"Wilson Woods" vârmïnt@frèêdom.úsâ.çøm wrote in message
nk.net...
pearl wrote:
"Brian Smith" wrote in message
...

Sounds like he is cheating and may already have had one. Get him into
quarantine as soon as possible, he'll need plenty of time to recover
from eating dead animals, does he also have flatulence?

Do you work in a butchers, this would also make you seriously ill.

Good luck with the recovery.



Cheerio,

What are you harping on about! Humans have evolved to eat meat, its good for
you!


Humans have NOT 'evolved to eat meat'. It's NOT good for you!

Patently FALSE; in fact, a lie. Humans ARE
biologically and anatomically adapted to eating some
meat, and meat in reasonable quantities is VERY good
for you.

Am J Clin Nutr 1999 Sep;70(3 Suppl):532S-538S
Associations between diet and cancer, ischemic heart disease,
and all-cause mortality in non-Hispanic white California
Seventh-day Adventists.
Fraser GE. Center for Health Research and the Department of
Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Loma Linda University, CA USA.

Results associating diet with chronic disease in a cohort of 34192
California Seventh-day Adventists are summarized. Most Seventh-day
Adventists do not smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol, and there is a wide
range of dietary exposures within the population. About 50% of those
studied ate meat products 1 time/wk or not at all, and vegetarians
consumed more tomatoes, legumes, nuts, and fruit, but less coffee,
doughnuts, and eggs than did nonvegetarians. Multivariate analyses
showed significant associations between beef consumption and fatal
ischemic heart disease (IHD) in men [relative risk (RR) = 2.31 for
subjects who ate beef or =3 times/wk compared with vegetarians],
significant protective associations between nut consumption and fatal
and nonfatal IHD in both sexes (RR approximately 0.5 for subjects
who ate nuts or =5 times/wk compared with those who ate nuts
1 time/wk), and reduced risk of IHD in subjects preferring whole-grain
to white bread. The lifetime risk of IHD was reduced by approximately
31% in those who consumed nuts frequently and by 37% in male
vegetarians compared with nonvegetarians. Cancers of the colon and
prostate were significantly more likely in nonvegetarians (RR of 1.88
and 1.54, respectively), and frequent beef consumers also had higher
risk of bladder cancer. Intake of legumes was negatively associated
with risk of colon cancer in nonvegetarians and risk of pancreatic
cancer. Higher consumption of all fruit or dried fruit was associated
with lower risks of lung, prostate, and pancreatic cancers.
Cross-sectional data suggest vegetarian Seventh-day Adventists have
lower risks of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and arthritis than
nonvegetarians. Thus, among Seventh-day Adventists, vegetarians are
healthier than nonvegetarians but this cannot be ascribed only to the
absence of meat.

PMID: 10479227


No academically credentialed anthropologist or
biologist believes that humans aren't evolved as meat
eaters, and very few doctors believe that humans
shouldn't eat meat at all for good health. Yours is a
distinctly minority position based on religious faith
and politics rather than science. YOU CAN'T DO SCIENCE.

Metabolism 1997 May;46(5):530-7
Effect of a diet high in vegetables, fruit, and nuts on serum lipids.
Jenkins DJ, Popovich DG, Kendall CW, Vidgen E, Tariq N,
Ransom TP, Wolever TM, Vuksan V, Mehling CC, Boctor DL,
Bolognesi C, Huang J, Patten R.
Clinical Nutrition and Risk Factor Modification Center, Division
of Endocrinology, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

