Crosswords7 mins ago
Vegetarian vs. Non-vegetarian
Why is it healthier to eat quorn or something like that rather than real meat?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Pelly8910. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I'm not clinging to anything either, I'm just questioning your information as it does seem a little contradictory in places and fails to answer one highly important question... why would we turn to meat if we weren't 'blood thirsty'. I appreciate humans supposedly originated in africa but to be as successful a species as we are we couldn't have been starving. There's enough vegitation to sustain our species, so why, if we're naturally herbivorous, have we taken so much to meat?
and you have clearly not read this post properly - yet another person jumping in and not reading properly...i have not said we are not omnivores! of course we are!
my point is that PHYSICALLY we are not well equipped to be...that is a fact.
the word omnivore just means that we eat both! in itself it is not a 'type', just characteristics of boths - a sheep could be an omnivore if you fed it meat...
snakes have fangs and venom and boas the skill of restriction, and can eat huge meals and last months without food... so that is a stupid argument...they are very well equipped killers and predators...
i have not cobbled anything together, just taken some condensed info an pasted ...i cannot give everything here!
i would suggest you actually do some research and study the information available instead of just jumping on the anti veggie bandwagon.
you simply cannot claim humans are physiologically well equipped to be predators...and if you do...explain how...?
instead of attacking me for saying all this, i suggest you actually address the points raised...
my point is that PHYSICALLY we are not well equipped to be...that is a fact.
the word omnivore just means that we eat both! in itself it is not a 'type', just characteristics of boths - a sheep could be an omnivore if you fed it meat...
snakes have fangs and venom and boas the skill of restriction, and can eat huge meals and last months without food... so that is a stupid argument...they are very well equipped killers and predators...
i have not cobbled anything together, just taken some condensed info an pasted ...i cannot give everything here!
i would suggest you actually do some research and study the information available instead of just jumping on the anti veggie bandwagon.
you simply cannot claim humans are physiologically well equipped to be predators...and if you do...explain how...?
instead of attacking me for saying all this, i suggest you actually address the points raised...
Research indicating an extra 3.6 years life expectancy for long term vegetarians
http://www.theage.com...21/1064082865083.html
Is 3.6 years significant to you?
http://www.theage.com...21/1064082865083.html
Is 3.6 years significant to you?
pa__ul...id say we turned to meat probably simply because we couldi and its tasty..it was there, it was safe to eat so why not...? why do humans do lots of things?
i cannot give every single detail of it here, its all there to see if you would care to read it
when i say bloodthirsty i mean our first reaction when seeing another animal is not kill it and eat it like most carnivores ...unless we are starving - even domestic cats still have that instinct despite being well fed
i cannot give every single detail of it here, its all there to see if you would care to read it
when i say bloodthirsty i mean our first reaction when seeing another animal is not kill it and eat it like most carnivores ...unless we are starving - even domestic cats still have that instinct despite being well fed
I thought domestic cats, for example, killed birds and mice etc as 'offerings', they don't eat them do they? And with most predators it's not any animal, it's animals they see as food, which in the wild they need to survive, or they kill as competition, that's just basic survival.
If humans, however many million years ago, took to eating meat as survival, are you essentially saying we've just evolved sufficiently to cope with the meat intake? If this is the case then would the human body not have evolved to be more in between carnovores and herbivores given that that's essentially what evolution is? Of those who had to eat meat for survival, those with the digestive system edging closer to the carnivorous would handle the meat intake better and thrive with this trend continuing until a perfect balance was met to manage the balance of the diet. I mean I'm just using my logical interpretation of what I know of evolution, it's in no way massively detailed, but that's what makes sense to me.
