin Resistance. So until it's proven it's "needed", I'm not losing sleep over it.



The bigger picture is this:

If meat provided things we MUST have and we CANNOT make or obtain from plant sources, then all vegans must be suffering from malnutriton. However, the fact is that vegans aren't sick and dying.

The vegans I know tell me they all felt physically better when they gave up meat. Studies that looked at nutrient deficiencies in vegans who ate a balanced diet found no evidence vegans had any significant difference over meat-eater.

I've been a vegetarian for about 15 yrs now. Never had a health issue related to nutrition, except being overweight. Funny thing is in my diet the most calorie dense foods are those with cheese and eggs. I hope to shift over to vegan. All the vegans I meet are a good weight and have a healthy glow, and I hope to have that kind of good health some day.

Its expense is a separate issue from what's good for the body.

Expense is relevant.

Money is what makes livestock producers overcrowd their animals and pump them full of horomones. Money is what makes the processing plants run the lines at top speed, even know the faster you cut up the animal, the higher the risk of mixing in fecal matter, brain tissue, or intestinal contents (=pathogens). It's all about money.

Again, a separate issue, whose answer is: make the industry more responsible.

How do you propose to do that? Every effort that's made is met with strong resistance, scare tactics, and intense lobbying to maintain the status quo. If we brainwash everyone to be convinced they need daily meat, now people are dependent in the meat industry, no matter how vile the industry becomes.

I argue with you from my personal experiences dealing with livestock producers and the livestock sales. Livestock auctions are not pretty places: sick and crippled animals are so much the norm, they're in every sale, and nobody gives them a second thought. Sick animals mean sick meat. Sick animals mean overuse of antibiotics and drugs, which gives you tainted meat.

I personally volunteer to give anyone seriously interested in learning where your meat comes from a tour of one of the big livestock auctions near me. New Holland Sales is the nearest one to me. I was there over spring break and witnessed pigs so cripped they couldn't walk. One had his head through the bars to look out of a pen so overcrowded there was no open floorspace; I saw a stranger kick him in the head. There is a 'dead pile' around back they don't mention to visitors where the animals that die on their way through the sale are dumped (sometimes not completely dead). This is an example of livestock production nationwide. Sick animals = sick meat.
NoDowners.org
Lancaster County stockyard convicted of animal cruelty - YDR Pets
Gene Baur's Bloggings - All posts tagged 'new holland'

Pic of my local auction (New Holland), overcrowded and dirty:



Dairy cows are shipped still lactating and full of hormones. Their udders are extremely painful this size:


New Holland also sells meat (to be exported and slaughtered for the eurpean market). Europeans: this is where your gourmet "cheval" comes from:



I hope anyone interested will google "downers" and find out how many downers actually become a normal part of the meat supply.

Yes, meat eaters certainly do want them, so it sure would be helpful if knowledgeable people would point them to alternative sources of it, instead of just beating them over the head with how bad the factory farmed-food they eat is.

So what you're saying is who cares the cost of producing meat or eating meat, all that matter is people should get what they want.

Let me repeat myself: sick animals -> sick meat

[funchy]

Back to the topic of essential nutrients in meat, you missed a few:



antibiotics: an estimated 70-78% of all antibiotics used in the US are given to livestock. Isn't something wrong if our animals are so sick they need that much antibiotics to remain alive long enough for slaughter? Isn't it odd I need a prescription to get most antibiotics, but if I go to a feed store, I can get pretty much anything I want? Much of this is given to livestock for "non-therapeutic" use. In other words, cram as many pigs or cows in a tiny space, and give them antibiotics every single day to "help them grow".

drugs: Livestock are given dewormers, fly control, medications, and other maintenance drugs throughout their life. A responsible producer will keep the animal from slaughter for 30-90 days (depending on the drugs) but nobody wants to investigate how long the chemicals stay in the tissue. I own horses which get the same dewormers as cattle (ivermectin, fenbenzdole, pyrantel palomate). In horses these same drugs are marked "not for use in animals intented for slaughter". Add in sterioids and growth enhancing drugs. The FDA does NOT drug-test meat. How is a drug-residue cocktail healthy?

