Vegetarian Discussion: Time - SHOULD WE ALL BE VEGETARIANS?

Time - SHOULD WE ALL BE VEGETARIANS?
Posts: 54

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6   Next  (First | Last)

Dr. Jai Maharaj
2005-08-29 17:39:07 EST
Time - SHOULD WE ALL BE VEGETARIANS?

Forwarded message from Fidyl <fidyl@yahoo.com>

[ Subject: Should We All Be Vegetarians?
[ From: Fidyl <fidyl@yahoo.com>
[ Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005

Health

Should We All Be Vegetarians?

Would we be healthier? Would the planet? The risks and
benefits of a meat-free life.

By Richard Corliss
TIME
Posted Sunday, July 7, 2002; 10:31 a.m. EST

FIVE REASONS TO EAT MEAT:

1) It tastes good
2) It makes you feel good
3) It's a great American tradition
4) It supports the nation's farmers
5) Your parents did it

Oh, sorry ... those are five reasons to smoke cigarettes.
Meat is more complicated. It's a food most Americans eat
virtually every day: at the dinner table; in the
cafeteria; on the barbecue patio; with mustard at a
ballpark; or, a billion times a year, with special sauce,
lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame-seed bun.
Beef is, the TV commercials say, "America's food" -- the
Stars and Stripes served up medium rare -- and as
entwined with the nation's notion of its robust frontier
heritage as, well, the Marlboro Man.

But these days America's cowboys seem a bit small in the
saddle. Those cattle they round up have become
politically incorrect: for many, meat is an obscene
cuisine. It's not just the additives and ailments
connected with the consumption of beef, though a dish of
hormones, E. coli bacteria or the scary specter of mad-
cow disease might be effective enough as an appetite
suppressant. It's that more and more Americans,
particularly young Americans, have started engaging in a
practice that would once have shocked their parents. They
are eating their vegetables. Also their grains and
sprouts. Some 10 million Americans today consider
themselves to be practicing vegetarians, according to a
Time poll of 10,000 adults; an additional 20 million have
flirted with vegetarianism sometime in their past.

To get a taste of the cowboy's ancient pride, and current
defensiveness, just click on South Dakota cattleman Jody
Brown's website, www.ranchers.net, and read the new meat
mantras: "Vegetarians don't live longer, they just look
older"; and "If animals weren't meant to be eaten, then
why are they made out of meat?" (One might ask the same
of humans.) For Brown and his generation of unquestioning
meat eaters, dinner is something the parents put on the
table and the kids put in their bodies. Of his own kids,
he says, "We expect them to eat a little of everything."
So beef is served nearly every night at the Brown
homestead, with nary a squawk from Jeff, 17, Luke, 13,
and Hannah, 11. But Jody admits to at least one liberal
sympathy. "If a vegetarian got a flat tire in my
community," he says, "I'd come out and help him."

For the rancher who makes his living with meat or the
vegetarian whose diet could someday drive all those
breeder-slaughterers to bankruptcy, nothing is simple any
more. Gone is the age of American innocence, or naivet\ufffd
when such items as haircuts and handshakes, family names
and school uniforms, farms and zoos, cowboys and
ranchers, had no particular political meaning. Now
everything is up for rancorous debate. And no aspect of
our daily lives -- our lives as food consumers -- gets
more heat than meat.

For millions of vegetarians, beef is a four-letter word;
veal summons charnel visions of infanticide. Many
children, raised on hit films like Babe and Chicken Run,
recoil from eating their movie heroes and switch to what
the meat defeaters like to call a "nonviolent diet."
Vegetarianism resolves a conscientious person's inner
turf war by providing an edible complex of good-deed-
doing: to go veggie is to be more humane. Give up meat,
and save lives!

Of course, one of the lives you could save or at least
prolong is your own. For vegetarianism should be about
more than not eating; it's also about smart eating. You
needn't be a born-again foodist to think this. The
American Dietetic Association, a pretty centrist group,
has proclaimed that "appropriately planned vegetarian
diets are healthful, are nutritionally adequate and
provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment
of certain diseases."

So, how about it? Should we all become vegetarians? Not
just teens but also infants, oldsters, athletes --
everyone? Will it help us live longer, healthier lives?
Does it work for people of every age and level of work
activity? Can we find the right vegetarian diet and stick
to it? And if we can do it, will we?