If humans, however many million years ago, took to eating meat as survival, are you essentially saying we've just evolved sufficiently to cope with the meat intake? If this is the case then would the human body not have evolved to be more in between carnovores and herbivores given that that's essentially what evolution is? Of those who had to eat meat for survival, those with the digestive system edging closer to the carnivorous would handle the meat intake better and thrive with this trend continuing until a perfect balance was met to manage the balance of the diet. I mean I'm just using my logical interpretation of what I know of evolution, it's in no way massively detailed, but that's what makes sense to me.
pa__ul..not sure of your 'argument' here as you seem to be kind of reiterating what ive said...
yes we have evolved to cope with it, our systems are happy to accept it, we survive on it, it gives us nutrients etc...it would do the same to many other animals too...there arents many that wouldnt be able to eat it at all...they may not like it or it may make them sick at first but it wouldnt kill the...they would get used to it if they had too - there are many times when vegetation wasnt sufficient that we would have turned to other sources of food...
there is actually a theory that long term veggies would be initially ill if they suddenly ate meat again...but our bodies, as amazing machines designed for survival, would adapt fairlt quickly...
we are undoubtedly omnivores - but mainly because we found a way to be...it would not have come easily to us without our intelligence
as i have said, our bodies have very few predatory characteristics...we have not evolved any proper useful ones simply because we havent needed to - because we have the brains to have invented other methods...if we didnt have the brains to invent tools etc , then maybe we would have developed proper claws and fangs etc - who knows...but necessity is the mother of invention
the point about the cat is, its still kills even though it has no need to...'offerings' means nothing as that is just our way of perceiving their actions...maybe they feel they are feeding us back...maybe they dont eat it because they are not hungry or prefer the catfood - either way its still bloodthirsty killing
yes we have evolved to cope with it, our systems are happy to accept it, we survive on it, it gives us nutrients etc...it would do the same to many other animals too...there arents many that wouldnt be able to eat it at all...they may not like it or it may make them sick at first but it wouldnt kill the...they would get used to it if they had too - there are many times when vegetation wasnt sufficient that we would have turned to other sources of food...
there is actually a theory that long term veggies would be initially ill if they suddenly ate meat again...but our bodies, as amazing machines designed for survival, would adapt fairlt quickly...
we are undoubtedly omnivores - but mainly because we found a way to be...it would not have come easily to us without our intelligence
as i have said, our bodies have very few predatory characteristics...we have not evolved any proper useful ones simply because we havent needed to - because we have the brains to have invented other methods...if we didnt have the brains to invent tools etc , then maybe we would have developed proper claws and fangs etc - who knows...but necessity is the mother of invention
the point about the cat is, its still kills even though it has no need to...'offerings' means nothing as that is just our way of perceiving their actions...maybe they feel they are feeding us back...maybe they dont eat it because they are not hungry or prefer the catfood - either way its still bloodthirsty killing
Having followed this thread very carefully I am at a loss to know what point joko is trying to make. Without our inventive brains we would not be able to fly, to survive under water, to travel fast or to see things thousands of miles away. So what purpose does it serve to point out that such accomplishments are not 'natural' ?
What remote ancestor of ours (very remote it would have to be) had no skill as a hunter but then developed the cunning to hunt and kill artificially? Can joko name it?
And wasn't it lucky that it then discovered that it had a digestive system fully able to digest the resulting meat? That couldn't have been a later evolution because if that first meat had been indigestible then eating it would have stopped.
The bit about meat festering in our stomachs is silly. From the first mixing with saliva through the whole system millions of bacteria work on it - which produce, in turn, the highly complex chemicals of which our bodies are exclusively made.
(Incidentally, if quorn did not contain chemicals it would be useless as a food.)
What remote ancestor of ours (very remote it would have to be) had no skill as a hunter but then developed the cunning to hunt and kill artificially? Can joko name it?
And wasn't it lucky that it then discovered that it had a digestive system fully able to digest the resulting meat? That couldn't have been a later evolution because if that first meat had been indigestible then eating it would have stopped.
The bit about meat festering in our stomachs is silly. From the first mixing with saliva through the whole system millions of bacteria work on it - which produce, in turn, the highly complex chemicals of which our bodies are exclusively made.
(Incidentally, if quorn did not contain chemicals it would be useless as a food.)
my 'argument' Joko is that we have a body designed to eat meat, and it seems your argument has evolved as much as we have as you're now kind of agreeing saying we adapt fairly quickly and, after at first saying we're not predators because we don't have claws & sharp teeth etc, now saying that we would have had we not invented tools to do that job for us!
To look at it completely scientifically, to say we 'developed' into omnivores through necessity you'd have to at first prove we were herbivores to start with and, with the whole missing link think, that can't be done. You're speculating about that as much as you;re speculating about the reason cats bring dead mice in for their owner.
