Is it wrong to be an Omnivore?

[btbam]

First, I'm not pushing anything on anyone. I'm just deconstructing arguments being posted here, especially those without any merit. If you want to beat your wife, your kids or kill stray dogs and cats, then apparently that is your choice and one which no one should question you for, right?

This right here. Veiled insults and disdain for someone who made a different choice than you. There is a HUGE schism between beating your wife and children and eating meat. Hyperbolic dribble. Don't pretend you aren't preaching because you are. Basically your past few posts have implied someone who eats meat is selfish, irrational or revels in the suffering of animals.

[RaY_210]

Why in the world would it be wrong to be an omnivore?

It's not

[Chille]

First, I'm not pushing anything on anyone. I'm just deconstructing arguments being posted here, especially those without any merit. If you want to beat your wife, your kids or kill stray dogs and cats, then apparently that is your choice and one which no one should question you for, right?

I beat my meat all the time but id never hit a woman or kids :3 and just because im a meat eater doesnt mean im selfish.

[vegan_mekey]

This right here. Veiled insults and disdain for someone who made a different choice than you. There is a HUGE schism between beating your wife and children and eating meat. Hyperbolic dribble. Don't pretend you aren't preaching because you are. Basically your past few posts have implied someone who eats meat is selfish, irrational or revels in the suffering of animals.

So wait, I'm confused why do you eat meat then?

Also, I'm unsure why your method of addressing the debate is ascribing a postulated motivation or intent.

Not a shock to see a speciest view point, but how come you chose not address the example of killing small animals? If you were walking down the street and saw someone setting their dog on fire with a blowtorch, would you feel compelled to stop this action or would you understand that it is well within their own right to make this choice: specifically because A) the dog inherently has no rights of their own or B) the rights of the dog are superseded by the rights of their owner.

Granted it is this individual's choice to set fire to his own property (or to this living breathing creature, depending on your viewpoint). Therefore, you should respect this individual's choice regardless of the damage and suffering that it incurs. That's your point, right?

[btbam]

Oh the hyperbole! I'm actually not participating in the debate really, just pointing out you are kind of making an ass of yourself on that ivory tower of yours. Also just trying to point out that veiled insults (see irrational, selfish, or sadism) generally are not the best way to sway people to your side. Catch more flies with honey sort of thing. Now i did not address the example of the dogs or cats because its the same hyperbolic nonsense of beating a wife or a child. I felt addressing every point of hyperbole was like beating a dead horse, but if you must know, i disapprove of a human blow-torching a dog. That would be a monstrous act.

[vegan_mekey]

but if you must know, i disapprove of a human blow-torching a dog. That would be a monstrous act.

Unless it was for a BBQ, right?

[Chille]

Unless it was for a BBQ, right?

I wouldnt BBQ a dog, but i did see these cows earlier today

And err unless america is different but i normally use a grill and coal, not a blowtorch.

[btbam]

This is ridiculous. Make whatever exaggerated, asinine claims you want. I'm out. Such distorted baloney is abhorrent.

[UberZman]

Unless it was for a BBQ, right?

Why would anyone BBQ a dog?

removed a bit of the post as its offensive and stereotypical.
~dc


Sorry dc.

[Super_Lilith]

Why would anyone BBQ a dog?

removed a bit of the post as its offensive and stereotypical.
~dc


Sorry dc.

Because a dog can be another animal and form of meat just like a cow or sheep is. Some even view humans in this way.

It is easy to be repulsed and I am, but that makes me a hypocrite (which I admit) since in the end it's killing another animal that probably didn't want to die for food, just one that our culture is not accustomed to.

[BoyBettaKnow]

I could eat a dog if I had too but I've been raised with them as family members. If I had a chicken as a friend my whole life I may have felt the same way as I do on dogs.

If it was a life and death situation then you better believe I'd eat anything and anyone to remain alive.


BBK. Tapatalking.

[Super_Lilith]

I could eat a dog if I had too but I've been raised with them as family members. If I had a chicken as a friend my whole life I may have felt the same way as I do on dogs.

If it was a life and death situation then you better believe I'd eat anything and anyone to remain alive.


BBK. Tapatalking.

