My response to people that say humans HAVE to eat meat...

FearAnLoathing

I dont "have" to eat meat I like to eat meat.

cppeace

I lived several months as a vegetarian and was encouraged to go back to eating meat by a vegetarian as with my likes and dislikes of certain foods was making it darn hard for me to get enough protein.
So I lived all those months not eating meat and easily swapped back to eating meat. I felt no better or worse not eating meat. What did make me feel amazingly better was when I lowered my sodium(which there is a ton of is processed prepared meats for sure) and when I stopped taking in diet products. (Fake sugars etc)
I believe I wouldn't have canine teeth if I wasn't meant to eat some meat.
I'm an animal lover, nature protector and omnivore Pagan.
Proud to be me
Kimmy

jamielise2

I need and want meat. Am actually allergic to soy. GO meat!

I probably don't have to eat meat... but I sure as heck want to :P

81Katz

I love eating meat, but I usually eat more chicken or turkey. Yes poultry, still an animal. That is my choice to consume these foods. Could I live without meat, as in physically, sure I probably could. Do I want to, NO.

I imagine all those against eating meat don't wear leather or don't eat fish either. (ohhhh I'd lose count of all the FISH EATING vegetarians I have met over the years) They probably never go to zoo's or to the circus either, maybe never took a ride in a carriage.

Basically eat what you want to eat, and I'll eat what I want to eat. What goes into my mouth doesn't affect you in the slightest.

VegesaurusRex

Why exactly are you so concerned about someone eating or not eating meat? Their own choice. Not your business.

Right. Just so long as I don't have to pay their medical bills under some crazy scheme like Obamacare.

YassSpartan

:bigsmile: So funny people always ask for scientific facts and Google searches are totally invalid. When presented with a "legit" reference, then they claim scientists make mistakes too. In other words, everybody is wrong and right at the same time LOL

AEB_WV

My weekly Sunday entertainment reading arguments on MFP. I think last week it was about mold and fungus.
Whatever it takes to limit saturated fats and refined sugars should decrease your risk of heart disease and diabetes.
That does not mean you have totally give up any certain type of food. To each his own. Cheers to healthy choices!

PeaceLoveVeggies

That "If God didn't want us to animals, why did he make them out of meat" "logic" if you want to call it that, is so overrated, and totally not true.

Also, humans are not natural omnivores. Just saying

sunkisses

My response is: eat meat - don't eat meat... I don't give a fuhhhhhhhhh

RonSwanson66

Our physiology is made up to eat both animal products and plant material, we're not herbivores. Plain and simple.

You are wrong, plain and simple. Our dentition, mandibular structure and intestines are all herbivore. We are not carnivores. As for omnivore, I have yet to hear a defintiion of that word that makes sense. A carnivore eats mostly meat. A herbivore eats mostly vegetables. What does an omnivore eat?

Sigh.

SYNOPSIS OF THE PRIMARY EVIDENCE (CONCLUSIONS)
Humans can be regarded as natural omnivores, so long as one uses the common definition of the term: a natural diet that includes significant amounts of both plant and animal foods. (Humans might not qualify as omnivores if one uses the definition of omnivore as advocated by D.J. Chivers and associates, and discussed in earlier sections herein.)

To use terms that are linked to gut morphology, humans are either faunivores [meat-eaters] or frugivores with specific (evolutionary) adaptations for the consumption of animal foods. This, of course, means that humans are not natural vegetarians. A short summary of some of the evidence supporting this follows (the material below was discussed in depth in earlier sections of this paper).

The fossil record. Approximately 2.5 million years of human omnivory/faunivory are apparent in the record, with genetic adaptation to that diet the inevitable and inescapable outcome of evolution. The supporting evidence here includes isotope analysis of fossils, providing further evidence of consumption of animal foods.

Comparative anatomy of the human gut. The best scientific evidence available to date on gut morphology--analyzed using two different statistical approaches--shows evidence of adaptations for which the best explanation is the practice of faunivory. (Faunivory as an explanation is also supported by optimal foraging theory in hunter-gatherer tribes.) Further, the human gut morphology is not what might be expected for a strict vegetarian/fruit diet.

Comparative physiology (metabolism)

Intestinal receptors for heme iron. The existence of intestinal receptors for the specific absorption of heme iron is strong evidence of adaptation to animal foods in the diet, as heme iron is found in nutritionally significant amounts only in animal foods (fauna).

B-12 an essential nutrient. Similarly, the requirement for vitamin B-12 in human nutrition, and the lack of reliable (year-round) plant sources suggests evolutionary adaptation to animal foods in the human diet.

