The True Cost Of Meat

"pearl" <tea.RemoveThis@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:<cfrc6d$7h3$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> "tcomeau" <tunderbar.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:b550f406.0408160602.236d5ddf@posting.google.com...
>
> <lots of silly ad hominem>
>
> > Both John's Hopkins and Mayor Bloomberg have taken swipes at Atkins in
> > the past.
>
> Who hasn't..
> www.all-creatures.org/mfz/health-atkins-mg.html

Why are you referencing an article from an animal rights group in a
science newsgroup? Your wasting band-width and wasting our time.

TC
 >> Stay informed about: The True Cost Of Meat 

tunderbar DeleteThis @hotmail.com (tcomeau) wrote in message news:<b550f406.0408190631.1b9b7a07 DeleteThis @posting.google.com>...
> "pearl" <tea DeleteThis @signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:<cfrc6d$7h3$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > "tcomeau" <tunderbar DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message news:b550f406.0408160602.236d5ddf@posting.google.com...
> >
> > <lots of silly ad hominem>
> >
> > > Both John's Hopkins and Mayor Bloomberg have taken swipes at Atkins in
> > > the past.
> >
> > Who hasn't..
> > www.all-creatures.org/mfz/health-atkins-mg.html
>
> Why are you referencing an article from an animal rights group in a
> science newsgroup? Your wasting band-width and wasting our time.
>
> TC


I have already tried to make him realize that him and his information
are worth about as much as that of a tobacco company trying to say
smoking is good for you. He just does not get it.
 >> Stay informed about: The True Cost Of Meat 

"tcomeau" <tunderbar.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:b550f406.0408190631.1b9b7a07@posting.google.com...
> "pearl" <tea.DeleteThis@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:<cfrc6d$7h3$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > "tcomeau" <tunderbar.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b550f406.0408160602.236d5ddf@posting.google.com...
> >
> > <lots of silly ad hominem>
> >
> > > Both John's Hopkins and Mayor Bloomberg have taken swipes at Atkins in
> > > the past.
> >
> > Who hasn't..
> > www.all-creatures.org/mfz/health-atkins-mg.html
>
> Why are you referencing an article from an animal rights group in a
> science newsgroup? Your wasting band-width and wasting our time.

Ad hominem evasion.
 >> Stay informed about: The True Cost Of Meat 

"Wolfbrother" <rangerhasten RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6eb8f6eb.0408191018.6cfd7265@posting.google.com...
> tunderbar RemoveThis @hotmail.com (tcomeau) wrote in message news:<b550f406.0408190631.1b9b7a07 RemoveThis @posting.google.com>...
> > "pearl" <tea RemoveThis @signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:<cfrc6d$7h3$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > > "tcomeau" <tunderbar RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b550f406.0408160602.236d5ddf@posting.google.com...
> > >
> > > <lots of silly ad hominem>
> > >
> > > > Both John's Hopkins and Mayor Bloomberg have taken swipes at Atkins in
> > > > the past.
> > >
> > > Who hasn't..
> > > www.all-creatures.org/mfz/health-atkins-mg.html
> >
> > Why are you referencing an article from an animal rights group in a
> > science newsgroup? Your wasting band-width and wasting our time.
> >
> > TC
>
> I have already tried to make him realize that him and his information
> are worth about as much as that of a tobacco company trying to say
> smoking is good for you.