That's gangsta, but at least you are saying it as it is. I would do the same but be horrified at myself at the same time.

My question back to vegans or vegetarians is: What if you found an edible animal that died of natural causes or an accident like falling of a cliff, would you eat the mofo then? would it be alright for us meat eaters in this case?

[Sufi]

Please let me know which supplements are necessary to be vegan?

If you think B12, well you're wrong. Inadequate B12 in vegans is more strongly relative to recent top soil erosion of the last 50-60 years (alongside the hyper-sterilized and santitized society in which we now live).Prior to the last 50-60 years, consumption of biologically active B12 was obtained via soil. Therefore, your stance that veganism is inherently inpossible in nature is incorrect. In fact, "nature" provides all the required nutrients but once nature is removed from our foods or destroyed, it becomes more difficult. If you would like I can link you to many studies that confirm this.

So again what are the nutrients that vegans require supplementation?

Yes, I'd like a link to that because I can't seem to find it anywhere on the net. If that is the case then I understand what you're saying...however, slightly beside our discussion, if you think poor planning is the reason for taking supplements then do understand that there's a larger risk of poor planning by going on a veggie diet and even worse, a vegan.

It's difficult in a developed country such as ours, much more so in developing countries around the world.

So again what's your non-selfish excuse/rationalization to perpetuate the suffering of over one hundred animal per year? Last time it was reality TV.

I'm still not understanding what you mean here. Where is this 100 number coming from? More so, can you rationalize how the rest of the world go on a vegan plan considering the amount of precision and planning that goes into it.

You're expecting more than 6 billion people to have a routine supplement plan?

[Super_Lilith]

You're expecting more than 6 billion people to have a routine supplement plan?

The UN estimates we have almost a billion malnourished and starving right now so whatever plan we have currently it's bullshit anyway.


I think the way forward is unrestricted GM crops that are enhanced and also have the necessary proteins in them.

Of course that won't happen because the biotech companies always restrict the crops to make more money and rip off the farmers of poor nations.

[Chille]

The UN estimates we have almost a billion malnourished and starving right now so whatever plan we have currently it's bullshit anyway.


I think the way forward is unrestricted GM crops that are enhanced and also have the necessary proteins in them.

Of course that won't happen because the biotech companies always restrict the crops to make more money and rip off the farmers of poor nations.

And also GM crops havent be tested properly and the current GM crops cant be digested by the human stomach

[Super_Lilith]

And also GM crops havent be tested properly and the current GM crops cant be digested by the human stomach

I researched this a while a go but can't remember now, what is different about GM crops that make them undigestable to the human stomach again?

[Sufi]

The UN estimates we have almost a billion malnourished and starving right now so whatever plan we have currently it's bullshit anyway.


I think the way forward is unrestricted GM crops that are enhanced and also have the necessary proteins in them.

Of course that won't happen because the biotech companies always restrict the crops to make more money and rip off the farmers of poor nations.

Well likely that and the fact that while they are malnurished, making it more complicated definitely will not help. Providing them with super crops is completely different than adapting a restrictive lifestyle. One is making their life easier, the other one isn't.

[vegan_mekey]

`

Yes, I'd like a link to that because I can't seem to find it anywhere on the net.

Effect of ingestion of soil on the iodine, copper, cobalt (vitamin B12) and selenium status of grazing sheep.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1...?dopt=Citation

Grace ND.
AgResearch Ltd, Grasslands Research Centre, Private Bag 11008, Palmerston North, New Zealand. neville.grace@agresearch.co.nz

AIM: To determine the impact of ingestion of soil on the iodine (I), selenium (Se), copper (Cu) and cobalt (Co; vitamin B12) status of young sheep. METHODS: Twenty young sheep were divided into two groups; one group was fed lucerne pellets, while the other group was fed lucerne pellets plus 100 g soil, for 63 days. At the end of the study the animals were blood-sampled, slaughtered, and the liver removed, and concentrations of I, Cu, vitamin B12 and Se were determined. RESULTS: The ingestion of soil significantly increased concentrations of I and vitamin B12 in serum, but had no effect on concentrations of Cu and Se in serum/blood and liver, and vitamin B12 in liver. CONCLUSION: Ingested soil can be a significant source of I and Co (vitamin B12) for grazing sheep.

