PDA

View Full Version : Question for vegetarians.



Bluey
Jan. 21, 2009, 08:09 AM
The off topic forum was closed before I could ask this question on the vegetarian thread, but maybe it still fits here, since it is about horses also:

I received this notice and was wondering some questions, that I am sure vegetarians have mulled over and may have found some answers:

---"Vegetarianism Among Children is at a rate of one out of every 200 U.S. people under the age of 18, according to a recent CDC report. In its coverage of the report, the Associated Press quoted vegetarians who said animal welfare, not health, is what motivates most child vegetarians. However, there are health-related reasons to be concerned about meatless diets for children.
Lean beef is a naturally rich source of several nutrients important to cognitive development and functioning including iron, zinc and vitamin B12. Beef's ability to provide the high quality protein necessary in the diet of growing boys and girls also must not be overlooked."---

Yes, that was from a cattlemens magazine release, but brought questions about how do vegetarians feel about not eating meat "for animal welfare reasons" and still will have pets and many evidently, as they were posting here, are involved with horses.

Animal welfare doesn't preclude anyone from eating meat, as animal welfare is in the forefront of anyone raising animals for meat.
If they didn't have the welfare of the animals in mind, animals would just not perform properly, as unhappy or abused animals just are not thrifty.
I think that many are blowing out of proportion any abuses, forgetting that some abuse will happen in all we do in life, with people and animals, that is it part of who some people are and that the rest of us is always trying to curb abuse wherever it happens.
We need to keep remembering that use is NOT abuse.

My question is, if someone thinks just by us using animals for all the products and uses we make of them are not doing a good enough job that some have to protest by not consuming those products, that their bodies evolved to use and need, especially the young, still growing bodies, how do they explain to themselves that they do make use of animals in other ways, as pets, including the horses they enjoy and ride?

I find being a vegetarian for "animal welfare" reasons and then still riding horses for their own pleasure a little bit like saying I don't agree that others do what they want with animals and won't use those products, but when I want to do something with animals, it is ok, so I have dogs, cats and horses and use their products as leathers and others.

It just doesn't seem logical to me.:confused:

ASB Stars
Jan. 21, 2009, 08:36 AM
I think that there is a dramatic difference between decrying the inhumane slaughter of horses, and riding them. You are swinging from one end of the pendulum, to the other.

The reason I disagree so often with your viewpoints, is that you literally offer the most consevative view point, and then state that any other is an extremist view. You go from reasonable freedoms, to "if you don't agree- the Nazi's are coming!"

You CAN buy sythetic tack, and shoes that aren't leather....etc. I certainly am not "perfect", by any standard. I DO eat chicken and turkey. I have my guilty moments, but I am not going to eat beef, and I can't even comprehend eating horse. I struggle with the idea of cheese, knowing that calves are being ill-treated, and slaughtered. And yes, if I had to kill anything, I'd be a vegan.

S1969
Jan. 21, 2009, 08:37 AM
Come on, Bluey, you can't possibly be comparing the raising of hogs in gestation crates where they are immobile for the majority of their life to riding a horse that is properly cared for.

http://www.all-creatures.org/articles/ar-avoid-1.jpg

These could not possibly be two more different and unrelated cases.

I am not a vegetarian but I have not eaten pork in years because of gestation crates and living conditions for hogs in factory farms. I eat very little meat and search high and low for sources where I do not have to imagine this sort of hell.

gloriginger
Jan. 21, 2009, 08:45 AM
Well for one, I don't believe that we need to eat beef. Sorry, haven't had a bite of it since I was 12- and I grew up just fine- strong, healthy and a contributing member of society...


I may not be the same as others, but I don't eat meat for a few reasons- one- I don't like the taste of it. Two- I don't like to support the mass production of animals for human consumption. I don't have a concern with those that hunt wild animals for consumtion, or animals that are raised by a family and then slaughtered- as long as they are treated humanely. I only by local eggs and milk from people I know treat their chickens and cows well and on occassion I will eat fish that is caught by local fisherman- or my own family.

I don't deny the food chain and the nature of predator versus prey- but I do take issue with chickens being bred without eyelashes so they can't sleep- breast so enlarged they would not be able to fly- or cows given mass amounts of anitbiotics and steroids to make them grow faster- living in filth- and/or chained to huts. I have seen feedlots and the sad animals that are there to be slaughtered for human consumption- the smell alone is forever branded in my memory.

I believe in "you are what you eat" and eating the flesh of an animal that was a genetic mutation - or lived in a filthy disgusting conditions, and/or died a horrible death just doesn't sit well with me and I refuse to support those industries.

Lastly, I see no correlation with the above and owning and loving a cat a horse and a dog.

Bluey
Jan. 21, 2009, 08:45 AM
Come on, Bluey, you can't possibly be comparing the raising of hogs in gestation crates where they are immobile for the majority of their life to riding a horse that is properly cared for.

http://www.all-creatures.org/articles/ar-avoid-1.jpg

These could not possibly be two more different and unrelated cases.

I am not a vegetarian but I have not eaten pork in years because of gestation crates and living conditions for hogs in factory farms. I eat very little meat and search high and low for sources where I do not have to imagine this sort of hell.

I am not talking about any one kind of raising of animals, if you don't agree with that, work to change it.
I am talking in general, people that won't eat any meat, even if that means they miss some important part of their diet in some nutrients that they can't hardly get from any other sources, on a flimsy reason and single cases, like the crated hogs, but then do go ahead and use horses, that all know also fall in the hands of abusers of all kinds.

If you want to say all are abusers no matter what they do with animals and I won't eat any animal products or use them, then I would think it is logical that people that feel like that, IN GENERAL, would not be using HORSES either, as we do USE them.
It is not in the best interest of horses to be raised, confined, trained and ridden, if you really look at this only from the horse's side.:confused:

Cielo Azure
Jan. 21, 2009, 08:53 AM
Vegetarian children do not miss important parts of their diet. If you look at life span records of people in the USA, those groups that don't eat meat live much longer than those that do. Veggy children are as healthy, if not healthier.

Bluey: Ever hear of milk and eggs? Vegan does not equal vegetarian. Tell me, what are children missing? The fat? The hormones? The steroids? The growth factor? The excess protein?

Frankly, your point of view is just plain ole weird and aimed at raising trouble.

Go do some research and then come back. Citing cattlemens association propoganda as fact is wrong (for some reason Oprah comes to mind).

Bluey
Jan. 21, 2009, 09:00 AM
Vegetarian children do not miss important parts of their diet. If you look at life span records of people in the USA, those groups that don't eat meat live much longer than those that do. Veggy children are as healthy, if not healthier.

Do you have any firm figures on that?

Bluey: Ever hear of milk and eggs? Vegan does not equal vegetarian. Tell me, what are children missing? The fat? The hormones? The steroids? The growth factor? The excess protein?

They are missing some vitamins and minerals and the whole complement of proteins, as some aminoacids we need are found in the best available form in meats.
I think there has been enough research that indicates if a kid is raised as a vegetarian only it can be legally considered abuse.

Frankly, your point of view is just plain ole weird and aimed at raising trouble.

Go do some research and then come back. Citing cattlemens association propoganda as fact is wrong (for some reason Oprah comes to mind).

Thank you for explaining the differences between vegetarian and vegan.:)

The last of your post does seem, as you say, "aimed to raise trouble".;)

My posts are honest questions.:yes:

JSwan
Jan. 21, 2009, 09:12 AM
Come on, Bluey, you can't possibly be comparing the raising of hogs in gestation crates where they are immobile for the majority of their life to riding a horse that is properly cared for.
.

Hogs aren't raised in gestation crates and they're not kept immobile for the majority of their life.

Most folks who decry farming methods don't have the foggiest notion of how animals are raised or handled.

While you may think riding a horse does not compare to the raising of animals for food, you'd be surprised to find that most people would disagree. The notion of a horse being ridden, asked to jump or do dressage, to be forced to live in a stall - these are no different than gestation crates, veal crates, force feeding for foie gras, or any other industrial farming method.

Don't be so flippant about keeping horses. Most Americans don't ride, don't know anything about horses, and think we're a bunch of rich white people who deserve to be maligned, taxed, and that we're all cruel to our horses.

Chances are a lot of people out there that would very much like to liberate your horse - and they don't care if the horse lives or dies, as long as it's taken out of your control.



(before you lambaste me, I was a vegetarian for many years. My statement isn't made out of ignorance ;))

Carry on with the impending train wreck.

county
Jan. 21, 2009, 09:17 AM
Hogs spend most their life in a gestation crate? Where is this at. I've raised 1000's of hogs and have never even owned a gestation crate. People who make these kinds of statements either have no clue on the subject or make them to try and start a fight.

Cielo Azure
Jan. 21, 2009, 09:19 AM
http://www.usnews.com/articles/science/2008/04/30/ancient-nutcracker-man-challenges-ideas-on-evolution-of-human-diet.html

tle
Jan. 21, 2009, 09:22 AM
Vegetarian children do not miss important parts of their diet. If you look at life span records of people in the USA, those groups that don't eat meat live much longer than those that do. Veggy children are as healthy, if not healthier.

Ah, but as you pointed out in your "what are they missing?" list... I don't believe your above statements would be true (or AS true) if one looked at the difference between vegetarian and a meat eating diet consisting of NATURALLY raised meats. this would include no hormones, no antibiotics, no grain fed meats.... grass fed, pasture raised is GOOD stuff! It's what mankind has been raised on for thousands of years. Obviously we weren't doing EVERYTHING wrong. It's only been in the last few decades that we're seeing health declines associated with food consumption -- to include obesity, diabetes, autism spectrum disorders (I wasn't online early enough to comment on the OT discussion but I think the rise in these disorders is PRIMARILY due to foods we eat and that our parents have eaten). We now have the 2nd (sometimes 3rd) full generation of TV and Microwave dinner eaters....as well as high fructose corn syrup in everything eaters.

What we eat is cummulative.... I read a study once on how a feast or famine at certain times during the grandparents lives (12-13 years old if i remember correctly) could affect how their grandchildren processed certain foods. It was fascinating and I wish I could cite my source but it's been too long ago. So why do we not think that what we eat in terms of over-processed, over hormoned, over anti-biotic'd, over-chemicaled and over sugared isn't going to affect us... much less our children?

So while I won't say that Bluey isn't pot-stirring with the way the questions and information has been phrased, to blanketly say that vegetarian children are healthier than those who eat meat without regards to the types of meats much less the frequency or the content of the rest their diet isn't much better.

tkhawk
Jan. 21, 2009, 09:27 AM
Well as far as not eating for their personal belief, that is a different issue.
But health wise , it is fine. I grew up in India, where a big chunk of the population is vegetarian. Milk is the only "acceptable" animal product. Most of them do just fine and with the advent of modern medicine, the life expactancy has shot up to close to 69. It is low, but that is more due to poverty, lack of access to health care, a big chunk surviving on one meal a day etc.Nutrition wise being vegetarian is fine-all though I am not sure how it would be without milk? Almost all my relatives were pure vegetarians-milk excepted-and survived into their 70s and 80s. My great grandma lived to be 98. My parents were the first to eat meat, when they moved to the Middle East for a job.

But the other stuff, I don't know-I eat evrything except horse, cat and dog. While I am not a fan of factory type corporate farming, I eat out most of the time, so I have no clue where the meat comes from. So I really have no right to point fingers at anybody!:cool:

JSwan
Jan. 21, 2009, 09:45 AM
I don't see why this has to be a black or white issue.

Vegetarianism is nothing new.

A healthy nutritious diet is hard to come by in much of the world, and I'm afraid that's starting to include Western countries as well. In our case, it's from overconsumption of calorie dense foods almost complete devoid of nutrition.

There's nothing "wrong" with eating meat, and there is nothing "wrong" with not eating it. If your personal philosophy or religion forbids the consumption of certain foodstsuffs, then don't eat them.

I'd prefer it if you didn't force your beliefs on the rest of us. I'd not force a Muslim to eat pork or drink alcohol, and I'd prefer it if vegetarians didn't force their beliefs on me.

I find these threads interesting because I raise most of my own food, including meat. I grow it, harvest it and preserve it. I sell a few herd shares for a little income. And a lot of you find that disgusting. And I'd bet that the same folks that find it disgusting take great pride in eating organic strawberries, grown in Mexico, and shipped thousands of miles to be consumed in January.

It boggles the mind.....

Bluey
Jan. 21, 2009, 09:51 AM
I don't see why this has to be a black or white issue.

Vegetarianism is nothing new.

A healthy nutritious diet is hard to come by in much of the world, and I'm afraid that's starting to include Western countries as well. In our case, it's from overconsumption of calorie dense foods almost complete devoid of nutrition.

There's nothing "wrong" with eating meat, and there is nothing "wrong" with not eating it. If your personal philosophy or religion forbids the consumption of certain foodstsuffs, then don't eat them.

I'd prefer it if you didn't force your beliefs on the rest of us. I'd not force a Muslim to eat pork or drink alcohol, and I'd prefer it if vegetarians didn't force their beliefs on me.

I find these threads interesting because I raise most of my own food, including meat. I grow it, harvest it and preserve it. I sell a few herd shares for a little income. And a lot of you find that disgusting. And I'd bet that the same folks that find it disgusting take great pride in eating organic strawberries, grown in Mexico, and shipped thousands of miles to be consumed in January.

It boggles the mind.....

Yes, I wanted to hear opinions, not people becoming defensive and emotional over why they may or not be vegetarians because of the animals, but still use animals when it suits their purposes.

It didn't make sense to me, but some of the explanations here do make some sense, in different ways.

When people used horses for all kinds of ways they made a living, people understood that we do need animals for our own lives.

I think that, with the loss of direct, general use, we are marginalizing horses and, like Swan pointed out, less and less people really care for them any more, other than as a magical figure.
Interesting thoughts, thank you.:cool:

county
Jan. 21, 2009, 09:57 AM
One of the things I've always found sad is so many people I hear go on about things like " hogs live in crates " or chickens live in cages " and think they ahould all be running on large tracts of land are the same ones that have a horse locked in a stall or small paddock. Its fine for them to do it just no one else.

Bluey
Jan. 21, 2009, 10:04 AM
One of the things I've always found sad is so many people I hear go on about things like " hogs live in crates " or chickens live in cages " and think they ahould all be running on large tracts of land are the same ones that have a horse locked in a stall or small paddock. Its fine for them to do it just no one else.

That is just what JSwan meant, I think, that depending on what you are familiar with, you may think one or another is abusive.
In Europe, where there is no room for horses other than in stalls, they spend most of their lives there once grown and in work and are fine, because they get to go out every day, many times every day most of them to be ridden in indoor lessons, outdoor lessons and trail rides.
Horses managed like that are fine in stalls for their down time.

Stalling a horse and not letting him out hardly, that is as abusive as turning one out in the biggest pastures and leaving him alone to fend for himself, without providing some supervision, water and food if necessary.

Calling where we keep a horse abusive is not about the space they are living in, within reason, but that the management of the horses be adequate to that space.

So, you can see where what you feel, in different circumstances, can be fine, as others see it.:yes:

fivehorses
Jan. 21, 2009, 10:05 AM
I have been a vegetarian for about 35 years. I grew up in a household where we had meat and veggies. When I went to college, my roomates decided to be vegetarians, so I was forced into it in a way.

I had great roomate cooks, and enjoyed not eating meat. When I came home, I found I didn't like the taste of meat at all. So, I chose to eat for most of my life, no other mammal. Lately, due to the reports on poultry abuse at slaughter plants, I decided, no chicken either.

I have many friends who raise their own pigs, beef, poultry. Some are very good at it, including the slaughter, others are reprehensible, and I find it disgusting that their thought of care and slaughter is not a consideration. They don't think the animal feels pain or suffering.

Now, as far as my keeping horses...well, yes, I do ride, and drive, etc. I don't think my horses suffer for being kept in stalls at night in the blasting cold air. In fact, I think my horses are very well cared for.
I don't think half the US population thinks I should set my horses free either.

I do try to not use leather as much as possible. I won't buy a car with leather seats, etc. I really do try and be mindful, but I also indulge in leather shoes. I am not perfect, but I do try to think about how my actions affect others, including animals.

Do I think I am being hypocritical? No, I think I live pretty ethically and with attention to how much impact I am making on my property, the earth, etc. I am very careful about the impact my horses have on the soil, sub surface water, et.

But, I chose not to eat meat after reading about a feed company that put herbicide in the grain of dairy cows and many folks became sick from the exposure. This was an old Ron Howard movie based on a true story. Later, I moved into the direction of animal welfare as I became increasingly aware of the factory farming and conditions most animals are kept in.

I do not begrudge anyone from eating meat...I also grew up in a hunting family, and yes, it may be odd for someone to walk into my house and see a deer head if they know me on a superficial surface.
I just expect and hope anyone who does eat meat to be respectful of its source and its treatment in life and in slaughter.

So, to sum up my response, I do not feel any oxymoron or hypocracy in being a vegetarian and a person who enjoys using her horses. I also don't feel bad about having a deer head on the wall. Now, if I shot it, well, then I think that might be different, yet I think some of the best advocates for animal welfare and conservancy are hunters. Its my dad who instilled my philosophy, he taught me the absolute responsibility of an animal welfare's is our responsibility as a human, yet, would go out and shoot Bambi or any other animal. However, he was intolerant of those who shot to shoot, and not to kill or who did not take care of their animals.

I think it has made me more tolerant of other people's lifestyles...as long as they are respectful of how they take a life.

Diamondindykin
Jan. 21, 2009, 10:13 AM
I have seriously considered becoming a vegetarian in the past. I do believe that meat is healthy and I love the taste but my problem is how SOME livestock are raised and more importantly slaughtered BUT since I have a leather saddle, leather seats in my truck and so on I feel that if I became a vegetarian for the reasons above that I would be a VERY big hippocrite. What I have tried to do now is only eat meat that I know was raised and slaughtered humanely. I buy my beef from a gentlemen down the road who doesn't use hormones and the cattle are out roaming on pasture their whole lives. When it is time to be slaughtered a butcher comes and puts a bullet in it's head. To me all this is humane and the meat is safe.

deltawave
Jan. 21, 2009, 10:29 AM
When compared with the synthetic substitutes, leather is not inherently "bad". At least it breaks down and was natural to begin with! And it's a renewable resource, unlike whatever-it-is synthetic stuff is made from. :eek:

Diamondindykin
Jan. 21, 2009, 10:32 AM
When compared with the synthetic substitutes, leather is not inherently "bad". At least it breaks down and was natural to begin with! And it's a renewable resource, unlike whatever-it-is synthetic stuff is made from. :eek:

I agree!! There is no way I would even consider synthetic tack.

JSwan
Jan. 21, 2009, 10:41 AM
What I DO enjoy reading in these threads is the number of people who seem to be trying to make informed decisions, or at least to be contemplative and make the best decisions they can.

I think we can all agree it's important to reflect upon our choices and what impact they have on other humans and our environment.

Can we agree on that?

If I tried to be objective about my own choices, I can understand that many people would find them horrific. My animals are not protected from danger.

The "free range" chickens are in fact, more likely to die from disease and predation. Horrible deaths. They are more likely to be infested with parasites. I raised them from chicks; bonding to them. Many would find the killing of something I raised, handled and bonded with to be barbaric. The pig I raised - he and I bonded. He bonded with other animals. He was out in the rain, sun, and sometimes got cuts or tick bites. He wasn't protected from harm, and he was more likely to suffer horrible injuries or be infested with parasites.

From my perspective, these animals were raised in a natural environment, had the best of care, did not fear me, and were quickly killed; quietly and without stress. BUT, I accepted and understood that raising them that way posed greater risk to the animal during its lifetime. AND, I accepted full responsibility for a quick and humane death - for the chickens - by my own hand.

I don't look down upon those who would make a different choice, nor do I look down on those who could not bear to kill something they raised or hunted. Not everyone is in a position or interested in raising their own food - and large scale agriculture is simply a fact of life.

It's crucial that ANY animal be treated humanely - but I do not consider "humane" to include not eating them. People like me just have a more realistic and sober view of the natural world.