'Michael Greger, MD, is a graduate of the Cornell University School
of Agriculture and the Tufts University School of Medicine.
...
References:
1 The Chronicle (Houston, TX) 9 March 1973.2 The New York Weekly 26 March 1973.
3 Maryland State Medical Journal 1974:70.
4 Obesity and Fad Diets. U.S. Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs. 12 April 1973 CIS
S581-13.
5 Obesity and Fad Diets. U.S. Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs. 12 April 1973 CIS
S581-13.
6 Shape Up America! news release 29 December 2003.
7 Journal of the American Dietetics Association 102(2002):260.
8 Chicago Tribune 18 October 1999.
9 Tampa Tribune (Florida) 19 October 1999.
10 Journal of the American Dietetics Association 66(1975):277.
11 Chicago Tribune 18 October 1999.
12 Dietician's Edge November-December 2001:42.
13 Institute of Medicine. Weighing the Options: Criteria for Evaluating Weight-Management Programs, The
National Academies Press, 1995.
14 American Cancer Society. Weighing In on Low Carb Diets. 2004.
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/SPC/content/SPC_1_A_Low_Carb_Diet_to_Pre...t_Cance
15 Circulation 104(2001):1869.
16 The Cleveland Clinic. High Protein, Low Carbohydrate Diets. August 2003.
http://my.webmd.com/content/article/46/2731_1666.
17 Diabetes 2004. Johns Hopkins University White Paper, 2004.
18 American Kidney Fund news release 25 April 2002.
19 Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 33(2001):2145.
20 National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Choosing a Safe and Successful
Weight-Loss Program. NIH Publ. No. 94-3700. National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD. 1993.
21 Circulation 104(2001):1869.
22 Journal of the American College of Cardiology 43(2004):725.
23 Journal of the American College of Nutrition 22(2003):9.
24 The New York Times 10 September 2002.
25 Donaldson, BF. Strong Medicine. Doubleday, 1960.
26 Hamilton, EMN and EN Whitney. Nutrition: Concepts and Controversies. Second Edition. West Publishing
Company, 1982.
27 Fraser, L. Losing It. Penguin Books, 1997.
28 Fraser, L. Losing It. Penguin Books, 1997.
29 Agatson, A. The South Beach Diet. Rodale, 2003.
30 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution. Avon Books, 1999.
31 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
32 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
33 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
34 Australian Magazine 10 April 2004.
35 Deutsch, RM. The New Nuts Among the Berries. Palo Alto, CA, 1977.
36 Modern Medicine 28 May 1973:132.
37 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
38 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
39 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution. Avon Books, 1992.
40 British Medical Journal 326(2003):1090.
41 Journal of the American Dietetics Association 100(2000):760.
42 New York Times Magazine 7 July 2002.
43 CNN/Money 1 December 2003.
44 Scripps Howard News Service 24 April 2003.
45 The Washington Post 27 August 2002.
46 Nutrition Action Healthletter November 2002.
47 The Washington Post 27 August 2002.
48 Nutrition Action Healthletter November 2002.
49 Nutrition Action Healthletter November 2002.
50 Nutrition Action Healthletter November 2002.
51 Reason magazine March 2003
52 Nutrition Action Healthletter November 2002.
53 Obesity Research 9(2001):1S.
54 Magazine Publishers of America news release 21 August 2003.
55 Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, FL) 11 April 2004.
56 Tufts University Health and Nutrition Letter 22(2004):1.
57 Tufts University Health and Nutrition Letter 22(2004):1.
58 Harvard Health Letter November 2003:5.
59 Agatson, A. The South Beach Diet. Rodale, 2003.
60 Tufts University Health and Nutrition Letter 22(2004):1.
61 Agatson, A. The South Beach Diet. Rodale, 2003.
62 Tufts University Health and Nutrition Letter 22(2004):1.
63 USDA Agriculture Research Service. Nutrient Data Laboratory. National Nutrient Database for Standard
Reference.
64 Agatson, A. The South Beach Diet. Rodale, 2003.
65 PR Newswire 21 May 2004.
66 Scripps Howard News Service 19 February 2004.
67 The New York Times 14 April 2004.
68 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
69 Fortune 17 May 2004.
70 Family Practice News 15 March 2004.
71 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution. Avon Books, 1999.
72 Eades, MR and MD Eades. Protein Power. Bantam, 1997.
73 Sears, B. Enter the Zone. Regan Books, 1995.
74 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (1997):1264.
75 Diabetes care 7(1984):465.
76 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 50(1997):1264.
77 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 50(1997):1264.
78 Journal of the American Dietetics Association 1010(2001):411.
79 Schweizerische medizinische Wochenschrift 107(1977):1017.
80 Journal of the American College of Nutrition 22(2003):9.
81 Australian Family Physician 6(1977):155.
82 Journal of the American Medical Association 289(2003):1773.
83 "One Year Effectiveness of the Atkins, Ornish, Weight Watchers, and Zone Diets in Decreasing Body Weight
and Heart Disease Risk" by Michael L. Dansinger, Joi L. Gleason, John L. Griffith, Wenjun Li, Harry P.
Selker, Ernst Schaefer; Tufts University, New England Medical Center, Boston, Mass.
84 Diabetes Care 16(1993):1459.
85 American Journal of Cardiology 69(1992):440.
86 Metabolism 43(1994):621.
87 Nutrition Reviews July 1974:1s.
88 University of California at Berkeley Wellness Letter April 2000.
89 Journal of the American College of Nutrition 22(2003):9.
90 Journal of the American Dietetics Association 100(2000):760.
91 Nutrition Action Healthletter November 2002.
92 Health 19(1996):102.
93 Archives of Internal Medicine 112(1963):87.
94 Journal of Clinical Investigation 58(1976):529.
95 Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine 68(2001):761.
96 The Washington Post 23 November 1999.
97 Journal of the American Medical Association 289(2003):1854.
98 Callaway, W. The Callaway Diet. Bantam, 1990.
99 Lancet 2(1960):939.
100 Obesity Research 9(2001):1S.
101 Medical Journal of Australia 175(2001):637.
102 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution. Avon Books, 1999.
103 Sears, B. Enter the Zone. Regan Books, 1995.
104 Scripps Howard News Service, November 13, 2003.
105 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
106 Journal of the American Medical Association 224(1973):1418.
107 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
108 BBC News 21 January 2004.
109 The Chronicle (Houston, TX) 9 March 1973.
110 Journal-World (Lawrence, KS) 27 January 2004.
111 Journal of the American Medical Association 224(1973):1416.
112 Journal of the American Medical Association 289(2003):1837.
113 Medicine and Health 83(2000):337.
114 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution 3rd edition. M. Evans and Company, Inc. 2002.
115 Obesity Research 9(2001):1S.
116 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution. Avon Books, 1999.
117 Annals of internal Medicine 68(1968):467.
118 Nutrition and Metabolism 17(1974):360.
119 Lancet 2(1960):939.
120 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 63(1996):174.
121 International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders 20(1996):1067.
122 Journal of the American Dietetics Association 90(1990):534.
123 Journal of the American Medical Association 228(1974):54.
124 Journal of the American Dietetics Association 77(1980):264.
