We Weren't Designed To Eat Meat, Here Is Proof

Show me proof meat doesnt rot in your digestive track.. I have had many doctors tell me it can. It takes less than 24 hours for meat to start giving off toxins, or rotting. As for being a bible thumper, I will only state this once, I have on use for the bible except for a archaeological reference, not a historic but archaeological...I believe the bible is a human narrative from people who had no grasp of the scientific world around us. Our stomach enzimes are not strong enough to break meat down fast enough before it starts to rot, doctors have opened up patients and found undigested rotting meat in the stomach of patients, it is documented. I could point you to a dozen google searches that say yes red meat does rot in your stomach or digestive track but you will always have those poeple who will not believe or start screaming "BIBLE THUMPERS" because they are to inept to discuss the topic rationally.

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


The odd doctors that I have spoke with are from the Mayo Clinic, the UCSF, and Harborview in Seattle. The doctors I refer to our doctors that are the top people in thier field. I had astro cytoma of the brain and I have also and still do have cancer of the spinal cord. The doctors I refer to are my doctors that performed Brain surgery and the 5 man team of doctors that opened up my spinal cord and removed a cancer biopsy from my spinal cord, not the enduro but from the actual bundle of nerves in my spinal cord. That should tell you the stature of these doctors...They were not from my local nose bleed clinic. I wish that people who choose to debate a point would take more time to research so they can debate rather than just agrue a point.

Originally posted by Bachelor
When a Vegetarian girl I was dating, told me that the life of a fish is no less important than my own... I've since come to realize it's best not to try and understand how those people think.

**just nods and agrees... whatever you say dear.

If you think objectively...a human is really no more important than a fish. Both don't serve some great necessary universal purpose. They live, sleep, reproduce, eat, #, die. Of course, being a human, I would like to think I am more important than a fish. But that's the key, I would LIKE to think.

reply to post by jalien


Lets make something clear here, when meat is digested and broken down it doesn't smell great. When fruit and vegetables break down in the gut, they absolutely stink, if you have ever skinned a rabbit and nicked it's intestines you will know the true smell of digested matter, i can't describe it but it is hard to wash out your clothes i promise you.

If meat rots within a day then i am lucky to be alive as i've kept cold chicken for a couple of days to put on sandwiches. I do it quite regularly actually. I think the rotting meat recovered from patients as you describe is being misrepresented, it's simply food that's being broken down. Although technically any breaking down of food by bacteria is rotting, so it could be said all food that enters our gut is rotting including fruit and vegetables

How does a doctor define rotting meat in intestines? I would be interested to know. Because as i said, technically any food matter entering your digestive tract, being broken down by bacteria and enzymes is rotting, whether it's a slab of beef or an apple.

.They were not from my local nose bleed clinic. I wish that people who choose to debate a point would take more time to research so they can debate rather than just agrue a point.

My apologies i just wanted to see if you'd bite lol, i don't usually do that but you have been so condescending i thought it should be done. These doctors no matter what stature in their field are going against science. We have teeth designed to eat meat, enzymes in our bodies specifically designed to break down meat proteins and bacteria in our guts that thrive on meat.

[edit on 15-6-2008 by ImaginaryReality1984]

hey guys just my 2 cents worth here ...i read an interesting artical a while back on this stuff and another reason they think we eat cooked meat(hot or warm) is to imitate a fresh kill,cant remember were i read it but will try to post link.

peace

It is generally acknowledged by anthropologists that we wouldn't have evolved into homo sapiens without the extra protein found in meat. The protein being responsible for our large brains. Having said that, what we probably started out eating was marrow from scavenged carcasses. Homo habilis, an early man before homo erectus, used tools to crack bones and eat the marrow. So, technically, we were meat eaters before we became homo sapiens.

The first cooked meat was probably the scavenged carcass of an animal killed in a forest fire.