To look at it completely scientifically, to say we 'developed' into omnivores through necessity you'd have to at first prove we were herbivores to start with and, with the whole missing link think, that can't be done. You're speculating about that as much as you;re speculating about the reason cats bring dead mice in for their owner.
1. I would kill if I was starving - can't see any difficulty with that. There are slow moving animals that would stay still long enough for me to catch them.
2. Earlier on joko mentioned that we were designed to eat vegetables and fruit and that it takes longer to get through the digestive system. Not my digestive system! It whizzes through with no effort.
2. Earlier on joko mentioned that we were designed to eat vegetables and fruit and that it takes longer to get through the digestive system. Not my digestive system! It whizzes through with no effort.
pa__ul...i suggest you read the post properly - i have not changed anything - you have just misunderstood what i have said ...hence why i do not undertsand most of your points...
saying that we would have what? i havent said he would have done anything if we hadnt invented tools...??
we are not 'designed' to eat meat at all - thats the whole point if you bothered to look into it! - we are more similar to herbivores than carnivores - i dont know how many other ways there are to state that fact!
i dont know whether you are deliberately ignoring or misunderstanding me because you are anti veggie, but unless you can prove me wrong its pointless you commenting...
chakka - it was just a comment that all...i noted the fact that PHYSICALLY we are not ideally suited to be predators...thats a fact... almost nothing about our bodies resembles a carnivores more than a herbivores...
i myself pointed out that we do many things that are not physically within our grasp - yet our brains allow us to do them ...and without those brains we wouldnt do them!
that is my point..without brains, tools an cunning, if for instance we had the brains of a sheep, we would probably not eat much meat...
but everyone leapt on it and attacked with the anti veggie attitude and a refusal to even acknowledge what i had said...
it is irrelevant whether people believe or agree - facts by their nature do not require belief or agreement...
show me one thing about us that matches between us an carnivores...?
saying that we would have what? i havent said he would have done anything if we hadnt invented tools...??
we are not 'designed' to eat meat at all - thats the whole point if you bothered to look into it! - we are more similar to herbivores than carnivores - i dont know how many other ways there are to state that fact!
i dont know whether you are deliberately ignoring or misunderstanding me because you are anti veggie, but unless you can prove me wrong its pointless you commenting...
chakka - it was just a comment that all...i noted the fact that PHYSICALLY we are not ideally suited to be predators...thats a fact... almost nothing about our bodies resembles a carnivores more than a herbivores...
i myself pointed out that we do many things that are not physically within our grasp - yet our brains allow us to do them ...and without those brains we wouldnt do them!
that is my point..without brains, tools an cunning, if for instance we had the brains of a sheep, we would probably not eat much meat...
but everyone leapt on it and attacked with the anti veggie attitude and a refusal to even acknowledge what i had said...
it is irrelevant whether people believe or agree - facts by their nature do not require belief or agreement...
show me one thing about us that matches between us an carnivores...?
starbuck one...i did not say that at all
i said our intestines were long, like a herbivores...not that veg takes longer...
meat stays in our intestines longer than any carnvore...
and that is my point - you would be forced to eat it if you are starving...as would any animal...but without brains tools and cunning you would struggle ... even to cut the meat!
imagine a starving sheep or chicken trying to catch a rabbit and eat it?
i said our intestines were long, like a herbivores...not that veg takes longer...
meat stays in our intestines longer than any carnvore...
and that is my point - you would be forced to eat it if you are starving...as would any animal...but without brains tools and cunning you would struggle ... even to cut the meat!
imagine a starving sheep or chicken trying to catch a rabbit and eat it?
Joko.. no animal is ideally suited to it's environment, simply because environments change all the time in all sorts of subtle ways. Humans are not ideally suited to any one environment but have a body that is very adaptable which controlled by a brain that is very good at searching for patterns in it's environment makes a combination that has proved very successful. I am not anti veggie I like eating vegetarians, vegans however have a rather alien taste. ;-)
joko - you said "if we didnt have the brains to invent tools etc , then maybe we would have developed proper claws and fangs etc " so I missed out a maybe but that was the point to which I'm referring.