125 British Journal of Nutrition 15(1961):53.
126 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 30(1977):160.
127 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 26(1973):197.
128 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 21(1968):1291.
129 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 20(1967):139.
130 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 24(1971):290.
131 Journal of the American Dietetics Association 64(1974):47.
132 International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders 3(1979):210.
133 Nutrition and Metabolism 22(1978):269.
134 American Journal of Public Health 76(1986):1293.
135 New England Journal of Medicine252(1985):661.
136 Annals of Internal Medicine 68(1968):467.
137 Annals of the New York Academy of Science 819(1997):44.
138 USDA. Economic Research Service.
http://www.usda.gov/news/pubs/factbook/001a.pdf
139 Reason, March 2003.
140 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
141 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution 3rd edition. M. Evans and Company, Inc. 2002.
142 Australian Magazine 10 April 2004.
143 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
144 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution. Avon, 2002.
145 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
146 Milling & Baking News 7 March 2000.
147 New York Times Magazine 7 July 2002.
148 Nutrition Action Healthletter, November 2002.
149 Asia Pacific Journal of Clinical Nutrition 6(1997):122.
150 Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 53(2004):80.
151 Economic Research Service/USDA. The Economics of Obesity / E-FAN-04-004, 2004.
152 New York Times 6 September 1995.
153 Journal of the Arkansas Medical Society 8(2004):255.
154 New York Times 26 December 2000.
155 Nutrition Action Healthletter November 2002.
156 ABC News 20 May 2002.
157 USA Today 20 February 1996.
158 http://www.nsda.org/SoftDrinks/index.html
159 Gray, G.A. An Atlas of Obesity and Weight Control. Boca Raton, FL: Parthenon Publishing , 2003.
160 Critser, G. Fat Land. Houghton Mifflin Co., 2003.
161 Nutrition Action Healthletter, November 2002.
162 The New York Weekly 26 March 1973.
163 Obesity and Fad Diets. U.S. Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs. 12 April 1973 CIS
S581-13.
164 Maryland State Medical Journal 1974:70.
165 Clinics in Endocrinology and Metabolism 12(1983):413.
166 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
167 The New York Weekly 26 March 1973.
168 Obesity and Fad Diets. U.S. Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs. 12 April 1973 CIS
S581-13.
169 Whelan, E. The One-hundred-percent Natural, Purely Organic, Cholesterol-Free, Megavitamin, Low
Carbohydrate Nutrition Hoax. Athenium, 1983.
170 Hamilton, EMN and EN Whitney. Nutrition: Concepts and Controversies. Second Edition. West Publishing
Company, 1982.
171 McCall's Monthly Newsletter for Women, April 1973.
172 The Chronicle (Houston, TX) 9 March 1973.
173 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
174 Obesity and Fad Diets. U.S. Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs. 12 April 1973 CIS
S581-13.
175 Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine 68(2001):761.
176 Archives of Internal medicine 112(1963):333.
177 Schweizerische medizinische Wochenschrift 107(1977):1017.
178 War Medicine 7(1945):345.
179 Epilepsia 39(1998):744.
180 Gastroenterology 118(2000):1233.
181 Circulation. 102(2000):2284.
182 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution. Avon Books, 1999.
183 The Washington Times 30 May 2004.
184 Annals of Internal Medicine 140(2004):769.
185 Berland, T and L Frohman. CONSUMER GUIDE Rating the Diets. Publications International, Ltd., 1974.
186 http://www.healthyweightnetwork.com/posters.htm#Slim%20Chance%20Awards%20poster
187 Obesity Research 9(2001):1s.
188 American Journal of Cardiology 85(2000):1018.
189 New England Journal of Medicine 350(2004):1093.
190 The Observer 18 January 2004.
191 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution. Avon Books, 1999.
192 Asia Pacific Journal of Clinical Nutrition 12(2002):396.
193 Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution 3rd edition. M. Evans and Company, Inc. 2002.
194 Journal of the American College of Nutrition 22(2003):9.
195 Time Magazine 1 November 1999.
196 International Journal of Obesity 19(1995):811.
197 International Journal of Obesity 19(1995):811.
198 MIT News 20 February 2004.
199 Press Association 1 March 2004.
200 MIT News 20 February 2004.
201 MIT News 4 November 2004.
202 Fraser, L. .Losing It. Penguin Books, 1997.
203 MIT News 20 February 2004.
204 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
205 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
206 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
207 Allopurinol. Physicians' Desk Reference. Thomson Healthcare, 2004.
208 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution. Avon Books, 1999.
209 Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins Diet Revolution. David McKay Company, Inc., 1972.
210 Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution 3rd edition. M. Evans and Company, Inc. 2002.
211 Australian Magazine 10 April 2004.
212 BBC Two 22 January 2004, 9pm.
213 Journal of the American Medical Association 289(2003):1837.
214 Dansinger, M.L., Gleason, J. L., Griffith, J.L., et al., "One Year Effectiveness of the Atkins, Ornish,
Weight Watchers, and Zone Diets in Decreasing Body Weight and Heart Disease Risk," Presented at the American
Heart Association Scientific Sessions November 12, 2003 in Orlando, Florida.
215 New England Journal of Medicine 348(2003):2082.
216 Annals of Internal Medicine 140(2004):778.
217 Dansinger, M.L., Gleason, J. L., Griffith, J.L., et al., "One Year Effectiveness of the Atkins, Ornish,
Weight Watchers, and Zone Diets in Decreasing Body Weight and Heart Disease Risk," Presented at the American
Heart Association Scientific Sessions November 12, 2003 in Orlando, Florida.
218 http://atkins.com/Archive/2003/12/11-933145.html
219 Scripps Howard News Service 13 November 2003.
220 Journal of the American Medical Association 280(1998):2001.
221 Obesity Research 9(2001):1S.
222 International Journal of Obesity 27(2003):728.
223 Journal of the American Dietetics Association 1010(2001):411.
224 Metabolism 43(1994):621.
225 Nutrition Research 10(1990):39.
226 Metabolism 43(1994):621.
227 New England Journal of Medicine 348(2003):2082.
228 Annals of Internal Medicine 140(2004):778.
229 http://annemfletcher.com/
230 Nutrition 19(2003):253.
231 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 70(1999):412.
232 Nutrition Reviews 62(2004):1.
233 American Journal of Public Health 87(1997):747.
234 American Journal of Public Health 87(1997):747.
235 The Washington Post 23 November 1999.
236 Institute of Medicine. Weighing the Options. National Academy Press, 1995.
237 Annals of Internal Medicine 119(1993):661.
238 Consumers Union news release 6 May 2002.
239 Time Magazine 7 June 2004.
240 Reason, March 2003.
241 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 66(1997):239 and Atkins, RC. Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution. Avon
Books, 1999.
242 The Washington Post 27 August 2002.
243 Time Magazine 25 April 2004.
244 Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution 3rd edition. M. Evans and Company, Inc. 2002.
www.all-creatures.org/mfz/health-atkins-mg.html