Incorporation of a high level of vitamin B12 into a vegetable, kaiware daikon (Japanese radish sprout), by the absorption from its seeds http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...04416504000868


Other studies finding B12 in Soil
Robbins WJ, Hervey A, Stebbins ME. Studies on Euglena and vitamin B12. Science 1950(Oct 20):455.
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.230...21101131332147

Halsted JA, Carroll J, Rubert S. Serum and tissue concentration of vitamin B12 in. certain pathologic states. N Engl J Med. 1959;260:575-80.

J Bacteriol. 1952 February; 63(2): 219–226. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...2/?pageindex=3

Production of vitamin B12-active substance has been shown by organisms from various sources, including soil. Robbins et al (1950) have stated that as many as 50% of the organisms developing on plates seeded with soil were found to produce B12. Employing special selective media, Burton and Lochhead (1951) found 70 percent of the bacteria isolated from cultivated soil, and 84 percent of the bacteria as well as 66 percent of of the antinomycetes from uncultivated soils of northern Canada to be capable of synthesizing vitamin B12 active substances.

Studies finding uptake of B12 from soil into organic plant (consumable) matter
Mozafar A. Enrichment of some B-vitamins in plants with application of organic fertilizers. Plant & Soil. 1994;167:305-311.

La Guardia M, Venturella G, Venturella F. On the chemical composition and nutritional value of pleurotus taxa growing on umbelliferous plants (apiaceae). J Agric Food Chem. 2005 Jul 27;53(15):5997-6002

Plant And Soil. Vol 129, 1. (1992), 23-30, DOI: 10.1007/BF00012838 http://www.springerlink.com/content/k6h3l6r51xw601j5/

A. Mozafar1 and J. J. Oertli1
(1) Institute of Plant Sciences, Division of Agronomy, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), ETH Zentrum, CH-8092 Zürich, Switzerland
Received: 9 October 1990

Abstract Vitamin B12 (Cyanocobalamin) is one of the vitamins believed to be produced exclusively by microorganisms. Although soil is a rich source of vitamin B12, systematic study as to possible uptake of this vitamin by the plant roots is lacking. This study was undertaken to investigate, under water culture conditions, the uptake of [57Co]-cyanocobalamin by soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.). In the range of 10 to 3200 mol L–1, uptake of vitamin B12 was a linear function of the vitamin concentration in the nutrient solution. Depending on the vitamin concentration, 12 to 34% of the total absorbed vitamin was transported to the plant shoots, with proportionally more vitamin B12 transported at higher vitamin concentrations.

Losses of Nutrients from Soil during the last 50 years

http://www.nutritionsecurity.org/PDF...Vegetables.pdf
based on info from Lindlahr, 1914; Hamaker, 1982; U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1963 and 1997

Changes in USDA Food Composition Data for 43 Garden Crops, 1950 to 1999
J Am Coll Nutr December 2004 vol. 23 no. 6 669-682
http://www.jacn.org/content/23/6/669...urcetype=HWCIT

http://www.nutritionsecurity.org/PDF...%20Content.pdf

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=272047

Changes in Soil and Abundance of Microelements In Long Term Fertilizer Experiment
http://www.pjss.org/artykuly/pjss/Po...06_39_1_91.pdf






As above we can begin to see that there was a discernable quality of B12 available of soil (and absorbed in plant matter). Therefore, there is thus far no basis for your hypothesis that veganism possible due to recent advances in recent technology. In fact, the following studies also indicate that until recent our soils are losing their nutrient density due to multiple factors (i.e. soil erosion). This directly contrasts with your hypothesis as it indicates that recent advances in technology has actually made veganism harder in obtaining certain nutrients.



__________________________________________________ _____________________________

If that is the case then I understand what you're saying...however, slightly beside our discussion, if you think poor planning is the reason for taking supplements then do understand that there's a larger risk of poor planning by going on a veggie diet and even worse, a vegan.

If you are driving off a cliff, does it matter the type of car?
Sure a maserati may take you there quicker, but your destination is still the same.