There are as many reasons to try vegetarianism as there
are soft-eyed cows and soft-hearted kids. To
impressionable young minds, vegetarianism can sound
sensible, ethical and -- as nearly 25% of adolescents
polled by Teenage Research Unlimited said -- "cool."
College students think so too. A study conducted by
Arizona State University psychology professors Richard
Stein and Carol Nemeroff reported that, sight unseen,
salad eaters were rated more moral, virtuous and
considerate than steak eaters. "A century ago, a high-
meat diet was thought to be health-favorable," says Paul
Rozin of the University of Pennsylvania. "Kids today are
the first generation to live in a culture where
vegetarianism is common, where it is publicly promoted on
health and ecological grounds." And kids, as any parent
can tell you, spur the consumer economy; that explains in
part the burgeoning sales of veggie burgers (soy, bulgur
wheat, cooked rice, mushrooms, onions and flavorings in
Big Mac drag) in supermarkets and fast-food chains.

Children, who are signing on to vegetarianism much faster
than adults, may be educating their parents. Vegetarian
food sales are savoring double-digit growth. Top
restaurants have added more meatless dishes. Trendy
"living foods" or "raw" restaurants are sprouting up,
like Roxanne's in Larkspur, Calif., where no meat, fish,
poultry or dairy items are served, and nothing is cooked
to temperatures in excess of 118\ufffdF. "Going to my
restaurant," says Roxanne Klein, "is like going to a
really cool new country you haven't experienced before."

Like any country, vegetarianism has its hidden
complexities. For one thing, vegetarians come in more
than half a dozen flavors, from sproutarians to pesco-
pollo-vegetarians.

http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101020715/story2.html#

The most notorious are the vegan (rhymes with intriguin'
or fatiguin') vegetarians. The Green Party of the
movement, vegans decline to consume, use or wear any
animal products. They also avoid honey, since its
production demands the oppression of worker bees. TV's
favorite vegetarian, the cartoon 8-year-old Lisa Simpson,
once had a crush on a fellow who described himself as "a
Level Five vegan -- I don't eat anything that casts a
shadow." Among vegan celebrities: the rock star Moby and
Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich, who swore off steak for
breakfast and insists he feels much better starting his
day with miso soup, brown rice or oat groats.

Are We Eating Out Vegetables?

View chart here:
http://i.timeinc.net/time/covers/1101020715/images/chart.gif

To true believers -- who refrain from meat as an A.A.
member does from drink and do a spit-take if told that
there's gelatin in their soup -- a semivegetarian is no
vegetarian at all. A phrase like pesco-pollo-vegetarian,
to them, is an oxymoron, like "lapsed Catholic" or
"semivirgin." Vegetarian Times, the bible of this
particular congregation, lays down the dogma: "For many
people who are working to become vegetarians, chicken and
fish may be transitional foods, but they are not
vegetarian foods ... the word 'vegetarian' means someone
who eats no meat, fish or chicken."

Clear enough? Not to many Americans. In a survey of
11,000 individuals, 37% of those who responded "Yes, I am
a vegetarian" also reported that in the previous 24 hours
they had eaten red meat; 60% had eaten meat, poultry or
seafood. Perhaps those surveyed thought a vegetarian is
someone who, from time to time, eats vegetables as a side
dish -- say, alongside a prime rib. If more than one-
third of people in a large sample don't know the broadest
definition of vegetarian, one wonders how they can be
trusted with something much more difficult: the full-time
care and picky-picky feeding of their bodies, whatever
their dietary preferences.

We know that fruits, vegetables, grains, legumes and nuts
are healthy. There are any number of studies that show
that consuming more of these plant-based foods reduces
the risk for a long list of chronic maladies (including
coronary artery disease, obesity, diabetes and many
cancers) and is a probable factor in increased longevity
in the industrialized world. We know that on average we
eat too few fruits and vegetables and too much saturated
fat, of which meat and dairy are prime contributors. We
also know that in the real world, real diets --
vegetarian and nonvegetarian -- as consumed by real
people range from primly virtuous to pig-out voracious.
There are meat eaters who eat more and better vegetables
than vegetarians, and vegetarians who eat more artery-
clogging fats than meat eaters.

The International Congress on Vegetarian Nutrition, a
major conference on the subject, was held this spring at
Loma Linda (Calif.) University. The research papers
presented there included some encouraging if tentative
findings: that a predominantly vegetarian diet may have
beneficial effects for kidney and nerve function in
diabetics, as well as for weight loss; that eating more
fruits and vegetables can slow, and perhaps reverse, age-
related declines in brain function and in cognitive and
motor performance -- at least in rats; that vegetarian
seniors have a lower death rate and use less medication
than meat-eating seniors; that vegetarians have a
healthier total intake of fats and cholesterol but a less
healthy intake of fatty acids (such as the heart-
protecting omega-3 fatty acids found in fish oil).

But one paper suggested that low-protein diets
(associated with vegetarians) reduce calcium absorption
and may have a negative impact on skeletal health. And
although several studies on Seventh-Day Adventists
(typically vegetarians) indicated that they have a
longer-than-average life expectancy, other studies found
that prostate-cancer rates were high in Adventists, and
one study found that Adventists were more likely to
suffer hip fractures.