We assessed the effect of a diet high in leafy and green vegetables,
fruit, and nuts on serum lipid risk factors for cardiovascular disease.
Ten healthy volunteers (seven men and three women aged 33 +/- 4
years [mean +/- SEM]; body mass index, 23 +/- 1 kg/m2) consumed
their habitual diet (control diet, 29% +/- 2% fat calories) and a diet
consisting largely of leafy and other low-calorie vegetables, fruit, and
nuts (vegetable diet, 25% +/- 3% fat calories) for two 2-week periods
in a randomized crossover design. After 2 weeks on the vegetable diet,
lipid risk factors for cardiovascular disease were significantly reduced
by comparison with the control diet (low-density lipoprotein [LDL]
cholesterol, 33% +/- 4%, P .001; ratio of total to high-density
lipoprotein [HDL] cholesterol, 21% +/- 4%, P X .001; apolipoprotein
[apo] B:A-I, 23% +/- 2%, P .001; and lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)],
24% +/- 9%, P = .031). The reduction in apo B was related to
increased intakes of soluble fiber (r = .84, P = .003) and vegetable
protein (r = -.65, P = .041). On the vegetable compared with the
control diet, the reduction in total serum cholesterol was 34% to 49%
greater than would be predicted by differences in dietary fat and
cholesterol. A diet consisting largely of low-calorie vegetables and
fruit and nuts markedly reduced lipid risk factors for cardiovascular
disease. Several aspects of such diets, which may have been consumed
early in human evolution, have implications for cardiovascular disease
prevention.

Publication Types: Clinical trial Randomized controlled trial
PMID: 9160820 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

"Brian Smith" wrote in message
...
Humans have NOT 'evolved to eat meat'. It's NOT good for you!

So why do we have teeth designed for tearing flesh, you know, those 4 teeth
either side of your front 2, they are sharpe and perfect for ripping flesh.

'Most “nutritionists” assert that we have definite carnivorous leanings,
and some have even termed our incisor teeth “fangs” in defense of
their erroneous position that humans are natural meat-eaters! If you
look at the various species in the animal kingdom, each is equipped
with teeth that are ideally suited to masticate a particular type of food.
Herbivores (like the cow) have 24 molars, eight jagged incisors in
the lower jaw and a horny palate in the upper jaw. Their jaws move
vertically, laterally, forward, and backward, enabling the herbivore
to tear and grind coarse grasses. Omnivores (like the hog) have
tusk-like canines allowing them to dig up roots. Frugivores (like the
chimpanzee) have 32 teeth: sixteen in each jaw including four incisors,
two cuspids, four bicuspids, and six molars. The cuspids are adapted
for cracking nuts, and the uniform articulation of the teeth enables the
frugivore to mash and grind fruits. On the contrary, carnivores (like
the cat family) have markedly developed canines that are long, sharp,
cylindrical, pointed, and set apart from the other teeth. Fangs and
sharp pointed teeth that penetrate and kill, that rip and tear flesh, are
a feature of all true carnivores (except certain birds). The powerful
jaws of the carnivore move only vertically, and are ideal for ripping
and tearing flesh that is swallowed virtually whole and then acted
upon by extremely potent gastric juices. Human teeth are not designed
for tearing flesh as in the lion, wolf or dog, but rather compare closely
with other fruit-eating animals. Human teeth correspond almost
identically to the chimpanzees and other frugivores. The complete
absence of spaces between human teeth characterizes us as the
archetype frugivore. The “canine” teeth of humans are short, stout,
and slightly triangular. They are less pronounced and developed
than the orangutan's, who rarely kills and eats raw flesh in its natural
environment. Human canines in no way resemble the long, round,
slender canines of the true carnivore. Human teeth are not curved
or sharp like the wolves or tigers, nor are they wide and flat like
the grass and grain-eating species. Human teeth are actually like
the fruit-eating monkeys, and the human mouth is best suited for
eating succulent fruits and vegetables. It would be extremely
difficult, if not impossible, for humans to eat raw flesh without the
aid of fork and knife. To term our incisor teeth “fangs” or even to
liken them as such is outrageous. '
http://www.iol.ie/~creature/BiologicalAdaptations.htm

We evolved from monkeys right ..

Relating Chimpanzee Diets to Potential Australopithecine Diets
Conklin-Brittain, Nancy Lou
Wrangham, Richard W.

We report data using an ape model to reconstruct the nutrient
composition of the frugivorous diet of our last common ancestor
with African great apes. We aimed to determine whether the
African ape clade, from which hominids evolved, has any unusual
features. We studied frugivory by comparing chimpanzee diets to
that of three species of cercopithecine monkeys in Kibale Forest,
Uganda.

