Eating Flesh Pros and Cons

[mantis]

upon second glance of your post you are right. i am a vegan and have been for a while but i decided not to get myself into this conversation as people will always say this is better than that or that is better than this. i believe a vegan diet is an alright choice in that it helps your body become alkaline over acidic, which meat will do.

 

freeform, you questioned the increase of heart disease and obesity with meat, here it is.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_meat

 

if you cannot believe what is said simply scroll down and you have all the citations and resources you need. while i am not saying we should all become vegans and drop animals - you should however pause a moment and look at yourself deep to find where you are. while the tao does say your body is wise, you must remember that the taoists where healthy people and where not taking into account the hazardous habits that we have developed over the past few decades. a healthy body will tell you what it needs to remain healthy while an unhealthy body will tell you what it needs to remain unhealthy. if you need proof of this find someone who is obese or close, they will often talk of exercise but seldom do it and continue to munch on junk and lay around.

[Taoist81]

To sum this up, man did not originate as a predatory species. It is obvious by looking at us. Man is weak, slow, lacks fangs or claws, and not suited for combat if compared to actual predatory species, such as wild dogs, lions, tigers, and bears oh my! Man is a prey animal. If you don't believe me, I give you the Cow challenge. Take off all your clothes, including any sharp objects such as rings and jewelery, and start a fight with a simple oxen. If you can kill him with your bare hands and tear his flesh without tools, I consider you a predator. But I fear that oxen will gore you to death in seconds. Man began a vegetarian, then moved to the coastal areas of africa and began spear-fishing. That is largely why men stand upright, are intelligent enough to devise tools, have hair that is practically invisible, unlike other primates, and used to live in tribal societies where everything is shared. If you can make a living that way, I consider you a very strong man. But you can't. You're alive because of the 2% of the population who work as farmers, honest men who keep you alive with their hard labour.

 

By your definition Hawks, dingoes, and any other animal that feeds off rodents, fish, birds or insects cannot be carnivorous (keep in mind this is coming from a vegetarian). You would agree that bear are carnivores, right? Some bear, feed mainly on salmon. While we are at it though, there are individuals (for example in traditional Kali training) who do wrestle Water Buffalo. And bear-wrestling as well as crocidile wrestling have been known to occur. Not to mention that many predators hunt in packs as we used to.

Humans have for at least the better part of our evolution been OMNIvores. Our intestinal tract falls in between the lengths of herbivores vs. carnivores, we possess canine teeth and incisors that are excellent for tearing flesh and molars which are great for grinding fiber (i.e. plants). We have eyes in the front of our heads like most predatory species (to focus in front of us on prey) instead of on the sides like most "prey species" (so they can see more around them to watch for predators). We also have an ingenious talent for using tools (the same way apes use tools to gather ants and other insects) to hunt other animals.

Bottom line, it is likely (from an evolutionary standpoint) that our species would not have gotten to the point where we are now, without eating meat in the past. Does this mean we should/have to now? Not necessarily. We can survive quite pleasantly (thanks to our technological advances in food preparation : ) ) without meat, at least most people could. But we can also eat meat, of the non-deep-fried variety, and survive pretty much as well. The life expectancies between a healthy meat eater and a healthy vegetarian only favor the vegetarian by a few years, and we all know how exact "life expectancy" can be.

 

The consumption of meat only began with ranching, and now, Man has made disastrous changes to the world ecology all for the sake of eating meat three times a day.

 

Hmmm, no, we started eating meat long before we started "ranching" which implies agricultural advances. Aren't you forgetting all those cave paintings with our ancestors hunting down Mammoths (packs remember?)? We weren't raising them. While your ecological issues are not without merit, in the words of George Carlin "The Planet is FINE, the people are f&%ked."

 

If you want to rationalize your behavior, fine, but the world is a terrible thing to waste. Meat is scarcity food, good for when there are no vegetables or yogurt to eat, but the world can't physically support 6 billion carnivores. And the land required to raise a few dairy cows, rather than thousands of cattle for the slaughter, is a very small ratio. By definition, you kill one mature cow, and its gone. One dairy cow gives milk all its life, and therefore is more valuable alive then dead.