Plant foods are poor sources of EFAs. In general, the EFAs in plant foods are in the "wrong" ratio (with the exception of a very few exotic, expensive oils), and the low synthesis rates of EPA, DHA, and other long-chain fatty acids from plant precursors point to plant foods as an "inferior" source of EFAs. This strongly suggests adaptation to foods that include preformed long-chain fatty acids, i.e., fauna.

Taurine synthesis rate. The low rate of taurine synthesis in humans, compared to that in herbivorous animals, suggests human adaptation to food sources of taurine (fauna) in the human diet.

Slow conversion of beta-carotene. The sluggish conversion rate of beta-carotene to vitamin A, especially when compared to the conversion rate in herbivorous animals, suggests adaptation to dietary sources of preformed vitamin A (i.e., a diet that includes fauna).

Plant foods available in evolution were poor zinc and iron sources. The plant foods available during evolution (fruits, vegetative plant parts, nuts, but no grains or legumes) generally provide low amounts of zinc and iron, two essential minerals. These minerals are provided by grains, but grains are products of agriculture (i.e., were not available during evolution), and contain many antinutrients that inhibit mineral absorption. This suggests that the nutritional requirements for iron and zinc were primarily met via animal foods during human evolution.

Bitter taste threshold as a trophic marker. An analysis of the human bitter taste threshold, when compared to the threshold of other mammals, suggests that our sensitivity to the bitter taste is comparable to that of carnivores/omnivores.

There is no such thing as a veg*n gatherer tribe. And there are no records to indicate that any such tribes ever existed; also no evidence of any vegan societies either.

The actual diets of all the great apes includes some fauna--animal foods. Even the great apes that are closest to being completely vegetarian, gorillas, deliberately consume insects when available. Chimps and bonobos, our closest relatives, hunt and kill vertebrates and eat occasional meat.

Many of the ancillary claims made in comparative "proofs" of veg*n diets are logical fallacies:

The misinterpretation of animal studies using domesticated or feedlot meats to condemn all omnivore diets.

The misinterpretation of clinical studies showing negative results for the SAD/SWD as indicating negative results for all omnivore diets.

The misinterpretation of the results of the China Project to claim it "proves" vegan diets are best and all omnivore diets are bad.

John McArdle, Ph.D., an anatomist and primatologist, a vegetarian, and scientific advisor to the American Anti-Vivisection Society, summarizes the situation clearly [McArdle 1996, p. 174]:

Humans are classic examples of omnivores in all relevant anatomical traits. There is no basis in anatomy or physiology for the assumption that humans are pre-adapted to the vegetarian diet. For that reason, the best arguments in support of a meat-free diet remain ecological, ethical, and health concern

http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/comp-anat/comp-anat-9a.shtml

MissFit0101

I totally HAVE to eat meat.. .:happy:

kristarablue

I am not going to get into the debate really because honestly to each their own...its all good. I was a vegitarian for 5 years and during that time I gained oh so much weight...I was not a vegan, I ate dairy products and eggs. But please don't assume that by leading the vegitarian lifestyle you will lose weight and be healthier, that is simply not true. I think whether or not you eat meat you can make good or bad choices to lead a healthy or unhealthy lifestyle...it is all on what you chose in life.

colinmcp

I was born with incisors and canine teeth.

Indy_Mario

My response to your response: Mmmmm, bacon!


Also, we these teeth called canines, cuspids, fangs, if you will, yeah, those are not for eating spinach.


Also, mmmm, bacon!

beckym71

My weekly Sunday entertainment reading arguments on MFP. I think last week it was about mold and fungus. To each his own. Cheers to healthy choices!

Haha! Me too! You're guaranteed a perfect *pass the popcorn* thread whenever the OP claims, *I'm not looking for argument or debate BUT....then proceeds to state an extremely divisive opinion

songbyrdsweet

As someone with 3/4 of a PhD (so far lol) in studying diet-related obesity and metabolic disease and dysregulation....false.

As someone who deals with scientific literature every day, I really appreciate cites to studies.

By the way, I do not imply or agree with the ad Verecundiam argument, which I believe you were advocating. Experts make mistakes. In my experience, frequently.

The experts aren't the ones doing the studies. It's their grad students. Maybe you should read from journals with higher impact factors.

Gee, I guess Nature, Cell, Science, PNAS, PLoS One, JBC, and the other journals I read are shoddy. Tell me which ones I should be reading.

Well then I'd love to hear about all these mistakes so I can avoid making them in the future.

I sent you one cite, and am waiting for your first citation to anything. I don't know what you are doing so I can't tell you what mistakes you are making.

Unless you're an "expert" on every single method ever written, you can't tell me what mistakes I'm making anyway.

You'd be surprised. But so far you haven't said anything that indicates to me that you have ever actually been in a lab, other than maybe Bio 101. Why don't you state what your point is. What research you have to back it up, and why you believe 64 years of research (since the Framingham study) are wrong.