BGH: Bovine Growth Hormone is given to cattle, namely dairy cows, for no purpose other than to make money (more milk). BGH passed through the udder and ends up in your milk carton. Older milk cows who spent their life injected with BGH are shipped to slaughter when they can no longer meet quota; their meat is put alongside untainted meat and not labeled.

E Coli: only comes from animal sources (guts, feces, manure/sewage). Especially common in ground meats such as burgers because one bit of contaminated meat gets mixed in throughout the enitre batch. Contamination can come from something as simple as a rushed slaughterhouse worker nicking a hole in the lower intestines/colon and the fluid dribbling out.

environmental contaminants and pollutants: anything in the environment such as pesticides, air/water/soil chemical pollutants, and heavy metals end up in animal tissue. The higher up on the food chain you eat, the more these are concentrated. You have no way of knowing the last time the cattle farmer sprayed 2-4D on his weeds where his cows graze. You have no way of knowing if the shallow well or pond the cows drank from wasn't full of chemical run-off.

Let's just take arsenic for example. The people who eat a lot of chicken consume up to 32.50–47.07 μg total arsenic/day just from chicken meat.
http://www.jhsph.edu/clf/PDF_Files/E...ky_arsenic.pdf

Did you know they passed a law that made it a federal crime to announce a negative thing about the livestock industry if the announcement costs the meat industry money? Even if it's true? Ever wonder why nobody talks about mad-cow anymore? Did you know Oprah was sued for mentioning mad-cow on her show, even know the segment was not lies?

And reforms on the meat industry are fought using any tactic, even if it's a reform that will keep your food safer. For example, the meat industry is actually fighting to keep it legal for downer animals to slaughtered fro you to eat. Do you want to eat animals to weak and sick to stand?
Humane society challenges meat industry over new law - DailyBulletin.com

Further reading:
Canadian Health Coalition
Eat Chicken, Get Cancer | Knowledge Spy


How is any of this healthy for anyone??

[funchy]

Originally Posted by Brutha

Not everything that vit C does is good either.

That interesting. Thanks for sharing the link. Two questions:

How do they define "large" doses? 1000mg? 2500mg? more?

Is it clear that Vit C is doing a bad thing if it's playing a role in mitosis? Uncontrolled cell growth is cancer, so maybe activating some of the inhibition genes is a good thing?

I wish I could read the text of the full study, but I don't have access to that journal.

[Brutha]

I wish I could read the text of the full study, but I don't have access to that journal.

Being at university has it's advantages
The think I link to is a review that's unfortunately behind the pay wall. Fortunately the main study is published in plosone:
PLoS ONE: Antiproliferative Effect of Ascorbic Acid Is Associated with the Inhibition of Genes Necessary to Cell Cycle Progression

Uncontrolled cell growth is cancer, so maybe activating some of the inhibition genes is a good thing?

If you do have cancer it's probably a good thing but that doesn't mean that it's also a good thing if you don't have cancer.

[funchy]

Wow, Brutha, you rock! Thanks for the link.

I skimmed through the paper, and I'll admit I didn't understand every word, but I came away with the idea that the study was on the beneficial aspects of ascorbic acid, in this case in blocking cancer cell growth. I'd like to learn more. Can you explain why ascorbic acid's role in halting cell proliferation is of concern to you? Certainly we don't want all cells in the body halting division or dying off, but apoptosis is a normal body function.

On an unrelated notice, I noticed in the introduction they've found ascorbic acid to be beneficial in dealing with Charcot Marie Tooth disease. I tried to search the site but didn't find it. This is fascinating! CMT is a genetic disease, and I know someone with it. Last I heard there wasn't much to treat it besides "exercise" and "physical therapy", and it's exciting to see they had some success, especially with something so common and inexpensive as Vit C.

[liamona]

I take this to mean you haven't read my zillion other posts on this very subject. :..(.