Can it be that vegetarianism is bad for your health?
That's a complex issue. There's a big, beautiful plant
kingdom out there; you ought to be able to dine healthily
on this botanical bounty. With perfect knowledge, you can
indeed eat like a king from the vegetable world. But
ordinary people are not nutrition professionals. While
some vegetarians have the full skinny on how to watch
their riboflavin and vitamins D and B12, many more
haven't a clue. This is one reason that vegetarians, in a
study of overall nutrition, scored significantly lower
than nonvegetarians on the USDA's Healthy Eating Index,
which compares actual diet with USDA guidelines.

Another reason is that vegans skew the stats, because
their strict avoidance of meat, eggs and dairy products
can lead to deficiencies in iron, calcium and vitamin
B12. "These nutrients are the problem," says Johanna
Dwyer, a professor of nutrition and medicine at Tufts
University. "At least among the vegans who are also
philosophically opposed to fortified foods and/or vitamin
and mineral supplements."

Debates about the efficacy of vegetarianism follow us
from cradle to wheelchair. In 1998 child-care expert Dr.
Benjamin Spock, who became a vegetarian late in life,
stoked a stir by recommending that children over the age
of 2 be raised as vegans, rejecting even milk and eggs.
The American Dietetic Association says it is possible to
raise kids as vegans but cautions that special care must
be taken with nursing infants (who don't develop properly
without the nutrients in mother's milk or fortified
formula). Other researchers warn that infants breast-fed
by vegans have lower levels of vitamin B12 and DHA (an
omega-3 fatty acid), important to vision and growth.

And there is always the chance of vegetarian theory gone
madly wrong in practice. A Queens, N.Y., couple were
indicted last May for first-degree assault, charged with
nearly starving their toddler to death on a strict diet
of juices, ground nuts, herbal tea, beans, flaxseed and
cod-liver oils. At 16 months, the girl weighed 10 lbs.,
less than half the normal weight of a child her age.
Their lawyer's defense: "They felt that they have their
own lifestyle. They're vegetarians." The couple declined
to plea-bargain, and are still in jail awaiting trial.

Many children decide on their own to become vegetarians
and are declaring their preference at ever more
precocious ages; it's often their first act of domestic
rebellion. But a youngster is at a disadvantage insisting
on a rigorous cuisine before he or she can cook food --
or buy it or even read -- and when the one whose menu is
challenged is the parent: nurturer, disciplinarian and
executive chef. Alicia Hurtado of Oak Park, Ill., has
been a vegetarian half her life -- she's 8 now -- and
mother Cheryle mostly indulges her daughter's diet.
Still, Mom occasionally sneaks a little chicken broth
into Alicia's pasta dishes. "When she can read labels,"
Cheryle says, "I'll be out of luck."

By adolescence, kids can read the labels but often ignore
the ingredients. Research shows that calcium intake is
often insufficient in American teens. By contrast, lacto-
ovo teens usually have abundant calcium intake. For
vegans, however, consuming adequate amounts of calcium
without the use of fortified foods or supplements is
difficult without careful dietary planning. Among vegan
youth who do not take supplements, there is reason for
concern with respect to iron, calcium, vitamins D and
B12, and perhaps also selenium and iodine.

For four years Christina Economos has run the Tufts
longitudinal health study on young adults, a
comprehensive survey of lifestyle habits among
undergraduates. In general, she finds that "kids who were
most influenced by family diet and health values are
eating healthy vegetarian or low-meat diets. But there is
a whole group of students who decide to become
vegetarians and do it in a poor way. The ones who do it
badly don't know how to navigate in the vegetarian world.
They eat more bread, cheese and pastry products and load
up on salad dressing. Their saturated-fat intake is no
lower than red-meat eaters, and they are more likely to
consume inadequate amounts of vitamin B12 and protein.
They may think they are healthier because they are some
sort of vegetarian and they don't eat red meat, but in
fact they may be less healthy."

Jenny Woodson, 20, now a junior at Duke, has been a
vegetarian from way back. At 6, on a trip to McDonald's,
she ordered a tossed salad. When Jenny lived in a dorm at
high school, she quickly realized that teens do not live
on French fries and broccoli alone. "We ended up making
vegetarian sandwiches with bagels and ingredients from
the salad bar, cheese fries and stuffed baked potatoes
with cottage cheese." Jenny and her friends were careful
to avoid high-fat, calorie-laden fare at the salad bar,
but for those who don't exercise restraint, salad-bar
fixings can become vegetarian junk food.