Data came from a 12-month period that showed inter-monthly
variation in fruit abundance. The monkeys consumed stable
nutrient levels except for lipid, which was low (3.2 +/- 2.0 %
dry matter (DM)), but peaked at about 9% DM during ripe fruit
abundance. Chimpanzees also consumed low lipid and sugar diets
during fruit poor seasons. Protein intake reflected each species'
fallback food: leaf consumption kept the protein levels high for
monkeys (16.7 +/- 1.9% DM); chimpanzees relied on herbaceous piths
and maintained a low protein intake (9.5 +/- 3.0% DM). Fallback
food was probably also responsible for the high fiber (NDF) intakes
by monkeys, which was not significantly different from chimpanzees'
(32.4 +/- 3.6% NDF versus 33.6 +/- 4.5% NDF respectively).

Three conclusions emerge: fat intake was low for all frugivores,
protein intake was low for chimpanzees, and fiber intake was high
for all species. Our data (from a lipid-poor habitat) show that
high lipid or high protein is not needed for normal health and
reproduction of chimpanzees. Therefore, hominids were probably
capable of living on a low-fat, low-protein diet such as would be
provided by fibrous roots commonly found in a seasonal woodland
environment.
http://www.cast.uark.edu/local/icaes.../abstract.html

.. and monkeys eat flesh, we've all seen the
nature program that filmed the 3 chips chasing after the tree monkey,
capturing it, killing it, then eating it. They were compelled to do it by
instinct!

'According to Tuttle, the first substantive information on chimp diets
was provided by Nissen in 1931 (p.75). In 1930 Nissen spent 75
days of a 3-month period tracking and observing chimps. He made
direct unquantified observations and examined fecal deposits and
leftovers at feeding sites. He also found "no evidence that they ate
honey, eggs or animal prey" - this observation may have been too
limited due to seasonal variations in the chimp diet.

In Reynolds and Reynolds (1965), Tuttle says that a 300 hour
study of Budongo Forest chimps over an 8-month period revealed
"no evidence for avian eggs, termites or vertebrates", although
they thought that insects formed 1% of their diet (p.81).

In another study of Budongo Forest chimps from 1966 to 1967,
Sugiyama did not observe "meat-eating or deliberate captures
of arthropods", although he reported that "the chimpanzees
did ingest small insects that infested figs" (p.82).

Tuttle says that later observations at Budongo by Suzuki revealed
meat eating. Where the earlier observations wrong, or incomplete,
or maybe an accurate reflection of their diet at the time? Did the
chimps change their diet later? We do not know. Chimps sometimes
change their diets on a monthly basis. A study of chimps at the
Kabogo Point region from 1961 to 1962 by Azuma and Toyoshima,
revealed that they witnessed "only one instance of chimpanzees
ingesting animal food, vis. termites or beetles from rotten wood."
(p.87).

From 1963 to 1964, similar observations were found in Kasakati
Basin by a Kyoto University team, and when Izawa and Itani published
in 1966 they reported "no chimpanzees eating insects, vertebrates,
avian eggs, soil or tree leaves and found no trace in the 14 stools
that they inspected " (p.86). In contrast Kawabe and Suzuki found
the Kasakati chimps hunting in the same year (p.88), although only
14 of 174 fecal samples contained traces of insects and other animal
foods. So perhaps these differing observations are due to seasonal
variation, or even local differences (cultural variation) in feeding
preferences - Tuttle does not reveal which. Maybe some of the chimps
groups are 'vegetarian', while other are not. But see the Kortlandt
observations below before believing that all chimps are meat-eaters.
...
Kortlandt states that predation by chimpanzees on vertebrates is
undoubtedly a rather rare phenomenon among rainforest-dwelling
populations of chimpanzees. Kortlandt lists the reasons given below
in his evidence.

# the absence (or virtual absence) of animal matter in the digestive
systems of hundreds of hunted, dissected or otherwise investigated cases
# the rarity of parasites indicating carnivorous habits
# rarity of pertinent field observations
# the responses when he placed live as well as dead potential prey
animals along the chimpanzee paths at Beni (in the poorer environments
of the savanna landscape however, predation on vertebrates appears to
be much more common)

Kortlandt concludes this section on primate diets by saying that
the wealth of flora and insect fauna in the rain-forest provides
both chimpanzees and orang-utans with a dietary spectrum that seems
wide enough to meet their nutritional requirements, without hunting
and killing of vertebrates being necessary. It is in the poorer
nutritional environments, where plant sources may be scarce or of
low quality where carnivorous behaviour arises. Even then he says
that the meat obtained are minimal and perhaps insufficient to meet
basic needs. Finally he adds "The same conclusion applies, of course,
to hominids . . . it is strange that most palaeoanthropologists have
never been willing to accept the elementary facts on this matter
that have emerged from both nutritional science and primate research."
...'
http://web.archive.org/web/200303011...c/polemics.htm


Brute.