 

So suit yourself. Your spirituality and knowledge amazes me.

Uh, by the way, you do realize that "dairy cows" don't just magically produce milk, right? They, like all mammals, produce milk in response to having been pregnant . However in the case of a dairy farm, the calves are taken away and the cows are milked. The females are continuously bred to continuously produce more milk (they can continuously produce milk but they produce more through constant breeding) and what do you suppose happens to the calves? The males may become breeders or they are castrated and raised for slaughter. Many are locked away to be made into veal. If you are talking about a small local farm, then sure, it can be quite humane, too much milk can hurt the cow. But if you are speaking of 99% of the milk drunk in modern society then you can't call it humane.

However, as far as spirituality goes, this has as much or as little to do with it as the individual in question feels and you step out on quite a limb by making such arrogant statements. A Sufi may point out that (since his/her spirituality is based on the Koran) as long as an animal is killed with a quick slit to the throat out of view of others that are to be slaughtered, it is pleasing to Allah and thus, uplifting spiritually. A Sikh, will point out that Ek Onkar has pointedly approved meat for consumption. A tantric may eat meat as a benefit to his/her spirituality simply to overcome the taboo. Spirituality, on the question of meat consumption as with many other things, is mostly a point of view (The Tao Te Ching acknowledges the "need" of having a chief executioner, something that many of us may not approve of).

We are a multi-faceted species, and before we had "spirituality" we developed our ability to survive. That is what meat-eating is, not an essential spiritual dogma (as has been shown already there are many differing views even within traditions), but a leftover tribute to our ability, as the dominant species (for better or worse) of this planet, to survive.

[witch]

well according to what you say witch, i have no sexual energy, which is too far from the truth

 

You are a young healthy man following Mantak Chia's practices--of course you have plenty of sexual energy. Even a bad diet wouldn't diminish it much, unless you were near famine.

 

But I think if you try my thing you will be surprised at how much more sexual energy you have. If that's what you are after.

[mantis]

By your definition Hawks, dingoes, and any other animal that feeds off rodents, fish, birds or insects cannot be carnivorous (keep in mind this is coming from a vegetarian). You would agree that bear are carnivores, right? Some bear, feed mainly on salmon. While we are at it though, there are individuals (for example in traditional Kali training) who do wrestle Water Buffalo. And bear-wrestling as well as crocidile wrestling have been known to occur. Not to mention that many predators hunt in packs as we used to.

 

hawks have a ferocious beak that they can use to usually kill their prey in a single peck. a dingo is pretty much a dog and if you ever encounter a wild dog on the street unless you are well versed in self defense chances are it will bite you and possibly severely wound or kill you (this is one, not a pack, as they travel in the wild). i do not see the correlation between a bear eating salmon as if it wanted to it could eat anything else.

 

as for the wrestling, keep in mind the sub-sahara where i'd imagine you'd find the kali's has one of the lowest life expectancy rates in the world. i don't know about you but if wrestling crocodiles is in their daily regimen i can see why. for proof see this. simply speaking, without the tools us humans have created we would not survive, which is why we are intelligent over strong like say an ape, or a gorilla.

 

edit: i would have already tried your diet, witch, if i was not a vegan. i am considering ordering those omega-zen3 capsules you listed somewhere around here and taking them for some time. not so much for sexual energy but i am concerned if i am getting enough omega's with vegetables and nuts and such alone.

Edited July 31, 2007 by mantis

[freeform]

upon second glance of your post you are right. i am a vegan and have been for a while but i decided not to get myself into this conversation as people will always say this is better than that or that is better than this. i believe a vegan diet is an alright choice in that it helps your body become alkaline over acidic, which meat will do.

 

freeform, you questioned the increase of heart disease and obesity with meat, here it is.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_meat

 

if you cannot believe what is said simply scroll down and you have all the citations and resources you need. while i am not saying we should all become vegans and drop animals - you should however pause a moment and look at yourself deep to find where you are. while the tao does say your body is wise, you must remember that the taoists where healthy people and where not taking into account the hazardous habits that we have developed over the past few decades. a healthy body will tell you what it needs to remain healthy while an unhealthy body will tell you what it needs to remain unhealthy. if you need proof of this find someone who is obese or close, they will often talk of exercise but seldom do it and continue to munch on junk and lay around.