Maggie Ellinger-Locke, 19, of the St. Louis, Mo., suburb
of University City, has been a vegetarian for eight years
and went vegan at 15. Since then she has not worn leather
or wool products or slept under a down comforter. She has
not used cups or utensils that have touched meat. "It
felt like we were keeping kosher," says Maggie's mother
Linda, who isn't Jewish. At high school Maggie was
ridiculed, even shoved to the ground, by teen boys who
apparently found her eating habits threatening. She found
a happy ending, of sorts, enrolling at Antioch College,
where she majors in ecofeminism. "Here," she says, "the
people on the defensive are the ones who eat meat."

Maggie hit a few potholes on the road to perfection.
Until recently, she smoked up to two packs of cigarettes
a day (cigarettes, after all, are plants fortified with
nicotine), quitting only because she didn't want to
support the tobacco business. And she freely admits to an
eating disorder: for the past year she has been bulimic,
bingeing and vomiting sometimes as much as once a day to
cope with stress. But she insists she is true to her
beliefs: even when bingeing, she remains dedicated to
vegan consumption.

The American Dietetic Association found that vegetarian
diets are slightly more common among adolescents with
eating problems but that "recent data suggest that
adopting a vegetarian diet does not lead to eating
disorders." It can be argued that most American teens
already have an eating disorder -- fast food, soft drinks
and candy are a blueprint for obesity and heart trouble.
Why should teens be expected to purge their bad habits
just because they have gone veggie? Still, claims Simon
Chaitowitz of the pro-vegetarian and animal-rights group
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, "Kids are
better off being junk-food vegetarians than junk-food
meat eaters."

Maybe. According to Dr. Joan Sabate, chairman of the Loma
Linda nutrition conference, there are still concerns over
vegetarian diets for growing kids or lactating women.
When you are in what he calls "a state of high metabolic
demand," any diet that excludes foods makes it harder to
meet nutrient requirements. But he is quick to add that
"for the average sedentary adult living in a Western
society, a vegetarian diet meets dietary needs and
prevents chronic diseases better than an omnivore diet."

Like kids and nursing moms, athletes need to be
especially smart eaters. Their success depends on bursts
of energy, sustained strength and muscle mass, factors
that require nutrients more easily obtained from meat.
For this reason, relatively few top athletes are
vegetarians. Besides, says sports nutritionist Suzanne
Girard Eberle, the author of Endurance Sports Nutrition,
"lots of athletes have no idea how their bodies work.
That's why fad diets and supplements are so attractive to
them."

Eberle notes that vegetarian diets done correctly are
high in fiber and low in fat. "But where are the
calories?" she asks. "World-class endurance athletes need
in excess of 5,000 or 6,000 calories a day. Competition
can easily consume 10,000. You need to eat a lot of
plant-based food to get those calories. Being a
vegetarian athlete is hard, really hard to do right."

It's not that easy for the rest of America, either.
Middle-aged to elderly adults can also develop
deficiencies in a vegetarian diet (as they can, of
course, with a poor diet that includes meat).
Deficiencies in vitamins D and B12 and in iodine, which
can lead to goiter, are common. The elderly tend to
compensate by taking supplements, but that approach
carries risks. Researchers have found cases in which
vegetarian oldsters, who are susceptible to iodine
deficiency, had dangerously high and potentially toxic
levels of iodine in their bodies because they overdid the
supplements.

Meat producers acknowledge that vegetarian diets can be
healthy. They also have responded to the call for leaner
food; the National Pork Board says that, compared with 20
years ago, pork is on average 31% lower in fat and 29%
lower in saturated fat, and has 14% fewer calories and
10% less cholesterol. But the defenders of meat and dairy
can also go on the offensive. They mention the need for
B12. And then they ratchet up the fear factor. Kurt
Graetzer, ceo of the Milk Processor Education Program,
scans the drop in milk consumption (not only by vegans
but by kids who prefer soda, Snapple and Fruitopia) and
declares, "We are virtually developing a generation of
osteoporotic children."

Dr. Michelle Warren, a professor of medicine at New York
Presbyterian Medical Center in New York City -- and a
member of the Council for Women's Nutrition Solutions,
which is sponsored by the National Cattlemen's Beef
Association -- expresses concern about calcium
deficiency connected with a vegan diet: "The most serious
consequences are low bone mass and osteoporosis. That is
a permanent condition." Warren says that in her practice,
she has seen young vegetarians with irregular periods and
loss of hair. "And there's a peculiar color, a yellow
tinge to the skin," that occurs in people who eat a lot
of vegetables rich in beta carotene in combination with a
low-calorie diet. "I think it's very unattractive." She
also is troubled by the reasons some young vegetarians
give for their choice of diet. One female patient, Warren
says, wouldn't eat meat because she was told it was the
reason her father had a heart attack.

Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for
Science in the Public Interest in Washington, sees most
of the meat and dairy lobby's arguments as desperate,
disingenuous scare stories. "It unmasks the industry's
self-interest," he says, "when it voices concern about
B12 while hundreds of thousands of people are dying
prematurely because of too much saturated fat from meat
and dairy products." Indeed, according to David Pimentel,
a Cornell ecologist, the average American consumes 112
grams of protein a day, twice the amount recommended by
the National Academy of Sciences. "This has implications
for cancer risks and stress on the urinary system," says
Pimentel. "And with this protein comes a lot of fat.
Fully 40% of our calories -- and heavy cardiovascular
risks -- come from fat."

Pimentel argues that vegetarianism is much more
environment-friendly than diets revolving around meat.
"In terms of caloric content, the grain consumed by
American livestock could feed 800 million people -- and,
if exported, would boost the U.S. trade balance by $80
billion a year." Grain-fed livestock consume 100,000
liters of water for every kilogram of food they produce,
compared with 2,000 liters for soybeans. Animal protein
also demands tremendous expenditures of fossil-fuel
energy -- eight times as much as for a comparable amount
of plant protein. Put another way, says Pimentel, the
average omnivore diet burns the equivalent of a gallon of
gas per day -- twice what it takes to produce a vegan
diet. And the U.S. livestock population -- cattle,
chickens, turkeys, lambs, pigs and the rest -- consumes
five times as much grain as the U.S. human population.
But then there are 7 billion of them; they outnumber us
25 to 1.

In the spirit of fair play to cowboy Jody Brown and his
endangered breed, let's entertain two arguments in favor
of eating meat. One is that it made us human. "We would
never have evolved as large, socially active hominids if
we hadn't turned to meat," says Katharine Milton, an
anthropologist at the University of California, Berkeley.
The vegetarian primates (orangutans and gorillas) are
less social than the more omnivorous chimpanzees,
possibly because collecting and consuming all that forage
takes so darned much time. The early hominids took a bold
leap: 2.5 million years ago, they were cracking animal
bones to eat the marrow. They ate the protein-rich muscle
tissue, says Milton, "but also the rest of the animal --
liver, marrow, brains -- with their high concentrations
of other nutrients. Evolving humans ate it all."

Just as important, they knew why they were eating it. In
Milton's elegant phrase, "Solving dietary problems with
your head is the trajectory of the primate order."
Hominids grew big on meat, and smart on that lovely
brain-feeder, glucose, which they got from fruit, roots
and tubers. This diet of meat and glucose gave early man
energy to burn -- or rather, energy to play house, to
sing and socialize, to make culture, art, war. And
finally, about 10,000 years ago, to master agriculture
and trade -- which provided the sophisticated system that
modern humans can use to go vegetarian.

The other reason for beef eating is, hold on, ethical --
a matter of animal rights. The familiar argument for
vegetarianism, articulated by Tom Regan, a philosophical
founder of the modern animal-rights movement, is that it
would save Babe the pig and Chicken Run's Ginger from
execution. But what about Bugs Bunny and Mickey Mouse?
asks Steven Davis, professor of animal science at Oregon
State University, pointing to the number of field animals
inadvertently killed during crop production and harvest.
One study showed that simply mowing an alfalfa field
caused a 50% reduction in the gray-tailed vole
population. Mortality rates increase with each pass of
the tractor to plow, plant and harvest. Rabbits, mice and
pheasants, he says, are the indiscriminate "collateral
damage" of row crops and the grain industry.

By contrast, grazing (not grain-fed) ruminants such as
cattle produce food and require fewer entries into the
fields with tractors and other equipment. Applying (and
upending) Regan's least-harm theory, Davis proposes a
ruminant-pasture model of food production, which would
replace poultry and pork production with beef, lamb and
dairy products. According to his calculations, such a
model would result in the deaths of 300 million fewer
animals annually (counting both field animals and cattle)
than would a completely vegan model. When asked about
Davis' arguments, Regan, however, still sees a
distinction: "The real question is whether to support
production systems whose very reason for existence is to
kill animals. Meat eaters do. Ethical vegetarians do
not."

The moral: there is no free lunch, not even if it's
vegetarian. For now, man is perched at the top of the
food chain and must live with his choice to feed on the
living things further down. But even to raise the
question of a harvester Hiroshima is to show how far we
have come in considering the humane treatment of that
which is not human. And we still have a way to go. "It
may take a while," says actress and vegetarian Mary Tyler
Moore, "but there will probably come a time when we look
back and say, 'Good Lord, do you believe that in the 20th
century and early part of the 21st, people were still
eating animals?'"

It may take a very long while. For most people, meat
still does taste good. And can "America's food" ever be
tofu?