In fact, the Standard American Diet is notorious for its lack of malnutrition when regarding micronutrient and polyphenol intake and within macronutrient distribution (specifically long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids).

I'm still not understanding what you mean here. Where is this 100 number coming from? More so, can you rationalize how the rest of the world go on a vegan plan considering the amount of precision and planning that goes into it.

You're expecting more than 6 billion people to have a routine supplement plan?

NO. I'm asking about YOU.

What's your non-selfish excuse/rationalization to perpetuate the suffering of over one hundred animal per year?

About 100+ Animals per year.

Per culminated data from FARM from the USDA Reports
http://farmusa.org/statistics11.html

Per-person, an average American meat-eater is responsible for the suffering and death of 28 land animals and an estimated 175 aquatic animals per year, totaling over 15,000 individual animals over a 75 year lifespan.






What's your non-selfish excuse/rationalization to perpetuate the suffering of over one hundred animal per year?

[vegan_mekey]

I think the way forward is unrestricted GM crops that are enhanced and also have the necessary proteins in them.

LOL @ Kwashiorkor being the only form of malnutrition in the world. .

[Blacksite]

Per-person, an average American meat-eater is responsible for the suffering and death of 28 land animals and an estimated 175 aquatic animals per year, totaling over 15,000 individual animals over a 75 year lifespan.

LOL @ throwing around statistics in an attempt to change people's eating habits.

[RaY_210]

LOL @ throwing around statistics in an attempt to change people's eating habits.

Damn! We need to spam PSU with emails to fix the +rep button! I wouldn't be able to rep this enough lol

[vegan_mekey]

I can only assume you both missed the part when sufi asked for this information.

[Super_Lilith]

LOL @ Kwashiorkor being the only form of malnutrition in the world. .

ummm but it's not...

Also, do you think it's wrong to eat a cow that fell of a cliff and died of natural causes?

[vegan_mekey]

ummm but it's not...

that's why I LOL'd

[Sufi]

`

Effect of ingestion of soil on the iodine, copper, cobalt (vitamin B12) and selenium status of grazing sheep.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1...?dopt=Citation

Grace ND.
AgResearch Ltd, Grasslands Research Centre, Private Bag 11008, Palmerston North, New Zealand. neville.grace@agresearch.co.nz

AIM: To determine the impact of ingestion of soil on the iodine (I), selenium (Se), copper (Cu) and cobalt (Co; vitamin B12) status of young sheep. METHODS: Twenty young sheep were divided into two groups; one group was fed lucerne pellets, while the other group was fed lucerne pellets plus 100 g soil, for 63 days. At the end of the study the animals were blood-sampled, slaughtered, and the liver removed, and concentrations of I, Cu, vitamin B12 and Se were determined. RESULTS: The ingestion of soil significantly increased concentrations of I and vitamin B12 in serum, but had no effect on concentrations of Cu and Se in serum/blood and liver, and vitamin B12 in liver. CONCLUSION: Ingested soil can be a significant source of I and Co (vitamin B12) for grazing sheep.

Incorporation of a high level of vitamin B12 into a vegetable, kaiware daikon (Japanese radish sprout), by the absorption from its seeds http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...04416504000868


Other studies finding B12 in Soil
Robbins WJ, Hervey A, Stebbins ME. Studies on Euglena and vitamin B12. Science 1950(Oct 20):455.
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.230...21101131332147

Halsted JA, Carroll J, Rubert S. Serum and tissue concentration of vitamin B12 in. certain pathologic states. N Engl J Med. 1959;260:575-80.

J Bacteriol. 1952 February; 63(2): 219–226. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...2/?pageindex=3

Production of vitamin B12-active substance has been shown by organisms from various sources, including soil. Robbins et al (1950) have stated that as many as 50% of the organisms developing on plates seeded with soil were found to produce B12. Employing special selective media, Burton and Lochhead (1951) found 70 percent of the bacteria isolated from cultivated soil, and 84 percent of the bacteria as well as 66 percent of of the antinomycetes from uncultivated soils of northern Canada to be capable of synthesizing vitamin B12 active substances.

Studies finding uptake of B12 from soil into organic plant (consumable) matter
Mozafar A. Enrichment of some B-vitamins in plants with application of organic fertilizers. Plant & Soil. 1994;167:305-311.