Originally Posted by funchy

Sometimes I get busy and can visit this site as often, so perhaps I missed them?

I'm just joshing with ya.

I'm glad you've read whatever posts of mine you have, because I appreciate your arguments and especially the passion and intelligence you bring to them. We may disagree, but your posts always make me think!

Sure, healthy young people without problems like diabetes can convert ALA to small amounts of DHA and EPA, and beta-carotene to vitamin A. But what about babies or those who are old or have health issues that interfere with the conversions?

Originally Posted by funchy

Odd that there are old vegans out there then? Shouldn't they be dead? And I know vegans often raise their children to go meat-free. Why don't any of my vegan friends & their kids suffer from malnutrition? I think throwing in the "health issues" thing is a scare tactic.

My point is that foods containing nutrients are different (superior) than foods whose nutrients need to be converted by the body. And so many people have gut and digestive issues, which will definitely interfere with nutrient conversion.

Of course there's healthy vegans. There's also healthy SAD eaters too. The healthiest ones tend to be the ones whose parents and grandparents ate optimally.

However, those who show signs of physical degeneration (narrow face, narrow jaw, crooked teeth) may need to be more careful of their diet, especially women who want to conceive and/or have trouble conceiving.

Among my acquaintance the health-minded omnis and veg*ns tend to be the healthiest, followed by SAD vegetarians (who often dislike cooking) and SAD omnis and militant non-supplementing vegans (the latter and their kids seem to suffer from strange health issues).

In some of the online forums I belong to there are numerous former veg*ns with interesting stories. I appreciate the posts from Mothering.com's discussion forums, because the women tend to be intelligent and trying to live consciously:

Any ex-vegetarians/vegans here?

For ex-vegans

Support: Vegetarian going back to eating meat. (long)

One could argue that "elderly" and "those with health issues" are less likely to survive a bout of illness from E Coli, a common meat-based pathogen. Isn't it true elderly, babies, and those with weak immune systems can't eat undercooked meats? If meat is so good for them, why would it kill someone?

It's common because of factory farming, not because meat in itself is inherently bacteria-laden. In fact, grass-fed cows have virtually no pathogenic E. coli like E. coli O157.

Also keep in mind that the nutrients in plant foods are bound up in fiber, but the ones in meat are directly digested and absorbed.

Much of what we call fiber is cellulose, which makes up the outside of the cells. The nutrients are inside the cell wall. When you chew, cook, blend, digest, and/or cook plants, you break open those cells.

That's simplifying it quite a bit! It's pretty well-known that zinc and iron from meat is superior than what's in veggies, because of their bioavailability:

"There are two kinds of iron, heme and non-heme iron. In plant foods, iron exists in the less bioavailable non-heme form (2). Relative to heme iron, non-heme iron is far more sensitive to the enhancers and inhibitors of iron absorption, and also to physiological iron need (7, 8)."

"Bioavailability of non-heme iron and dietary zinc is greatly influenced by both dietary inhibitors and enhancers (7, 9). This may place certain segments of the vegetarian population at risk for iron and zinc deficiency."

From "Factors in Vegetarian Diets Influencing Iron and Zinc Bioavailability."

Here's something from the National Institutes of Health:

"Dietary Supplement Fact Sheet: Iron"

"Absorption of heme iron from meat proteins is efficient. Absorption of heme iron ranges from 15% to 35%, and is not significantly affected by diet [15]. In contrast, 2% to 20% of nonheme iron in plant foods such as rice, maize, black beans, soybeans and wheat is absorbed [16]. Nonheme iron absorption is significantly influenced by various food components [1,3,11-15]"

I disagree again. I can't speak for other cultures or coutries, but here everyone eats the SAD diet: commercially produced meats, usually red meat, chicken (mainly whitemeat), some turkey, ham, and a few popular seafoods. I can't think of a single person I know who eats organ meats. I know someone somewhere does, but organmeat and meat are not synonymous. When I see McDonald's offering a McLiver sandwich, then I'll reconsider. So when we speak of "meat" I feel it's important to speak of what's consumed in the real world.