Again - if another person has a different philosophy I have the utmost respect for those views.

I think it's reasonable to request that a different philosophy be respected too.

For you vegetarians - if you do not have a copy of the Moosewood Restaurant Cookbook you MUST go out and buy one. Terrific vegetarian cuisine from all over the world! Nom nom nom nom:)

danceronice
Jan. 21, 2009, 10:44 AM
If there were more vegetarians like fivehorses, we'd all be better off. But the ones I encounter do tend to be the "city folk" described by Bluey, country, and JSwan. (It doesn't help I live near Boston. Most of these people wouldn't know from cow if I stampeded a herd across the Common.) They frequently don't "get" horsekeeping, either.

Personally? I'm a great ape with an omnivore's digestive tract. All our nearest relatives eat animal protein when given the oppertunity (yes, even gorillas. And the all-veg diet gorillas STILL can have very severe cardiac problems in captivity. They're trying to figure out why diet doesn't seem to matter.) Chimps are pack-hunters who eat other primates. Meat tastes good (at least beef does. Pork the jury's out on.) Especially when I'm feeling anaemic. I'm going to keep eating meat. If your religion (real religion or philosophical equivalent) forbids you eating certain foods, fine, but if I wanted fanatics dictating my life I'd move to Iran. You eat what you want and I'll eat what I want, and I will buy whatever meat I want as well.

county
Jan. 21, 2009, 11:01 AM
danceronice's last sentence sums it up very well. I've never once in my life told someone they should or should not eat something. I will accept nothing less from others.

tle
Jan. 21, 2009, 11:19 AM
JSwan... we have a very similar view. I'm finding quiet a few people who have no problem with a McDonald's hamburger that are cringing (literally) at the thought that I raise meat rabbits.

EqTrainer
Jan. 21, 2009, 11:29 AM
"...even if that means they miss some important part of their diet in some nutrients that they can't hardly get from any other sources"
--

There are LOTS of other sources for all nutrients. Including supplements that come in pills.

I don't think one of my children will eat meat much longer, and it will be an animal welfare issue for him. My daughter, on the other hand, routinely declares that "cows taste good!" and he gags when she says it :lol:

I have been a vegetarian off/on for years. Sometimes due to finances, in my working student days I lived in the country and good vegetables were plentiful and cheap - meat was expensive in comparison - so I didn't eat it. Then my tastes had evolved that I did not eat it. Then I married a carnivore.. and I do eat a little bit now, but still, only 3-4 times a month. And never, ever anything BUT beef because those legs and body parts just gross me out.. a little filet tho' I can forget about what it is.

No matter what I was eating tho' I have always supplemented with vitamin/minerals. I also use digestive enzymes as I have a hard time digesting any sort of milk product.

Trixie
Jan. 21, 2009, 01:42 PM
I have been a vegetarian since I was eight. Couldn't bear eating cow because they were so close to the horses I rode and cared for, and so on. Further, I'm not huge on the way *some* animals are raised for slaughter, and I don't particularly think they should die for the benefit of my stomach. Following that, the idea of consuming muscles, etc, has always grossed me out.

I don't equate it with keeping horses. It's not like my horses would do any better if I turned them loose. Keeping horses happy and healthy doesn't bother me: I'd be far more inclined to eat meat (gross out issues aside) if I could guarantee they were humanely kept and slaughtered.

I would never stop someone ELSE from eating meat, or tell them not to, my personal choices are just that, my personal choices.

I am aware that I'm moderately hypocritical as I do use leather for tack and shoes. I also try to take the best care I can of all my leather so that it lasts as long as possible.

I do think it's totally possible to eat a healthy vegetarian diet. I made a great, super high protein tofu chili this week.

LarkspurCO
Jan. 21, 2009, 02:03 PM
I dare say it's much easier to develop a nutritional deficiency by eliminating vegetables from your diet than by eliminating meat from your diet.

Most people I know don't eat any fresh vegetables, just meat, bread, potatoes and anything with sugar. What does everybody have against vegetables? Humans didn't evolve on bread. They ate mostly plants, and some meat.

I believe a diet with a variety of fresh, raw vegetables and fruit and a little meat is far superior than a vegetarian diet of lots of bread and cereal products and very few vegetables (my nephew for example).

I've been vegetarian by and large for the past 25 years. I recently began eating a little bit of poultry. Other than a brief vegan phase long ago, I've always eaten eggs and cheese.

Just look at the chronic disease and obesity in this country and ponder how much of that is directly related to a crappy diet and lifestyle. If I had to be the food police, I'd force people to eat vegetables. I wouldn't take away their meat! (If I had to be the foot police I'd make them wear better shoes.)

Bluey
Jan. 21, 2009, 02:43 PM
Very interesting answers all, thank you.

I grew up where we didn't have hardly any meat and little fish and, really not much of anything else either.
Most of the food and other was rationed, like two eggs a week for our family of four adults and three kids, the eggs because there were two kids under ten and they were supposed to be for them.:(

I didn't eat a beefsteak until one year after I had already been living in the USA, just didn't know they existed, until the stable I was helping took all to a restaurant one evening.
The rest is history, because, if you like it, corn feed beef is really one of the few eating luxuries we in the USA take so easily for granted, that much of the world doesn't get to enjoy, or didn't 40 years ago for most of those there.

For those that wonder how that steak got to their plate, I will say that cows live out in pastures all their lives, eating grasses, are bred and have calves.
Once the calves are large enough to be weaned, they become stockers and go to grass pastures for a few more months, where some, under the "grass fed", " organic", "natural" and such labels will then feed them grain the last few months and then they are slaughtered.
Others are sold after five or six months on grass to feedlots, where they will live in pens for some four months and then be slaughtered.
Once the cows are older, they are slaughtered and used for hamburger.
The eating quality of pure grass fed beef is just not comparable with corn fed the last few weeks.
Most people would not eat hardly any steaks if all they had was truly grass only fed beef.
The consumers are speaking there.

If you read any of Temple Grandin books, you will find that today's methods of raising, finishing on grain and slaughtering beef cattle are not objectionable to anyone that is not an extremist.
Cattle today are handled (other than, again where some abuse may occur and that should not happen anywhere) in specific, gentle ways.
If a producer were idiot enough not to care for their cattle properly, much less abuse them, the cattle would not gain and he would not stay in business long, because cattle performance is tied directly in with how happy they are, for cattle.

Now, even today, I still don't have mean in the house, other than what is in the can soups, or the cold cut ham packages for a rare sandwich, or some jerky, as all here like it and makes good dog treats.
I eat one steak a week if and when I go to town, maybe once a week at most, which I don't always do and that is at a friend's restaurant.
I understand that we should eat in moderation, all, not just meats.

Our Dr told us here and there over the years about patients that had been vegetarians for many years and, as they aged, they had severe health problems from it, way more than anyone has from eating a varied diet.
So I have a hard time believing that vegetarians as a group are healthier, unless they are very careful to have inherited the right genetics only from their parents to stay healtier than average and eat a very carefully balanced diet full of supplements.

I understand that vegetarians today can add vitamins, minerals and other nutrients missing in their restricted diets to compensate for what they are not getting, but how much sense does it make to not eat natural, renewable produce as animal products are and then buy a pill made in a laboratory to make up for what they are not getting?

Those are part of the answers that still don't make sense, although people don't have to make sense, I understand that.

As for those that add the large volume of soy products to their diet it takes to try to complement the protein profile of vegetables, to be closer to what humans need, I, as so many, am allergic to soy.
I could not have gone that route anyway, just as someone that is truly allergic to animal products would not be able to eat any.
By the way, I am allergic to fresh pork, so that I also don't eat, or I get dime sized hives all over and itch.;)

I think that people are all a little bit different and have been raised in many ways to like or dislike all kinds of things.
I think it is good that each one of us are lucky enough to live where we can eat what we want, when we want and not eat what we don't want, for any reason, or no reason at all.
Would others in the rest of the world be so lucky. Sadly, many are not.:(

I try to understand where some are coming from and, having learned much, still don't quite see some points as valid.
As others have said, I will defend other's rights to do as they wish and hope they will permit me also to have the right to do as I want.:)

Thanks again to all that responded.:cool:

tle
Jan. 21, 2009, 03:02 PM
If you read any of Temple Grandin books, you will find that today's methods of raising, finishing on grain and slaughtering beef cattle are not objectionable to anyone that is not an extremist.

I take exception to this comment. I dont' care who Temple Grandin is... but yes, I find grain fed beef objectionable. Maybe I'm extremist (probably labelled so by many given my views on our diets, marriage rights and government interference issues) but still... grass fed ALL the way is how we try to eat. Corn is NOT healthy... at least not the way it's mass produced in this country.

magnolia73
Jan. 21, 2009, 03:19 PM
I have to ask- which diet is more nutrient deficient? The kid who eats KFC, Mc D's and Pizza Hut 7 nights a week or the kid of some vegan who eats a diet of beans, legumes, grains, and fruits and veggies. Yeah- both are probably short on some nutrients.... betting the vegan's kid is healthier though.

As a vegetarian/rider.... my horse lives in a nice pasture, with shelter, food twice a day, daily grooming, socializing with other horses. I ask her for 45 minutes of work (at most) a day, most of which she seems to enjoy. Would she rather be out on the range? Don't know. I'll take the risk that I am abusing her.

By contrast- I don't eat pork (factory raised). Those animals are confined, no fresh air, limited socialization. IE, held in an unnatural life. That to me is very wrong.

That said, I have no problems with humanely raised meat, though I do not eat it.

county
Jan. 21, 2009, 03:20 PM
Some say it is some don't but what is without a doubt is what the consumer wants over all and thats corn fed meat.

JSwan
Jan. 21, 2009, 03:28 PM
Some say it is some don't but what is without a doubt is what the consumer wants over all and thats corn fed meat.

Agreed.

The vast majority of what is on the American menu is driven almost entirely by consumer demand.

magnolia73
Jan. 21, 2009, 03:32 PM
I find these threads interesting because I raise most of my own food, including meat. I grow it, harvest it and preserve it. I sell a few herd shares for a little income. And a lot of you find that disgusting. And I'd bet that the same folks that find it disgusting take great pride in eating organic strawberries, grown in Mexico, and shipped thousands of miles to be consumed in January.

Actually, I don't know that anyone posting here finds what you do disgusting. :) I know there are people who would, but doesn't sounds like anyone is decrying the way you raise your food inhumane or gross.

Hog farming does disturb me. I have seen footage from farms (non-PETA). The fact that it is so industrialized - the smell, the pollution from the concentrated hog waste is disconcerting. To your point on free range- I realize that the techniques they use to minimize illness, to the point of keeping super sterile environments, well balanced feeds etc. But I kind of see it like the fancy show horse who likes in a padded stall only to be ridden on perfect footing- to protect him from an injury at liberty. I don't know that changing the natural environment to promote safety and longevity is always a good trade off. And perhaps those hogs are happy- happier than those out on a farm.

FWIW, I know several producers of "free range" hogs and cattles and all are disconcerted by the treatment of factory farmed animals. It could well be fancy marketing for them, but they all seem quite sincere.

snbess
Jan. 21, 2009, 03:34 PM
I have been a vegetarian for 12+ years and a rider for 25+ years. I have struggled with the feelings of hypocracy that come from being vegetarian and yet also using a leather saddle, boots, etc. What I have recently come to is a feeling that we do the best we can at the time with what we have. I have a similar point of view about "green" living. I don't label myself or anyone else as hypocritical because we have done 6 things to increase our greenness, but have not addressed the other 36. Life is a journey, a work in progress. As humans, we are not always consistent in our values vs. our actions. But we - all of us - do better when we have some kind of value system to hold onto and to strive to meet. I know that, as a vegetarian, I am in the minority in the U.S. I'm ok with that. Those of you who don't understand it...maybe you can at least not let it drive you crazy. I'm not sitting here judging your personal decisions, though I might have different values. Like with religion and environmentalism and all kinds of topics we have differing opinions on, there is a lot of room for acceptance and common ground.

billiebob
Jan. 21, 2009, 03:53 PM
I am a vegetarian because I don't feel like eating something that was once breathing. It's not really for animal welfare, just personal taste. If someone wants to eat meat, go right ahead. Just don't ask me to do it.

I have no problem using leather or riding horses. I think those who believe animals shouldn't be used are ridiculous. If the animals are treated humanely and are happy (and yes, some horses are happy to be ridden!), what's the big deal? Animal rights extremists make me so mad. It's not a black and white issue like they want you to think. There's so much gray area. Plus, last time I checked I'm not god so I won't be telling anyone how to live their life anytime soon.

I do love the Moosewood cookbook! I haven't used it in a while.....maybe I will tonight for dinner!

ETA: I've met more than a few people who say they're veggies for animal welfare reasons and then go and eat fish and seafood. Don't even get me started on them!

JSwan
Jan. 21, 2009, 03:56 PM
Actually, I don't know that anyone posting here finds what you do disgusting. :) I know there are people who would, but doesn't sounds like anyone is decrying the way you raise your food inhumane or gross.




You are kind to write that. I was trying to use myself as an example not to promote my virtues (or lack thereof), but more as a discussion point.

If anyone is interested in a real life example, I'll offer some information for consideration. Many people are rightly concerned by animal welfare, as well as food safety (of meat and crops).

Do you want to know why those big farms exist? Because of American consumers.

I've been spending a great deal of time with a few people on small scale poultry slaughter for small and medium farms.

It ain't gonna happen. Not now. (I got the word this afternoon)

And it's not my fault. Again, I'll offer personal information in order to help illustrate WHY things are the way they are.

1) Much of what we now consider to be "factory" farming has its roots in the tremendous improvements in health, nutrition and reproduction. Improvements have resulted in healthier livestock, faster growing, more efficient, easier to handle, more humane slaughter, increase in food safety.

Arguably it's gone to the other extreme - not everything is so automated, improved and streamlined that welfare is being compromised.

2) Fewer people farm, farmers are being pushed out by development, and agriculture is being consolidated as a result. The gene pool of livestock becomes smaller, older heritage breeds become endangered, farming becomes more homogenized.

Arguably, it's another extreme. From the small, diverse family farm to the mega farms that produce inexpensive meat and crops, rely upon only a few strains of seeds, but the overall health of the human population improves. (to the point we're a bunch of fatty patty's)

3) The small farms that remain are still pressured by development and an influx of urbanites, sick of city life but have an idealistic view of country life. The small farms, trying to rely upon a diverse herd, multiple products, and environmentally sound practices have difficulty even in breaking even.

The small and medium farm has to negotiate a horrific and complex maze of regulations, insurance requirements, more regulations, inspections, more regulations, conflicting regulations, are easily wiped out, and are only a niche market - relying upon a wealthy consumer in good economic times.


In practical terms - what does this mean for the American that wants healthy, nutritious food?

The answer is - you buy it at the grocery store; and if you have money you pay a premium for labeling that may or may not be accurate.

People like me can't provide you a humanely raised chicken unless the price is so high it's ridiculous. You'd never pay it.

The amount of money required to set up a proper operation is exorbitant. Complying with state and federal requirements is exorbitant. The insurance requirements are exorbitant.

If a shopper can buy two chicken breasts for 3.99 at the grocery store - would he/she really want to pay me over 25$ for the same chicken breasts raised and butchered here?

Unfortunately, the answer is no.

And that goes the same for row crops, too. The regulatory requirements aren't as strict but it's just as hard to make even a small part time income.

It's CRAZY. Really.


ETA - the scenarios I describe may vary depending on where you live in the US.

gloriginger
Jan. 21, 2009, 04:17 PM
In practical terms - what does this mean for the American that wants healthy, nutritious food?

The answer is - you buy it at the grocery store; and if you have money you pay a premium for labeling that may or may not be accurate.



And sadly that is not true-- there is salmonella in peanut butter! Nothing mass produced is safe anymore :(

Bluey
Jan. 21, 2009, 04:29 PM
And sadly that is not true-- there is salmonella in peanut butter! Nothing mass produced is safe anymore :(

Put that in perspective, for the trillions of products out there, the extremely rare case of contamination should not be a concern for the public, as much as for the producers, that really, honestly, are not trying to kill their consumers.

There are many, many more times the number of people maimed and killed by car wrecks than the few in a whole nation made sick or much less killed by some contaminated product.

Also remember than some times, contamination doesn't happen at the producer level, but in people's kitchens.

Before we had mass produce, people were still getting sick and killed with what they raised at home or bought from their neighbor.

Some risk is very hard to avoid in life, but in general, we still have today one of the most aboundant, varied and safe food any nation had in history.
That doesn't mean we need to let up improving all and try to get it as 100% safe as we can.:)

JSwan
Jan. 21, 2009, 04:45 PM
Before we had mass produce, people were still getting sick and killed with what they raised at home or bought from their neighbor.


Sorry to pop in again but this is exactly what I meant by "improvements in welfare".

One of the reasons all these regulations and processes exist is because of what USED to happen.

The small family farm wasn't idyllic. Home canning resulted in botulism. Home butchering resulted in salmonella and a host of other diseases, including parasites. Steam cannners exploded and maimed housewives and children. (in my state the extension offers a free pressure test every year - this is still a concern!) Malnutrition was a reality; including diseases like rickets.

Now our food is so consistent in quality, it's fresh, it keeps longer in the fridge, it's CHEAP, it tastes the same no matter where you go, the animals are cared for and there is oversight. No more TB from milk, no more rickets, etc.

There is a downside to that. The small farm could only affect a small number of people. These large farms and processing facilities - one mistake and thousands or more could be sickened or die.

I don't know which is "right".

danceronice
Jan. 21, 2009, 04:50 PM
The American Livestock Breeds Conservancy is finding that some the best help they're getting in publicizing rare breeds is their new program that's been started using...chefs. There was a Turkey Tasting at the last meeting.

From an evolutionary standpoint: we don't like vegetables because they are not fast-energy foods and you have to eat a high volume of them as compared to protein, sugar-rich fruits, fat, and carbohydrates to get nutritional benefits, and as far as energy goes they're not very useful. They basically provide roughage and some vitamins. And as such, they don't taste appealing to primates whose ancestors needed to both pack on stored energy for lean times and to get fast-burning energy. When we became able to grow grain, we were able to produce the carbs we needed instead of having to forage through a lot of roughage to find it. We are REALLY good at producing it, and so our bodies like to "stock up", even though they don't actually need it any more.

Vegetables, on the other hand, are "good for us" more because they provide bulk that fills you up without calories, and some vitamins (although some like iron are better absorbed from animal sources and oddly, folate is best absorbed from synthetic vitamins). Better for our sedentary modern lifestyles, though deficient on their own, but our genes are 25,000 years old and saying something totally different.

And a vegan's child will only be healthy if they are extensively breast-fed or artificially suplimented-adults can get away without natural sources of B12, but only because it's built up in childhood. There was a case recently (I'll have to ask my parents where it was) that involved a third-generation vegan family--the kids were breastfed by their mother, who was raised vegan by HER mother, and they developed B-vitamin deficiency illnesses. The mother had an insufficient store in her own body to pass it on through lactation. Vegetarian is one thing, veganism without close medical supervision and supplimentation is something else entirely. You can't ignore that we evolved to be omnivores and consume animal protein in some form and expect not to have problems.

Trixie
Jan. 21, 2009, 05:07 PM
I understand that vegetarians today can add vitamins, minerals and other nutrients missing in their restricted diets to compensate for what they are not getting, but how much sense does it make to not eat natural, renewable produce as animal products are and then buy a pill made in a laboratory to make up for what they are not getting?


I have to ask- which diet is more nutrient deficient? The kid who eats KFC, Mc D's and Pizza Hut 7 nights a week or the kid of some vegan who eats a diet of beans, legumes, grains, and fruits and veggies. Yeah- both are probably short on some nutrients.... betting the vegan's kid is healthier though.


I think that's kind of the thing: an *ideal* diet probably includes some meats for protein and vitamins + a lot of vegetables, fruits, dairy, and whole grains.