And stop being such a 'victim' I'm not anti-veggie at all! My best mate's a veggie so I'm used to all this. I've read your points and I've simply countered them. I'm guessing you just want to believe what you want to believe and to say "unless you can prove me wrong it's not worth commenting" you can't prove you're right, that's what I'm getting at! There are patterns biologically, but that doesn't mean we're 'meant' to be herbivores. I've asked you to enlighten me about other omnivores given that you've studied this topic but you;ve not mentioned anything. Bears for example are omnivores with what I'm assuming you'd call predatorial attributes. How do we compare with them?
And stop being such a 'victim' I'm not anti-veggie at all! My best mate's a veggie so I'm used to all this. I've read your points and I've simply countered them. I'm guessing you just want to believe what you want to believe and to say "unless you can prove me wrong it's not worth commenting" you can't prove you're right, that's what I'm getting at! There are patterns biologically, but that doesn't mean we're 'meant' to be herbivores. I've asked you to enlighten me about other omnivores given that you've studied this topic but you;ve not mentioned anything. Bears for example are omnivores with what I'm assuming you'd call predatorial attributes. How do we compare with them?
thats my point jomilf!
we are a product of our environment...we are the way we are through our environment and our abilities
pau__l...you have not countered anything though...you have not made any actual argument....and actually you have more or less agreed with me...because as i stated you have not read the post properly...
i am not a victim at all but its clear on here that many have had aknee jerk reaction to my comments simply because they dont like the idea...rather than actually considering the points made
when you actually learn something about the subject then feel free to counteract me...i look forward to it...id be interested in hearing it...
the comments i have made are of theories based on evidence and fact..i have not made them up! no-one really know 100% when we began eating meat, but through research the conclusion is that we did mainly because we could...rather than being physiologically designed to ...
this is all available for you to see yourself
i am not sure why you think comparing us to other omnivores is relevant...we are omnivores by choice and ability, not because of any physical reason
omnivores have - naturally - the attributes of both herbivores and carnivores...thats all the that word means...we do not have any attributes of carnivores...
i have not studied the ins and outr of every other animal..but the comparisons of humans in general...
bears for instance can climb (and i mean climb properly, like a climber...not just able to get up onto things)...and have almost hand like claws to pick...rather than the 'feet like paws of other carnovires...they also can stand an walk upright...to reach...
i am not sure how many other ways i can phrase that before you get that.
i am in no way suggesting we shouldnt eat meat...i am just saying that it is not what we are ideally suited to do, given the way our bodies are
we are a product of our environment...we are the way we are through our environment and our abilities
pau__l...you have not countered anything though...you have not made any actual argument....and actually you have more or less agreed with me...because as i stated you have not read the post properly...
i am not a victim at all but its clear on here that many have had aknee jerk reaction to my comments simply because they dont like the idea...rather than actually considering the points made
when you actually learn something about the subject then feel free to counteract me...i look forward to it...id be interested in hearing it...
the comments i have made are of theories based on evidence and fact..i have not made them up! no-one really know 100% when we began eating meat, but through research the conclusion is that we did mainly because we could...rather than being physiologically designed to ...
this is all available for you to see yourself
i am not sure why you think comparing us to other omnivores is relevant...we are omnivores by choice and ability, not because of any physical reason
omnivores have - naturally - the attributes of both herbivores and carnivores...thats all the that word means...we do not have any attributes of carnivores...
i have not studied the ins and outr of every other animal..but the comparisons of humans in general...
bears for instance can climb (and i mean climb properly, like a climber...not just able to get up onto things)...and have almost hand like claws to pick...rather than the 'feet like paws of other carnovires...they also can stand an walk upright...to reach...
i am not sure how many other ways i can phrase that before you get that.
i am in no way suggesting we shouldnt eat meat...i am just saying that it is not what we are ideally suited to do, given the way our bodies are
We don't have hooves. we are not ruminants like cows, don't eat our faeces like rabbits, We cannot digest cellulose. so we aren't herbivores. We do have claws but much reduced in size, we do have fangs(canine teeth) again reduced in size so the evidence points to us having been carnivores who appreciated a bit of salad much like foxes and wolves (carnivores I believe).Perhaps that is why wild herbivores run away from humans just as they run away from wolves and lions Just for the record common examples of other omnivores are wild boar, badgers, rats and grey squirrels.
Latest Posts
News10 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles13 mins ago
Good Morning Late Wednesday Birds.
ChatterBank13 mins ago
Starmer Continues With "Grossly...
News13 mins ago