Damn right!

"Jim Webster" wrote in message ...

"pearl" wrote in message
...
"Brian Smith" wrote in message
...
Sounds like he is cheating and may already have had one. Get him into
quarantine as soon as possible, he'll need plenty of time to recover
from eating dead animals, does he also have flatulence?

Do you work in a butchers, this would also make you seriously ill.

Good luck with the recovery.



Cheerio,

What are you harping on about! Humans have evolved to eat meat, its good
for
you!

Humans have NOT 'evolved to eat meat'. It's NOT good for you!


really pulling the loonies out of the woodwork,

Attacking the Person
(argumentum ad hominem)

Definition:
The person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the
argument itself. This takes many forms. For example, the
person's character, nationality or religion may be attacked.
Alternatively, it may be pointed out that a person stands to
gain from a favourable outcome. Or, finally, a person may be
attacked by association, or by the company he keeps.
There are three major forms of Attacking the Person:
(1) ad hominem (abusive): instead of attacking an assertion,
the argument attacks the person who made the assertion.
(2) ad hominem (circumstantial): instead of attacking an
assertion the author points to the relationship between the
person making the assertion and the person's circumstances.
(3) ad hominem (tu quoque): this form of attack on the
person notes that a person does not practise what he
preaches.

still talking to inner earth beings Pearl.

? Does replying to a worm count?


Jim Webster

"pearl" wrote

Thus, among Seventh-day Adventists, vegetarians are
healthier than nonvegetarians but this cannot be ascribed only to the
absence of meat.

Exactly, as the study says, the vegetarians differ from the non-vegetarians
in several other factors, which means the study you keep pasting here is
foiled, it does not show what you portray.

" About 50% of those
studied ate meat products 1 time/wk or not at all, and vegetarians
consumed more tomatoes, legumes, nuts, and fruit, but less coffee,
doughnuts, and eggs than did nonvegetarians."

The study that is required is a comparison between two otherwise nearly
dietarily identical groups, one vegan, and the other consuming a reasonable,
recommended, healthy amount of meat, not more donuts and coffee, not less
nuts or fruit. The caloric intake would need to be similiar and the calories
obtained from meat would be offset by whatever the vegan group used for
protein, i.e. tofu, tempeh, rice, or beans.

"Dutch" wrote in message news:Sc2Jc.12823$ek5.8932@pd7tw2no...
"pearl" wrote

Thus, among Seventh-day Adventists, vegetarians are
healthier than nonvegetarians but this cannot be ascribed only to the
absence of meat.

Exactly, as the study says, the vegetarians differ from the non-vegetarians
in several other factors, which means the study you keep pasting here is
foiled, it does not show what you portray.

" About 50% of those
studied ate meat products 1 time/wk or not at all, and vegetarians
consumed more tomatoes, legumes, nuts, and fruit, but less coffee,
doughnuts, and eggs than did nonvegetarians."

The study that is required is a comparison between two otherwise nearly
dietarily identical groups, one vegan, and the other consuming a reasonable,
recommended, healthy amount of meat,

'.. disease rates were significantly associated within a range of dietary
plant food composition that suggested an absence of a disease prevention
threshold. That is, the closer a diet is to an all-plant foods diet, the
greater will be the reduction in the rates of these diseases.'
http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases...sis_paper.html

not more donuts and coffee, not less
nuts or fruit. The caloric intake would need to be similiar and the calories
obtained from meat would be offset by whatever the vegan group used for
protein, i.e. tofu, tempeh, rice, or beans.

Emphasis* added...

Am J Clin Nutr 1999 Sep;70(3 Suppl):532S-538S
Associations between diet and cancer, ischemic heart disease,
and all-cause mortality in non-Hispanic white California
Seventh-day Adventists.
Fraser GE. Center for Health Research and the Department of
Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Loma Linda University, CA USA.