Most people do not eat an ideal diet, vegetarian or not. Fried meats aren't healthy, frequently, in restaurants, the vegetarian alternative is the healthier choice (though, not always, when it's a gallon of pasta in cream sauce).

I guess it's about making good choices, and trying to eat right. It's definitely a personal thing: I feel full and energetic when I eat mostly veggies and carbs. Mr. Trixie feels horrible when he eats like that; he needs to be consistently eating protein. We're both slim, active, and athletic. It just depends.

Bluey
Jan. 21, 2009, 05:12 PM
We had a small goat dairy, started when we needed some goat milk to supplement foals.
We were selling the excess milk to a few customers for several years and one day, it became illegal for us to do so without expensive machines to pasteurize milk, so it would be safe for the public.

Those new regulations made our food much safer, but only the larger producers could afford them, so we had to quit selling any.

Multiply that by most other people were producing and selling and now we have less producers and really, safer products.

Farmers markets are one place where I don't think the food supply is regulated and it is not all as clean and pure as we would like, although I think people are really learning in a hurry that is what the public demands, so many are doing a better job of cleaning the food before offering it to the public there.
Even if you raise your own food, you still have to clean it very well, as the outside world is really not that clean itself and a little oversight can contaminate a whole batch.
Imagine using horse apples to raise garden produce.:D

Daydream Believer
Jan. 21, 2009, 05:28 PM
Kinda off topic but have any of you ever read the diet book "Eat Right for Your Type"... the blood type diet. According to this guy Type O's, the oldest blood type, are the "hunter gatherers" and best suited to less grains/starches and red meat and vegetable diet. He recommended avoiding wheat entirely and suggested Spelt a much older grain and cousin to wheat and easier to digest. Interestingly...I'm a Type O and have Celiac's disease...I can't eat wheat, rye and several plants related like Spelt...other than the problem with Spelt I'd have been well suited to that lifestyle. If I really watch the carbs, eat lots of meat and leafy veggies, I feel fantastic and stay nice and slender.

Type A's were the quintessential vegetarians...the blood type that developed after people learned to farm the land. These folks do well with the grains and a high veggie diet. I think the only meat he recommends for a Type A is chicken and fish though. It's been a while since I read it so I may be off on that.

Type B and AB came later in evolution and were more specific in their diets.

What made me think of this was Trixie's comment about how well she does on a veggie/carb diet and how Mr. Trixie does not. I'd be curious what their blood types are.

S1969
Jan. 21, 2009, 05:29 PM
Hogs aren't raised in gestation crates and they're not kept immobile for the majority of their life.

Sorry, apparently I should have been more specific to say CAFO "breeding sows" are kept in crates and farrowing pens, until they are no longer good breeding material, and then they are slaughtered:(http://www.farmsanctuary.org/issues/factoryfarming/pork/); whereas commercially raised (CAFO) hogs, such as those at Smithfield farms "live by the hundreds or thousands in warehouse-like barns, in rows of wall-to-wall pens." :
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/12840743/porks_dirty_secret_the_nations_top_hog_producer_is _also_one_of_americas_worst_polluters

Of course there are farmers out there who do not raise hogs this way. But it's up to the consumer to find them. I completely disagree with the concept that the consumer drives the supply (consumers demand corn fed cows). The theories behind economics assume many things: like no supplier is large enough to impact the market independently; perfect information, meaning consumers have the information necessary to make choices.

And that there are "no barriers to entry into the market" for suppliers, which is obviously not true. If you prefer grass-fed beef because of its taste or animal welfare, it's not like you can just go to the grocery store and buy it. Some stores *might* carry it, but most do not. Or pork that was not factory farmed, etc. It takes a concerted effort to find out how animals were farmed, and even harder to find a substitute if you disagree with farming practices. I think it's naive to say "but people want corn-fed beef". Most people have never tasted grass-fed beef, so how would they know?

Personally, I think that an omnivorous diet is the best way to meet your nutritional needs, but the amount of meat and animal products needed to fulfil our needs is far, far less than most people consume. There are also costs to our environment and wildlife when we grow huge fields of soybeans and process them into soy products rather than eating meat.

cbv
Jan. 21, 2009, 05:32 PM
but an interesting read that discusses many of these issues is the book "An Omnivore's Dilemma".

When I say interesting I mean it in the best sense -- not just that the subject may interest many of you if you are concerned with issues of farming and diet -- but because the guy is a fabulous writer. The whole first part of the book is about corn -- something that would not normally fascinate -- but this guy can make it do just that.

He comes down on the side of grass fed beef -- but whether you agree with all his viewpoints -- I think you will find much of what he says of interest and most folks will find something they agree with.

And JSwan, the author talks at some length about the difficulties small producers have dealing with getting their products slaughtered and packed and to market. However, at least in my area, some small producers are finding ways to bring their products to markets at the local farmer's markets in Richmond. I am sure it is not easy, and I am sure the prices reflect some of the challenges, but the one farm I like to buy from ( I don't eat meat but buy butter, eggs, cheese, and dog bones from them) seems to do ok. And they are wonderful to deal with. And while prices might be higher, one market is near a university and many of the students on limited incomes shop there regularly.

Like everything, vegetarians are a diverse group and at least those I am around tend not to come from the PETA end of the spectrum. I am an ecologist and most of my colleagues/friends/students that limit meat in one form or another are very thoughtful and non-judgemental of anyone's personal diet choices...the reasons for their diet choices are as varied as the personalities involved.

I work with lots of ecologists/biologists that entered this field because of their experiences as hunters and fishermen and wanted to learn more and preserve those wildlife communities. Several of those folks only eat meat from small organic producers or what they hunt or fish for themselves.

I had one friend that, when living in the US was a pretty staunch, some might say over the top, vegetarian. But he also spends quite alot of time in Africa, initially in the Peace Corp. In Africa where many of those he works with rely heavily on small herds of livestock for the bulk of their nutrition and where the village will kill and roast a goat to welcome him or honor him for his assistance -- he eats goat.

Daydream Believer
Jan. 21, 2009, 05:32 PM
It has been well demonstrated that grass fed beef is way better and healthier for the people who eat the meat and healthier for the cow also. A corn based diet fed in the feed lots is hard on the cow's digestion and causes health problems for them. Since they are slaughtered shortly after being stuffed with corn, no one cares.

Bluey
Jan. 21, 2009, 05:42 PM
It has been well demonstrated that grass fed beef is way better and healthier for the people who eat the meat and healthier for the cow also. A corn based diet fed in the feed lots is hard on the cow's digestion and causes health problems for them. Since they are slaughtered shortly after being stuffed with corn, no one cares.

Grass fed beef is fed corn, just on grass pastures, not in a feedlot.
Ask County, he is one of those producers, I think.
Pure grass fed beef would have yellow fat and be generally considerably tougher and taste different than corn fed beef. That is why it is mostly used for grinding and spiced well to cook it, not steaks.

There are some posts with several things written that are not so, but I doubt that here is the place to discuss meat production, how and why, in detail.

JSwan
Jan. 21, 2009, 05:56 PM
And JSwan, the author talks at some length about the difficulties small producers have dealing with getting their products slaughtered and packed and to market. However, at least in my area, some small producers are finding ways to bring their products to markets at the local farmer's markets in Richmond. I am sure it is not easy, and I am sure the prices reflect some of the challenges, but the one farm I like to buy from ( I don't eat meat but buy butter, eggs, cheese, and dog bones from them) seems to do ok. And they are wonderful to deal with.


Like I wrote before, it's a niche market. Next time you're there, take a look at the meat for sale. The folks who are selling that meat are likely not insured.

How much butter or eggs do you think a person needs to sell to make enough money, after taxes (and there are a LOT of taxes), to have a decent income? Heck, health insurance alone would be over 1000$ a month; not to mention housing expenses, food, gas, clothing, etc.

That's a lot of butter and eggs.

You can't buy milk, either. You can buy eggs because the farmer has not altered the product. (or he better not have or he's in trouble) Bones for dogs are not regulated.

You have to dance around regulations. Purchase shares in a cow to get around the milk regs. Same for goats.

Different regs for cheese and butter than milk. Inspection requirements.

Let me tell you something about the farmers markets. A lot of those products are shipped in from extremely large farms in the Valley, and outside Virginia as well. Even among the niche market - it's cutthroat.

You can get a poultry exemption; but you can't get insurance. So if you want to utilize the exemption, you open yourself up to great financial risk. No underwriter will touch you.

Same with canned goods. Chances are the folks you are buying from are either dancing around regulations, ignoring them, or operating without insurance coverage. Or they think they're covered because they have a farm policy. They're not.

I guess none of you have heard of Joel Salatin? He's in the Valley and has a nice operation. And still, he's been threatened with shutdowns many times.

Another local farmer and his wife were taken away from their farm in handcuffs. They slaughtered their meat at home the old fashioned way - because that the only way they could make a profit. These folks were in their 60's. The USDA destroyed every single bit of meat these folks had in storage. There was nothing wrong with the meat. It was safe to consume, the animals had been treated well, the works.

But nope - they're criminals.

Some of you are looking at this from the consumer's perspective - but I'm looking at this from the PRODUCER's perspective.

From the Producer's perspective (a producer is also operating a business and has to pay all the requisite taxes), it's a regulatory, legal and financial nightmare.

I'm glad all of you are enjoying your free range whatever. Don't be so sure it's really free range. There are regulations and definitions of what is free range, natural, organic, grass fed, grass finished, etc that you may not like.

You may even be fooled by the cachet and ambiance of the farmers market or local butcher, only to find that they're importing mass produced products from outside the area and passing them off as locally grown by little old farmers in coveralls. (because what is considered "local" is also regulated and defined)

From the Producer's perspective, it's very tempting to operate on a knife point, hoping that the lack of insurance and kinda sorta adhering to regulations doesn't attract the wrong attention. ;)

Joel's book is called, "Everything I want to do is illegal", by the way. He's kind of a nut, but a nice nut. :)

county
Jan. 21, 2009, 06:07 PM
I have " grass fed beef " there on grass or forage until 750 lbs after that they can have all the corn we want to give them. "

vacation1
Jan. 21, 2009, 06:20 PM
I find being a vegetarian for "animal welfare" reasons and then still riding horses for their own pleasure a little bit like saying I don't agree that others do what they want with animals and won't use those products, but when I want to do something with animals, it is ok, so I have dogs, cats and horses and use their products as leathers and others. It just doesn't seem logical to me.:confused:

Well, it's not. Which is why logic isn't that helpful in considering human behavior. Logically, any time you have a human interact with an animal, there's an element of coercion, of the human bending the animal to the human's will. The horseman, the farmer, the pet owner and the kid who tortures cats are on the same logical plane. Humans manipulating animals. The way they manipulate animals is a moral question, not a logical one. So a horseman being a vegetarian for animal welfare reasons is as logical or illogical as a farmer saying he takes good care of his livestock.

Daydream Believer
Jan. 21, 2009, 06:44 PM
I have " grass fed beef " there on grass or forage until 750 lbs after that they can have all the corn we want to give them. "

Why feed them corn? Doesn't it have something to do with marbling the meat with fat? My understanding is that grass fed beef not finished on corn is a healthier leaner meat for people to eat..maybe doesn't taste as good as fat tastes good to people...but it's better for us.

Obviously a cow at a feedlot being fed corn is not eating grass. Maybe they get some hay or silage...I don't know but I have read up on how they are fed so much corn to fatten up fast that it can cause them to have major health problems.

S1969
Jan. 21, 2009, 06:44 PM
Grass fed beef is fed corn, just on grass pastures, not in a feedlot.
Ask County, he is one of those producers, I think.
Pure grass fed beef would have yellow fat and be generally considerably tougher and taste different than corn fed beef. That is why it is mostly used for grinding and spiced well to cook it, not steaks.


My beef producer's website says "100% grass fed" on pasture, hay, and haylage. I will have to ask whether he feeds corn at all. I will say that the meat does taste different than grocery store beef; it is dryer and less fatty, for sure. I don't really eat steaks often so I haven't bought any of his steaks but I will have to buy one just to try it.

JSwan, what you are describing is what I'm talking about when I say it's naive to say "consumers demand XYX". It's not appropriate to suggest that consumer demand is the reason for our food production trends [sure, some of it is], but also the fact that there are obvious barriers to entry in the market - regulations that can only be adhered to by large-scale operations - and producers that are so large they flood the market with products so cheaply that they DO affect the market, again making it nearly impossible for smaller producers to compete.

Maybe consumers really do like the taste of corn-fed beef, but it's not fair to say that their personal choices are driving the market. I am quite sure you CAN'T buy "grass-fed" (or grass fed and corn finished) in a supermarket in my area. If they are selling it here, they aren't marketing it that way....which suggests to me that they aren't selling it here (because I've looked!)

cbv
Jan. 21, 2009, 06:55 PM
I meant in my remarks to acknowledge you are exactly right -- it is a huge problem -- I never meant to imply it is not, just mentioned that one can sometimes find such products which I thought a good thing and some people try to support those growers. I didn't think that was a bad thing or meant to imply that farmer's markets were likely to solve the entrenched problem.

And I do know of Joel Salatin -- he is featured in the book I mentioned -- as are those very issues you raise, which is why I mentioned it and thought you specifically might enjoy reading the book. And that is one reason I try to do what little I can to support individuals trying to do what he does. The folks I mentioned that sell in Richmond are, I believe, similar to his set up (perhaps they are imposters importing from out of state but I have read about them in an article that featured Joel and other small producers like him and have visited their website).

Never meant to imply my actions would solve all the problems of the farm to plate issues. And you are absolutely right that my little contribution won't keep anyone afloat including Ukrops or Walmart -- and I suppose cause my little bit doesn't contribute alot to their bottom line I can just go elsewhere and stop recommending them to others that do buy the range of their products including beef and chicken -- although they are nice folks and I might ask them their views on that very issue.

Anyway that really wasn't the point of my post ( and who knows what it started out to be) -- I got off on a tangent responding to issues you raised which I agree are a problem and sympathize with -- was actually trying to find common ground.

Bluey
Jan. 21, 2009, 07:00 PM
Why feed them corn? Doesn't it have something to do with marbling the meat with fat? My understanding is that grass fed beef not finished on corn is a healthier leaner meat for people to eat..maybe doesn't taste as good as fat tastes good to people...but it's better for us.

Obviously a cow at a feedlot being fed corn is not eating grass. Maybe they get some hay or silage...I don't know but I have read up on how they are fed so much corn to fatten up fast that it can cause them to have major health problems.


If you eat a big, fatty steak every day, it would be bad for you.:eek:
If you eat meat of all kinds in moderation, no, a reasonably sized, excellent quality steak those few times here and there won't be "bad" for your health, plus will give you many vitamins and minerals you don't generally get as readily available.:)

county
Jan. 21, 2009, 07:06 PM
Theres " grass fed " and theres " grass raised " beef and theres " grass backgrouded beef " they all mean something different in how there fed. Unless it says 100% grass or 100% forage then the animal has had corn at some point.

Why feed corn? Money and taste. Corn as someone mentioned puts marbling on the animal which is fat and makes the meat tender. Most people when tested which they like the taste of better choose the beef with fat. Is it more healthy? No bottom line is its no, bottom line is its cheaper. The american consumer in most cases has always chosen price over what best for you. Theres a reason the cheapest place to buy a hamburger is Mc Donalds they use the lowest grade beef there is. Think rejected dairy cattle for the most part.

Its also cheaper to feed corn over grass or forage. To 100% grass or forage feed all the beef we raise would require literally millions and millions more acres of grass land then is now used. Plus theres virtually no part of the country that has prime grass year round. So if your not going to have grass and you want only forage fed beef you have to feed the best hay you can get. I hear alot of people complain about hay prices how high you think there will go when you have to compete with 100 million head of cattle eating hay not corn?

S1969
Jan. 21, 2009, 07:13 PM
The american consumer in most cases has always chosen price over what best for you. Theres a reason the cheapest place to buy a hamburger is Mc Donalds they use the lowest grade beef there is. Think rejected dairy cattle for the most part.

I agree, although McDonalds deliberately targets the people at the lowest socioeconomic levels. What is really sad about this fact is that it is bad for farmers and consumers! Who is it good for?? McDonald's, Walmart, Target....

I always get depressed when I get in discussions like this.

Daydream Believer
Jan. 21, 2009, 07:13 PM
Bluey,

I get what you are saying but I'm not sure I'm buying that the fatty feedlot steak doesn't come without a price.

From Eatwild.com comparing grass fed meat to confinement operation products.

From http://eatwild.com/basics.html

More Nutritious. A major benefit of raising animals on pasture is that their products are healthier for you. For example, compared with feedlot meat, meat from grass-fed beef, bison, lamb and goats has less total fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, and calories. It also has more vitamin E, beta-carotene, vitamin C, and a number of health-promoting fats, including omega-3 fatty acids and “conjugated linoleic acid,” or CLA (http://eatwild.com/cla.html). Read more about the nutritional benefits of raising animals on pasture. (http://eatwild.com/healthbenefits.htm)

Unnatural Diets. Animals raised in factory farms are given diets designed to boost their productivity and lower costs. The main ingredients are genetically modified grain and soy that are kept at artificially low prices by government subsidies. To further cut costs, the feed may also contain “by-product feedstuff” such as municipal garbage, stale pastry, chicken feathers, and candy. Until 1997, U.S. cattle were also being fed meat that had been trimmed from other cattle, in effect turning herbivores into carnivores. This unnatural practice is believed to be the underlying cause of BSE or “mad cow disease.”

Animal Stress. A high-grain diet can cause physical problems for ruminants—cud-chewing animals such as cattle, dairy cows, goats, bison, and sheep. Ruminants are designed to eat fibrous grasses, plants, and shrubs—not starchy, low-fiber grain. When they are switched from pasture to grain, they can become afflicted with a number of disorders, including a common but painful condition called “subacute acidosis.” Cattle with subacute acidosis kick at their bellies, go off their feed, and eat dirt. To prevent more serious and sometimes fatal reactions, the animals are given chemical additives along with a constant, low-level dose of antibiotics. Some of these antibiotics are the same ones used in human medicine. When medications are overused in the feedlots, bacteria become resistant to them. When people become infected with these new, disease-resistant bacteria, there are fewer medications available to treat them.

Another interesting study comparing supermarket beef to grass fed.

http://eatwild.com/ReadMore34.htm


JSwan...what products do you offer? Do you have a website? PM if you'd rather. I'm interested in that sort of products. :)

JSwan
Jan. 21, 2009, 07:19 PM
I apologize. I did not mean to pick on your post at all. It's just very frustrating to do small scale farming in this state.

No offense was taken, and I meant none. :)

I think it's great when people support the small farmer, and I'm thrilled that you are supporting the farmers in your area.

It's just a darn shame. I bet most of the people at that market are like the small farmers here. It's a part time business done on the side; often after retirement from a "real" job. Or if it's a full time business, they didn't make their money farming. They made it elsewhere and decided to get into farming. (there are a lot of those here) it can be a smart move tax wise.

Other than reducing our own population, I really see no clear answer. The UN is decrying the loss of rural communities, as language, folklore and histories are disappearing. As the community disappears, the health of the surrounding ecosystem suffers. So we need to preserve rural communities, including agriculture, to preserve the gene pool of domestic animals, diversified crops, preserve language, customs, folklore, etc.

Then we turn around and engage in practices designed to consolidate humans into mega cities, and homogenize agriculture to the point that the entire world is relying upon only a few strains of wheat and other grains, and a few species and breeds of livestock.

I don't know about you - but it just makes me shake my head. Diversity in plants and animals are crucial to the survival of any species... including humans.

For some reason we keep seeing ourselves as separate and apart from the rest of the natural world. But humans have requirements for their health and welfare just like any other species. Shoving us all into synthetic clothes, jammed packed into synthetic urban oases, and fed a monoculture diet of texturized proteins grown in vats sounds like something out of a really bad scifi movie.