What do you disagree with, the fact that meat contains the richest sources of theses nutrients? And what do these nutrients have to do with SAD meat?

Organ meats were commonly consumed up until the 70s, until the harmful low-fat dogma stemming from Ancel Keys' diet propaganda became common.

Even old La Leche League cookbooks contain recipes for organ meats—they were called "variety meats."

Expense is relevant.

Money is what makes livestock producers overcrowd their animals and pump them full of horomones. Money is what makes the processing plants run the lines at top speed, even know the faster you cut up the animal, the higher the risk of mixing in fecal matter, brain tissue, or intestinal contents (=pathogens). It's all about money.

What I meant is that just because modern methods are producing meat in unhealthy ways, doesn't mean that meat itself is the problem. if it were, there wouldn't be all the evidence that people have thrived on it for millions of years.

Again, a separate issue, whose answer is: make the industry more responsible.

How do you propose to do that? Every effort that's made is met with strong resistance, scare tactics, and intense lobbying to maintain the status quo. If we brainwash everyone to be convinced they need daily meat, now people are dependent in the meat industry, no matter how vile the industry becomes.

[...]

I argue with you from my personal experiences dealing with livestock producers and the livestock sales. Livestock auctions are not pretty places: sick and crippled animals are so much the norm, they're in every sale, and nobody gives them a second thought. Sick animals mean sick meat. Sick animals mean overuse of antibiotics and drugs, which gives you tainted meat.

That's true! I don't know. People were starting to finally buy the better foods, when the Greater Depression hit.

What I would like to see is people getting together locally and growing/raising their own foods, so that each community can be self-sufficient.

I don't think it's impossible to go back to farming the way it used to and should be:


(Image from Franklin Farmers Market. Other small farmers can be found at EatWild.com)

These kinds of farms are finally starting to become more known about, so that's a good sign. It took decades for us to get away from this method; it may take that long to go back to it.

[Brutha]

Certainly we don't want all cells in the body halting division or dying off, but apoptosis is a normal body function.

Wounds for example need to regrow and in general I think that the body knows when it should have cell devision and messing with that decision doesn't seem to be a good idea but maybe I'm also overinterpreting the effect.

[funchy]

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on the "necessity" of meat to get needed nutrients in a healthy diet.


What I meant is that just because modern methods are producing meat in unhealthy ways, doesn't mean that meat itself is the problem. if it were, there wouldn't be all the evidence that people have thrived on it for millions of years. [/quote]

Survival of something doesn't imply necessity. People also used to die before they turned 30 and bathe in the same creek they dumped the chamberpot.

[/COLOR]I don't think it's impossible to go back to farming the way it used to and should be:


(Image from Franklin Farmers Market

These kinds of farms are finally starting to become more known about, so that's a good sign. It took decades for us to get away from this method; it may take that long to go back to it.
[/QUOTE]

One picture provided by a farmer's market web site does not imply all vendors at the market grow locally, have nice healthy looking animals, don't load the cows with drugs, feed them only grass, no feedlots, etc.

Even if your cows are grass fed (almost all are not), they are shuffled around and resold at auctions. Then when they hit maturity, they're shipped to feedlots to be given garbage-feed to "finish" them. Then they're shipped again to some centralized slaughterhouse. Every time they're shipped and shuffled around, there is stress. Disease loves stress.

I think if you ask them, the meat vendors at your farmers market will also tell you the cows have to be processed (killed and butchered) in a USDA approved facility. This is required for them to be able to sell the meat to others. Even the USDA admits many of the meat processing plants (slaughterhouses) are poorly monitored.
Lawmaker: Nation's food system is collapsing - CNN.com

Processing plants are using animals too sick to even walk the 20' from the truck to the kill-room. This is normal at USDA processing plants. Ignoring the issue of the animal's suffering, animals that sick aren't really producing a healthy product. You as a consumer have no way to know if that animal was in 100% health or if he was barely able to stand up.
Undercover Investigation Reveals Rampant Animal Cruelty at California Slaughter Plant – A Major Beef Supplier to America’s School Lunch Program

Where do your local meat vendors get the cows they raise. It's commonplace to go to the auction to buy little cows (called "feeders"). When you're at a [non-purebred] livestock auction, they don't tell you where the animals came from. Those horrible photos of the animals at New Holland livestock auction is the kind of place a farmer near me buys his animals. All the farmer knows is they're cheap and you can get weight on them by fall and make a profit. No idea what the mother or calf was fed. No idea what they were exposed to. Probably exposed to diseases in the crowded auction barn.