La Guardia M, Venturella G, Venturella F. On the chemical composition and nutritional value of pleurotus taxa growing on umbelliferous plants (apiaceae). J Agric Food Chem. 2005 Jul 27;53(15):5997-6002

Plant And Soil. Vol 129, 1. (1992), 23-30, DOI: 10.1007/BF00012838 http://www.springerlink.com/content/k6h3l6r51xw601j5/

A. Mozafar1 and J. J. Oertli1
(1) Institute of Plant Sciences, Division of Agronomy, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), ETH Zentrum, CH-8092 Zürich, Switzerland
Received: 9 October 1990

Abstract Vitamin B12 (Cyanocobalamin) is one of the vitamins believed to be produced exclusively by microorganisms. Although soil is a rich source of vitamin B12, systematic study as to possible uptake of this vitamin by the plant roots is lacking. This study was undertaken to investigate, under water culture conditions, the uptake of [57Co]-cyanocobalamin by soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.). In the range of 10 to 3200 mol L–1, uptake of vitamin B12 was a linear function of the vitamin concentration in the nutrient solution. Depending on the vitamin concentration, 12 to 34% of the total absorbed vitamin was transported to the plant shoots, with proportionally more vitamin B12 transported at higher vitamin concentrations.

Losses of Nutrients from Soil during the last 50 years

http://www.nutritionsecurity.org/PDF...Vegetables.pdf
based on info from Lindlahr, 1914; Hamaker, 1982; U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1963 and 1997

Changes in USDA Food Composition Data for 43 Garden Crops, 1950 to 1999
J Am Coll Nutr December 2004 vol. 23 no. 6 669-682
http://www.jacn.org/content/23/6/669...urcetype=HWCIT

http://www.nutritionsecurity.org/PDF...%20Content.pdf

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=272047

Changes in Soil and Abundance of Microelements In Long Term Fertilizer Experiment
http://www.pjss.org/artykuly/pjss/Po...06_39_1_91.pdf






As above we can begin to see that there was a discernable quality of B12 available of soil (and absorbed in plant matter). Therefore, there is thus far no basis for your hypothesis that veganism possible due to recent advances in recent technology. In fact, the following studies also indicate that until recent our soils are losing their nutrient density due to multiple factors (i.e. soil erosion). This directly contrasts with your hypothesis as it indicates that recent advances in technology has actually made veganism harder in obtaining certain nutrients.

Ok, but which plants are we talking about? When I was searching for B12 in soil, I came across an article explaining that it's not produced in plants that we can possibly eat.

If you are driving off a cliff, does it matter the type of car?
Sure a maserati may take you there quicker, but your destination is still the same.

I don't get it. Then we should just all kill ourselves right now because we're eventually going to die anyway.

The point is that you're likely to have more deaths, diseases and syndromes if the average people tried to change their lifestyle to strictly vegan than being an omnivore.

In fact, the Standard American Diet is notorious for its lack of malnutrition when regarding micronutrient and polyphenol intake and within macronutrient distribution (specifically long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids).

In fact, that's an American statistic and you don't have to tell me that to believe it. I come from another culture and the first thing I noticed coming here was that people did not eat enough fruits or vegetables...things are changing now but that's how I saw it when I first came here.

NO. I'm asking about YOU.

What's your non-selfish excuse/rationalization to perpetuate the suffering of over one hundred animal per year?

About 100+ Animals per year.

Per culminated data from FARM from the USDA Reports
http://farmusa.org/statistics11.html

Per-person, an average American meat-eater is responsible for the suffering and death of 28 land animals and an estimated 175 aquatic animals per year, totaling over 15,000 individual animals over a 75 year lifespan.

Ok, just the way you were stating it, sounded sort of odd because it implied as if you knew more about me than I assumed.

What's your non-selfish excuse/rationalization to perpetuate the suffering of over one hundred animal per year?

I don't understand the point of asking me this question, but what I'm trying to understand is that you're implying that majority of the world is selfish and irrational.

I have a question for you, could you lay out the basic structure of your Vegan diet for me? I'm curious to find out how you obtain everything that your body needs.