[edit on 15-6-2008 by TheComte]

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

I challenge you then to sit a plate of meat in the sun or at 98 degrees or greater somewhere exposed and let it sit for 24 hours then eat it...you trying to tell me that room temperature meat doesnt start to rot in 24 hours, little lone exposed to prior digestions that have already have the bacteria associated with rotting food which exists in your stomach and intestines.. Like I said before this has gone from a debate to someone just wanting to argure, place facts out there please Imagine instead of just trying to reduce this debate into an arguement. I believe that is the main problem with this forum, I should rephrase that, not the forum but the people whom you choose to debate in this forum. There are the ones who really want to debate facts and those who want to fight over opinions. Here is something to think about, would you sit and argue with a child over the patriot act. Of course not!! Why? More than likely the child has not read it and if he has he or she does not have the capacity to fully understand it. That to me is what I believe happens to most of the links here on ATS

As for the post after Imagine, I certainly agree that the higher protein levels jumped started the evolution of man, but thats not to say that if man had never eaten meat and cont. on as an agricultural society that grains with just as high as protien contect as meat would have been discovered and planted therefore jump starting the higher brain functions. There are plenty of grains and bugs with protien levels equal to that of red meat.

i agree with u,i was more or less just saying that even today it seems that we are still trying to imitate a fresh catch so to speek,in a much more cival manor.

Originally posted by jalien
Show me proof meat doesnt rot in your digestive track.. I have had many doctors tell me it can. It takes less than 24 hours for meat to start giving off toxins, or rotting. As for being a bible thumper, I will only state this once, I have on use for the bible except for a archaeological reference, not a historic but archaeological...I believe the bible is a human narrative from people who had no grasp of the scientific world around us. Our stomach enzimes are not strong enough to break meat down fast enough before it starts to rot, doctors have opened up patients and found undigested rotting meat in the stomach of patients, it is documented.

I agree, to an extent. What you are failing to do is telling us what kind of meat was found rotten inside of those patients. I'll make a guess and say it was most likely pork and probably bovine. I insist that humans are perfectly evolved to eat meat, just not beef and pork.

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


The problem is not with the food rotting or going bad inside your body, its the toxins given off while this process is happening. Meat gives of poisons unlike grains and vegtables. I am not sure about fruit. Its those poisons which are not good for your body. That once again is why a carnivorious animal has a shorter digestive track, its to get those toxins out of the body much quicker, also the harsher acids break the food down quicker. Although the harsher acids my be attributed to thier lifestyle of not knowing when the next meal is coming, so therefore the body needs to break the food down quicker and get the protiens into the body much quicker in case it has gone days without food. So the stomach acids is less conclusive than the digestive track.

Originally posted by jalien
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

 

I challenge you then to sit a plate of meat in the sun or at 98 degrees or greater somewhere exposed and let it sit for 24 hours then eat it...you trying to tell me that room temperature meat doesnt start to rot in 24 hours, little lone exposed to prior digestions that have already have the bacteria associated with rotting food which exists in your stomach and intestines.. Like I said before this has gone from a debate to someone just wanting to argure, place facts out there please Imagine instead of just trying to reduce this debate into an arguement.

Don#t try turning this around you were the one who started the insults many pages back calling people ignorant. The test you give wouldn't be scientific now would it, a real test would involve a sealed system not something in direct sunlight. I noticed you skipped over the FACT that an breaking down of food could technically be called rotting. You skipped over the FACt that a rabbit, freshly cut open, if you nick it's intestine absolutely smells foul because of the digestive process and they are essentially fluffy versions of vegans. This smell could easily be misinterpreted of "rotting" food, although again technially it is rotted as it's being broken down.

Please provide a link about the rotting of food in intestines that surgeons have found so i can review it, you ask for facts but provide none of your own.

I think you are simply trying to down my points by saying i'm just trying to cause an arguement, i am not doing that i am trying to debate the issue the OP asked to be debated in regards to the forum we're in. That i believe is following the terms and conditions of the site.