While I do like the idea of supporting local growers, there buying at a farmers market is not a guarantee of purity or quality. It might be produced locally, and you may even meet the growers. Just because they're good people claim they "love" the cattle, doesn't mean they don't use chemicals, de-wormers, steroids, BgH, antibiotics and medications. If it's organic, you're a little better off, but that doesn't guarantee the animal isn't in unhealthy high-density confinement. High-density farming can happen in any area. It's not just some horrible thing that happens in other far-away places. The higher the density, generally the higher the pathogens/disease. The more they sleep in their own ammonia and feces. Confinement and high-density is profitable and normal.
CDC - Associations between Indicators of Livestock Farming Intensity and Incidence of Human Shiga Toxin-Producing Escherichia Coli Infection
Impact of Livestock Buildings as Sources of Gas and Odor Emissions
Livestock Yards, Open-Air Feedlots and Wintering Sites are “Outdoor Confinement Areas” Under The NMA, 2002

Even good producers are forced by the industry to NOT do things that would produce better meat. Some of the cattle producers wanted to voluntarily test for BSE (mad-cow disease). Industry interests pressured the government to make it ILLEGAL for them to do so. They were afraid the public might realize there could still be BSE in the nation's meat supply. People might ask why all cows weren't tested. So now we have no idea if our meat supply is safe, but who cares as long as meat-eaters get their cheap burgers, i guess?
Feds fight broad testing for mad cow - Mad Cow in the U.S.- msnbc.com
Meatpacker and USDA battle over right to test for mad cow disease: Consumer Reports on Safety

Let's say the one grower at your Rocky Glade Farmer's market does everything right and somehow has access to one of the few decent USDA processing plants. Let's say the meat is organic. Is that one example really indicative of what we call "beef" in this country? Knowing that 99.9% of beef for sale in the US doesn't meet the idea, why promote (general) meat when the only healthy meat might be your 1% good meat?

The problem is that even if the consumer wanted only properly-produced meat, it just isn't available. The US food meat supply is corrupt. It's poorly monitored and the industry is controlled by special interests. Legislation helps the big producers and greedy, but those who want to do things right get nowhere. Unless you're breeding, raising, and slaughtering the animals yourself, you really don't know the quality of the meat.

[liamona]

Originally Posted by funchy

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on the "necessity" of meat to get needed nutrients in a healthy diet.

I don't think it's necessary, exactly! But that's okay.

What I meant is that just because modern methods are producing meat in unhealthy ways, doesn't mean that meat itself is the problem. if it were, there wouldn't be all the evidence that people have thrived on it for millions of years.

Originally Posted by funchy

Survival of something doesn't imply necessity. People also used to die before they turned 30 and bathe in the same creek they dumped the chamberpot.

I didn't say survive—I said people THRIVED on it.

That's why Weston Price's research was revolutionary—he didn't study any old group of people (especially those dumping chamberpots in creeks! LOL).

He went around the world studying people thriving in optimal health. And all of them ate meat some of the time (the ones who ate the least, the isolated Swiss villagers in Loetschental Valley, consumed a lot of dairy).

One picture provided by a farmer's market web site does not imply all vendors at the market grow locally, have nice healthy looking animals, don't load the cows with drugs, feed them only grass, no feedlots, etc.

Actually, there's a lot of small vendors who post pictures of their farms. I was surprised.