Edited to remove all those details cause I don't REALLY want my data everywhere. So sorry if you missed it!

Rhea30

I love eating meat, but I usually eat more chicken or turkey. Yes poultry, still an animal. That is my choice to consume these foods. Could I live without meat, as in physically, sure I probably could. Do I want to, NO.

I imagine all those against eating meat don't wear leather or don't eat fish either. (ohhhh I'd lose count of all the FISH EATING vegetarians I have met over the years) They probably never go to zoo's or to the circus either, maybe never took a ride in a carriage.

Basically eat what you want to eat, and I'll eat what I want to eat. What goes into my mouth doesn't affect you in the slightest.

And fish has alot of health benefits to it! To bad its meat so off limits to vegans

LabRat529

If you're not looking for a heated debate, you probably shouldn't have started this thread. People don't respond well to being preached at- especially when you are preaching nonsense.

Nonsense or not, there's no reason to get heated when stating an opinion. We're adults for the most part, although not so civil when it comes about stating a point in most cases.

I think you're reading more "heat" into my post than was intended, but I did intend for their to be SOME heat. I found the OP's original post to be arrogant and offensive. She makes assumptions that meat eaters on a whole are more concerned about comfort than health.

You make assumptions that are simply incorrect or that have not been proven conclusively. The evidence that animal protein causes cancer is weak. And refined sugars do not cause high cholesterol. Nor do they cause diabetes, heart disease, prostate/breast cancer, etc...

I agree with you about animal protein or red meats not causing cancer. Actually, I will add that a lot of countries from Central and South America are red meat eaters and the cancer levels are probably lower than in the US. What in my opinion can help increase the amount of cancer and diseases in this country is the huge and absurd amount of hormones, chemicals and antibiotics used in farms with this animals. [/quote]

Fair enough. I'll agree that maybe the hormones, chemicals, and antibiotics can cause problems, but it's easy enough to get animal protein from animals raised without any of those things.

Furthermore, your claim that we can prevent and reverse most illnesses with diet is absolute bull ****. The "tested and proven" part of your statement is a fantasy- yours.

Just because you don't believe in something, doesn't me is absolute bull ****. For your information, in holistic medicine it is believed that the human body is capable to prevent / reverse most diseases with proper diet and other factors, including exercises. That Western Medicine doesn't want to admit it, that's a whole different story. Easter Medicine has been successful at achieving this for thousands of years. But like I said, it is a matter of whatever you believe. [/quote]

Ah this... well in the spirit of honesty, I am strongly biased against "alternative medicine" which includes eastern medicines. I try not to be, but it's a losing battle. Still... I'd like to hope that I'd become a believer if I were confronted with peer-reviewed double-blind clinical trials demonstrating conclusively that eastern medicine is more effective than placebo. I haven't seen anything like that. Nor has anyone been able to explain how eastern medicine works on a level that I can understand... and there in lies the source of my bias. Fair or not, if I can't understand how it works... well... I'm suspicious and I tend to categorize that type of medicine into the "faith healing" category.

Still... even if eastern medicine IS effective... I find it irresponsible to suggest that you can reverse most diseases with a proper diet. Some diseases are terminal and it turns my stomach when a parent, for example, withholds cancer treatment for their child because they believe they can cure that cancer with herbs.

PS. Now shoot me :bigsmile:

Why? I enjoyed your well reasoned, respectful argument. I like to read different opinions when they're presented so well. I don't have to agree with someone's comment to enjoy it.

funkycamper

My son is vegetarian and his wife is vegan. The rest of the family are omnivores. We co-exist peacefully. When they hosted Thanksgiving dinner this year, they bought a pre-cooked turkey for us meat-eaters and had plenty of options for themselves and the other vegetarians/vegans at the dinner. When they come to our home, I always make some vegan options.

I just don't understand why we can't all co-exist like this and just respect everybody's choices.

Both my son and DIL exercise a lot (they are runners and do some lifting) yet she is a tad overweight and he is still probably in the obese range or close to it. And she seems to get a lot of colds. So I know the change in lifestyle doesn't automatically mean you become slim or immune from the bad germs floating around.

Question: I am diabetic and my BG levels are perfectly controlled by eating a diet focusing on vegetables, proteins, healthy fats, limited dairy very limited consumption of grain-based carbs. I don't understand how I could even go vegetarian/vegan if I wanted to as it would mean eating virtually nothing except vegetables and fats, right? How could that possibly be healthy or even filling? I think I would be starving all the time. And I have a hard enough time getting in enough protein eating this way. Can't imagine how I could get enough from just vegetables.

songbyrdsweet

Also, Vegesaurus, you haven't addressed the issue of why we express genes for BCAAT, BCKAD, peptidases, etc.