 

 

Hi mantis - thanks for the link.

 

The problem with studies - and basing your lifestyle on studies is that they're never completely accurate. For example the main study the article in that link cited was based on a huge study of heavy red and processed meat eating populations - you have to have at least two big portions of red or processed meat per day, every day to qualify.

 

If there was a similar study done on people eating large quantities of processed meat-replacement products (usually made from soy) then it's likely that there would be some health problems.

 

There was also a study on consuming high dosages of vitamin C that showed a link with the vit c and bowel cancer. Then there are other studies that contradict it and show that high dosages of vit c actually reduces cancer.

 

So who do you trust?

 

No one except your body.

 

You said: "a healthy body will tell you what it needs to remain healthy while an unhealthy body will tell you what it needs to remain unhealthy."

 

That's a very good observation - and you will notice that the ones that are unhealthy are not actually listening to their bodies, but trying to shut their bodies up. Some people call this emotional eating - you eat to sustain or supress emotions. It's much harder to deal with the emotion than to 'treat' it by eating - so people tend to live their life like that. Your observaiton is true if you define an unhealthy body as one full of unresolved traumas and emotional patterns and therefore unconsciousness.

 

When I say listen to your body to decide what to eat, people always say: so how about kids - if I left them to eat anything they liked they would eat only sweets. and similarly adults will only eat unhealthy, tasty food. Listening to the body is a forgotten art. Emotion tends to express as 'feeling' in the body - so people think that's listening to the body - but they're actually listening to emotion.

 

You can try it yourself - what does it feel like when you want to eat something really sweet? There is a specific feeling - for me this feeling is like a hole that needs to be filled and is located between my throat and my heart. If you stay with that feeling for a few minutes, patiently, you may start to discover that there is a memory behind it - I have a specific one of my grandma giving me ice cream because I was upset.

 

So I observe all feelings and eventually I'm starting to be able to differentiate between feelings that come from the past (emotions, traumas, habitual patterns etc) and feelings that come from 'now'. I can tell when I'm hungry because my body needs food, and I can tell when I feel like eating something 'tasty' so that I feel better.

 

Not eating meat so that you feel less guilty, or more morally upright is the same sort of emotional eating. I dont deny that for some people it's far better not to eat meat, and that's great - in fact I havent had meat for about a week, I hadn't even realised untill now. I may eat meat tomorrow I may never eat meat ever again, I'm open to the possibility of either, and it's not even a concern for me. (even if I stopped eating meat, I wouldn't call myself a vegetarian).

 

Mantis - it's great to have some maturity from you, in contrast to Primal Unity

 

Oh and Taoist81 - thanks, I couldn't bring myself to start writing why 'vegetarianism = spirituality' is so ridiculous...

Edited July 31, 2007 by freeform

[Pero]

To sum this up, man did not originate as a predatory species. It is obvious by looking at us. Man is weak, slow, lacks fangs or claws, and not suited for combat if compared to actual predatory species, such as wild dogs, lions, tigers, and bears oh my! Man is a prey animal. If you don't believe me, I give you the Cow challenge. Take off all your clothes, including any sharp objects such as rings and jewelery, and start a fight with a simple oxen. If you can kill him with your bare hands and tear his flesh without tools, I consider you a predator. But I fear that oxen will gore you to death in seconds. Man began a vegetarian, then moved to the coastal areas of africa and began spear-fishing. That is largely why men stand upright, are intelligent enough to devise tools, have hair that is practically invisible, unlike other primates, and used to live in tribal societies where everything is shared. If you can make a living that way, I consider you a very strong man. But you can't. You're alive because of the 2% of the population who work as farmers, honest men who keep you alive with their hard labour.

 

Man does not have to rely on strength and claws and what not to be a predatory species because he has a more evolved brain (don`t know how else to put it). Why would we need strength and sh1t if we can create guns to shoot animals?

So, man a prey animal? I`m sure you`re kidding... I don`t know where you live, but bears and tigers don`t rule the part of the world where I live...