Even if your cows are grass fed (almost all are not), they are shuffled around and resold at auctions. Then when they hit maturity, they're shipped to feedlots to be given garbage-feed to "finish" them. Then they're shipped again to some centralized slaughterhouse. Every time they're shipped and shuffled around, there is stress. Disease loves stress.

Not all producers do that. In fact, farmers like Joel Salatin of the infamous Polyface Farm will ONLY sell to local people. He will not ship his farm's products anywhere, no matter what the asking price:

COMMUNITY: We do not ship food. We should all seek food closer to home, in our foodshed, our own bioregion. This means enjoying seasonality and reacquainting ourselves with our home kitchens.

The problem is that even if the consumer wanted only properly-produced meat, it just isn't available. The US food meat supply is corrupt. It's poorly monitored and the industry is controlled by special interests. Legislation helps the big producers and greedy, but those who want to do things right get nowhere. Unless you're breeding, raising, and slaughtering the animals yourself, you really don't know the quality of the meat.

All the more reason why meat-eaters need to insist on eating meats that are from animals raised properly, instead of throwing up their hands because of the problems, or burying their head in the sand when they see information on factory farms. Nothing will change if we only look at the problems!


A site like EatWild.com is invaluable to search for the few people doing things the right way. They even have a directly for 100-Percent Grass-Fed Dairies. This is a list of things the site looks at as criteria for inclusion in its directory:

We welcome new suppliers who meet the following production standards (revised 5/08):
Criteria for Listing on Eatwild

• We raise our animals in a low-stress, natural environment and treat them humanely from birth to market.
• We protect our streams and other natural water sources from harmful animal impact.
• We manage the grazing pattern of our animals to enhance the growth of the pasture, the health of the land, and the nutritional value of our products. To do this, we take into account the specific soil conditions, vegetation, altitude, growing season, and temperature range of our climate.
• When high-quality pasture is not available, we feed the animals stored grasses, which can include hay, haylage, and grass silage. We do not feed them grain, soy, corn silage, or concentrate.
• We do not treat our animals with hormones.
• We do not treat our animals with routine, low-level antibiotics. Those animals that we do treat with antibiotics due to health problems or injury are removed from the program.
• We do not confine our animals except for: 1) brief periods prior to and during birthing, 2) to protect them from extreme weather conditions, or 3) to prevent “pugging” of the soil during wet weather.
• We raise our dairy animals on pasture with little or no grain or concentrate. (We will list you if you feed your dairy animals a small percentage of grain—6 pounds or less per day, provided you specify the type and amount. This information must be included in your listing.)
• We raise our poultry outdoors on good-quality pasture as soon as they are old enough to withstand outdoor conditions. (Note: Having “access to the outdoors” is not enough. The birds must be getting a significant amount of their nourishment from growing plants. This means that they need to be in a large area of grass, or moved frequently so that they always have a good supply of fresh pasture. Unlike ruminants, poultry can be fed a significant amount of supplemental food, such as grain and seeds.)
• We raise our pigs or rabbits outdoors on good pasture. (As is true for poultry, they can be given supplemental grain, nuts, seeds, fruits, and other nutritious foods in addition to grasses.)
• Organic certification is desirable, but not essential.

Eatwild reserves the right to remove a supplier from the website if there is reason to believe that the supplier does not meet these criteria, or if for any reason inclusion of the supplier might reflect negatively on Eatwild.

[Datum]

2 liamona,

No matter how many pro-meat arguments/articles you will provide, no matter how many professors you quote, all of them, including you, will agree that we are NOT designed to eat raw meat. That is the biggest hint for you that we are not meat eaters. Cooking happened only "recently" and meat eating occurred as adjustment when we moved from warm to cold. Any carnivore can eat raw meat without consequences, humans do not have digestive system that can handle raw meat. You cannot argue against that fact.

Any being is designed to survive without tools. Hunting and building is unnatural for humans. Our brain is side effect of genetic mapping and diet. We are still clueless how we can use it and what is the purpose of it.
Do you really think nature designed us to hunt with spears and guns? Or to raise meat in a box? Just think about it.