> He just does not get it.

Ad hominem evasion. We get it..

Denial is the primary psychological symptom of addiction.

'Denial is so powerful that addicts are often the last to
recognize their disease. Some pursue their addiction as their
life and health deteriorate, continuing their denial until they die.'
http://www.egetgoing.com/Drug/5_7_1.asp
 >> Stay informed about: The True Cost Of Meat 

"pearl" <tea DeleteThis @signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:<cg2lrq$ijg$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> "tcomeau" <tunderbar DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message news:b550f406.0408190631.1b9b7a07@posting.google.com...
> > "pearl" <tea DeleteThis @signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:<cfrc6d$7h3$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > > "tcomeau" <tunderbar DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:b550f406.0408160602.236d5ddf@posting.google.com...
> > >
> > > <lots of silly ad hominem>
> > >
> > > > Both John's Hopkins and Mayor Bloomberg have taken swipes at Atkins in
> > > > the past.
> > >
> > > Who hasn't..
> > > www.all-creatures.org/mfz/health-atkins-mg.html
> >
> > Why are you referencing an article from an animal rights group in a
> > science newsgroup? Your wasting band-width and wasting our time.
>
> Ad hominem evasion.

One must always consider the source. In this case the source is an
animal rights group. The historical radicalism and the extremism, not
to mention their financial support of domestic terrorism, within the
animal rights movement has completely skewered their approach to their
advocacy. The result is that there isn't an iota of credibility to
anything coming from them.

Which, I believe is very unfortunate. Some of us who are truly
compassionate, in a less extremist way, about animals and their
treatment, are left with no credible voice on the issues.