Results associating diet with chronic disease in a cohort of 34192
California Seventh-day Adventists are summarized. Most Seventh-day
Adventists do not smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol, and there is a wide
range of dietary exposures within the population. About 50% of those
studied ate meat products 1 time/wk or not at all, and vegetarians
consumed more tomatoes, legumes, nuts, and fruit, but less coffee,
doughnuts, and eggs than did nonvegetarians. *Multivariate analyses*
showed significant associations between beef consumption and fatal
ischemic heart disease (IHD) in men [relative risk (RR) = 2.31 for
subjects who ate beef or =3 times/wk compared with vegetarians],
significant protective associations between nut consumption and fatal
and nonfatal IHD in both sexes (RR approximately 0.5 for subjects
who ate nuts or =5 times/wk compared with those who ate nuts
1 time/wk), and reduced risk of IHD in subjects preferring whole-grain
to white bread. The lifetime risk of IHD was reduced by approximately
31% in those who consumed nuts frequently and by 37% in male
vegetarians compared with nonvegetarians. Cancers of the colon and
prostate were significantly more likely in nonvegetarians (RR of 1.88
and 1.54, respectively), and frequent beef consumers also had higher
risk of bladder cancer. Intake of legumes was negatively associated
with risk of colon cancer in nonvegetarians and risk of pancreatic
cancer. Higher consumption of all fruit or dried fruit was associated
with lower risks of lung, prostate, and pancreatic cancers.
Cross-sectional data suggest vegetarian Seventh-day Adventists have
lower risks of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and arthritis than
nonvegetarians. Thus, among Seventh-day Adventists, vegetarians are
healthier than nonvegetarians but this cannot be ascribed only to the
absence of meat.
PMID: 10479227

Multivariate Analysis
A set of techniques used when variation in several variables has to be
studied simultaneously. In statistics, multivariate analysis is interpreted
as any analytic method that allows simultaneous study of two or more
dependent variables.
http://medical.webends.com/kw/Multivariate+Analysis.

Brian Smith wrote:
Humans have NOT 'evolved to eat meat'. It's NOT good for you!

Patently FALSE; in fact, a lie. Humans ARE
biologically and anatomically adapted to eating some
meat, and meat in reasonable quantities is VERY good
for you.

No academically credentialed anthropologist or
biologist believes that humans aren't evolved as meat
eaters, and very few doctors believe that humans
shouldn't eat meat at all for good health. Yours is a
distinctly minority position based on religious faith
and politics rather than science. YOU CAN'T DO SCIENCE.



Exactly as I said, humans evolved to eat meat, and we have teeth designed
for eating meat!

Our teeth are well adapted - I don't believe in
"design" in this manner - for eating a wide range of
foods. In fact, our teeth and the rest of our anatomy
are *not* well adapted to eating large quantities of
meat, especially the raw meat that would have been
consumed at the time of the appearance of the homo
genus. As you note, though, moderate portions of meat
are extremely beneficial to human health. Very few
people in medicine dispute this, and those who do are
going against their medical training in order to make a
polemical point.

These newsgroups are not supposed to be about
discussion of the anatomy of humans or the nutritional
value of meat. They're supposed to be concerned with
the (alleged) ethical issues concerning human use of
animals. The idiot Lesley can't discuss that, though,
so for some bizarre reason she veers off into
discussion of other stuff she ALSO doesn't know,
specifically science. It's a weird sort of piling-on,
isn't it? Sort of: "...and *another* thing: meat is
bad for you!" Well, she's wrong - small portions of
meat are good for you - and it isn't "another" thing,
because she in particular has never established any
FIRST thing, i.e. that human use of animals is wrong.

Eating it in small quantities is beneficial, particularly to the immune
system.
Like you said, vegetarian/vegans base there opinions on religious/political
beliefs. What annoys me is that they condemn and put pressure on, others who
do not share their opinion!

That's because they are totalitarian in their thinking.
Fortunately for the rest of us, they are impotent,
ineffectual little crybabies, too, so they seldom act
on their totalitarian impulses.

pearl wrote:
"Wilson Woods" vârmïnt@frèêdom.úsâ.çøm wrote in message
nk.net...

pearl wrote:

"Brian Smith" wrote in message
. com...