- Reported by Melissa August and Matthew
Cooper/Washington, David Bjerklie and Lisa McLaughlin/New
York, Wendy Cole/Chicago and Jeffrey Ressner/ Los Angeles

End of forwarded message from Fidyl <fidyl@yahoo.com>

Jai Maharaj
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

Hindu Holocaust Museum
http://www.mantra.com/holocaust

Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org
http://www.hindunet.org

The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate

The terrorist mission of Jesus stated in the Christian bible:

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not so send
peace, but a sword.
"For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the
daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in
law.
"And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
- Matthew 10:34-36.

o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.

Since newsgroup posts are being removed
by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
this post may be reposted several times.

Rudy Canoza
2005-08-29 22:00:56 EST
not-a-Doctor-at-all and notorious LIAR Jay Stevens violated Time's
copyright:
> Time - SHOULD WE ALL BE VEGETARIANS?
>
> Forwarded message from Fidyl <fidyl@yahoo.com>
>
> [ Subject: Should We All Be Vegetarians?
> [ From: Fidyl <fidyl@yahoo.com>
> [ Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005
>
> Health
>
> Should We All Be Vegetarians?
>
> Would we be healthier? Would the planet? The risks and
> benefits of a meat-free life.
>
> By Richard Corliss
> TIME
> Posted Sunday, July 7, 2002; 10:31 a.m. EST

I knew that bullshit story would get around to the bullshit,
discredited "efficiency" non-argument:

"[David] Pimentel argues that vegetarianism is much more
environment-friendly than diets revolving around meat. 'In terms of
caloric content, the grain consumed by American livestock could feed
800 million people -- and, if exported, would boost the U.S. trade
balance by $80 billion a year.' Grain-fed livestock consume 100,000
liters of water for every kilogram of food they produce, compared with
2,000 liters for soybeans. Animal protein also demands tremendous
expenditures of fossil-fuel energy -- eight times as much as for a
comparable amount of plant protein. Put another way, says Pimentel,
blah blah blah..."

There's a very good reason the grain consumed by American livestock is
not exported to feed "hungry people" around the world: the livestock
operators are willing to pay more money for it than the "hungry people"
are willing to pay. The grain farmers aren't stupid - if "hungry
people" were willing to pay them more for the grain than ranchers pay,
the stuff would be sold to the "hungry people".

The resources used in producing meat are not "wasted". They are going
to their highest valued use as measured by willingness to pay, which is
the *definition* of economic efficiency. All that grain and water are
fed to livestock because meat consumers PAY for it to go to them. If
someone starts outbidding the livestock producers for the grain and the
water, then their costs of production will rise, the price of meat will
rise, and consumers will eat less of it.


Harmony
2005-08-30 14:15:50 EST
"Dr. Jai Maharaj" <usenet@mantra.com> wrote in message
news:baEko5893AVAfO@KwaAe...
> Time - SHOULD WE ALL BE VEGETARIANS?
>

there is no better way. besides, it's the right thing to do - it makes all
happy.
one day it will be proved that there would be no huricanes if americans ate
no meat.



Dr. Jai Maharaj
2005-08-30 14:33:13 EST
In article <Hg1Re.8121$tT.5847@okepread02>,
"harmony" <aka@hotmail.com> posted:
> "Dr. Jai Maharaj" <usenet@mantra.com> wrote in message
> news:baEko5893AVAfO@KwaAe...
> > Time - SHOULD WE ALL BE VEGETARIANS?
> >
>
> there is no better way. besides, it's the right thing to do - it makes all
> happy.
> one day it will be proved that there would be no huricanes if americans ate
> no meat.

WHY HINDUS DON'T EAT MEAT

Besides being an expression of compassion
for animals, vegetarianism is followed for
ecological and health rationales

REASONS

In the past fifty years, millions of meat-eaters --
Hindus and non-Hindus -- have made the personal decision
to stop eating the flesh of other creatures. There are
five major motivations for such a decision:

1. The Dharmic Law Reason

Ahinsa, the law of noninjury, is the Hindu's first
duty in fulfilling religious obligations to God and God's
creation as defined by Vedic scripture.

2. The Karmic Consequences Reason

All of our actions, including our choice of food,
have Karmic consequences. By involving oneself in the
cycle of inflicting injury, pain and death, even
indirectly by eating other creatures, one must in the
future experience in equal measure the suffering caused.

3. The Spiritual Reason

Food is the source of the body's chemistry, and what
we ingest affects our consciousnes, emotions and
experiential patterns. If one wants to live in higher
consciousness, in peace and happiness and love for all
creatures, then he cannot eat meat, fish, shellfish, fowl
or eggs. By ingesting the grosser chemistries of animal
foods, one introduces into the body and mind anger,
jealousy, anxiety, suspicion and a terrible fear of
death, all of which are locked into the the flesh of the
butchered creatures. For these reasons, vegetarians live
in higher consciousness and meat-eaters abide in lower
consciousness.