 

The consumption of meat only began with ranching, and now, Man has made disastrous changes to the world ecology all for the sake of eating meat three times a day. If you want to rationalize your behavior, fine, but the world is a terrible thing to waste. Meat is scarcity food, good for when there are no vegetables or yogurt to eat, but the world can't physically support 6 billion carnivores. And the land required to raise a few dairy cows, rather than thousands of cattle for the slaughter, is a very small ratio. By definition, you kill one mature cow, and its gone. One dairy cow gives milk all its life, and therefore is more valuable alive then dead.

 

I`m sure eating meat is not the reason for current ecological state of this planet, or at least not the only one. I think that if everyone stopped eating meat ecology would not change that much. The world could support 6 billion carnivores. Ok, maybe it wouldn`t be able to if they were all overeating or something.

 

 

So suit yourself. Your spirituality and knowledge amazes me.

 

And your spirituality and knowledge amuses me.

Edit: ok, maybe that`s a bit rude...Sorry. But, you cannot judge other peoples knowledge just by the fact that they eat meat. That is ridiculous.

Edited July 31, 2007 by Pero

[mYTHmAKER]

Vegetarians who eat fish obviously have a leg up over regular meat-eaters. The only reasonable vegetarian DHA supplement is Omega-Zen

http://www.nutru.com/our_products/omega.htm

 

Vegetarians who eat fish are NOT vegetarians.

There are other good DHA supplements out there

DHA Purity being one of them.

[witch]

Vegetarians who eat fish are NOT vegetarians.

There are other good DHA supplements out there

DHA Purity being one of them.

 

I take twenty times the dosage he recommends of DHA alone. So I'd blow through that bottle in three days (and that's not counting the EPA I take too).

 

On the other hand, it is conveniently in liquid form. If he sold it in bulk, it would be practical. Thanks for the tip, always like to learn about alternatives.

 

By the way, to show how important EPA and DHA are for the human body, see this link:

 

http://www.oilofpisces.com

[Pero]

BTW, someone mentioned Buddhist Tantra... It`s not only for overcoming a taboo, but also to help the animal. You see, not eating meat because of compassion is more like a sutra point of view. From a higher perspective, that is a "little" compassion, because from a tantric perspective you aren`t really doing anything for the animal. Since it will be reborn as an animal infinitely in samsara because it can`t have contact with the teaching. So by eating it with proper awareness (also use of mantras) you create a good cause for the animal, so in the future it can start following the teaching. Also, by eating it, you create a connection with it. So when you get enlightened the animal will receive benefit. Through you the animal becomes connected to the teaching. Also "bad" connection is better than no connection.

One should not restrict this only to meat though, and eat with distraction when eating plants. Because animals die too when plants are harvested. Worms, bugs and so on, are also animals. They may not be killed intentionally, but they still die. So you should remember that when you eat.

[Taomeow]

you guys are as ignorant as dogs.

 

I object. In this country, dogs and cats, as well as humans, get most of their nutrition out of corn and soy and a helluva lot of chemicals, which is what "pet food" and "prolefeed" (Orwell, 1984) alike really consist of. That's why all dogs and cats on a diet of commercial pet food get cancer in the end of a physically, emotionally and mentally morbid life of obesity, arthritis, diabetes, allergies, renal failure, liver disease and foul breath. And this is why most humans fare likewise, regardless of whether they are vegetarians or not. However, since dogs in this country are indeed mostly vegetarians, through no choosing of their own, "ignorant as dogs" seems to pertain to vegetarians rather than to us omnivorous regulars (who've been this way for the past one million years, give or take), don't you agree?

[Taomeow]

"Meat eating only began with ranching?" Tell it to the mammoth, hunted to extinction by our very own species. Perhaps prehistoric cavemen had their special mammoth ranches and herded mammoths there for the purpose.

 

Not only have we hunted for as long as we've existed (I'm told "vegetarian" is the Native American for "bad hunter"), but if you study paleoanthropology (like I did), you might discover something interesting:

man always went after the largest and fattest animal in his environment. On the North Pole, it will be whale and seal. On the plainlands, it will be buffalo (after the mammoth is gone). Only running out of luck with these will indigenous man eat "white meat!"