And yet... that seems to be where we're headed as a species. I hope I don't live to see it. :no:


Daydream Believer - thank you for inquiring. I am selling herd shares, but I'm afraid it's probably not doable for you. Due to regulatory and insurance requirements I cannot transport or ship by mail, and you must deal with the local slaughterhouse directly. So you'd have to drive here and pick it up.

However, if you are interested in herd shares I'd be happy to help you find someone local! There's so much agriculture down you're way I'm sure there are farmers offering that. That eatwild site is great.

Disclaimer - hey mods -please don't consider this advertising - I'm not and wouldn't use the BB for that purpose.

What county and bluey are saying about corn is spot on. The pig I raised, 100% grass fed and finished, does not taste anything like supermarket pork. (especially since he ate a LOT of acorns)

A lot of people really do not like the taste of grass fed and finished. You even have to cook it differently. It can be really tough and dry, and you have to adjust the recipes, cooking time and temp. With pork you still have to cook to 160, but it can come out looking like shoe leather.






I meant in my remarks to acknowledge you are exactly right -- it is a huge problem -- I never meant to imply it is not, just mentioned that one can sometimes find such products which I thought a good thing and some people try to support those growers. I didn't think that was a bad thing or meant to imply that farmer's markets were likely to solve the enrenched problem.

Anyway that really wasn't the point of my post -- I got off on a tangent cause of your posts -- was actually trying to find common ground.

Daydream Believer
Jan. 21, 2009, 07:20 PM
T
Its also cheaper to feed corn over grass or forage. To 100% grass or forage feed all the beef we raise would require literally millions and millions more acres of grass land then is now used. Plus theres virtually no part of the country that has prime grass year round. So if your not going to have grass and you want only forage fed beef you have to feed the best hay you can get. I hear alot of people complain about hay prices how high you think there will go when you have to compete with 100 million head of cattle eating hay not corn?

Thanks for your answer. I bought some local beef grass fed and finished on cottonseed last Fall. Danged if it isn't the most fat meat I've ever bought. Too much fat for me...I'll be seeking out a source of grass fed/finished beef going forward. Buying from a supermarket is out of the questions...I won't touch beef from those sources. Eating out once in a great while, yes...but not knowingly buying it from feedlots/comfinement operations.

On your comment on the hay versus corn...If the demand for corn to feed cows went down and demand for hay went up (assuming farmers fed hay to cows instead of corn) wouldn't it balance out at some point? Less corn would be grown and instead the farmers would put in hay. A bit simplistic but it's basic market supply and demand economics.

Daydream Believer
Jan. 21, 2009, 07:23 PM
Other than reducing our own population, I really see no clear answer. The UN is decrying the loss of rural communities, as language, folklore and histories are disappearing. As the community disappears, the health of the surrounding ecosystem suffers. So we need to preserve rural communities, including agriculture, to preserve the gene pool of domestic animals, diversified crops, preserve language, customs, folklore, etc.

Then we turn around and engage in practices designed to consolidate humans into mega cities, and homogenize agriculture to the point that the entire world is relying upon only a few strains of wheat and other grains, and a few species and breeds of livestock.

I don't know about you - but it just makes me shake my head. Diversity in plants and animals are crucial to the survival of any species... including humans.

For some reason we keep seeing ourselves as separate and apart from the rest of the natural world. But humans have requirements for their health and welfare just like any other species. Shoving us all into synthetic clothes, jammed packed into synthetic urban oases, and fed a monoculture diet of texturized proteins grown in vats sounds like something out of a really bad scifi movie.

And yet... that seems to be where we're headed as a species. I hope I don't live to see it. :no:

Amen, Amen, Amen.

"There's something wrong in the world today, the lightbulb's getting dim" Aerosmith from Living On The Edge.

cbv
Jan. 21, 2009, 07:41 PM
My head swims every day trying to find clues to solve the very problems you raise. Although I work in Richmond I live in a very rural farming community, I both study and teach ecosystem science, I spend most of my spring and summer out on Va's tidal rivers collecting data -- I see the best and the worst -- and I work with amazing folks on every side of the education, research, and management issues.

The only sure thing is how complex the issues and how even more complex and seemingly impossible to craft solutions.

county
Jan. 21, 2009, 08:25 PM
DB, to a point there would be some more hay put into production and less corn but IMO not a great deal. One reason is the gov. programs favor grain growers as far as payments. Another reason is labor and machinery costs. The labor needed for hay production especially small squares is much more then grain crops. With grain one person my age and even much older today can handle 1000's of acres by himself. With hay production its tough to operate with 1 person plus if your on a larger scale you have a huge investment in equpment. While you certainly have a big investment in grain also that equipment can be used for virtually all grain type crops. Also you can buy federal crop insurance for a failed grain crop.

JSwan
Jan. 21, 2009, 08:49 PM
I both study and teach ecosystem science, I spend most of my spring and summer out on Va's tidal rivers collecting data -- I see the best and the worst -- and I work with amazing folks on every side of the education, research, and management issues.


Before I dropped out of society I worked in conservation (Development) I'm an edumacated redneck. This means I use a coaster for my Budweiser so I don't leave rings on my mama's good furniture. :D

Monitoring conservation easements and working with ranchers in Montana is one of my fondest memories, as was being serenaded by a drunk cowboy blowing "Love Me Tender" on his Elk bugle. Ahhhh... youth....

I mentioned the UN in a prior post - no doubt you're familiar with what I'm referring to. Recent issues of SEED magazine had several articles devoted to the subject (albeit from a purely academic perspective). I think you can access the articles free on-line. If you like I can post a link to a few of them.

Sorry to stray from a the vegetarian perspective - but I think vegetarians and vegans may share many of the same concerns.

I enjoy reading county's posts, and the posts of many other full-time farmers. My family has slowly gotten out of farming; now only a few cousins are farmers and their adult children are not interested. I have a small acreage and only do it part-time - it's a much different "world" than full timers or those with large holdings.

Daydream Believer
Jan. 21, 2009, 08:54 PM
County,

That is very interesting. I did not realize much of that about labor and equipment investments. Interesting too that you can't buy insurance for hay but you can for grain. How whacked out is that?

tkhawk
Jan. 21, 2009, 08:57 PM
Other than reducing our own population, I really see no clear answer. The UN is decrying the loss of rural communities, as language, folklore and histories are disappearing. As the community disappears, the health of the surrounding ecosystem suffers. So we need to preserve rural communities, including agriculture, to preserve the gene pool of domestic animals, diversified crops, preserve language, customs, folklore, etc.
.

That is true. When I was kid growing up in India, we had zebu cattle. These are very tough-extremely disease resistant-the humped ones. No one ever vaccinated them-they just lived for ever. Milk production wasn't that great-but people valued the males more as oxen. There were several sub varieties. They tolerate the heat, insects very well and my grandfather recalled that rarely would you ever hear of a cow or an oxen being sick. They even exported them to Australia and brazil for the toughness. Then tractors came and males lost value. To increase milk, the govt bought in friesians, jerseys and even ayrshires through A.I. Milk production soared-but so did costs. You had to vaccinate them, they were not suitable for the heat and needed protection from the insects, weather, diseases, pretty much everything. Their life span is also much lesser. but they produce a lot of milk. Before we had a lot of sub breeds in different areas-now wherever you go, it is mixes of these and it takes a lot to keep them going in that weather.

Yes about everything tasting the same here. Growing up in India, every restaurant tasted different. You go to a diff town, cuisine everything changed. Rarely would you come across anything that taste the same. When I first came to the U.S, I was astounded when I drove from FL to CA. The same franchise really tasted the same throughout. Now of course the same thing is happening in India. In the old days, they had a multitude of seeds. Each village would have different types of rice, corn-so when you ate them, it tasted a little different than your neighbour's. Since those were the days before pesticides, they were naturally resistant. You just ploughed, sowed them and then spread your manure and some other compost and that was it. But sometimes each field's crop would taste different. Now the multinational companies pretty much have a monopoly even over there and it is beginning to resemble agriculture here-uniformity, high yields-but just bland...

Bluey
Jan. 21, 2009, 09:05 PM
---"Now the multinational ompanies pretty much have a monopoly even over there and it is beginning to resemble agriculture here-uniformity, high yields-but just bland..."---

Yes, but the much larger yields lets them feed the growing population and freed many from farming to other work.

That is how civilizations move forward, when they can provide more and better for their citizens, so more can have a higher standard of living, more become other than basic laborers all their lives.:yes:

Don't they have a seed reservoir? Most countries do, so they can classify and preserve all those old seed lines.

tkhawk
Jan. 21, 2009, 09:30 PM
That is true, the yield wether it is in crops or milk has gone up tremendously.
Those zebu cows would give you two or three litres of milk a day . A good western cow can give upto 20 even 25 lites per day(it is litres over there)

Same ratios with grain/rice-yield per acre has grown up tremedously.In some years they actually have a surplus of some types of grain -no mean feat considering India has a billion people. but the unique taste is gone.

Hmm not sure about a seed reservoir-but if it exists, it is not like the ones here. See it is a very decentralized country. It is more close to the European model-each state has its own language and history dating back millenia. So it is not like here. So a lot of the stuff is lost- the federal govt is not as involved and the state govt is more worried about starvation and not preserving genetic diversity. It is changing now as it is becoming more affluent. But we do have organizations that are equivalant of the USDA-but they have no teeth and most farmers never even heard of them. The reason everybody switched to the multinational grain/seeds is the yields. Nobody forced them-it is a choice..

equinelaundry
Jan. 21, 2009, 09:53 PM
A lot of people really do not like the taste of grass fed and finished. You even have to cook it differently. It can be really tough and dry, and you have to adjust the recipes, cooking time and temp. With pork you still have to cook to 160, but it can come out looking like shoe leather.

How do you cook Kevin's bacon?!! Bacon is the only grass-fed/finished meat that I can't tolerate. It also happens to be one of my favorites. I have a certified humane source and it's fabulous - from the window it's no nitrates, etc. and when packaged contains nitrates, etc. Do you think that makes a difference in addition to grass-fed?

JSwan
Jan. 21, 2009, 10:07 PM
Hi EL! Have you started getting your seed catalogs yet????? I can't wait until spring!

I'm afraid I can't answer your question. Kevin tastes....... delicious. Especially the bacon.

BUT. He's not very fatty. In the case of the bacon, it can turn into cardboard in seconds if the burner is too hot.

Long slow cooking is the key with grass fed and finished. There's just not that much marbleing as county and others pointed out. So it can really be dry.

The only other difference I can think of is that Kevin ate a LOT of acorns. Acorns do impart a very unique taste to pork, and that might also be a factor. If you've ever had prosciutto (pancetta) - that is made from pigs finished on acorns. You also cook that in a slack oven - under 300 degrees.

I didn't plant to really finish him on acorns, we just had a bumper crop and I've got lots of hickory trees and oaks on my place. He also had hay when the grass died back in the winter. But nothing really special. He ate everything that wasn't nailed down.



How do you cook Kevin's bacon?!! Bacon is the only grass-fed/finished meat that I can't tolerate. It also happens to be one of my favorites. I have a certified humane source and it's fabulous - from the window it's no nitrates, etc. and when packaged contains nitrates, etc. Do you think that makes a difference in addition to grass-fed?

equinelaundry
Jan. 21, 2009, 10:34 PM
I'm scared of seeds JSwan!! I'm thinking I may take the easy way out and do starters but not quite sure yet. Love the book you recommended though and know there was a thread a few days ago about gardening that I'm going to bump up.... family, who farm hundreds of acres of corn, can't tell me how to do a simple set-up for sweet corn.:eek:

I'd like to hear your composting ideas now that I have horse, goat and chicken poo to turn into black gold. What breed did you choose for your meat birds? I'll dig out some grocery receipts but it sure seems like a huge difference in price when it comes to chicken breasts! I'd do herd share in a minute but too much meat for just the 2 of us.

For the vegetarians.........do you use veggie based make-up, shampoos, etc? I'm a huge fan of Alba Organics skin & hair stuff. Thanks to the flu and County's info on horse in Mt. Dew I conquered that. Love jello but get a little icked out over the ingredients.

tle
Jan. 22, 2009, 09:24 AM
Trying desperately to catch up but wanted to say...

I LOVE true grass fed beef!! Not corn fed... not corn finished, but GRASS FED all along. It's the way the cows are supposed to be fed and once you get used to the taste, you'll have a hard time with corn fed beef. Oh and the fat is better for you too.

Ok... back to catching up on reading (I'm only on page 3).

county
Jan. 22, 2009, 09:35 AM
A huge amount depends on the grass thats fed. I'll bet the farm if you eat beef from poorly managed grass lands your not going to want it. Or grass fed during a drought, never fertilized, not rotated pastures, etc. Good grass fed beef is delicious but theres WAY WAY more to it then kicking cattle out in a pasture and it takes a great deal of land. Grass fed for the entire nation let alone export? You better annex Can. into the U.S. then get rid of 1/2 the people from both countries.

equinelaundry
Jan. 22, 2009, 09:41 AM
Trying desperately to catch up but wanted to say...

I LOVE true grass fed beef!! Not corn fed... not corn finished, but GRASS FED all along. It's the way the cows are supposed to be fed and once you get used to the taste, you'll have a hard time with corn fed beef. Oh and the fat is better for you too.

Ok... back to catching up on reading (I'm only on page 3).

Hey there! You're in my neck of the woods - where do you buy your meat?
I get mine from DLM, an organic farmer up in Yorkshire, OH across from my MIL or Dale Filbrun in W. Alex. His organic eggs go for ~$5.dz but I can stock up on beef & chicken & organic chicken food for well under $100 for the 2 of us. Do you know who supplies the rabbits at DLM? I don't eat them but they seem to be a big seller!

tle
Jan. 22, 2009, 09:41 AM
---"Now the multinational ompanies pretty much have a monopoly even over there and it is beginning to resemble agriculture here-uniformity, high yields-but just bland..."---

Yes, but the much larger yields lets them feed the growing population and freed many from farming to other work.

That is how civilizations move forward, when they can provide more and better for their citizens, so more can have a higher standard of living, more become other than basic laborers all their lives.:yes:

I don't know... a civilization "moves forward" by removing people from nature and turning nature into something unnatural that in the end makes people sick (ie: obesity, diabetes)... that's progress to be proud of?

:(

That's why we're looking at moving to a farm next year. We've already started with a small garden, have our cow and goat shares in place, make a lot of our own foods (ie: sauerkraut, jams, jerky, veggie soup and chicken broth), buy grassfed cow whenever we can... and now I have us started in rabbits (both for us and for feeding the dogs). Expansion has to wait for the farm (chickens, etc.) but we're looking forward to it. Due to food allergies and sensitivities... the type that cause things like celiac, autoimmune disorders, autism spectrum disorders, etc.... we believe that food really is important... not jsut what but the quality of what. Mega-super-monoculture farms and humongous feed lots are essentially what's destroying this country... not what's moving it forward.

Oh, and did anyone read the article (NYTimes I think) a few weeks back that Michael Pollan (author of Omnivore's Dilemma) wrote "to the new president" regarding our food supply? The one thing that stuck with me is that if a terrorist wanted to harm a large portion of our population it would be easy... just hit one of the few large meat processing plants. How many THOUSANDS of hamburgers go out of one of those DAILY?

tle
Jan. 22, 2009, 09:47 AM
Hey there! You're in my neck of the woods - where do you buy your meat?
I get mine from DLM, an organic farmer up in Yorkshire, OH across from my MIL or Dale Filbrun in W. Alex. His organic eggs go for ~$5.dz but I can stock up on beef & chicken & organic chicken food for well under $100 for the 2 of us. Do you know who supplies the rabbits at DLM? I don't eat them but they seem to be a big seller!


Hey You!! We used to hit DLM for a lot of the meat, but it's so expensive for the 5 of us. We do get some from one of the vendors at the 2nd Street Market (Eat Food for Life)... as well as we get most of our eggs from him and have our cow/goat share arranged through him though the cow lady is in Germantown. NOTHING beats fresh raw jersey cow milk!!! We do still hit DLM for some things depending on sales and such... and I think we hit some Kroger for their better stuff (Laura's ground beef for example). Don't know who supplies the rabbit for DLM. Once I get up and going enough to have a steady supply, I may have to find out ... who knows... could be me at some point! :-) Right now we have started with our own -- although it's been a tough winter and I've "lost" (one way or another) all 3 litters so far. I have a 4th expected next week although the doe was nest building this morning (a couple days early but I gave her a nestbox anyway). Anyway, rabbit is amazingly healthy! Per calorie, per fat... lowest of any other meat, including chicken. We have 1 in the freezer now and hubby will be processing another as soon as he's home AND it's relatively warm... and I can't wait! Both were older so I'm thinking stew or chili.

almost forgot... we've picked up as much as half a cow from a farmer up near Wapakoneta in the past and had wanted to try the farmer just over on Rt 4 this year but no funds and (almost more important) no freezer space. We SO need a 2nd deep freeze. Between what we make in soups and such on a weekly basis and what I want space for the dog food... we're out of room already!

tkhawk
Jan. 22, 2009, 09:54 AM
You do lose a lot of the uniqueness when you have big farms. But for our poplation, we just don't have a choice.
I remember growing up, one of my grandpa's cows used to produce milk that tasted very good. All of us kids would fight to get the milk from that cow. Generally over there people only had 2 or 3 cows. So it could be separated. I don't know if it had extra fat or what, but it just tasted so good. But once it gets all mixed in, milk just tastes the same no matter where you buy it. Same thing with grain, there is such a variation in taste-but now a lot of the stuff is just homogenized.

But nobody is starving and we even have a surplus-so it is better in that aspect..

Bluey
Jan. 22, 2009, 09:56 AM
I don't know... a civilization "moves forward" by removing people from nature and turning nature into something unnatural that in the end makes people sick (ie: obesity, diabetes)... that's progress to be proud of?

:(

That's why we're looking at moving to a farm next year. We've already started with a small garden, have our cow and goat shares in place, make a lot of our own foods (ie: sauerkraut, jams, jerky, veggie soup and chicken broth), buy grassfed cow whenever we can... and now I have us started in rabbits (both for us and for feeding the dogs). Expansion has to wait for the farm (chickens, etc.) but we're looking forward to it. Due to food allergies and sensitivities... the type that cause things like celiac, autoimmune disorders, autism spectrum disorders, etc.... we believe that food really is important... not jsut what but the quality of what. Mega-super-monoculture farms and humongous feed lots are essentially what's destroying this country... not what's moving it forward.

Oh, and did anyone read the article (NYTimes I think) a few weeks back that Michael Pollan (author of Omnivore's Dilemma) wrote "to the new president" regarding our food supply? The one thing that stuck with me is that if a terrorist wanted to harm a large portion of our population it would be easy... just hit one of the few large meat processing plants. How many THOUSANDS of hamburgers go out of one of those DAILY?

Well, if you want to live like that, fine, but why obligate all those that rather buy their food and have other services provided by the society they live in?

If societies didn't have, as we do today, 2% providing food for the rest of the 98%, that then can do other than substinence living, there would be many, many unhappy people.

You think living off the land is easy? How young are you, what will you and your family do if you or some of them get sick, handicapped, just plain old?
Who will be your doctor and nurses, who will provide all you may need in supplies so you can have a good quality of life if all have to spend their time trying to produce enough, one person at the time, to have what we need?

That is like asking that we close all factories, because of course it is terrible that people have to spend all those hours a day in an assembly line and now each mechanic that feels like it can make a car from scratch and sell it.
I doubt that we would ever have had enough cars for people to get around under that system.;)

Societies do much more than provide the basics when they can have division of labor.
Asking that people now take a part of their time and energy to provide for themselves sounds utopian, fuzzy and warm, but life is really not like that and many don't really want to provide for themselves like so many other of us like or at least don't mind.

More and more kids today are growing up loving to work only with their minds.
Physical work is not what they want from life and it is their right also to have a world as they like.
Those of us that like to work directly with our hands, in physical ways, as long as we can, should not demand that the whole world do so, just because we think is good.

TinkerBells
Jan. 22, 2009, 10:08 AM
I am not talking about any one kind of raising of animals, if you don't agree with that, work to change it.
I am talking in general, people that won't eat any meat, even if that means they miss some important part of their diet in some nutrients that they can't hardly get from any other sources, on a flimsy reason and single cases, like the crated hogs, but then do go ahead and use horses, that all know also fall in the hands of abusers of all kinds.

If you want to say all are abusers no matter what they do with animals and I won't eat any animal products or use them, then I would think it is logical that people that feel like that, IN GENERAL, would not be using HORSES either, as we do USE them.
It is not in the best interest of horses to be raised, confined, trained and ridden, if you really look at this only from the horse's side.:confused:

Bluey, there are other ways to get the nutrition that comes from meat. You get protein from things like legumes, nuts, peanut butter, soy, etc ...

If you drink milk you can drink soy milk. It's very good.

You eat many vegetables that are high in vitamins.

For any other vitamin/mineral concerns take a multi-vitamin.

This is just a small breakdown of how a vegan gets their nutrition.

I have my blood tested annually, and my doctor has never had a concern that I was missing anything nutritionally.

tle
Jan. 22, 2009, 10:18 AM
Well, if you want to live like that, fine, but why obligate all those that rather buy their food and have other services provided by the society they live in?

If societies didn't have, as we do today, 2% providing food for the rest of the 98%, that then can do other than substinence living, there would be many, many unhappy people.

You think living off the land is easy? How young are you, what will you and your family do if you or some of them get sick, handicapped, just plain old?
Who will be your doctor and nurses, who will provide all you may need in supplies so you can have a good quality of life if all have to spend their time trying to produce enough, one person at the time, to have what we need?

That is like asking that we close all factories, because of course it is terrible that people have to spend all those hours a day in an assembly line and now each mechanic that feels like it can make a car from scratch and sell it.
I doubt that we would ever have had enough cars for people to get around under that system.;)

Societies do much more than provide the basics when they can have division of labor.
Asking that people now take a part of their time and energy to provide for themselves sounds utopian, fuzzy and warm, but life is really not like that and many don't really want to provide for themselves like so many other of us like or at least don't mind.

More and more kids today are growing up loving to work only with their minds.
Physical work is not what they want from life and it is their right also to have a world as they like.
Those of us that like to work directly with our hands, in physical ways, as long as we can, should not demand that the whole world do so, just because we think is good.

My point is that by combining everything into huge monoculture farms and feedlots, we actually ENDANGERING the population. Recalls for contaminants anyone? I'm not saying having everyone farm is the answer, but I don't think what we have now is the answer either because of the physical dangers that our current process of making food is causing. Obesity? Diabetes? Autism spectrum disorders? Celiac? Thyroid problems? Heart disease? Rheumatoid arthritis? We are killing ourselves because we're so "good" at making so much food.

As for it being the "right" of kids to have a world as they like... where did you get that? Kids have a right to work hard to CREATE a life they want to lead. But I certainly don't want to leave them a world that is slowly killing them because they don't want to go outside and do a little weeding in teh garden. I know that's boiling it down to simplistic but really... a right?... that's beyond proposterous.

And as for my family... do we think its' easy? DUH! We're all reasonably intelligent people... please don't think we're stupid and are jumping into this with our eyes all rosey colored. This has been a dream of ours (individually and collectively) for a long time. Not everyone is cut out for farming and yes society needs those who don't farm to do other things. But the government, through subsidies, has ENDORSED huge monoculture farms (please watch several documentaries on teh subject, most recently "King Corn") at the expense of small farms. As JSwan noted, they make it HARD to IMPOSSIBLE for small farms to make a profit because of regulations imposed on them the same as the large monoculture farms. That is NOT in the best interest of the public.

S1969
Jan. 22, 2009, 10:19 AM
I'd love to hear what the the larger farmers here think about Michael Pollan's book (The Omnivore's Dilemma) or his audio podcasts: http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/a-list/2007w52/msg00025.htm. He suggests, in a nutshell and I'm not doing his argument justice in one sentence...that the market is being driven by the corn processors and is skewed by USDA farmer subsidies; farmers can't afford to produce anything other than soybeans and corn, but they are making less and less growing these anyway. So it's not that "we can't possibly feed our population" if we grew hay instead of corn; but that factory farms are a product of cheap corn as animal food, not the other way around.

I have read this book as well as others and want to maintain a critical comparison -- are these things really true, or is this a skewed version of reality? But I haven't found anything specifically refuting what he is saying.

I'm not sure I believe "there is no other way" to feed our society besides factory farms or expecting everyone to become a subsistence farmer. I do think that it would be hard to change the system that is in place...but I don't think that it is impossible.

TinkerBells
Jan. 22, 2009, 10:20 AM
I have been a vegetarian for about 35 years. I grew up in a household where we had meat and veggies. When I went to college, my roomates decided to be vegetarians, so I was forced into it in a way.

I had great roomate cooks, and enjoyed not eating meat. When I came home, I found I didn't like the taste of meat at all. So, I chose to eat for most of my life, no other mammal. Lately, due to the reports on poultry abuse at slaughter plants, I decided, no chicken either.

I have many friends who raise their own pigs, beef, poultry. Some are very good at it, including the slaughter, others are reprehensible, and I find it disgusting that their thought of care and slaughter is not a consideration. They don't think the animal feels pain or suffering.

Now, as far as my keeping horses...well, yes, I do ride, and drive, etc. I don't think my horses suffer for being kept in stalls at night in the blasting cold air. In fact, I think my horses are very well cared for.
I don't think half the US population thinks I should set my horses free either.

I do try to not use leather as much as possible. I won't buy a car with leather seats, etc. I really do try and be mindful, but I also indulge in leather shoes. I am not perfect, but I do try to think about how my actions affect others, including animals.

Do I think I am being hypocritical? No, I think I live pretty ethically and with attention to how much impact I am making on my property, the earth, etc. I am very careful about the impact my horses have on the soil, sub surface water, et.

But, I chose not to eat meat after reading about a feed company that put herbicide in the grain of dairy cows and many folks became sick from the exposure. This was an old Ron Howard movie based on a true story. Later, I moved into the direction of animal welfare as I became increasingly aware of the factory farming and conditions most animals are kept in.

I do not begrudge anyone from eating meat...I also grew up in a hunting family, and yes, it may be odd for someone to walk into my house and see a deer head if they know me on a superficial surface.
I just expect and hope anyone who does eat meat to be respectful of its source and its treatment in life and in slaughter.

So, to sum up my response, I do not feel any oxymoron or hypocracy in being a vegetarian and a person who enjoys using her horses. I also don't feel bad about having a deer head on the wall. Now, if I shot it, well, then I think that might be different, yet I think some of the best advocates for animal welfare and conservancy are hunters. Its my dad who instilled my philosophy, he taught me the absolute responsibility of an animal welfare's is our responsibility as a human, yet, would go out and shoot Bambi or any other animal. However, he was intolerant of those who shot to shoot, and not to kill or who did not take care of their animals.

I think it has made me more tolerant of other people's lifestyles...as long as they are respectful of how they take a life.

AMEN ! Well said!

TinkerBells
Jan. 22, 2009, 10:24 AM
I have seriously considered becoming a vegetarian in the past. I do believe that meat is healthy and I love the taste but my problem is how SOME livestock are raised and more importantly slaughtered BUT since I have a leather saddle, leather seats in my truck and so on I feel that if I became a vegetarian for the reasons above that I would be a VERY big hippocrite. What I have tried to do now is only eat meat that I know was raised and slaughtered humanely. I buy my beef from a gentlemen down the road who doesn't use hormones and the cattle are out roaming on pasture their whole lives. When it is time to be slaughtered a butcher comes and puts a bullet in it's head. To me all this is humane and the meat is safe.

Even being a vegan, I have no problem with other people eating meat or other livestock products as long as it is done responsibly. I have no problem with livestock being raised for meat if it is done in the above fashion. Personally, I just have no desire to eat meat or the other products of the industry.

Bluey
Jan. 22, 2009, 10:25 AM
Bluey, there are other ways to get the nutrition that comes from meat. You get protein from things like legumes, nuts, peanut butter, soy, etc ...

If you drink milk you can drink soy milk. It's very good.

You eat many vegetables that are high in vitamins.

For any other vitamin/mineral concerns take a multi-vitamin.

This is just a small breakdown of how a vegan gets their nutrition.

I have my blood tested annually, and my doctor has never had a concern that I was missing anything nutritionally.

Glad to know that how you eat agrees with you.:)

Proteins are made of amionoacids and that aminoacid profile will fit in human nutrition in certain ways.
There are some proteins that we would have to eat some vegetables by the pound to get enough of those proteins to do us good, when a few onces of meat provides them.

The same with some vitamins and minerals.
As long as today's vegetarians do their home work and are careful to balance their diet properly with supplements when needed, adults can do fine, even if it is cumbersome and not ideal.

For a growing human, being a vegetarian is not good enough, too risky, sorry.

Again, what each one of us needs really depends on each person, what they like and how their body is processing what they eat.

We aer in general very resilient and can make do with much that makes sense and some that doesn't, with little harm.
Not all that smoke get lung cancer.;)

Eclectic Horseman
Jan. 22, 2009, 10:41 AM
I haven't read any of the other responses.

I have not eaten meat or poultry since 1981. (I am not a vegan or a vegetarian since I eat dairy and seafood.)

When asked why I do not eat meat, I always answer with a famous quote known as Plutarch's Question:

“You ask me why I refuse to eat flesh. I, for my part, am astonished that you can put in your mouth the corpse of a dead animal, astonished that you do not find it nasty to chew hacked flesh and swallow the juices of death wounds.”


I don't see how this has any bearing on my use of animals for work, recreation or sport, do you?

tkhawk
Jan. 22, 2009, 10:47 AM
Hmm nutritionally I don't know. The science of it I don't know-I can only go by my experience. When I was growing up, we were the only meat eating family among our relatives. When they came over, we had to cook in separate dishes, because they didn't want to touch the same dishes!:)

A lot of them were that strict. The kids were fine and in those days the adults were actually working. When my mom was just hitting adult hood, electricity hit the villages. It is a somewhat dry area, so they had to irrigate the fields using wells. They had a contraption with a pulley and a giant bucket like thing and would hitch oxen to them. All night long they would go back and forth-dump it in the well, fill with water ,pull it up and dump the water intot he canals. Everything was hard , physical labour. Children started work very early-by their teens they were considered to be pretty much close to an adult.
All this on a purely vegetarian diet. Milk of course-but not even eggs. Now the vegetarian diet over there is different that what is available here. For the most part, despite the physical labour they did fine. Once western medicine came in, the disease levels-to those who could afford western medicine-is somewhat similar to here.

Of course now all that is changing-people are not cooking(I shouldn't complain as I don't cook:winkgrin:) and there is an epidemic of processed foods and obesity and meat eating is becoming more common. But growing up, I knew a majority of the whole village would be vegetarian -or if they ate meat, once in a blue moon , as it was so expensive- and did just fine. But again the diet there is very different than the vegetarians here and dairy products-milk, ghee, butter-were a staple. So I don't know if that makes a difference.

Bluey
Jan. 22, 2009, 10:47 AM
I haven't read any of the other responses.

I have not eaten meat or poultry since 1981. (I am not a vegan or a vegetarian since I eat dairy and seafood.)

When asked why I do not eat meat, I always answer with a famous quote known as Plutarch's Question:

“You ask me why I refuse to eat flesh. I, for my part, am astonished that you can put in your mouth the corpse of a dead animal, astonished that you do not find it nasty to chew hacked flesh and swallow the juices of death wounds.”


I don't see how this has any bearing on my use of animals for work, recreation or sport, do you?

Yes, if you just don't like to eat meat, that makes sense not to eat any.
Some people love grasshoppers, I rather not eat them and there is very little I won't eat.:yes:
I grew up with little to eat, so you learn to eat whatever you can get your hands on, no place to be choosy.;)

It is those that don't want to eat meat because we breed, raise and eventually slaughter animals for the many products we get from them, that I question why they still then use animals, as there is a fine line from one use to another, when it comes to any animal use, as the animal rights people keep reminding us.:)
As someone explained already, they do what they can, don't feel they have to be that strict with their actions.

Seems that there are more than vegetarians that only eat vegetables, so there may be some confusion from that.
When we add other than vegetables, like milk, butter, fish, "rarely meat" etc., we really are not talking surviving on vegetables only any more.

county
Jan. 22, 2009, 10:56 AM
I've never seen the big deal if someone doesn't eat meat but uses leather or other products whats the big deal? I love beef steak but don't like beef heart at all, no different if someone likes cow leather but not beef steak.

Bluey
Jan. 22, 2009, 10:59 AM
I've never seen the big deal if someone doesn't eat meat but uses leather or other products whats the big deal? I love beef steak but don't like beef heart at all, no different if someone likes cow leather but not beef steak.

You are right, that is not a big deal and none of anyone's business what someone else likes, really.;)

I was questioning those that don't want to eat meat because of animal rights concerns, but still will use animals when it is convenient for what they want.
That is what was puzzling to me, but has been answered already, see my post right above.:yes:

S1969
Jan. 22, 2009, 11:07 AM
Hmm nutritionally I don't know. The science of it I don't know-I can only go by my experience. When I was growing up, we were the only meat eating family among our relatives. When they came over, we had to cook in separate dishes, because they didn't want to touch the same dishes!:)

A lot of them were that strict. The kids were fine and in those days the adults were actually working. When my mom was just hitting adult hood, electricity hit the villages. It is a somewhat dry area, so they had to irrigate the fields using wells. They had a contraption with a pulley and a giant bucket like thing and would hitch oxen to them. All night long they would go back and forth-dump it in the well, fill with water ,pull it up and dump the water intot he canals. Everything was hard , physical labour. Children started work very early-by their teens they were considered to be pretty much close to an adult.
All this on a purely vegetarian diet. Milk of course-but not even eggs. Now the vegetarian diet over there is different that what is available here. For the most part, despite the physical labour they did fine. Once western medicine came in, the disease levels-to those who could afford western medicine-is somewhat similar to here.

Of course now all that is changing-people are not cooking(I shouldn't complain as I don't cook:winkgrin:) and there is an epidemic of processed foods and obesity and meat eating is becoming more common. But growing up, I knew a majority of the whole village would be vegetarian -or if they ate meat, once in a blue moon , as it was so expensive- and did just fine. But again the diet there is very different than the vegetarians here and dairy products-milk, ghee, butter-were a staple. So I don't know if that makes a difference.

I think in that sense of vegetarian, it is very natural and probably quite healthy. My sense from Indian and many other Asian foods is that they eat a great deal of bean dishes [in fact I can't even find many of the beans used in my Indian cookbook] as a staple in their diets so their protein needs are more likely being met without supplement. Americans don't eat a diet very high in legumes, in my opinion. If a diet were rich in legumes, dairy, and maybe eggs, as well as a variety of good vegetable sources [meaning the carrots and celery with your wings don't really count!] I would expect it would be very healthy.

I think that many people don't eat a good diet at all...vegetarian or otherwise, and more likely than not the missing items aren't because they don't eat a variety good vegetable sources. I also think that because processed soy foods are readily available in our grocery stores, people may eat them without really considering whether their nutritional needs are being met. I'm not sure that a Tofu-dog in a bun is really a *good* source of protein if it were compared to a lentil/bean meal or to eggs/meat, etc. And certainly the iceberg lettuce and hard, sour orange tomato in January don't really count as vegetables, either.

Just my opinion. No data on this but I do know that my kids are considered bizarre because they claim their favorite vegetable to be broccoli and would rather eat spinach than corn. And I don't think they are all that daring or adventurous. But apparently compared to most, they are.

Pennyhill
Jan. 22, 2009, 11:16 AM
its simple, really.

Meat makes me throw up, so I don't eat it.

Horses don't make me throw up, so I ride them.

:D

Cielo Azure
Jan. 22, 2009, 11:49 AM
For a growing human, being a vegetarian is not good enough, too risky, sorry.


Because all the BILLIONS of vegetarians in India, China and other Asian countries clearly having been risking the lives of their children for thousands of years... All those Hindus families that have not eaten meat for how manu hundreds of years, also taking a huge risk.

All those Seventh Day Adentist vegetarian children who have grown up to have the longest life spans in the USA, with data tracking having been done on them now for generations. Clearly taking a huge risk.

Get real.

Bluey, your postings on this subject show such major lack of clear headed thinking and they show such a significant bias, I don't know even where to begin. I think the books you read on this subject must be dated by at least twenty years (along the lines of vegetarians must eat all 20 amino acids at the same time each day -who remembers that pile of ___)?

Again, let me reiterate VEGETARIAN does not equal VEGAN. Vegan children are at risk. I think even most vegans agree on this. Vegetarian children are not.

What you write is offense and wrong.

Trixie
Jan. 22, 2009, 11:57 AM
For a growing human, being a vegetarian is not good enough, too risky, sorry.

Again, what each one of us needs really depends on each person, what they like and how their body is processing what they eat.

I don't think that's true. I've been a vegetarian since I was nine or thereabout. You may not *choose* to raise your children vegetarian, but some of us have done perfectly fine. Some articles on the subject:

http://www.downtoearth.org/articles/veggie_kid.htm

http://kidshealth.org/parent/nutrition_fit/nutrition/vegetarianism.html

http://www.llli.org/NB/NBJulAug00p131.html

mbm
Jan. 22, 2009, 12:03 PM
i didnt read thru the entire thread... but i did want to post my experience.

i am a veg and have been for oh..... 20+ years now. and believe me - once i started thinking about it - i couldnt find any reason to support riding horses. so of course i have a very hard time riding and have a very uneasy agreement with myself over it.

not a very comfortable place to be and sometimes i wish i hadn't had this moral awakening.

Eclectic Horseman
Jan. 22, 2009, 01:42 PM
i didnt read thru the entire thread... but i did want to post my experience.

i am a veg and have been for oh..... 20+ years now. and believe me - once i started thinking about it - i couldnt find any reason to support riding horses. so of course i have a very hard time riding and have a very uneasy agreement with myself over it.

not a very comfortable place to be and sometimes i wish i hadn't had this moral awakening.

Wow. Do you work for a living? Do you expect your kids to do the same? Then why not animals?

Personally, I wonder whether if there is no use for animals (such as those in the wild) then will they all become extinct through neglect and habitat destruction? We are losing species every day....

mbm
Jan. 22, 2009, 01:58 PM
well but i have free choice. horses do not. so, like i said - i have an uneasy truce with my conscience - as long as they horse seems to be fine and happy in the work then i am fairly ok with it. it is when a horse starts protesting and saying they dont like it that i have issues.

and believe it or not - i did stop riding for a few years because of how i feel.... but i did chance my POV enough to ride and train as long as the horse is on board and walking up to me when they know it is work time.

Eclectic Horseman
Jan. 22, 2009, 02:03 PM
well but i have free choice. horses do not. so, like i said - i have an uneasy truce with my conscience - as long as they horse seems to be fine and happy in the work then i am fairly ok with it. it is when a horse starts protesting and saying they dont like it that i have issues.

and believe it or not - i did stop riding for a few years because of how i feel.... but i did chance my POV enough to ride and train as long as the horse is on board and walking up to me when they know it is work time.

I still think you may be a little hard on yourself, but I agree that I don't take any pleasure in riding horses that are sore or sour. But I think it is part of my job as a rider/trainer to keep the horse happy. :yes: My favorites come when they are called even when they know that they are going to work.

Daydream Believer
Jan. 22, 2009, 02:05 PM
My point is that by combining everything into huge monoculture farms and feedlots, we actually ENDANGERING the population. Recalls for contaminants anyone? I'm not saying having everyone farm is the answer, but I don't think what we have now is the answer either because of the physical dangers that our current process of making food is causing. Obesity? Diabetes? Autism spectrum disorders? Celiac? Thyroid problems? Heart disease? Rheumatoid arthritis? We are killing ourselves because we're so "good" at making so much food.



Celiac's Disease is genetic...I know I have it. I cannot digest Wheat in any form. Untreated it can lead to a myriad of autoimmune complications ranging from IBS to Chrons Disease to Rheumatoid Arthritis. I do think however that fact that wheat gluten is added in so many forms to processed food, it makes someone who would normally only be mildly affected have much more trouble as there is hardly anything you can safely eat unless you make it yourself. Bread even has gluten added to make it rise better! MSG is added as a flavor enhancer to almost everything from beef jerky to potato chips.

Thyroid problems seem more related to the increasing amount of goitrogenic substances in our environment like pesticides, toxins and even the food we eat. A major culprit is soy for thyroid damage. No warnings on the label with soy but it's been well problem to be a goitrogen.

ellemayo
Jan. 22, 2009, 02:07 PM
Because all the BILLIONS of vegetarians in India, China and other Asian countries clearly having been risking the lives of their children for thousands of years... All those Hindus families that have not eaten meat for how manu hundreds of years, also taking a huge risk.

All those Seventh Day Adentist vegetarian children who have grown up to have the longest life spans in the USA, with data tracking having been done on them now for generations. Clearly taking a huge risk.

Get real.


Thank you for this. I was just about to post my thoughts. I haven't read through all of the posts... it seems to me that the OP began this discussion as a question of the hypocrisy of claiming that eating meat is unethical while owning pets and riding horses.

I'm not going to get into that, but I did notice that there have been many comments made saying that vegetarian children aren't getting enough nutrients. And I believe that Bluey made the comment that "not everyone who smokes dies from it" or something like that.
Yeah, that's true, but you're making quite a leap there, comparing that to vegetarian children. How many vegetarian children have you known in your lifetime who have died from nutrient deficiencies? How many have you heard of?

And I'm not talking about children in third world countries here, I'm talking about children who are taken care of and get plenty of food, and just don't eat meat.

How many?

I'm one of those Seventh Day Adventist children who grew up not eating meat. Probably about half of all the people I know don't eat meat. And I have never known anyone who has had problems because of it.

In a 12 year study done in California of vegetarian Adventist men and women against other California residents, the vegetarian women were found to have a life expectancy 6.1 years longer, and the men 9.5 years.
In fact, Loma Linda California, where just about half of the population is Seventh Day Adventist, and the majority of those people are vegetarian, has been sited by National Geographic as being one of three places in the world where people live unusually long lives.

So please, give me an example of someone you know who died because of
nutrient deficiencies due to vegetarianism.

And please, don't get me started on the medical problems that are caused by consumption of meat and dairy. I could go on for days.

danceronice
Jan. 22, 2009, 02:11 PM
VEGETARIAN is one thing. (Even then, there is some risk to having a lot of soy--I can't have too much for the same reason I can't take estrogen birth control--the hormones are the same and it puts me at risk for blood clots.) If you include eggs and dairy, it is possible to raise a healthy child without feeding them animal flesh (aside: "vegetarians" in Asia frequently eat fish, which, I don't care how you lable it, is not vegetarianism but omnivorism in denial.)

VEGAN is not a good diet for children in particular or anyone in general. Again: our bodies evolved to be ominivores. We have vitamins and minerals our bodies absorb best from animal protein sources. We are at a scientific point where we can artificially add it, but that adds expense and effort. And it doesn't always work--iron is poorly absorbed from vegetable sources, and most readily-available iron pills don't absorb well either. (My haematologist only prescribes one very specific brand because of this.)

Personally, I would like to be able to buy "humane" meat. However, I can't afford it. It is not an expense I'm willing to incur. For the same reason I don't buy bison or other 'rare' meats. If I'm ever rich enough to raise my own food, maybe that'll change (though I would definitely have to SEND animals to slaughter--I don't think I could raise it then pull the trigger.)

tle
Jan. 22, 2009, 02:29 PM
Celiac's Disease is genetic...I know I have it. I cannot digest Wheat in any form. Untreated it can lead to a myriad of autoimmune complications ranging from IBS to Chrons Disease to Rheumatoid Arthritis. I do think however that fact that wheat gluten is added in so many forms to processed food, it makes someone who would normally only be mildly affected have much more trouble as there is hardly anything you can safely eat unless you make it yourself. Bread even has gluten added to make it rise better! MSG is added as a flavor enhancer to almost everything from beef jerky to potato chips.

Thyroid problems seem more related to the increasing amount of goitrogenic substances in our environment like pesticides, toxins and even the food we eat. A major culprit is soy for thyroid damage. No warnings on the label with soy but it's been well problem to be a goitrogen.

I think I posted earlier about a study I read once that showed a link between how someone processed certain foods and whether or not their GRANDPARENTS had suffered a feast or famine at a specific time in their lives (I think 12-13 years old, but don't quote me). It was fascinating and I would love to cite the study but it's been so long I can't remember.... just the overall idea has stuck with me. Between that study and the fact that SO many diseases, including Celiac, are on the rise... AND happening younger and younger... I believe there IS a hard link between diet and genetics. That not only are our food choices having a cummulative effect on our bodies, but that they are passed on genetically to our children. Think about it -- we now have the 3rd generation growing up that will be raised on microwaves and fast food.... on high fructose corn syrup and gluten in damn near EVERYTHING! I'm sorry but that HAS to cause an issue somewhere. So while I see your point about Celiac being "genetic" I believe there is a food consumption link that plays a part in the genetics. Although I definitely agree with your assessment of the food supply not being kind to those who may be predisposed to the issue.

I have family members who have a wide range of issues -- from actual MD diagnosed issues (Hashimoto's thyroid issues) to undiagnosed but easily seen (auspergers, IBS, celiac, depression and RA for example). ALL of them are being helped by a change in diet. Not a simple change but a DRASTIC one -- they no longer eat processed foods pretty much of any kind (only recently able to tolerate stuff like Chipotle or a local pizzaria that uses natural ingredients - and then only in small amounts). No HFCS or sugar period - only small amounts of honey. Certain veggies and fruits are out due to their nutritional contents - apples and berries for instance. Only home-made yogurt made from unpasteurized cow and goat milk. No cow dairy otherwise. NO gluten or grains really (including rice). Foods like nuts are soaked first. Lots of GOOD fat (including coconut oil, natural lard and sunflower oils). I've seen the difference it makes... as well as how strict you have to be and how long it takes. but it took a borderline auspergers child with CHRONIC diarrhea til the day before he turned 5 and turned him into a sweet, creative albeit sometimes rambunctious little boy who no longer has bowel issues. It took a 33 year old mother of 2 from 45 pounds overweight, depressed, moody with diagnosed Hashimoto's and chronic LIMPING from RA ... to a vibrant, "normal" person who lost 60 pounds in a year and can dance around a fire again with no limping. Both cases were "cured" with FOOD changes and absolutely no medications (although they did take digestive enzymes for a while and still take some extra vitamins).

Yeah... I really believe food is the answer. As soon as I get over this cold I have (and thus regain somethign resembling willpower over comfort foods and my sugar addiction), I'll be on the road to a healthier me. ;-)

poltroon
Jan. 22, 2009, 03:09 PM
When compared with the synthetic substitutes, leather is not inherently "bad". At least it breaks down and was natural to begin with! And it's a renewable resource, unlike whatever-it-is synthetic stuff is made from. :eek:

I would add that even if you're worried about animal deaths, that the energy and petroleum required to make synthetic tack materials will incidentally cause some death and destruction. Synthetic tack does not last as long as leather tack, either. And leather is a byproduct, meaning that cows aren't killed for the leather. Indeed, you can use leather from a cow that dies of old age (in theory). Given all that, I think choosing leather can be perfectly responsible even if your primary concern is animal welfare.

We each make our choices. We choose to eat some animals and not others, to keep some animals and not others. We don't all have to make the same choices for them to be good choices.

Bluey
Jan. 22, 2009, 04:27 PM
i didnt read thru the entire thread... but i did want to post my experience.

i am a veg and have been for oh..... 20+ years now. and believe me - once i started thinking about it - i couldnt find any reason to support riding horses. so of course i have a very hard time riding and have a very uneasy agreement with myself over it.

not a very comfortable place to be and sometimes i wish i hadn't had this moral awakening.

I am glad someone else didn't think I am being goofy asking this question.

You see, I had those some questions that I had to answer for myself many, many years ago, almost 40.
I eventually decided that, even if it is sad that we use animals in some ways, that animals, although most of very advanced species, are not completely humanlike in the way we are and can think and know themselves and the world around them in the depth we can.
We did use and are still using them, as the animals they are and that is sad in many ways, but ok after all.

At that time, I was living in a dorm with three others and they told me I had long discussion with myself, loudly, about this, in my sleep.:rolleyes:

I later understood the place we all have in this world and decided that we as humans can and should and is ethical that we use animals in so many ways we do.

Again, there is the sticky question of what is proper use and what is abuse, but that is not what the basic question here is.

Seems that many have not yet thought about this in depth, or confronted it as the sad little demon that question should be for all of us that live, care and, yes, use animals.
Even those vegetarians do use animals, if they live in today's world, in many products they don't even know are available to them, with animal derived products in them.
Animal products are very pervasive and very hard to avoid, even in medication carriers and all other kinds of products.

Could we have what we have today without any use of animals at all?
Yes, I expect we could, although a total change to other kinds of sources would require new technologies, retooling and some we may just have to do without, as with our whole horse industry.

I will still think that anyone that has animals in their lives in whatever manner they do and then wants to throw stones at others that also use animals should first look in the mirror, before judging others too harshly.

Some questions have many hues of gray for answers, others are rather black and white.
You are pregnant or you are not.;)
If you use animals in any way and enjoy the life a society that uses them provides for you, I doubt that you can deny that others should use them and feel very righteous about it.

As for vegetarians, it seems that they too use some animal products, they just don't consider them animal products, only meats are such for them, so that answer my question there.:)

Highflyer
Jan. 22, 2009, 05:26 PM
Without reading through the thread--one good reason to keep riding horses is that, if they are not popularly used for meat and they are not working animals, they are not going to be around long as a species.

equineartworks
Jan. 22, 2009, 05:47 PM
I do believe eating meat is personal decision. We live a mostly vegetarian life but do eat meat now and then. I judge no one, nor do I expect to be judged. I have a very simply philosophy when it comes to food, chiefly "meat".

If I don't personally know it, or didn't grow it...I don't eat it.

My chicken, duck, beef and pork comes from about 2 miles down the road. The animals craze on organically managed pasture and eat organic feed from a local mill. They aren't genetically engineered creatures either, they are heritage breeds. The kinds most all farms had prior to the 60's and 70's. Eggs come from my backyard chickens.

Basically I can visit my food anytime I like. I know the butcher and I know how he handles the meats for processing. Some of the herbs I grow here are used in his seasonings.

So yes, I eat meat. But I also respect and understand each and every step of that animals life and no part of that animal is wasted either. They are treated with with care and compassion right to the end of their days and their end is also humane and without fear or stress. Do I feel guilt for eating it...no...because I know it was raised well and care for with respect.

Daydream Believer
Jan. 22, 2009, 06:50 PM
I think I posted earlier about a study I read once that showed a link between how someone processed certain foods and whether or not their GRANDPARENTS had suffered a feast or famine at a specific time in their lives (I think 12-13 years old, but don't quote me). It was fascinating and I would love to cite the study but it's been so long I can't remember.... just the overall idea has stuck with me. Between that study and the fact that SO many diseases, including Celiac, are on the rise... AND happening younger and younger... I believe there IS a hard link between diet and genetics. That not only are our food choices having a cummulative effect on our bodies, but that they are passed on genetically to our children. Think about it -- we now have the 3rd generation growing up that will be raised on microwaves and fast food.... on high fructose corn syrup and gluten in damn near EVERYTHING! I'm sorry but that HAS to cause an issue somewhere. So while I see your point about Celiac being "genetic" I believe there is a food consumption link that plays a part in the genetics. Although I definitely agree with your assessment of the food supply not being kind to those who may be predisposed to the issue.



I 100% agree with you! Seriously I hope I did not come across otherwise. Celiac's I think is on the rise because of all the hidden and added gluten into everything from gravies to sauces to seasonings to salad dressings...OMG...I can go on and on. I think it overwhelms the system with so much gluten that a gene that might have stayed dormant turns on. I personally in my little circle of acquaintances know 5 other people diagnosed with Celiacs now and its supposed to be rare??? Studies show as many as 1 in 300 people carry the gene. I have to buy special Millet bread and pasta and read every single label. Since I have gone gluten free...I feel SO MUCH better...truly a new lease on life. NO more IBS or misery and I do feel huge amounts better.

Interestingly I am much more affected by it than my Mother who I inherited it from. She has made it thru life with no more than a tendency to be bloated/gassy at times and no where near the severity of symptoms I had. Possibly a difference in how we were raised and the foods we ate? She grew up on a farm with their own cow and raising their own meat and veggies. I grew up with a working Mom eating a lot of prepared foods like Hamburger Helper, canned foods, and all that stuff that came along in the 60's that made life "easier" for Mom's to cook. That addition of all the preservatives, MSG, corn syrup, soy (I include that as in the forms we Westerners eat it, it is a recent addition to our diets unlike traditional Asian forms. Soy Milk and cheese and all these meat replacers are not traditional forms of soy but made from high processed ingredients and not necessarily good for us) and many others too numerous to mention.

The stuff that is added to our food is truly frightening if you take the time to really learn what it can do to our health and that of our children. Today parents will often put their kids on Ritalin before they try a dietary fix like removing sugar and corn syrup from their kids diets. The medical practitioners (with insurance companies dictating what they can and can't do for testing to some degree also) that push a "treat the symptoms" type of care rather than insist you fix your diet and lifestyle are to blame also. Honestly though a large part of the blame needs to be on the people who want a fast easy fix...a pill to take to feel better and want to continue eating trashy empty processed foods.

danceronice
Jan. 22, 2009, 07:08 PM
Uh, again..corn syrup IS sugar. Fructose is still sugar. It's just not sucrose. There is nothing inhernetly wrong with it except that people like sweetness and so food manufacturers put it in everything because it's cheaper than using cane or beet sugar. It makes you fat because if you take in more fructose or glucose than you burn it gets stored as fat. Eat less overall and you can have it just fine.

I would be more worried about artificial dyes. Seriously--food does not need to be blue or bright red if that's not the color the ingredients are in their raw state. I don't buy that kids won't eat it unless it's weird shapes or colors. Sheesh, in my house it was a treat if we got to sprinkle sugar on Cheerios. Or Mom actually bought a sweet cereal that wasn't Honey Nut Cheerios. (As a rule she didn't.) When kids get hungry enough they'll eat what you give them. It doesn't have to be neon green.

S1969
Jan. 22, 2009, 08:32 PM
Uh, again..corn syrup IS sugar. Fructose is still sugar. It's just not sucrose. There is nothing inhernetly wrong with it except that people like sweetness and so food manufacturers put it in everything because it's cheaper than using cane or beet sugar. It makes you fat because if you take in more fructose or glucose than you burn it gets stored as fat. Eat less overall and you can have it just fine.

Yes, but high fructose corn syrup is in everything and people don't realize. They think they are doing the right thing by buying Cheerios and not buying Coco Puffs, but most people don't realize how much HFCS is in "healthy foods" like whole wheat bread, fruit juice, crackers, salad dressing, granola, ketchup, pickles, etc. There are some claims that HCFS is not processed by our bodies in the same manner as cane sugar, and that it is more easily stored...hence one argument for rising obesity in our country.

And yes, why does everything have to have dye in it? I tried to buy hot peppers the other day and most of them had yellow dye in them. WTF? :mad:

Frank B
Jan. 22, 2009, 09:05 PM
http://www.deergear.com/prodinfo.asp?number=5330

'Nuff said.

tle
Jan. 22, 2009, 10:42 PM
Let's not forget that sugar is ADDICTIVE.... HIGHLY addictive. One book I read compared it to heroin. So the more there is in food, the more we ingest... the more addiction it creates, the more we want more. Vicious cycle. Why else would EVERYTHING we eat "need" to be sweet?? Why else would sugar need to be in things like bread?

So we have a culture where people rely on processed foods (and easy so-called "fixes")... processed foods containing addictive substances... substances that have a cumulative affect on our health and our future generations... and people wonder why the health of our nation is in such crappy shape!

Bluey
Jan. 23, 2009, 07:01 AM
Let's not forget that sugar is ADDICTIVE.... HIGHLY addictive. One book I read compared it to heroin. So the more there is in food, the more we ingest... the more addiction it creates, the more we want more. Vicious cycle. Why else would EVERYTHING we eat "need" to be sweet?? Why else would sugar need to be in things like bread?

So we have a culture where people rely on processed foods (and easy so-called "fixes")... processed foods containing addictive substances... substances that have a cumulative affect on our health and our future generations... and people wonder why the health of our nation is in such crappy shape!

I doubt that you could consider sugar addictive, other than a very rare case.
Many animals, including humans, have taste buds that will recognice different types of tastes, sweet one of them, but I would not call that being addictive at all.

Addictive:

In medical terminology, addiction is a state in which the body relies on a substance for normal functioning and develops physical dependence. When this substance is suddenly removed, it will cause withdrawal, a characteristic set of signs and symptoms.

Whoever told you sugar is addictive was stretching the definition of addictive a little bit too much, I think.;)

Daydream Believer
Jan. 23, 2009, 08:56 AM
Try giving up all sugar/corn syrup and related compounds Bluey and get back to me on whether you agree it's addictive or not! I just did! I was half out of my mind with cravings for sugary and starchy foods for about 3 days, nauseous, headachey and miserable. (I'm low carbing at the moment for dieting). Get past that three day mark and suddenly you no longer want it. If that isn't addiction, I don't know what is!

Bluey
Jan. 23, 2009, 09:22 AM
Try giving up all sugar/corn syrup and related compounds Bluey and get back to me on whether you agree it's addictive or not! I just did! I was half out of my mind with cravings for sugary and starchy foods for about 3 days, nauseous, headachey and miserable. (I'm low carbing at the moment for dieting). Get past that three day mark and suddenly you no longer want it. If that isn't addiction, I don't know what is!

I don't eat much with any sugar in it, so can't say, but there were some studies when the hype was that kids would get hyperactive on sugar and they could not find any substance to that.

When you change your diet you may have some to get used to.
If I now start eating many beans, well, I will have some effect from that, but I would not call it because I was addicted to other I was eating before.
I understood true addiction to be to drugs or such.

tle
Jan. 23, 2009, 09:23 AM
Try giving up all sugar/corn syrup and related compounds Bluey and get back to me on whether you agree it's addictive or not! I just did! I was half out of my mind with cravings for sugary and starchy foods for about 3 days, nauseous, headachey and miserable. (I'm low carbing at the moment for dieting). Get past that three day mark and suddenly you no longer want it. If that isn't addiction, I don't know what is!

EXACTLY! Sugar IS addictive in every sense of the word.

JSwan
Jan. 23, 2009, 09:24 AM
All y'all better not be adding chocolate to the list of evil foods.

Them's fightin' words. :winkgrin:

S1969
Jan. 23, 2009, 12:58 PM
I don't eat much with any sugar in it, so can't say, but there were some studies when the hype was that kids would get hyperactive on sugar and they could not find any substance to that.

Are you sure? Unless you make most of your own foods, you may be eating a whole lotta sugar (in the form of corn syrup and high fructose corn syrup) without knowing it. We make a concerted effort to avoid it in my house, but in my own kitchen I found HFCS and/or corn syrup in: ketchup, Hershey's syrup, egg nog (hmmm...Xmas is over, that needs to go)...worcesteshire sauce, creamy horseradish sauce, whole wheat bread, barbeque sauce, plain bread crumbs, Berry Berry Cheerios, Special K, and I'm pretty sure it's in the beer (Labatts), although either I missed it or beer manufacturers don't have to itemize their ingredients?

I don't believe that kids get "hyperactive" by giving them cookies. But I do think kids' behavior and health can be altered if they are eating sugar/HFCS and processed carbs all day, every day. For one thing they have to be constipated, right??

equineartworks
Jan. 23, 2009, 01:16 PM
My DD was diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome almost 10 years ago. And back then there was so little really known about Asperger's other than that it was the "social autism". I had a friend who was very, very into natural health and clean eating and she suggested that we try to eliminate anything that came in a package. Things like snacks, breads, boxed mac n' cheese all the things that the majority of the county eat everyday and never give a thought.

First, let me preface this by saying that I live to cook. It was an easy choice for us to make. And if you read my previous post about meat and my feelings about it, you'll see that we have a very unique way of life that most do not.

I can say this, without a shadow of a doubt...our DD became a different child wihtin two months. Does she still have Asperger's? Of course, but her anxiety issues decreased dramatically which allowed therapy to become more effective. If she gets into junk food I can almost watch her change before my eyes. She gets moody, anxious, her sleep patterns are disruptive. It is like someone flipping a switch! It has made a huge difference in my MS as well.

LarkspurCO
Jan. 23, 2009, 01:22 PM
Glad to know that how you eat agrees with you.:)

Proteins are made of amionoacids and that aminoacid profile will fit in human nutrition in certain ways. There are some proteins that we would have to eat some vegetables by the pound to get enough of those proteins to do us good, when a few onces of meat provides them.

Which amino acids are you referring to specifically?

You can't compare meat and vegetable protein gram-for-gram. Meat is a complete protein and must first be broken down into individual amino acids before the body can use it. The body cannot use 100% of the meat protein. You have to consume more total grams of complete meat protein to get X grams of usable amino acids.

Consuming simpler proteins in the form of vegetables and legumes and such is more efficient, because the proteins are easier to break down, so the body actually uses a greater percentage of the amino acids compared with meat.

FatPalomino
Jan. 23, 2009, 01:39 PM
Which amino acids are you referring to specifically?

Taurine levels were found to be significantly lower in vegans than in a control group on a standard American diet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taurine Taurine is essential for feline health, as cats cannot synthesize the compound. The absence of taurine causes a cat's retina to slowly degenerate, causing eye problems and (eventually) irreversible blindness — a condition known as central retinal degeneration (CRD),[50][51] as well as hair loss and tooth decay. It was discovered in 1987 that taurine deficiency can also cause feline dilated cardiomyopathy,.[52] Unlike CRD, the condition is reversible with supplementation. Taurine is now a requirement of the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) and any dry or wet food product labeled approved by the AAFCO should have a minimum of 0.1% taurine in dry food and 0.2% in wet food.[53]

Gloria
Jan. 23, 2009, 01:41 PM
Oh come one. A person eats what he/she wants to eat. As to not eatting meat for "animal welfare"? I don't believe that a bit. Why don't they consider "vegetation welfare"? Just because those plants can't move or make noises, who say they aren't lives? huh?

Trixie
Jan. 23, 2009, 02:18 PM
Uh, actually, there ARE people that only eat fruit/veggies that fall from the tree... :winkgrin:

While I'm not entirely sure why the above poster used a reference to an amino acid in cats, taurine can be created synthetically. Further, you can add it to your diet as a vegetarian powder:

http://www.discount-body-building-supplements.com/taurine3.html

It's just a question of knowing what it is that your body actually needs.

Bluey
Jan. 23, 2009, 02:23 PM
Oh come one. A person eats what he/she wants to eat. As to not eatting meat for "animal welfare"? I don't believe that a bit. Why don't they consider "vegetation welfare"? Just because those plants can't move or make noises, who say they aren't lives? huh?

My question, as per my initial post, was in reference to the release of the poll on school kids that resulted in the figures of one in 200 calling themselves "vegetarians for animal welfare reasons".

Not knowing how that poll was conducted, I don't know how accurate it may be, but it was what led to my questions on those that would answer like that and how they felt about still using animals for other than food, like pets and horses.

Some have answered as they do what they can the way they see it and do other when convenient to what they want to do, I assume meaning that no one has to be logical about this, which is an explanation to my question.

TinkerBells
Jan. 23, 2009, 05:11 PM
Can Vegetarian Kid Get Proper Nutrition?
Protein, Nutrients Don't Have To Come From Meat
Darlene Dunn, Staff writer

Stephanie Elliot's 9-year-old daughter is a vegetarian by happenstance, she says.

"What I mean is she hates meat -- won't even try it -- so getting her to have the protein she needs in her diet is extremely challenging," Elliot says. "I would do anything for her to eat even a chicken nugget."

A new trend shows that a growing number of youth are choosing to follow a vegetarian diet. The latest figures show that 1 in 200 children is a vegetarian.

Like Elliot, many parents may have concerns about whether following a vegetarian lifestyle is appropriate for a growing child.

Tara Gidus, a registered dietitian and nutritionist, says there is no need for parents to fret. "A young person can get all of the nutrition they need with a carefully planned vegetarian diet," Gidus says.

Where To Get Protein

Gidus recommends that a source of protein is consumed at every meal, however.

"At breakfast, you could have soy milk or regular milk and some walnuts on your cereal. For lunch, you could have a bean burrito or some soy pepperoni on a salad," she says. "For dinner, (have) a veggie burger or grilled tofu."

She also encourages consuming 5 to 9 servings of fruits and vegetables and 6 or more servings of grains every day. Grains include any food made from wheat, rice, oats, cornmeal or barley.

While protein may be at forefront of most parents' minds, Gidus says it is also important that the child gets all the vitamins, minerals, amino acids and essential fatty acids that they need.

Gidus says a vegetarian diet can be unhealthy if not properly balanced.

"Many people simply cut meat out and don't replace it with vegetarian sources of proteins," she says. "Or they choose grilled cheese sandwiches, French fries, or cheese pizza frequently. Just like people who eat meat, it comes down to all choices you make in your diet to determine how healthy your diet is."

Gidus adds that vegetarians should take a B complex vitamin, because vitamin B12 is often hard for them to get.

She also says parents should make sure that young people add soy-based or legume-based foods into your diet to ensure that they get the amino acids, vitamins and minerals they may be missing with meat.

OK For Growing Bodies?

Elliot, who is also parenting editor for www.bettyconfidential, says it is OK for young people to follow a vegetarian diet if they are in general good health and have gotten clearance from a pediatrician.

Elliot's daughter gets the protein she needs through peanut butter sandwiches and milk in the mornings.

"She's healthy, thank goodness, but I do worry about her diet every single day," Elliot says.

Elliot says she believes following a vegetarian diet is healthier than one that includes meat.

"The child is most likely eliminating packaged foods and, hopefully, a lot of unnecessary sugar products that most kids eat today," Elliot says.

Additionally, it may be viewed as a "hip or cool thing to do."

"Overindulgence of meat causes clogged arteries and heart attacks -- isn't that what we've always heard? So to stop eating meat is supposed to make us feel like we're doing something good for ourselves," Elliot says.

Why, Why, Why

Elliot says there are a number of reasons, such as peer pressure, that young people choose a vegetarian lifestyle.

"Some probably do it because of their love for animals. Some do it because they are mad at their parents. Some do it because they truly do not like meat," she says. "And some do it because they have done their homework and think this is a good diet choice for them. It really depends on the age and maturity level of the person or youth who is going vegetarian."

Gidus adds that it is important for parents to be supportive of their child's decision.

"Ask them why they want to become a vegetarian and what you can do to support them," she says. "You can search for recipes together, go grocery shopping, and make meal planning a fun new family activity."

Copyright 2008, Internet Broadcasting. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
The story Can Vegetarian Kid Get Proper Nutrition? is provided by LifeWhile.

MSP
Jan. 23, 2009, 05:15 PM
My DD was diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome almost 10 years ago. And back then there was so little really known about Asperger's other than that it was the "social autism". I had a friend who was very, very into natural health and clean eating and she suggested that we try to eliminate anything that came in a package. Things like snacks, breads, boxed mac n' cheese all the things that the majority of the county eat everyday and never give a thought.

First, let me preface this by saying that I live to cook. It was an easy choice for us to make. And if you read my previous post about meat and my feelings about it, you'll see that we have a very unique way of life that most do not.

I can say this, without a shadow of a doubt...our DD became a different child wihtin two months. Does she still have Asperger's? Of course, but her anxiety issues decreased dramatically which allowed therapy to become more effective. If she gets into junk food I can almost watch her change before my eyes. She gets moody, anxious, her sleep patterns are disruptive. It is like someone flipping a switch! It has made a huge difference in my MS as well.


Diet change was a life saver for my Aspergers/ADHD son. I followed a diet change I found suggested for ADHD and it was an over night change in his behavior and capacity to focus. In the long run it was the nutritional change his body needed desperately. My son was living on basically simple carbs and milk was his only source of protein. I had him on vitamins but he would not eat meat or vegetables. I have since gotten him to eat chicken nuggets smothered in ketchup and spaghettio’s and meat balls. Here are some links for anyone interested.

http://health.msn.com/health-topics/adhd/slideshow.aspx?cp-documentid=100163625
http://health.msn.com/health-topics/adhd/articlepage.aspx?cp-documentid=100163620

http://www.disabled-world.com/artman/publish/article_352.shtml

http://www.nutraingredients.com/Research/More-support-for-omega-3-calming-ADHD-kids

My son wasn’t growing and doing very well before this diet change because of his limited diet but is doing well today. I use Muscle milk light for a protein supplement because his diet mainly consists of rice and pasta.

I am not a vegetarian or Vegan but I can get turned off by how food animals are handled. Way back when in college I swore off veal after a visit to a veal farm for my animal husbandry class, I haven’t eaten it since. And I must admit that I didn’t eat meat at all until I left Ag school! And on that note I have to post this. I found this on you tube while looking at something else the other day; this is over the top for me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nmkj5gq1cQU

TinkerBells
Jan. 23, 2009, 05:30 PM
That is just grotesque! :eek:

LarkspurCO
Jan. 23, 2009, 05:46 PM
Taurine levels were found to be significantly lower in vegans than in a control group on a standard American diet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taurine Taurine is essential for feline health, as cats cannot synthesize the compound. The absence of taurine causes a cat's retina to slowly degenerate, causing eye problems and (eventually) irreversible blindness — a condition known as central retinal degeneration (CRD),[50][51] as well as hair loss and tooth decay. It was discovered in 1987 that taurine deficiency can also cause feline dilated cardiomyopathy,.[52] Unlike CRD, the condition is reversible with supplementation. Taurine is now a requirement of the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) and any dry or wet food product labeled approved by the AAFCO should have a minimum of 0.1% taurine in dry food and 0.2% in wet food.[53]

Good thing none of my cats is vegan.

Daydream Believer
Jan. 23, 2009, 06:19 PM
Wow that cow video was repulsive. They look like HYPP QH's!

slc2
Jan. 24, 2009, 07:40 AM
Double muscling was a spontaneous mutation in cattle. Some breeders have seen it as a beneficial trait and bred to bulls that have it. It does cause a few problems. The animals are very heavy on their legs. But aside from being heavy on their legs, the animals are quite healthy, and they tend to select cattle for breeding that have strong legs and large bone. The double muscling gene causes cattle to have larger muscles. The muscles are normal, just enlarged. Clipping the hair is done to emphasize the muscles. With normal hair on them, it doesn't look quite so odd. It is very exaggerated looking, but so are very heavy hogs and turkeys with large breasts.

Dairy-beef groups are ALWAYS putting out stuff about how a vegetarian diet is bad for you. So what. They also lobbied the crap out of the powers that be to get them to DOUBLE the protein recommendations for everyone. They are playing some pretty dirty pool themselves.

Some folks seem to imagine that just because someone's a vegetarian, they are automatically against using animals, or that if they are vegetarian, they HAVE to be against using animals or they are hypocrites.

I think that's getting pretty darn silly.

I think a lot of people are 'moderate vegetarians' - they choose not to eat meat, or all kinds of meat, but they don't judge other people or beat their chests about how people use animals or leather. In fact, a lot of them aren't particularly political or fanatical at all, and they don't all run around carrying PETA signs or protesting that some people have leather belts at all.

I'm a partial vegetarian, and was complete vegetarian for a very long time, since I was about 14. I didn't do so for any fanatical or extreme political or philosophical reasons. And it has nothing to do for me or for many people, with riding, using leather or anything else.

It's just a choice I made. No, I don't go around beating my chest self righteously or accusing others of being horrible because they don't eat that way. It doesn't, or at least shouldn't threaten or piss off nearly as many people as it does.

I have NO idea why being a vegetarian gets so many people SO up in arms. After being a vegetarian on and off for most of my life, I STILL do not understand why it gets so many people so pissed off, or why they immediately have to find some grounds to attack the person on. They don't even wait for the person to open their mouth before they're on the defensive and on the attack. Y'all may firmly believe all vegetarians are this or all vegetarians are that, but they AREN'T. They just aren't. Stop generalizing, please, and stop getting so defensive, and stop trying so hard to find some way to pick on them. I've been listening to people do this for 40 years now, and I'm sick of it.

Jeez, people, RELAX! Someone not chowing on a burger is not going to threaten your way of life. RELAX! MOST people eat meat. It's not going to threaten any industry or change anything.

A lot of young folks have to find some sort of bandwagon to climb on, just because they look around at all the people in the world and feel lost and very, very non unique. Young folks are idealistic and struggle to find some way to raise themselves up. Being a vegetarian or following some idealistic cause is just their way of trying to fit into the world and make a difference, it's just their way of trying to find their place in the world. It's NOT that big of a deal.

The trouble with being a vegetarian is that it is very difficult to not eat meat - many sauces and broths in commercial food contain meat extracts, and it's actually very difficult to get enough protein without getting too much fat. There are so many ridiculous ideas about nutrition that people get into some very poor practices (veg and non veg both, frankly, have this problem), too. One REALLY has to think and research to get a broad and healthy diet if one cuts out any common ingredient. One has to research and discard a lot of misinformation.

For example, sugar is sugar. It doesn't matter if it's 'natural' or not. It may be less concentrated in an orange or a pulpy natural juice, but it's still sugar. One has to limit sugar. Carbs are carbs - people can only burn off so many carbs in their day, and above that amount, is too much. Fat is also fat, and calories are also calories. A lot of veg high protein items are also high in fat, such as nuts. Many soy products are not low in fat, actually.

And a lot of foods marketed as 'healthy' are actually very high in fat and sugar.

It takes a lot of research and time and care to get ANY good diet, but if you cut out a few common items, it actually gets harder to have a good diet.

It is VERY possible to have a wonderful, low fat vegetarian diet, and to have one that's very good for children as well. No concerns there.

But most people make the same mistakes when they 'go veg' as they do when they eat meat! Too many calories, too much fat, too much sugar. It doesn't ever really change that much.

Bluey
Jan. 24, 2009, 08:03 AM
---"Dairy-beef groups are ALWAYS putting out stuff about how a vegetarian diet is bad for you. So what. They also lobbied the crap out of the powers that be to get them to DOUBLE the protein recommendations for everyone. "---

Oh, I wonder where your perception of such comes from?
I have never seen anyone "putting out stuff about how a vegetarian diet is bad for you", as you say, much less in the dairy industry?:confused:

On the other hand, I have seen many campaigns by animal rights groups aligned with vegetarians against all kinds of use of animals, including eating meat, using all those donations that well meaning people send to them, thinking they are to help animals in abuse situations.:rolleyes:

When anyone warns against not eating a balanced diet with all nutrients in there and mentions vegetarians, it is because we have science behind it saying true vegetarian diets are very hard to balance properly and people that follow them need to be careful.

NO ONE is telling vegetarians not to eat whatever they want and skip what they don't care for, just that not eating ANY animal products comes with concerns they have to address thru supplements, or bend the vegetarian part of their diet a little and add some animal products, like so many seem to do, reading here.:yes:

Here is a page from the CDC, so people can learn how to balance proteins in their diet, one important concern with true vegetarian diets:

http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/nutrition/nutrition_for_everyone/basics/protein.htm

S1969
Jan. 24, 2009, 08:29 AM
NO ONE is telling vegetarians not to eat whatever they want and skip what they don't care for, just that not eating ANY animal products comes with concerns they have to address thru supplements, or bend the vegetarian part of their diet a little and add some animal products, like so many seem to do, reading here.:yes:

Here is a page from the CDC, so people can learn how to balance proteins in their diet, one important concern with true vegetarian diets:

http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/nutrition/nutrition_for_everyone/basics/protein.htm

This is a quote from the CDC text linked above:

What if I am a vegetarian?
Because some vegetarians avoid eating all (or most) animal foods, they must rely on plant-based sources of protein to meet their protein needs. With some planning, a vegetarian diet can easily meet the recommended protein needs of adults and children.

A point of semantics, though, I don't think *most* people who consider themselves "vegetarians" avoid "animal foods"....I think those people would more usually call themselves "vegans" and there is a very big difference, especially in meeting nutritional needs.

I have a friend who's son proclaimed himself a vegetarian at age 4, for "animal rights" issues. He has refused "animal foods" [meaning animals have to die] for 3 years in a non-vegetarian home [except the time he was forced to eat a hot dog in tears at a Kindergarten picnic when there was no vegetarian choice.] How do you argue with a child who is so devoted? Obviously he is lucky that his parents help him balance his diet, but he has been willing to learn to like foods that he would not normally have tried - soy products, bean dishes, etc. I suppose some families would tell him to "get over it" and eat meat, but I am sure he will find his own way when he is mature enough to really understand the issues involved. Personally I think he's lucky to have understanding parents, too.

slc2
Jan. 24, 2009, 09:45 AM
That is a very, very unusual thing for a small child to do in a non vegetarian household. I'd actually be a little worried about him. When a very small child refuses to eat the food common in his home, he may have anxiety problems or some very big worries. If it was my kid, I'd try to listen to him very closely and encourage him to talk about anything that's bothering him. I'd provide him with food alternatives too - it's not hard to pack a little sandwich or something to take along to a picnic. Little kids do quite often get very strong food preferences. Most of the advice is to accommodate them as long as they are overall, getting a balanced diet. My friend's 3 year old got a huge obsession with OLIVES and would eat nothing but olives for 2 weeks. She tired of them and moved on to something else! LOL, but the doc said overall she was ok, and not to worry.

Bluey
Jan. 24, 2009, 11:44 AM
In the sense of not wanting to eat animal products because animals have to die for us to use them, I think that people are being short sighted.

Animals are, amongst other, like so much else, renewable resources. Why waste them?:no:

That would be like insisting we have to live with pinworms, fleas and lice on us and crocroaches, fleas and mice in our houses because they too belong in this word.

It is good for kids to become aware of how the world works and be concerned that animals die for us to have those products.
Once mature, we should realize that there are trade-offs, that something dying so other can live is part of the very natural way this world and all here have evolved.
There is no place we would step foot that doesn't has something we step on and that has to make room for us to exist.

Now, there comes the rub, we don't need to abuse our needs and misuse all we live with in this planet.
Because of abuses, many people are forgetting that we can and should and do and have a need to use much that lives with us, including animals.

The alternatives would be to wipe humans off the earth and then leave the rest in there to eat each other, senseless as that would be, or to keep just a small number of people around, let the rest die off and so have a very restricted population, that used very few resources, controlling ourselves and our use of resources.

All that because so many today are refusing to admit that we as humans also have a right to exist and use our resources, or because many are confusing abuse, that no one is accepting anyway, that is not the problem.

Are vegetarians "for humane reasons" cutting their nose to spit their faces?
Are they living without a renewable resource humans have used for centuries, have evolved to use as a species, because they are not understanding that we are part of that cycle?
Do they live wormy, flea infested, in houses overrun with animals they don't want to bother, "for humane reasons"?
Again where is the "humane" in raising, training and using horses as we do, if we really only want to have a world without us making any demands of the animals we share our space with?
Why using horses is ok, using other animals not ok?

Is it any more inhumane to slaughter a cow than to poison rodents?

That way of selective thinking still just doesn't make sense to me.:confused:

county
Jan. 24, 2009, 12:04 PM
Guess what Sweet Pea. You don't make sense to alot of the world.

Bluey
Jan. 24, 2009, 12:13 PM
Guess what Sweet Pea. You don't make sense to alot of the world.