4. The Health Reason

Medical studies prove that a vegetarian diet is
easier to digest, provides a wider ranger of nutrients
and imposes fewer burdens and impurities on the body.
Vegetarians are less susceptible to all the major
diseases that afflict contemporary humanity, and thus
live longer, healthier, more productive lives. They have
fewer physical complaints, less frequent visits to the
doctor, fewer dental problems and smaller medical bills.
Their immune system is stronger, their bodies are purer,
more refined and skin more beautiful.

5. The Ecological Reason

Planet Earth is suffereing. In large measure, the
escalating loss of species, destruction of ancient
rainforests to create pasture lands for live stock, loss
of topsoils and the consequent increase of water
impurities and air pollution have all been traced to the
single fact of meat in the human diet. No decision that
we can make as individuals or as a race can have such a
dramatic effect on the improvement of our planetary
ecology as the decision not to eat meat.

HISTORY

The book FOOD FOR THE SPIRIT, VEGETARIANISM AND THE WORLD
RELIGIONS, observes, "Despite popular knowledge of meat-
eating's adverse effects, the nonvegetarian diet became
increasingly widespread among the Hindus after the two
major invasions by foreign powers, first the Muslims and
later the British. With them came the desire to be
'civilized,' to eat as did the Saheeb. Those atually
trained in Vedic knowledge, however, never adopted a
meat-oriented diet, and the pious Hindu still observes
vegetarian principles as a matter of religious duty.

"That vegetarianism has always been widespread in
India is clear from the earliest Vedic texts. This was
observed by the ancient traveler Megasthenes and also by
Fa-Hsien, a Chinese Buddhist monk who, in the fifth
century, traveled to India in order to obtain authentic
copies of the scriptures.

"These scriptures unambiguously support the meatless
way of life. In the MAHABHARAT, for instance, the great
warrior Bheeshm explains to Yuddhishtira, eldest of the
Paandav princes, that the meat of animals is like the
flesh of one's own son. Similarly, the MANUSMRITI
declares that one should 'refrain from eating all kinds
of meat,' for such eating involves killing and and leads
to Karmic bondage (Bandh) [5.49]. Elsewhere in the Vedic
literature, the last of the great Vedic kings, Maharaja
Parikshit, is quoted as saying that 'only the animal-
killer cannot relish the message of the Absolute Truth
[Shrimad Bhagvatam 10.1.4].'"

SCRIPTURE

He who desires to augment his own flesh by eating
the flesh of other creatures lives in misery in whatever
species he may take his birth.
MAHABHARAT 115.47

Those high-souled persons who desire beauty,
faultlessness of limbs, long life, understanding, mental
and physical strength and memory should abstain from acts
of injury. MAHABHARAT 18.115.8

The very name of cow is Aghnya ["not to be killed"],
indicating that they should never be slaughtered. Who,
then could slay them? Surely, one who kills a cow or a
bull commits a heinous crime. MAHABHARAT, SHANTIPARV
262.47

The purchaser of flesh performs Hinsa (violence) by
his wealth; he who eats flesh does so by enjoying its
taste; the killer does Hinsa by actually tying and
killing the animal. Thus, there are three forms of
killing: he who brings flesh or sends for it, he who cuts
off the limbs of an animal, and he who purchases, sells
or cooks flesh and eats it -- all of these are to be
considered meat-eaters. MAHABHARAT, ANU 115.40

He who sees that the Lord of all is ever the same
in all that is -- immortal in the field of mortality --
he sees the truth. And when a man sees that the God in
himself is the same God in all that is, he hurts not
himself by hurting others. Then he goes, indeed, to the
highest path. BHAGVAD GEETA 13.27-28

Ahinsa is the highest Dharm. Ahinsa is the best
Tapas. Ahinsa is the greatest gift. Ahinsa is the
highest self-control. Ahinsa is the highest sacrifice.
Ahinsa is the highest power. Ahinsa is the highest
friend. Ahinsa is the highest truth. Ahinsa is the
highest teaching. MAHABHARAT 18.116.37-41

What is the good way? It is the path that reflects
on how it may avoid killing any creature. TIRUKURAL 324

All that lives will press palms together in
prayerful adoration of those who refuse to slaughter and
savor meat. TIRUKURAL 260

What is virtuous conduct? It is never destroting
life, for killing leads to every other sin. TIRUKURAL
312, 321

Goodness is never one with the minds of these two:
one who wields a weapon and one who feasts on a
creature's flesh. TIRUKURAL 253

Copyright (C) 1993, Himalayan Academy, All Rights
Reserved. The information contained in this news report
may not be republished in any form without the prior
written authority of Himalayan Academy.
This is an authorized reproduction.