TC
 >> Stay informed about: The True Cost Of Meat 

tunderbar.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com (tcomeau) wrote in message news:<b550f406.0408200629.73b1af61.TakeThisOut@posting.google.com>...
> "pearl" <tea.TakeThisOut@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:<cg2lrq$ijg$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > "tcomeau" <tunderbar.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:b550f406.0408190631.1b9b7a07@posting.google.com...
> > > "pearl" <tea.TakeThisOut@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:<cfrc6d$7h3$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > > > "tcomeau" <tunderbar.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:b550f406.0408160602.236d5ddf@posting.google.com...
> > > >
> > > > <lots of silly ad hominem>
> > > >
> > > > > Both John's Hopkins and Mayor Bloomberg have taken swipes at Atkins in
> > > > > the past.
> > > >
> > > > Who hasn't..
> > > > www.all-creatures.org/mfz/health-atkins-mg.html
> > >
> > > Why are you referencing an article from an animal rights group in a
> > > science newsgroup? Your wasting band-width and wasting our time.
> >
> > Ad hominem evasion.
>
> One must always consider the source.

One must always refrain from using ad hominem, if one is to be taken
seriously (regardless of the topic).

Can you rebut the information presented or not?

> In this case the source is an
> animal rights group. The historical radicalism and the extremism, not
> to mention their financial support of domestic terrorism, within the
> animal rights movement has completely skewered their approach to their
> advocacy. The result is that there isn't an iota of credibility to
> anything coming from them.
>
> Which, I believe is very unfortunate. Some of us who are truly
> compassionate, in a less extremist way, about animals and their
> treatment, are left with no credible voice on the issues.
>
> TC
 >> Stay informed about: The True Cost Of Meat 

"tcomeau" <tunderbar.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:b550f406.0408200629.73b1af61@posting.google.com...
> "pearl" <tea.TakeThisOut@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:<cg2lrq$ijg$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > "tcomeau" <tunderbar.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b550f406.0408190631.1b9b7a07@posting.google.com...
> > > "pearl" <tea.TakeThisOut@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:<cfrc6d$7h3$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > > > "tcomeau" <tunderbar.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:b550f406.0408160602.236d5ddf@posting.google.com...
> > > >
> > > > <lots of silly ad hominem>
> > > >
> > > > > Both John's Hopkins and Mayor Bloomberg have taken swipes at Atkins in
> > > > > the past.
> > > >
> > > > Who hasn't..
> > > > www.all-creatures.org/mfz/health-atkins-mg.html
> > >
> > > Why are you referencing an article from an animal rights group in a
> > > science newsgroup? Your wasting band-width and wasting our time.
> >
> > Ad hominem evasion.
>
> One must always consider the source. In this case the source is an
> animal rights group. The historical radicalism and the extremism, not
> to mention their financial support of domestic terrorism, within the
> animal rights movement has completely skewered their approach to their
> advocacy. The result is that there isn't an iota of credibility to
> anything coming from them.
>
> Which, I believe is very unfortunate. Some of us who are truly
> compassionate, in a less extremist way, about animals and their
> treatment, are left with no credible voice on the issues.
>
> TC

Ad hominem, continued evasion, and attempt at sidetracking, noted.
 >> Stay informed about: The True Cost Of Meat 

"pearl" <tea.TakeThisOut@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:<cg7bv6$tav$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> "tcomeau" <tunderbar.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:b550f406.0408200629.73b1af61@posting.google.com...
> > "pearl" <tea.TakeThisOut@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:<cg2lrq$ijg$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > > "tcomeau" <tunderbar.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:b550f406.0408190631.1b9b7a07@posting.google.com...
> > > > "pearl" <tea.TakeThisOut@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:<cfrc6d$7h3$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > > > > "tcomeau" <tunderbar.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:b550f406.0408160602.236d5ddf@posting.google.com...
> > > > >
> > > > > <lots of silly ad hominem>
> > > > >
> > > > > > Both John's Hopkins and Mayor Bloomberg have taken swipes at Atkins in
> > > > > > the past.
> > > > >
> > > > > Who hasn't..
> > > > > www.all-creatures.org/mfz/health-atkins-mg.html
> > > >
> > > > Why are you referencing an article from an animal rights group in a
> > > > science newsgroup? Your wasting band-width and wasting our time.
> > >
> > > Ad hominem evasion.
> >
> > One must always consider the source. In this case the source is an
> > animal rights group. The historical radicalism and the extremism, not
> > to mention their financial support of domestic terrorism, within the
> > animal rights movement has completely skewered their approach to their
> > advocacy. The result is that there isn't an iota of credibility to
> > anything coming from them.
> >
> > Which, I believe is very unfortunate. Some of us who are truly
> > compassionate, in a less extremist way, about animals and their
> > treatment, are left with no credible voice on the issues.
> >
> > TC
>
> Ad hominem, continued evasion, and attempt at sidetracking, noted.

In order for me to rebut your arguments, you will have to present an
argument that has some credibility. Until then I will continue to ad
hominenize.

TC
 >> Stay informed about: The True Cost Of Meat 

"tcomeau" <tunderbar DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message news:b550f406.0408211532.4e1c6106@posting.google.com...
> "pearl" <tea DeleteThis @signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:<cg7bv6$tav$1@kermit.esat.net>...
<..>

> > Ad hominem, continued evasion, and attempt at sidetracking, noted.
>
> In order for me to rebut your arguments, you will have to present an
> argument that has some credibility. Until then I will continue to ad
> hominenize.

You just can't help yourself, can you? Done.

THE SKINNY ON ATKINS
By Michael Greger, M.D.

Part I
http://www.all-creatures.org/mfz/health-atkins-mg.html

Part II
http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/2004nl/040700puatkins.htm
 >> Stay informed about: The True Cost Of Meat 

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 23:55:16 +0100, "pearl" <tea.DeleteThis@signguestbook.ie>
wrote:

>>> ATKINS is not the authority. 20,000,000 years of teeth evolution has
>> identified that the diet has changed many times on the road to modern
>> human teeth, which include now both molars and incisors.
>
>'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!
....
> 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. ... It would be extremely
>difficult, if not impossible, for humans to eat raw flesh without the
>aid of fork and knife.

Precisely - we use weapons and tools for killing our prey and cutting
it up, not our teeth (and have done throughout our existence as a
species). Plus we usually cook our food as well, which makes it softer
and even easier to chew. So our teeth have to do far less work than
those of most other carnivores, which is why they are smaller.

>> Humans are
>> OMNIVORES, capable of eating a large assortment of foods including
>> meats, vegetables, seeds, berries, fish, grubs, and ice cream.
>
We are not omnivores. Our digestive tract is that of a typical
carnivore, it is much shorter than that of herbivores and is
completely unable to digest cellulose. Herbivores and true omnivores
(such as the rat) have a digesive system that allows fermentative
bacteria to break down cellulose. They derive energy and nutrients
from these fermentative bacteria, which allows them to survive on a
diet of fibrous plant matter alone if need be. We don't have this
capability, which means that most vegetative matter is completely
indigestible for us. It also means that even the limited plant foods
we can eat don't give us all the nutrients we need, people who are
forced to live on vegetarian foods alone without animal protein become
severely malnourished.

Just because we can eat fruit, nuts, and starchy vegetables (after
they've been cooked!) doesn't make us omnivores. Even highly
carnivorous animals such as hyenas and wolves will eat fruit when they
come across it. If we were true omnivores we would be able to digest
ordinary plant materials like grass and tree leaves.
 >> Stay informed about: The True Cost Of Meat 

"Hugh" <mightyhugh RemoveThis @yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:412917d3.647027@news.btopenworld.com...
> On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 23:55:16 +0100, "pearl" <tea RemoveThis @signguestbook.ie>
> wrote:
>
> >>> ATKINS is not the authority. 20,000,000 years of teeth evolution has
> >> identified that the diet has changed many times on the road to modern
> >> human teeth, which include now both molars and incisors.
> >
> >'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!
> ...
> > 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. ... It would be extremely
> >difficult, if not impossible, for humans to eat raw flesh without the
> >aid of fork and knife.
>
> Precisely - we use weapons and tools for killing our prey and cutting
> it up, not our teeth (and have done throughout our existence as a
> species). Plus we usually cook our food as well, which makes it softer
> and even easier to chew. So our teeth have to do far less work than
> those of most other carnivores, which is why they are smaller.

We use airplanes to fly, so does that mean we're a type of bird?

> >> Humans are
> >> OMNIVORES, capable of eating a large assortment of foods including
> >> meats, vegetables, seeds, berries, fish, grubs, and ice cream.
> >
> We are not omnivores.

True, humans are obligate frugivores.

> Our digestive tract is that of a typical carnivore,

Wrong!

'Among the various species throughout nature, the length of their
particular alimentary canals also differs greatly in relation to their
natural food. The gut of the carnivore is 3-6 times the length of
their body. They require a short, smooth, fast-acting gut since
their natural flesh diet becomes quite toxic and cannot be retained
within the intestine for long without poisonous putrefaction taking
place. The gut of the herbivore is sacculated for greater surface
area, and is 30 times the length of their body. Its herb and grass
diet is coarse and fibrous, requiring longer digestion to break
down cellulose. The length of the omnivores alimentary canal is
generally 6 times its body trunk size. The gut of the frugivore
(like humans) is also sacculated and is 12 times the length of it's
body. The length of the adult human alimentary canal is about
30 feet. The human digestive tract is about four times as long as
the carnivores. The intestine of the carnivore is short and smooth
in order to dissolve food rapidly and pass it quickly out of the
system prior to the flesh putrefying. The human digestive tract
is corrugated for the specific purpose of retaining food as long
as possible until all nutriment has been extracted, which is the
worst possible condition for the digestion and processing of
flesh foods. Meat moves quickly through the carnivores
digestive tract and is quickly expelled. The human lengthy
intestine cannot handle low-fiber foods including meat and
dairy very quickly at all. As a consequence, animal foods
decrease the motility of the human intestine and putrefaction
almost invariably occurs (as evidenced by foul smelling stools
and flatulence), resulting in the release of many poisonous
by-products as the low-fiber food passes through, ever so
slowly. In humans, eventual constipation may develop on
a meat-centered diet. Colon cancer is also common, both
of which are rare or non-existent on a high-fiber diet
centered around raw fruits and vegetables. '
http://www.iol.ie/~creature/BiologicalAdaptations.htm

> it is much shorter than that of herbivores and is
> completely unable to digest cellulose.

Which is why we need molars- to mash and liquidize our food,
breaking open plants' cellulose cell-walls, to get at the nutrients.

> Herbivores and true omnivores
> (such as the rat) have a digesive system that allows fermentative
> bacteria to break down cellulose. They derive energy and nutrients
> from these fermentative bacteria, which allows them to survive on a
> diet of fibrous plant matter alone if need be. We don't have this
> capability, which means that most vegetative matter is completely
> indigestible for us.

There is sufficient variety of plant-foods that we can and do consume.

> It also means that even the limited plant foods
> we can eat don't give us all the nutrients we need, people who are
> forced to live on vegetarian foods alone without animal protein become
> severely malnourished.

False.

'Analyses of data from the China studies by his collaborators
and others, Campbell told the epidemiology symposium, is leading
to policy recommendations. He mentioned three:

* The greater the variety of plant-based foods in the diet, the greater
the benefit. Variety insures broader coverage of known and unknown
nutrient needs.

* Provided there is plant food variety, quality and quantity, a healthful
and nutritionally complete diet can be attained without animal-based
food.

* The closer the food is to its native state - with minimal heating, salting
and processing - the greater will be the benefit.

http://www.sdearthtimes.com/et1101/et1101s18.html

> Just because we can eat fruit, nuts, and starchy vegetables (after
> they've been cooked!)

Not necessarilly. (You eat raw flesh?).

> doesn't make us omnivores. Even highly
> carnivorous animals such as hyenas and wolves will eat fruit when they
> come across it. If we were true omnivores we would be able to digest
> ordinary plant materials like grass and tree leaves.

See above, and I'd suggest following the link.

But first, to really confuse you;

Feeding types:
-------------------------------------
Herbivores Plant matter
-
Grazers grass
Browsers leaves, grass
Frugivores fruit
Folivores leaves
Nectarivores plant nectar
Granivores grain, seeds, nuts /p
--------------------------------------
Carnivores vertebrate prey
--------------------------------------
Insectivores insects
Ant eaters ants, termites
--------------------------------------
Piscivores fish
--------------------------------------
Scavengers dead animals
--------------------------------------
Sanguivores blood
--------------------------------------
Omnivores plants and animals
--------------------------------------
http://www.bio.gasou.edu/Bio-home/Pratt/vzmamm203.htm
 >> Stay informed about: The True Cost Of Meat 

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 11:54:34 +0100, "pearl" <tea.RemoveThis@signguestbook.ie>
wrote:


>> >> Humans are
>> >> OMNIVORES, capable of eating a large assortment of foods including
>> >> meats, vegetables, seeds, berries, fish, grubs, and ice cream.
>> >
>> We are not omnivores.
>
>True, humans are obligate frugivores.
>
>> Our digestive tract is that of a typical carnivore,
>
>Wrong!
>
Once it's passed through our stomach, our food is mixed with bile and
a number of digestive enzymes. The bile acts to emulsify fats,
breaking them up into small globules that can more easily be acted on
by the digestive enzymes. These enzymes break down fats into fatty
acids and protein into amino acids, which are then absorbed through
the wall of the small intestine. All this takes place without any help
from bacteria, which means that we don't require bacteria to aid in
our digestion. The slurry left behind after all the nutrients have
been removed then passes into the large intestine, where most of the
water is removed to produce a consolidated fecal mass which is then
excreted. We don't absorb nutrients in our large intestine, just
water. There are bacteria in the large intestine, but they are
putrefactive, not fermentative. The digestive process of other
carnivores works in exactly the same way.

Herbivores (and also omnivores) digest food in a completely different
way. They mix the food with fermentative bacteria and have a long,
convoluted intestine that gives the bacteria plenty of time to break
down cellulose, the main constituent of fibrous plant matter. Only
after the fermentative bacteria have had time to digest the cellulose
does the animal pump in its own digestive enzymes. Herbivores get much
of their nutrition from digesting these bacteria (which have by then
converted the cellulose into fatty acids and protein) rather than from
the plant matter itself.

