Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Is it dangerous to eat meat?











glasfryn

cleaning up cat sick
Nov 29, 2005
20,261
somewhere in Eastbourne
Wouldn't it be a laugh if it turned out McDonalds had the best quality beef on sale for all these years :lolol:

the thought drifted over me the other morning that the beef cat food pouch I gave my cats probably is 100% beef.......
 


withdeanwombat

Well-known member
Feb 17, 2005
8,732
Somersetshire
Nothing wrong with eating meat,even horse meat.As the Chief Medical Officer said,people are just influenced by the yuck factor.

Don't eat "value" ranges of food of any type,don't like the thought of mechanically recovered meats at all.

But I would eat horse meat if I knew thats what I was getting.Just would prefer to know what I'm getting and that it's what I ordered and paid for.

Please don't go on about the drugs in horses.I live with pain.All drugs welcome.
 




teaboy

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
1,840
My house
'100% beef' is not the same as '100% prime rump steak' - it's simply (supposed to be) 100% cow product, so mechanically-recovered entrails can still be 100% beef. The problem with this horsemeat issue is the labelling, and the best way to avoid labels being wrong is to not buy food in packets. Get fruit and veg from the market - you can see what you're buying and make a free choice. Buy meat from the butcher (obviously there's some trust here, but there are fewer links in the chain for problems to come in), and don't eat meat every day if you can't afford to - you don't need to. Protein is available in many other foods, and your body doesn't 'need' as much as most people put in anyway.
 


beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
36,063
with everything that's going on with the meat trade do you think it is dangerous to eat meat?
there is always someone skimming at bit off and making a fortune at someone else's expence only now it could be your health that is in danger

absolutly not. this is a couple of issues in the supply chain, but no means endemic throughout. if it is, then its not safe to assume its confined to meat. only a year or two ago there was the E-coli issue in broccolii and there are probably other incidents across europe that dont get reported here. if meat procssing has people skimming a bit off, then its reasonable to think that veg and fruit processing has people skimming a bit off.

since we arent all dieing or falling ill, i assume its isolated incidents.
 


Diego Napier

Well-known member
Mar 27, 2010
4,416
We are built to eat meat, best to buy from a reputable local butcher as most reday meals are full of junk meat anyway

Our bodies aren't designed to eat meat. We have started to eat meat fairly recently in our evolution because our ability to control fire means we can cook it rather than eat it raw.
 




Professor P

Member
Oct 6, 2006
86
Our bodies aren't designed to eat meat. We have started to eat meat fairly recently in our evolution because our ability to control fire means we can cook it rather than eat it raw.



Our bodies aren't designed to maintain a seated position or consume alcohol either - but I'll be f***ed if I'm going to stand around drinking Um Bungo.
 


Diego Napier

Well-known member
Mar 27, 2010
4,416
Our bodies aren't designed to maintain a seated position or consume alcohol either - but I'll be f***ed if I'm going to stand around drinking Um Bungo.

astute and worthwhile contribution
 


beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
36,063
Our bodies aren't designed to eat meat. We have started to eat meat fairly recently in our evolution because our ability to control fire means we can cook it rather than eat it raw.

so only a few hundred thousand years then. our consumption of meat predates fire any way, we are intended to eat meat, the only debate is over how much.
 




Professor P

Member
Oct 6, 2006
86
astute and worthwhile contribution

Ok chief, have some of this then...

A 21 century human eating just raw vegatable would last just 3 months before deterioration and death, such is the modern body’s adaptation to cooked food in an amazingly short space of time, in evolutionary terms. Our bodies can no longer digest raw food indefinitely.

When it comes to food, and there are a mirage of other example, human beings have engineered to ‘break’ their evolutionary code. That doesn’t mean that it’s wrong to be a vegetarian, it just means we are no longer dictated by our ancestors omnivorous past. I’m just suggesting that this line of ‘oh but were all omnivores deep down’ doesn’t really have any relevance today, just as saying the body’s mechanics were never design to sit on its arse because our ancestors always squatted rather than sat, until we invented this strange and rather unnatural upright sitting position.

And I still maintain my stance on Um Bungo
 


soistes

Well-known member
Sep 12, 2012
2,652
Brighton
Interesting debate. T

he question of what our bodies were "designed" or "built" to do seems irrelevant to me, not least because our bodies were not "designed" or "built" at all, but rather evolved. One key dimension of that evolution is the development of large brains, conscious awareness etc, which has given us a much greater ability to choose what we do, compared with other species. That choice includes doing all sorts of things to our bodies which are not necessarily things they would otherwise have evolved to do, without the additional factors associated with greater brain power. That choice also includes what we eat -- some people choose to eat meat, without great harm to themselves, others choose not to, also without harm to themselves: the evidence on what is better for you is mixed, although there are some good epidemiological studies which seem to suggest, after controlling for other factors, that not eating meat offers some advantages in terms of morbidity and mortality rates.