Jai Maharaj
Born in a Hindu family in Bharat, and a vegetarian since birth
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

Hindu Holocaust Museum
http://www.mantra.com/holocaust

Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org
http://www.hindunet.org

The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate

The terrorist mission of Jesus stated in the Christian bible:

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not so send
peace, but a sword.
"For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the
daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in
law.
"And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
- Matthew 10:34-36.

o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.

Since newsgroup posts are being removed
by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
this post may be reposted several times.

Rudy Canoza
2005-08-30 18:42:50 EST
harmony wrote:
> kneejerk,

Nope.

> dittohead

Nope.


> rudy, have the courage to experience the difference.

I have plenty of courage. Vegetarians are not courageous by dint of
being vegetarian; they're sheep-like.


Rudy Canoza
2005-08-30 19:19:14 EST
not-a-doctor and phony Hindoo and chronic LIAR Jay Stevens wrote:
> Corpse eaters

Stupid, juvenile pejorative, Jay.


> are basically cowards.

You're the coward, you squat-to-piss punk.


Rudy Canoza
2005-08-30 19:20:38 EST
whogasa wrote:
> Dr. Mahadung wants some advertisement for his health food and
> asstrology business. So he posts everything he can get his hands on -
> even stuff with the remotest association to what he is trying to
> further. He is not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

not-a-doctor and phony Hindoo Jay Stevens is about as sharp as a
cinderblock.


B*@hotmail.com
2005-08-30 20:53:02 EST

Rudy Canoza wrote:
> whogasa wrote:
> > Dr. Mahadung wants some advertisement for his health food and
> > asstrology business. So he posts everything he can get his hands on -
> > even stuff with the remotest association to what he is trying to
> > further. He is not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
>
> not-a-doctor and phony Hindoo Jay Stevens is about as sharp as a
> cinderblock.


Rudy, your empty skull is making noises again. Please make it stop.


Shrubkiller
2005-08-30 21:37:47 EST

Rudy Canoza wrote:
> harmony wrote:
> > kneejerk,
>
> Nope.
>
> > dittohead
>
> Nope.
>
>
> > rudy, have the courage to experience the difference.
>
> I have plenty of courage.


Dementia isn't courage Rudy.



Vegetarians are not courageous by dint of
> being vegetarian; they're sheep-like.


You aren't intelligent by dint of being you; you're imbecile-like.


D*@.
2005-08-31 08:40:25 EST
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 21:39:07 GMT, usenet@mantra.com (Dr. Jai Maharaj) wrote:

>Time - SHOULD WE ALL BE VEGETARIANS?
>
>Forwarded message from Fidyl <fidyl@yahoo.com>
>
>[ Subject: Should We All Be Vegetarians?
>[ From: Fidyl <fidyl@yahoo.com>
>[ Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005

[...]
>Gone is the age of American innocence, or naiveté

· Vegans contribute to the deaths of animals by their use of
wood and paper products, electricity, roads and all types of
buildings, their own diet, etc... just as everyone else does.
What they try to avoid are products which provide life
(and death) for farm animals, but even then they would have
to avoid the following in order to be successful:

Tires, Surgical sutures, Matches, Soaps, Photographic film,
Cosmetics, Shaving cream, Paints, Candles, Crayon/Chalk,
Toothpaste, Deodorants, Mouthwash, Paper, Upholstery,
Floor waxes, Glass, Water Filters, Rubber, Fertilizer,
Antifreeze, Ceramics, Insecticides, Insulation, Linoleum,
Plastic, Textiles, Blood factors, Collagen, Heparin, Insulin,
Pancreatin, Thrombin, Vasopressin, Vitamin B-12, Asphalt,
auto and jet lubricants, outboard engine oil, brake fluid,
contact-lens care products, glues, sunscreens and sunblocks,
dental floss, hairspray, inks, Solvents, Biodegradable
Detergents, Herbicides, Gelatin Capsules, Bandage Strips,
Combs and Toothbrushes, Emery Boards and Cloth, Adhesive Tape,
Laminated Wood Products, Plywood and Paneling, Wallpaper and
Wallpaper Paste, Cellophane Wrap and Tape, Adhesive Tape,
Abrasivesl, Steel Ball Bearings

The meat industry provides life for the animals that it
slaughters, and the animals live and die as a result of it
as animals do in other habitats. They also depend on it for
their lives as animals do in other habitats. If people consume
animal products from animals they think are raised in decent
ways, they will be promoting life for more such animals in the
future.
From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised
steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people
get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well
over 500 servings of meat. From a grass raised dairy cow people
get thousands of dairy servings. Due to the influence of farm
machinery, and *icides, and in the case of rice the flooding and
draining of fields, one serving of soy or rice based product is
likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of servings
derived from grass raised animals. Grass raised animal products
contribute to fewer wildlife deaths, better wildlife habitat, and
better lives for livestock than soy or rice products. ·
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron