Zebulon said:
I need to keep that in mind the next time I ask someone for evidence and they actually find some... "What? You found some evidence? Uh... Big deal! yeah, that's it!"
You didn't find some evidence. You found A opinion. And at the end of this opinion, the Dr. even pointed out that there were other doctors with a different opinion.
Zebulon said:
Oh, and our ACTUAL, biological ancestors, the chimpanzees, are ALSO OMNIVORES.
As someone else had so correctly pointed out to me, chimps aren't our ancestors. They're more like our cousins. This
website details the info Jane Goodall has collected. Of the time chimps spend obtaining food, only 1.4% of it is dedicated to getting meat. And since plants don't fight back, really the vast majority of their food intake is vegetarian. Actually, the site says it better than I can:
"So, given the vanishingly small amount of flesh actually consumed in the average chimp diet, the lack of significant nutritional input supplied by sucking the juice and not swallowing the meat itself, the fact that abundant amounts of proteins and fats are much more readily available in nuts/seeds, the presence of undigested meat in feces, the overwhelming evidence is that chimp flesh-eating is merely a SOCIAL pathology, as it is in the human. The argument that chimp flesh-eating implies that humans "should" or have a "need" for flesh is seen to be totally absurd, and absolutely insupportable by the facts."
Zebulon said:
Again with the brilliant retorts!! "What, MORE evidence? Won't even look at it." If you KNOW the problems they run into, why did you DENY there WERE any problems in a previous post?? Now I just think you're either backpedaling, or have no clue.
Your opinion of brilliant retorts is exceedingly low. I suggest you read a couple of teach's post if you want to find a good retort. Mine was merely a response. Of course a vegetarian diet can be unhealthy, just like an omnivorous one can be. If you eat nothing but white rice and margarine, you will get sick. I have never denied that unhealthy eating leads to problems. However, if a person does a little research before jumping into veganism, they will have no problem. The key is a balanced diet, as I have said before.
Zebulon said:
You got any actual links to all these ringing endorsements that everyone on the planet should be a vege/vegan? Not that I'm going to bother to look at them, and I'll just say "Big deal", of course... :mrgreen:.
If your not going to bother looking, why would I bother wasting my time to find them again? And I didn't bother looking at ONE of your sites because I already knew what it would say: "if vegans eat a unhealthy diet, they will be unhealthy".
But since I love being right:
Mayo Clinic
the American Heart Association
Cornell
the American Dietetic Association
American Academy of Pediatrics
Stanford University School of Medicine
Liverpool John Moores University in England
American Cancer Society
National Cancer Institute
USDA
Dieticians of Canada
British Nutrition Foundation
Zebulon said:
Well, since you didn't bother to read my links, then no, you probably haven't read anything about slow metabolisms. And no, nothing was said about caloric intake by my argument. Nice attempt at redirect, though. I talked about slow metabolism, which, if you actually read things, you'd know about. Just because YOU don't read it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Unless you, yourself, are at the forefront of metabolism research, I believe nothing you say. Give me ONE sorce proving a connection between veganism and low metabolism. Just one. There are none. I've looked. Making stuff up doesn't help your argument any.
Zebulon said:
You DO know, of course, that we can throw my whole analogy away and it doesn't suddenly make your shocking lack of information about your chosen lifestyle any better, right? I know this is your strongest "argument" to everything I posted, but expending all your arguments against what comes down to a turn of phrase on my part is pretty sad. To make you feel better, though, we can still argue that.
Your analogy sucked and made no sense. That's why I threw it away. That is hardly the strongest point in my argument, it just shows that you are grasping at straws. I'm sorry, expending all my arguments on your nonsensical analogy? As if I only have a certain amount of argumentative points? And between the two of us, who do you think has done more research into a vegan lifestyle? I can promise that the answer is not you.
Zebulon said:
The classification of herbivore is NOT an animal that only eats plants, unless you're referencing a 3rd grade science book. What about biological adaptation? What about digestive tract form and function? What about mandibular adaptations? Just because you "eat veggies", you are NOT a herbivore.
Our digestive tract is adapted to eat plants. Our stomach acid is 20 times weaker than animals that eat meat. In fact, the only other type of creature that has stomach acid so weak is...herbivores! Our teeth our adapted to eat plants, not tear apart raw meat. Just because you eat meat doesn't mean you are an omnivore.
Zebulon said:
Oh, and "how do you kill animals with no tools"??? You mean you don't know about every other carnivorous/omnivorous animal on the planet that does it without tools? Did tigers suddenly start using spears? Are wolves using guns now?
Sheesh!
As I have posted before. If you can chase a deer down, rip it's throat out with your teeth, shred it's hide with your claws, and eat it's still warm flesh raw, than I will believe that you are meant to eat meat. Good luck.