 

I don't think any age ever produced so many myths so richly false as our own age of purported science and alleged reason... Get your facts straight folks. You are omnivores in denial, is all you are, and ain't no shame in the omnivorous part (not your fault that nature has made and perpetuated you in this capacity and no other), but the denial part is really in the way... No wait... Religious fundamentalists are usually very unimpressed by facts, so I take the "get your facts straight" part back. Won't make a dent...

Edited July 31, 2007 by Taomeow

[mantis]

i can understand if you do not agree with being a vegan (or vegetarian), but stooping down to low levels and attempting to criticize it makes you seem overly-defensive when it doesn't have to be. i have posted studies in this topic linking (not one study was done, various) red meat consumption with a variety of diseases, including cancer. you may wish to word this differently to justify yourself in consuming - and that is fine, but the bottom line is that it is still there.

 

someone made a comment about eating plants and then killing worms. this is sad. not only sad but it is the common defense against a vegan or vegetarian. "you can save the cows but not the ants and worms!" well my friend, every step you take outdoors you damage nature somewhat, i guess we should all go back to living in a cave naked so that nature is preserved, eh? to add onto all of this, worms can eat grass, which vegans or vegetarians do not eat, so no, they will not disappear but that is not the point. the point is that any step you take in which you are not killing an animal solely for the purpose of ending your hunger will be that of a positive one.

 

the way native americans and indians treated their buffalo and cattle is very, very different from the way it is now. native americans allowed their buffalo's to be free and with their families, whereas now the females are taken to mass produce milk or to reproduce. native americans also didn't consume meat anywhere near the amount an average american does, which is usually about a steak a day, if not a steak some other animal (poultry, pig, etc.)

 

i will stop posting in this topic as i can tell it is getting on the offensive and it is sad to see it do so. no matter how much information i post if you truly aren't in agreement with the vegan ways or lifestyle you will find a way to mock it in some form or way. this is not to everyone in this topic - you will know who you are.

 

"Meat eating only began with ranching?" Tell it to the mammoth, hunted to extinction by our very own species. Perhaps prehistoric cavemen had their special mammoth ranches and herded mammoths there for the purpose.

 

Not only have we hunted for as long as we've existed (I'm told "vegetarian" is the Native American for "bad hunter"), but if you study paleoanthropology (like I did), you might discover something interesting:

man always went after the largest and fattest animal in his environment. On the North Pole, it will be whale and seal. On the plainlands, it will be buffalo (after the mammoth is gone). Only running out of luck with these will indigenous man eat "white meat!"

 

I don't think any age ever produced so many myths so richly false as our own age of purported science and alleged reasons... Get your facts straight folks. You are omnivores in denial, is all you are, and ain't no shame in the omnivorous part (not your fault that nature has made and perpetuated you in this capacity and no other), but the denial part is really in the way of getting those facts straight... religious fundamentalists are usually very unimpressed by facts, so I take the "get your facts straight" part back. Won't make a dent...

 

the wooly mammoth was hunted during the ice age, as far as my knowledge goes that is the only form of edible food as no vegetables grow during the winter. i do not take interest study of history as most of it is by word of mouth or an educated guess at how things happened. you are right, however, in that they would hunt for the largest and fattest animal. why? more food for a longer time. nowhere in your post does it justify the hunting of the mammoth other than the simply reason they wanted to survive. i simply do not believe humans must be an omnivore and if they choose to do so they wouldn't have to eat meat - which we don't, if not all us vegans would be dead.

[lino]

"Meat eating only began with ranching?" Tell it to the mammoth, hunted to extinction by our very own species. Perhaps prehistoric cavemen had their special mammoth ranches and herded mammoths there for the purpose.

 

Not only have we hunted for as long as we've existed (I'm told "vegetarian" is the Native American for "bad hunter"), but if you study paleoanthropology (like I did), you might discover something interesting:

man always went after the largest and fattest animal in his environment. On the North Pole, it will be whale and seal. On the plainlands, it will be buffalo (after the mammoth is gone). Only running out of luck with these will indigenous man eat "white meat!"

 

...eyes are bigger than the stomach

[lino]

I dunno

 

I think that going without meat can be possible but only when a person is sufficiently healthy enough. Hell, I think that William Bodri should classify it as a stage in cultivation, since it requires that the body be able to produce a lot of things that normally it wouldn't do in a less than optimal condition.