:lol:

My friends say that I make them think too hard.
Guess that much of the world doesn't want to think too hard.;)

county
Jan. 24, 2009, 12:15 PM
Actually you don't make people think at all that I can see. But if I were you I'd try it you'd probably find answers to alot of your questions with a little thought and a dose of common sense.

Bluey
Jan. 24, 2009, 02:23 PM
Actually you don't make people think at all that I can see. But if I were you I'd try it you'd probably find answers to alot of your questions with a little thought and a dose of common sense.

Probably so. I need to give that a try.:)
Thanks for the good advice.:yes:

slc2
Jan. 24, 2009, 03:41 PM
"Guess what Sweet Pea. You don't make sense to alot of the world."

That's an awfully rude thing to say to someone who simply has a different opinion than you do. It's also an extremely insular and small minded declaration to make as 'what makes sense' depends entirely on who your audience is at that particular moment, and at no given point in time, is your audience, 'the world', or even a very tiny percentage of it.

Bluey's point of view is probably something she and her friends are very comfortable with.

I may not agree with every point Bluey makes, but I do want to hear what she has to say, and I don't feel the need to say things like the above if someone disagrees on an issue like this. I also want the right to disagree with what she says; she's doing what all of you do - exaggerating a line of reasoning until it sounds untenable and getting high and mighty with people who disagree. No, Bluey, you don't make your friends 'think too much', you just exaggerate a position til it makes no sense and then shoot at it. But just about all of you do that.

We aren't talking here about how long does it take to get to Grand Prix dressage, or how to do a turn on the forehand. We are talking about stuff here which is a matter of opinion and lifestyle, there is no opinion that 'makes more sense'. There are opinions you like more, and opinions you like less. That's all there is.

county
Jan. 24, 2009, 05:23 PM
And my opinion is that alot of times she makes no sense.

Leftcoast.post
Jan. 24, 2009, 10:03 PM
As a practicing veggie for the last four years I have found a wonderful source of protein to replace meat in my diet. It's called Quinoa which falls into the seed/cereal category and is prepared along the same lines as rice. Quinoa offers between 12 and 18% protein and comes with a balanced set of amino acids making it a complete protein. It is also gluten free. You can find it in just about any large store with a well stocked bulk foods aisle. Bob's Red Mill if you have to but then it's quite pricey.

I chose to forgo meat in my diet as my body feels much better without it. It was a hard row to hoe with my family who LOVE their meat. Not to mention that my dad was a meatcutter/custom butcher. When I helped with the day to chores of running a meat shop, I had no problem eating meat. When my dad retired, I realized that I could no longer eat meat as I could not trust that anyone could take as much care in the raising, slaughtering and preparing of the final product.

I also have my blood tested every year and have yet to come up short on anything. I believe that with B-12, your body stores up enough to last roughly five years and that it is recommended to have your levels tested in that time span.

Eat meat or don't...just make the choice that you can live with. You don't worry about what's on my plate and I won't worry about what's on yours.

tle
Jan. 24, 2009, 10:35 PM
For example, sugar is sugar. It doesn't matter if it's 'natural' or not. It may be less concentrated in an orange or a pulpy natural juice, but it's still sugar. One has to limit sugar. Carbs are carbs - people can only burn off so many carbs in their day, and above that amount, is too much. Fat is also fat, and calories are also calories. A lot of veg high protein items are also high in fat, such as nuts. Many soy products are not low in fat, actually.

Actually... like most things, all are not created equal. Fat from a McDonald's hamburger is NOT the same as fat from a purely grassfed hamburger... or from a pat of organic butter... or a tablespoon of coconut oil. Carbs from spinach are not the same as carbs from french fries or even from an apple. In my family, we eat a LOT of fat. I don't think she tracks it anymore but when she was (to track symptoms and food correlations) her diet was about 45-50% fat. FAT is necessary. FAT is good for you IF it's good fat. Carbs are also necessary as are proteins but it's finding the RIGHT ones --- simple, quick carbs like a candy bar are obviously worse than carbs like spinach or broccoli or squash.


And a lot of foods marketed as 'healthy' are actually very high in fat and sugar.

Someone once said that if you see a label and it makes any health related claims... avoid the product. By and large, I've got to completely agree with that statement. Low in fat? Typically means high in sugar or additives. Low in carbs? high in fake crap. Nope... go for whole, natural, REAL food and you really can't go wrong -- other than eating too much... you still need to watch the amount.

JSwan
Jan. 24, 2009, 10:51 PM
Someone once said that if you see a label and it makes any health related claims... avoid the product. By and large, I've got to completely agree with that statement. Low in fat? Typically means high in sugar or additives. Low in carbs? high in fake crap. Nope... go for whole, natural, REAL food and you really can't go wrong -- other than eating too much... you still need to watch the amount.


You should have seen me in the grocery store today. I wanted a box of pasta. I've been buying the same brand for years. Plain old real italian pasta. Got a coupon for a new version - higher in protein and some other nutrient. Oh wow - lemme check this out.

So I grab a box of my regular "bad" pasta and a box of the new "healthy" pasta.

First thing I notice - box of "healthy" pasta is smaller and costs 1 1/2 times as much. But the serving size (measured in ounces) is the same so I can compare apples to apples in terms of nutritional information.

I get a little irked. Making a package smaller and using earth toned dyes on the box doesn't make a product "healthy".

Second thing I notice about the "healthy" pasta:

More calories
More fat
More carbohydrates
More sugar (listed separately)
Less fiber
More sodium

All that is different is that the product used a little bit of a legume flour in the processing. The rest is crap and they give you less and charge you more.

But it's "healthy".

Then I moved over to the cereal aisle.

I found a recipe for 6 dozen bran muffins in one of my cookbooks. Great! I make a whole bunch of real bran muffins. Yummy and healthy. The recipe calls for a few bran products.

I could not find ONE that did not have added high fructose corn syrup. Not ONE. Most had high fructose corn syrup PLUS added sugar. After spending time going over the list of ingredients it was clear that any health benefit was rendered meaningless by the amount of added sugar and chemicals.

And yet every single package had some sort of fabulous health claim on it. (the eco-friendly ones had the ubiquitous earth toned dyes on the package)

I had a conniption fit in the damn aisle. I just wanted to make a bunch of bran muffins, not go into insulin shock. :mad:

JER
Jan. 24, 2009, 11:01 PM
I think I posted earlier about a study I read once that showed a link between how someone processed certain foods and whether or not their GRANDPARENTS had suffered a feast or famine at a specific time in their lives (I think 12-13 years old, but don't quote me). It was fascinating and I would love to cite the study but it's been so long I can't remember.... just the overall idea has stuck with me.

I think you're talking about this study: Cardiovascular and diabetes mortality determined by nutrition during parents' and grandparents' slow growth period. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12404098?dopt=AbstractPlus) (Kaati G, Bygren LO, Edvinsson S., European Journal of Human Genetics, 2002 Nov;10(11):682-8.)

It is very interesting.

JSwan
Jan. 24, 2009, 11:09 PM
Wow.

Bluey
Jan. 25, 2009, 08:21 AM
---"I also want the right to disagree with what she says; she's doing what all of you do - exaggerating a line of reasoning until it sounds untenable and getting high and mighty with people who disagree. No, Bluey, you don't make your friends 'think too much', you just exaggerate a position til it makes no sense and then shoot at it. But just about all of you do that."---

Ok, I thought readers would understand that I was teasing when repeating what my friends say, also teasing about it.
The real meaning of those words "you make my head hurt, making me think too much", that is what they tell me at times, is a nice, gentle way to tell me to ease off, that I got on a high horse and we are not that serious, really.

I guess that not all have the same frames of reference, so we need to not use specific turns of phrase or we need to go thru the explanation so others understand what we meant.

As for "getting high and mighty", far from it, really, if you knew me you would be laughing silly at that thought, although you are not the first one that took my position as such, so the problem lays on my end, how I express myself, I think.

No, I really, really, can't make sense of the statement of not using animal products because of "animal welfare" concerns.

If we define animal welfare as for the welfare of the animals, something we all work to achieve, not use animals at all to achieve their welfare doesn't make sense.
If we quit using animals, we don't have to worry about their welfare, right?:)

No one wants to see abuse of anyone, humans or other animals, or for that matter anything else, any of our other many resources we have in this world that are not of animal origin.

If anyone truly is concerned about animal welfare, they will see that animals are used properly.
You don't do that by stopping use of all animal products or all other uses of our animals.

That is what animal RIGHTS proponents are wanting to promote and in doing so muddle those with the welfare of animals when using abuse, many times out of context, for their propaganda.

There are right now on TV some ads just for that, with soft, sad music and animal images to make people feel bad about the poor animals.
Something is wrong when a four year old refuses to eat animal products because of the animals, especially in a household where that is not the culture of the family.

All of us are losing the battle to keep using any animals any more, on many fronts.
Remember, most of those here are truly here because we think we humans should at least have the right to use horses.

Every one of those groups, some that, again, have positions that don't make sense when we look at the big picture, are eating away to our rights to use animals, including our horses.
Why don't we all see that?
That is what doesn't make sense to me.:no:

Daydream Believer
Jan. 25, 2009, 09:52 AM
I could not find ONE that did not have added high fructose corn syrup. Not ONE. Most had high fructose corn syrup PLUS added sugar. After spending time going over the list of ingredients it was clear that any health benefit was rendered meaningless by the amount of added sugar and chemicals.

And yet every single package had some sort of fabulous health claim on it. (the eco-friendly ones had the ubiquitous earth toned dyes on the package)

I had a conniption fit in the damn aisle. I just wanted to make a bunch of bran muffins, not go into insulin shock. :mad:


Here is a source of very good and healthy bread with NO crap additives (except soy in the low carb versions). I buy the millet for my gluten intolerance and keep it frozen until I need a new loaf but they have several other wholesome alternatives with wheat in the ingredients.

www.samisbakery.com (http://www.samisbakery.com)

S1969
Jan. 25, 2009, 10:10 AM
That is a very, very unusual thing for a small child to do in a non vegetarian household. I'd actually be a little worried about him. When a very small child refuses to eat the food common in his home, he may have anxiety problems or some very big worries.


Something is wrong when a four year old refuses to eat animal products because of the animals, especially in a household where that is not the culture of the family.

Wow, I find these responses really interesting! Perhaps I should have clarified that this is a child in a family that while they eat meat, they are a socially conscious family that makes their food and other purchases carefully. They have vegetarian friends, and talk openly about how food makes its way onto the table.

I am not sure if either of you have kids, but 4 is about the age they start to figure out what they are eating (or possibly earlier if they live on a farm)....I remember when my own dd, about that age asked "mom, when we're eating chicken is it....the same....is it a REAL chicken?" I don't think it's odd at all that a 4 year old might suddenly decide they don't want to eat meat for a while, or would start to think about it in a different way. In regards to this particular boy, a very intelligent kid and an animal lover...he asked his parents "if humans NEED to eat animals in order to live." And they said no, because humans don't need to eat animals to live. So he has remained very steadfast in his desire NOT to kill animals for food, but also because his parents are helping him do this. They have no issues with his vegetarian lifestyle as long as it's not "well, I'll eat bacon just this one time."

Now, to get to Bluey's point, however....is he hypocritical? Does he use bug spray, catch frogs and tadpoles and possibly injure/kill them in the process? Of course. He's a little boy. I think it's totally fine for a 7 year old not to make the leap from "not killing animals for food" to realizing that plowing a field for soybeans to make a tofu chicken nugget will, most definitely, kill animals in the process. That's an adult leap to make, and one I would think many vegetarians have considered...[not necessarily the soybean field, but other concepts like this]. That our actions, as humans DO impact animals and cause them harm and death in many ways. So....where do your food choices intersect the rest of your actions? It's a tough question for vegetarians and meat-eaters, I think.

I have a friend who has been a true vegetarian in every possible sense of the word for many years. She doesn't eat meat or any animal product [resulting from the death of an animal] and only buys eggs, milk & cheese from local farmer where she can be sure of the animal care. She would never put out rat poison. She would never buy leather if there were another option. To the extent possible, she tries to minimize her impact on animals and the environment (and still live a semi-normal life...yes, she drives a car because she has to get to work, etc.) I think it must be really hard to maintain this lifestyle but to her it's really important. She isn't a hypocrite; she really does believe in what she's doing.

As far as the cereal aisle JSwan....I'm with you. Sometimes I come home with hardly any food and then I'm depressed and hungry. But there was an article in a recent issue of Mother Earth News about baking bread at home and had recipes for bread dough that you would make in one big batch and then cut off pieces and cook throughout a week or so. Let me know if you're interested and I'll PM them to you.

tle
Jan. 25, 2009, 10:37 AM
I can see that happening. We have a 6 and an 8 yo here. While they haven't refused to eat anything in the last 3 years (since they started their SCD diets), I can see them questioning regarding the rabbits. But I *think* that since the family is very specific on food -- what's good for you, what's not and they've been living with eating "different" for a while (they had their version of pumpkin pie and yogurt yesterday at a cousin's b-day party instead of chocolate cake and this horribly multicolored ice cream) -- I think they understand the process. The 8yo was home yesterday and while she didn't help dad with the dispatching and processing (they aren't quite old enough for that), she did help me grind and package for the dogs. Was very helpful and interested -- she ASKED me if she could help.


As far as the cereal aisle JSwan....I'm with you. Sometimes I come home with hardly any food and then I'm depressed and hungry. But there was an article in a recent issue of Mother Earth News about baking bread at home and had recipes for bread dough that you would make in one big batch and then cut off pieces and cook throughout a week or so. Let me know if you're interested and I'll PM them to you.

I still eat bread although not much at all (and we buy spelt). In fact, i just made a batch of Banana Jam the other day (a new recipe from a book about putting up foods using honey instead of sugar). It's really good. So while I'm not JSwan... I would love the info on the bread. :)

Bluey
Jan. 25, 2009, 11:24 AM
Refined sugar, as salt is, are used for preservatives, as they are bacteriostatic.

Honey, unless processed, can have molds in it.

I used to care for the rabbits as a very little kid and didn't ever realized they were sold to the restaurant for food, until older, after I was not involved with them any more.

Boy, that would have been a shock, as they were my friends.;)
I do understand how little kids think.
I was mentioning that as how the whole society is being bombarded to eventually make us not be able to consider any use of animals adequate, including our horses.

A valid concern in today's world, I think, for what I keep seeing, hearing and reading.:no:

S1969
Jan. 25, 2009, 02:20 PM
II still eat bread although not much at all (and we buy spelt). In fact, i just made a batch of Banana Jam the other day (a new recipe from a book about putting up foods using honey instead of sugar). It's really good. So while I'm not JSwan... I would love the info on the bread. :)

Hey, I'm excited because I didn't realize I could get this article online!! I was trying to buy a copy of this magazine because my friend lent me her copy.

So...I'll post the whole article here. Very interesting and I'm hoping I can do it; my first batch was just ok but I didn't have regular yeast, just "bread machine yeast" [which I bought thinking I might actually use the bread machine someone bought me...but nope]...anyway we eat a lot of bread with two kids at home, lots of sandwiches. Lots of PB&J and I make all my own jelly/jam, too. Personally, I'd think that honey would be just fine in a jelly/jam recipes as long as you process for the proper time. Banana jam...on the other hand.....:confused: not sure that would be my thing! :)

http://www.motherearthnews.com/Real-Food/Artisan-Bread-In-Five-Minutes-A-Day.aspx

tle
Jan. 25, 2009, 06:18 PM
Thanks!

The book has quite a few good recipes for jam/jelly in it and I'm anxious to try a lot of them... including hte Wine Jelly and the Port Jelly. :-) The Banana Jam is different... but pretty darn good. A bit sweet though as the ingredient list is ripe bananas, orange juice, honey and lemon juice. Definitely don't want to eat too much at a time but it's pretty good.

MSP
Jan. 26, 2009, 09:54 AM
http://www.doctorgrandmas.com/

You can buy bulk whole grains from this site and make what you want from it. I have tried the muffin mix and the natural low cal sweetener. Both were very good.

JSwan
Jan. 26, 2009, 10:01 AM
Cool links everyone - THANKS! If my butt gets any bigger I'm going to have to put a sign on it saying, Caution - Wide Load!:lol: I don't need extra anything - much less added sugar!

Trixie
Jan. 26, 2009, 10:14 AM
That way of selective thinking still just doesn't make sense to me.

Again, that’s your world view. I think it’s equally selective to completely discount the viewpoints of others by calling their views “short sighted.”


As for "getting high and mighty", far from it, really, if you knew me you would be laughing silly at that thought, although you are not the first one that took my position as such, so the problem lays on my end, how I express myself, I think.

Personally, I’m not entirely sure that with all of your proselytizing and the rather incessant nature of your questions, that you actually want an answer. I agree with those who said that you were “exaggerating a line of reasoning until it sounds untenable and getting high and mighty with people who disagree.” I certainly think it does you no favors to repeatedly call those who disagree with you “short sighted” for their choices; that certainly doesn’t make me think you’d be willing to listen to another perspective. Maybe you need to reconsider how you express yourself and ask questions.



That is what animal RIGHTS proponents are wanting to promote and in doing so muddle those with the welfare of animals when using abuse, many times out of context, for their propaganda.

Many vegetarians disagree with the manner of which most “animal rights” groups go about promoting themselves. I think a lot of it draws away from the actual cause, because it’s “shock value” marketing. I would never donate money to PETA, because they’re incessant and don’t do much actual good. Therefore, I send my money to groups that are quietly doing good work.

However, in this culture, we’re bombarded ALL.THE.DAMN.TIME. I can’t walk outside my office without seeing ads on the damn TV in my office building elevator, walk down the street without being called upon to vote for LaRouche, lunch in the park without abortion posters going up around me, read a newspaper or watch television without ads for WALMART! TARGET! BEST BUY! CIRCUIT CITY! It’s everywhere. Personally, I’d like some damn quiet from all concerned, however, I can choose to support businesses and charities that I feel cause the least amount of chaos and harm.

I do see a difference between a healthy working animal and slaughtering animals for personal consumption. Therefore, I don’t have a problem with cared for working animals, but I choose not to eat them. For me, and for most, it’s about making decisions that we feel comfortable with. I’m not comfortable eating meat, therefore, I don’t think that it’s “cutting my nose to spite my face” if I choose not to. I’m also well aware of the fact that it’s impossible to live in this world without killing something or not using animal products at all, so I try to make my choices as sustainable as possible. I just do the best I can.

magnolia73
Jan. 26, 2009, 10:19 AM
I was mentioning that as how the whole society is being bombarded to eventually make us not be able to consider any use of animals adequate, including our horses.
Really? I think "animal rights" and vegetarians are pretty small minorities in the US. Look at Television. Do you see ads for tofu? veggie burgers? No, you see ads for meet- big beef burgers, perhaps an easy dinner that involves chicken. Maybe an ad for red lobster.

I think the bigger danger to the meat industry is food safety and lack of oversight. If anything makes the population stop eating meat, its going to be a massive food borne illness outbreak, not some actress espousing PETA.

Is my vegetarianism- for whatever reason REALLY a threat to McDonald's? We have exactly one vegetarian restaurant restaurant in Charlotte. Probably 1000's that serve meat. I believe there are 10 or so high end steak houses. 3 or 4 fried chicken chains. At least 2 restaurants where waiters carry meat on sticks around, carving off pieces for hungry diners.

I mean, I know a lot of vegetarians. One is PETA member and can't wait to come ride my horse. There was one loony bin who thought keeping cats and horses was cruel. She was mocked one day by the staff and diners at Hooters and moved to DC shortly after that. These people are pretty fringe and I don't think that they are somehow going to outperform the restaurant lobby, cattlemans, farmers to get meat or animal keeping outlawed.

Go on, eat your meat, enjoy it. And let us eat our tofurkey and let parents feed their own kids whatever.

Moderator 1
Jan. 26, 2009, 11:44 AM
Though there's some connection, this thread is a stretch, even for Around the Farm. Feel free to revisit the next OT Day.

Thanks!
Mod 1