There are also some environmental benefits I understand, which arise from humans getting more of their protein from non-animal sources

Personally, I haven't eaten meat since 1974 -- a personal choice on aesthetic grounds: I'm not an animal lover at all, I just don't fancy eating their decomposing corpses, any more than I fancy eating the decomposing corpses of humans. The longer it's been since I last ate meat, the less I fancy the idea of it.

Naturally, I'm delighted that the Amex offers a decent vegetarian pie - the only ground in my years of going to matches that has done this, in my experience
 


Fef

Rock God.
Feb 21, 2009
1,729
What makes you think its any safer eating vegtables they are all potentialy covered in herbicide fungicide and pestacide. As for mushrooms there grown in shit

So what do cows stand in all day?
 






Diego Napier

Well-known member
Mar 27, 2010
4,416
so only a few hundred thousand years then. our consumption of meat predates fire any way, we are intended to eat meat, the only debate is over how much.

On which basis?

Evolutionary scientists believe that the diet of any animal corresponds to its anatomical and physiological system. Animals can be divided into three categories according to their natural diet:

Carnivores such as lions, dogs, cats that live mostly on meat
Herbivores such as cows, sheep, and elephants that eat grass and leaves
Frugivores such as anthropoid apes that live on fruits, nuts, and grains

The intestinal tract of carnivores is only three times their body length so that rapidly decaying meat can pass out quickly.
Herbivores and frugivores, have intestinal tracts which are about twelve times their body length and their teeth are small and dull; so do humans.

Carnivores have claws and sharp front teeth for tearing.
Herbivores and frugivores have flat molars for grinding and small dull teeth; so do humans.

Carnivores have strong hydrochloric acid in their stomach to digest meat.
Herbivores and frugivores have stomach acid twenty times less strong than meat-eaters; so do humans.

Carnivores have no pores and they perspire through the tongue to cool their bodies.
Herbivores and frugivores perspire through millions of pores on the skin; so do humans.

Carnivores have small salivary glands in their mouth because they do not need to pre-digest flesh.
Herbivores and frugivores have well developed salivary glands which are needed to pre-digest grains and fruits; so do humans.

It seems that because of circumstances over the past several thousand years of man's history, some humans deviated from their natural diet and be came omnivores who eat both meat and plants. However, our anatomical and physiological features have remained similar to those of other vegetarian animals. In addition, humans can't eat raw meat like carnivores do. It is cooked, baked, boiled or fried, then decorated with sauces and spices to suppress its raw taste.

In addition to anatomical and physiological features, a human's natural instincts are very different from those of meat-eating animals. The day that you wake up and find yourself consumed with the desire to pounce upon a bird, tear its still living limbs apart with your teeth and suck its warm blood is the time when you might consider that you're designed to eat meat.
 


Nibble

New member
Jan 3, 2007
19,238
Our bodies aren't designed to maintain a seated position or consume alcohol either - but I'll be f***ed if I'm going to stand around drinking Um Bungo.

I am willing to be corrected but I don't think this is true. We have incisors designed to masticate meat, these would not have evolved in the time since we started cooking meat. All indications are that we were heavily dependant on raw meat in our diet for a long time. Our evolution leap-frogged when we learned to cook meat as it broke down and released vital proteins that enabled our brains to develop. We probably eat more meat now than we have ever done before though.

Humans obviously used to have a very short life span, perhaps anything between 15 and 30 years on average. We would have led short, brutal lives filled with danger and would have frequently employed our fight or flight instinct, protein fuels this act and allowed us to develop dense, quick response muscle fibres. The detrimental effects of 50, 60, 70 years of eating a diet high in meat would not have time to take effect in our early, short lifespan. They could effectively eat as much meat as they could kill and did so. We however do not need that dense muscle and live mostly without terminal danger in our lives so we don't need that much meat and we have the lifespan for the detrimental effects of eating a lot of meat (colon cancer, bowel cancer etc) to manifest.


As an aside, the military are experimenting with introducing enzymes and bacteria into soldiers guts to enable them to effectively digest bark and grasses, thus enabling them to eat cheaply and abundently while in the field. I'll have some of that, would cut down on my shopping bill, just pop outside and have a graze!

Edit: Think I quoted the wrong person
 
Last edited:






smeariestbat

New member
May 5, 2012
1,731
FFs, Is there a thread on here in the last month that hasn't descended into puns. f***ing wank.

dont worry, they cant go on furlong :thumbsup:
 




Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here