Fermentative digestion is essential if ordinary fibrous plant tissues
such as leaves and twigs are to be digested. Because we don't have
fermentative digestion, we are restricted to a very narrow range of
plant-sourced foods (those high in starches or oils and low in
cellulose, such as certain tubers, grains, fruits and nuts).

In other words our digestive system works in exactly the same way as
that of most carnivores. Our inability to digest cellulose means that
we cannot correctly be classified as omnivores. We are carnivores. The
fact that we can eat a very limited range of plant-sourced foods means
nothing - other carnivores can and do eat fruits when the opportunity
arises.

....
> animal foods
>decrease the motility of the human intestine and putrefaction
>almost invariably occurs (as evidenced by foul smelling stools
>and flatulence), resulting in the release of many poisonous
>by-products as the low-fiber food passes through, ever so
>slowly.

In my experience, the foods most likely to cause flatulence and the
emission of foul-smelling gases are all vegetarian foods, such as
beans, peanuts, lager and crisps. I don't seem to fart at all when
eating meat on its own. So if gaseous emissions and foul smells are
any guide, vegetarian foods putrefy far more in the human intestine
than meat does.

The real reason carnivores have much shorter intestines than
herbivores is that meat is much easier to digest than plant-sourced
foods. Carnivores quite simply don't need a long intestine, and having
one would weigh them down and reduce their agility. Like other
carnivores, we also have a short intestine - not quite as short as
that of long-time carnivores such as lions and wolves, but far shorter
than that of herbivores nonetheless. We use traps and weapons rather
than superior agility and speed to capture our prey, which means that
our intestines can be bulkier than that of other predators without
affecting our hunting ability.

> In humans, eventual constipation may develop on
>a meat-centered diet.
You can eat an all-meat diet without becoming constipated. Certain
societies such as the Inuit have lived on an all-meat diet for
thousands of years without dying out from chronic constipation and
putrefying bowels.

> Colon cancer is also common, both
>of which are rare or non-existent on a high-fiber diet
>centered around raw fruits and vegetables. '

There are some studies that appear to show an association between meat
and colon cancer, but then there are others where colon cancer is
associated with starches, sugars and polyunsaturated vegetable oils. I
guess the results depend on whether the authors of the study are
biased towards vegetarianism or not.

>
>> it is much shorter than that of herbivores and is
>> completely unable to digest cellulose.
>
>Which is why we need molars- to mash and liquidize our food,
>breaking open plants' cellulose cell-walls, to get at the nutrients.
>
You need to chew fibrous plant matter for a very long time to break
open a high percentage of the cell walls - herbivores typically spend
most of their waking hours chewing. They also get most of their
nutrition from fermentative bacteria, rather than from the plant
tissues themselves.

>> Herbivores and true omnivores
>> (such as the rat) have a digesive system that allows fermentative
>> bacteria to break down cellulose. They derive energy and nutrients
>> from these fermentative bacteria, which allows them to survive on a
>> diet of fibrous plant matter alone if need be. We don't have this
>> capability, which means that most vegetative matter is completely
>> indigestible for us.
>
>There is sufficient variety of plant-foods that we can and do consume.
>
>> It also means that even the limited plant foods
>> we can eat don't give us all the nutrients we need, people who are
>> forced to live on vegetarian foods alone without animal protein become
>> severely malnourished.
>
>False.

During famines, people often can't obtain meat at all and are forced
to subsist on starchy plant foods alone. They go on to develop a
condition called kwashiorkor, which is characterised by a pot belly,
emaciated appearance, stunted growth, mental retardation etc.
Eventually if they don't get meat they die. Famine victims typically
don't die of starvation, they die of malnutrition. We can't survive
without animal protein. Herbivores can, because they can synthesize a
wider range of amino acids and essential fatty acids than we can and
because they get nutients from the fermentative bacteria in their
digestive tract (which we don't have). Vegetarians and vegans in
western societies get round this by either consuming animal protein in
the form of dairy, eggs or fish, or by taking supplements.

Hugh
 >> Stay informed about: The True Cost Of Meat 

Once again great post. It is too bad that when it comes to reality
checks like this ideological extremist fanatics like Pearl just cover
their ears and say lalalal. Another important fact is that not only
is animal protein most easily digested by humans but RAW animal
protein is even more efficiently so. Experiments such as those done
by Francis Pottinger also show the benefits of raw animal foods to
carnivors. I think the transition of the human diet from containing a
large percentage of raw food to our modern diet of almost 100% cooked
food is a big reason in the degeneration of health in our modern
society. It would be nice if you could comment on that since im sure
you are more knowledgeable than I.
 >> Stay informed about: The True Cost Of Meat