[mantis]

funny yet educational short film.

 

[Pero]

...

someone made a comment about eating plants and then killing worms. this is sad. not only sad but it is the common defense against a vegan or vegetarian. "you can save the cows but not the ants and worms!" well my friend, every step you take outdoors you damage nature somewhat, i guess we should all go back to living in a cave naked so that nature is preserved, eh? to add onto all of this, worms can eat grass, which vegans or vegetarians do not eat, so no, they will not disappear but that is not the point. the point is that any step you take in which you are not killing an animal solely for the purpose of ending your hunger will be that of a positive one.

....

 

Dude, you misread and missed the point. I wasn`t saying that in defense against vegetarians. I couldn`t care less if you or anyone else is a vegan or something.

And the way it looks to me is, that vegetarians are trying to convince meat eaters to stop eating meat, not the other way around.

[Taoist81]

Dude, you misread and missed the point. I wasn`t saying that in defense against vegetarians. I couldn`t care less if you or anyone else is a vegan or something.

And the way it looks to me is, that vegetarians are trying to convince meat eaters to stop eating meat, not the other way around.

Hey! Not all the vegetarians : ) Some of us don't care what anyone else eats as long as it is not our pet.

[Pero]

Hey! Not all the vegetarians : ) Some of us don't care what anyone else eats as long as it is not our pet.

 

[beancurdturtle]

All my life I have had incisors. Well, except when I was an infant.

 

I don't think I got them for ornamental reasons.

 

[mantis]

 

of all the teeth we have, only 4 are sharp. and pero, not all vegans are activists or animal rights leaders which are the only people i see that try to convince people to stop eating it. i have clearly stated in my posts eat it - it's not my body it's yours, but be aware of what you're putting in it.

[Taoist81]

 

of all the teeth we have, only 4 are sharp. and pero, not all vegans are activists or animal rights leaders which are the only people i see that try to convince people to stop eating it. i have clearly stated in my posts eat it - it's not my body it's yours, but be aware of what you're putting in it.

You cannot really be saying that you don't consider the incisors "sharp" just because they don't have a pointy tip? The incisors are excellent for tearing flesh, just ask Mike Tyson. Our teeth have quite clearly adapted to be used for both meat and vegetables. Compare our teeth to a cow's and they are all quite sharp.

[Pero]

and pero, not all vegans are activists or animal rights leaders which are the only people i see that try to convince people to stop eating it. i have clearly stated in my posts eat it - it's not my body it's yours, but be aware of what you're putting in it.

 

Awareness was kind of the point of my post, though not in your sense.

[mantis]

taoist, look at the the teeth of a crocodile or of a tiger and then re-evaluate your statement.

[Taoist81]

taoist, look at the the teeth of a crocodile or of a tiger and then re-evaluate your statement.

No one said they were as sharp as carnivores. Only that they are "sharp". Our teeth work well for tearing flesh while retaining the ability to crush fiberous matter (i.e. plants). We fall, as was the point from the begining, in between. Using your example, put a tiger or a crocodile at one end and a cow or a horse at the other and our teeth share aspects of both.

[Bob H]

you guys are as ignorant as dogs.

 

Damn, that's just plain rude. Maybe you can include some Dale Carnegie in your reading list. He wrote a book about winning friends and influencing people that's considered a classic.

 

Take off all your clothes, including any sharp objects such as rings and jewelery, and start a fight with a simple oxen. If you can kill him with your bare hands and tear his flesh without tools, I consider you a predator.

So suit yourself. Your spirituality and knowledge amazes me.

 

You might enjoy this link: http://www.masutatsuoyama.com/masoyama.htm

He did not, as far as I know, "tear the flesh of the bulls" he killed with his bare hands, but he didn't try to do it either. I imagine that a man who can kill bulls with his bare hands could at least rip out the tongue barehanded for an impromptu barbecue. The average modern cubicle rat probably can't do this ... but it is within human capability.

 

Humans aren't predators. Humans are opportunistic feeders, which places us in gustatory company with raccoons and opossums. Find something an opposum won't eat.