Sounds like he is cheating and may already have had one. Get him into
quarantine as soon as possible, he'll need plenty of time to recover

from eating dead animals, does he also have flatulence?

Do you work in a butchers, this would also make you seriously ill.

Good luck with the recovery.



Cheerio,

What are you harping on about! Humans have evolved to eat meat, its good for
you!


Humans have NOT 'evolved to eat meat'. It's NOT good for you!

Patently FALSE; in fact, a lie. Humans ARE
biologically and anatomically adapted to eating some
meat, and meat in reasonable quantities is VERY good
for you.

[snip citation from article Lesley hasn't read, CANNOT read, and that does not prove moderate amounts of meat are bad for you]

No academically credentialed anthropologist or
biologist believes that humans aren't evolved as meat
eaters, and very few doctors believe that humans
shouldn't eat meat at all for good health. Yours is a
distinctly minority position based on religious faith
and politics rather than science. YOU CAN'T DO SCIENCE.

[snip citation from article Lesley hasn't read, CANNOT
read, and that does not prove moderate amounts of meat
are bad for you]


You just can't do science, Lesley. You have never
studied any.

pearl wrote:

"Brian Smith" wrote in message
...

Humans have NOT 'evolved to eat meat'. It's NOT good for you!

So why do we have teeth designed for tearing flesh, you know, those 4 teeth
either side of your front 2, they are sharpe and perfect for ripping flesh.

[snip ad hominem crap from incredible source]


We evolved from monkeys right ..


Relating Chimpanzee Diets to Potential Australopithecine Diets
Conklin-Brittain, Nancy Lou
Wrangham, Richard W.

[snip miscited partial research]

Chimpanzees eat meat.


.. and monkeys eat flesh, we've all seen the
nature program that filmed the 3 chips chasing after the tree monkey,
capturing it, killing it, then eating it. They were compelled to do it by
instinct!

[snip thoroughly uncredible bullshit from John Coleman's "vegan" scooter-riders' page]

Chimpanzees eat meat.

Brute.

Damn right!

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 11:56:09 +0100, Derek Moody
wrote:

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 10:54:24 GMT, "Steve Black"
wrote:

(...)

I'm having pork spare ribs tonight and won't be thinking of you at all you
pale ****!

For a ballet dance instructor you are very scary. No wonder you fish,
are all fishermen like you?


Oh, scary! Are all vegetable killers like you? You nasty beast.

--
Eat more 'possum

Cheerio,

Corn Flake

The followup is made to uk.test as this isp will not permit me to
post to such a large number of groups without a followup.

I would like to know the significance of posting this to uk.rec.gardening,
as some of us actually keep animals to kill and eat.

"Derek Moody" wrote in message
...
I used to be a great fisherman, charter boats and supply fishing gear.
It wasn't until my boat sunk through neglect, almost killing five
customers that I realized how shallow, selfish and cruel fishing was.
We turn a beautiful, tranquil, natural setting into a horrendous
bloodsport and dont even realise it, how dumb can we really be, that
we never even think of the fish and other wildlife? Perhaps we know we
are just kidding ourselves?

I think of my tummy and how to fill it!

1. Tell your friends (especially any that go angling) what happens
to fish when they are caught

They die and they are cooked to feed someone to keep them alive!

6. Don't eat fish.

Why on earth not, fish and chips are a delicasy.

7. Extend your compassion for fish to other animals and take a
vegetarian or vegan diet. A vegetarian eats no meat, fish, fowl or
slaughterhouse by-products such as gelatine or animal fat.

Man is not, at present, designed to live a healthy life on vegetables alone.

Why Vegetarian?
Did you realise that on average meat eaters eat 5 cows, 29
sheep, 822 poultry, 20 pigs and half a tonne of fish in their
lifetime?

Sounds wonderful, nothing better than a good roast.

Most of these animals are kept in close confinement with
many other animals causing extreme distress and boredom to the animal.

Perhaps you should be concetrating on improving their living
conditions rather than destroy all these species, which is what
would hapen if the maniacs who try to stop us eaating meat
would do.

All are brutally killed.

Not quite true some are brutally killed, mainly in the name of extreem
religions, but those killed for most of us are killed humanly.

So Why Vegan?
Calves are torn away from their mothers at one or two days
of age so that we can have milk. Their mothers are overworked and
treated as breeding milk machines. They are kept permanently pregnant
so that they will provide more milk.

So you want to eradicate all cattle and not have any on this earth at all.

Birds kept for eggs are usually
confined in battery cages where they can barely stretch their wings.

Not free range hens.

Most people keeping birds for eggs, even free range, will kill male
birds.

So?

If the numbers of male birds were to increase by large numbers,
they would be fighting amoungst themselves and do each other
more harm than controlling the numbers, just like human beings
in fact!

Alan
--
Reply to alan(at)windsor-berks(dot)freeserve(dot)co(dot)uk

Alan Holmes wrote:
:: The followup is made to uk.test as this isp will not permit me to
:: post to such a large number of groups without a followup.
::
:: I would like to know the significance of posting this to
:: uk.rec.gardening, as some of us actually keep animals to kill and
:: eat.


I would like to know the significance of your cross posting at all?
Why do you think your ISP disapproves of it? - because 90% of the groups
it's landing in have no interest at all, so don't get yourself killfiled by
continuing the X-posting crap...everyone else from other groups can see what
your sending and it makes no sense whatsoever when the first twenty replying
X-posters are already in the killfile...I've reset the follow ups to 'your'
group - keep them there!

Alan Holmes wrote:
:: The followup is made to uk.test as this isp will not permit me to
:: post to such a large number of groups without a followup.
::
:: I would like to know the significance of posting this to
:: uk.rec.gardening, as some of us actually keep animals to kill and
:: eat.

And BTW, you're clocks a mile out, you're posting at 11pm last night, when
in fact it was sent at 5 to 6 tonight.

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 20:49:11 +0100, "Michael Saunby"
wrote:


"Ben Blackmore" wrote in message
m...

Why? For having an opinion? Am I not allowed one? I think its an
opionion shared by may others!

Your opinion is designed to inflame others. Therefore, it is a troll.

Troll!


No it was not! Read it again, there was nothing intended to flame about
it!
It was an opinion, I never suggested that my opinion was the correct
opinion, or that others were wrong to have their own opinions! it was
nothing more than a discussion. I hope we're not going to start flaming
people for having a sensible conversation. Now yours on the hand, WAS
meant
to inflame others, so I suggest you practice what you preach, vicar
parsnip!

If you want to flame someone for posting threads that are designed to
inflame others I suggest you preach to Mr Moody! His entire
conversation/posts consists of backward logic and name calling!

Untrue. The crap you are refering to was posted by an infamous AR Troll
*pretending* to be Derek Moody, just as he somtimes posts as Nick Maclaren,
or "Malcolm", etc. Perhaps it's an illness that affects the minds of those
who eat no meat.


Troll!


Indeed - ARists do it constantly. The good news is that by encouraging
them to attact anglers I expect quite a few will have drowning related
deaths. Which must be a good thing.

Michael Saunby

Still desperate to get people to fight your battles Michael?
Bwahahahahahahahaha who's a pretty boy then, you wimp sock puppet
trollshit.

Do fishermen also **** animals like you do? never heard of that
before, do enlighten us.

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 13:16:54 -0700, Zachariah wrote:

Derek Moody wrote :

I used to be a great fisherman [yada yada yada]

I have some great Dolphin recipes. Let me know if you'd like them.

Coconut Crumbed Dolphin with Mango and Basil Sauce
Dolphin Fish Oriental Style
Dolphin Parmesan

and my personal fav...Grilled Mustard-Crusted Dolphin

I always recommend a slow death by bleeding. It really makes the meat
more tender.

HTH

You devil you.

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:20:49 GMT, Capy Ahab wrote:

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 11:56:09 +0100, Derek Moody
wrote:

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 10:54:24 GMT, "Steve Black"
wrote:

(...)

I'm having pork spare ribs tonight and won't be thinking of you at all you
pale ****!

For a ballet dance instructor you are very scary. No wonder you fish,
are all fishermen like you?


Oh, scary! Are all vegetable killers like you? You nasty beast.


You evil twinkletoes in jackboots, shame on you. All this attention
could go to a girls head!