Originally posted by joecamel
I believe that is the main problem with this forum, I should rephrase that, not the forum but the people whom you choose to debate in this forum. There are the ones who really want to debate facts and those who want to fight over opinions. Here is something to think about, would you sit and argue with a child over the patriot act. Of course not!! Why? More than likely the child has not read it and if he has he or she does not have the capacity to fully understand it. That to me is what I believe happens to most of the links here on ATS

And now you go way off ona rant about the people on ATs instead of teh issue at hand, further trying to discredit me instead of directly viewing my arguement and coming up with counter points and evidence. I honestly wanted to debate the issue, you are the one avoiding it so lets get back on topic shall we and stop this pettyness.

The original question was "Were we designed to eat meat?". The thread title stated we weren't and others have argued we were. My arguements are we have canine teeth, enzymes and bacteria to break down meat proteins specifically. There give me counter points for those so we can get back to the facts you love.

Originally posted by joecamel
As for the post after Imagine, I certainly agree that the higher protein levels jumped started the evolution of man, but thats not to say that if man had never eaten meat and cont. on as an agricultural society that grains with just as high as protien contect as meat would have been discovered and planted therefore jump starting the higher brain functions. There are plenty of grains and bugs with protien levels equal to that of red meat.

Actually i am not sure that meat protein encouraged the evolution of man. I've seen some solid arguements against that by very good scientists. I'm undecided on the issue, and no i'm not arguing for the sake of it as you'll probably accuse me of, that is a serious but unrelated point.

[edit on 15-6-2008 by ImaginaryReality1984]

[edit on 15-6-2008 by ImaginaryReality1984]

Originally posted by jalien
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

 

The problem is not with the food rotting or going bad inside your body, its the toxins given off while this process is happening. Meat gives of poisons unlike grains and vegtables. I am not sure about fruit. Its those poisons which are not good for your body. That once again is why a carnivorious animal has a shorter digestive track, its to get those toxins out of the body much quicker, also the harsher acids break the food down quicker. Although the harsher acids my be attributed to thier lifestyle of not knowing when the next meal is coming, so therefore the body needs to break the food down quicker and get the protiens into the body much quicker in case it has gone days without food. So the stomach acids is less conclusive than the digestive track.

Ok you're going to have to provide evidence for that as well. Which poisons are you talking about here? Actually some vegetables can be very bad for you, anything from the nightshade family can increase inflammation, anyone with artritis should avoid tomatoes for example.

Carnivorous animals have shorter tracts because they don't need long ones anymore. When we were big into eating leaves and tons of highly insoluble fibre we needed very long tracts to break down the tough, double cell walls of plants. It has nothing to do with toxins and you're deliberatley misinterpreting the facts of science.

I've heard two main theories on stomach acid, one is that it breaks down food, the other is that it protects us from harmful bacteria.

When you eat meat, you put your body into over drive to produce the acids needed to digest it. Which means your body is working harder than it should which results in expeditures of too much energy. Thats why we fell sluggish after our meaty meals. Last I heard, a serving of meat smaller than a deck of cards is all a human needs, once a month. Overall, to live in harmony, one does not need meat.

Originally posted by jalien
Show me proof meat doesnt rot in your digestive track.. I have had many doctors tell me it can. It takes less than 24 hours for meat to start giving off toxins, or rotting.

I'm sorry, I know it's awfully confusing, but I don't believe that these doctors meant that or that they know what they're talking about due to its simplicity.

Meat rots due to microorganisms. You know this, right? It's broken down by bacteria, and goes bad because it's turning from meat to bacteria crap.

Now, what do you need for meat to rot? That's right, meat-eating bacteria. You basically "rot" meat, too, as your body breaks it down using digestive enzymes. But, the question - is meat digested by the same microorganisms that causes it to spoil?

I believe the answer is no due to the fact that your digestive tract is generally a very inhospitable environment for such things to take place. It's essentially designed to prevent that from happening. Your stomach had hydrochloric acid, and then the acidity changes as it goes through your intestines. I find it highly unlikely that the meat would be broken down by foreign bacteria in a way that toxins normally found in spoiled are produced.

You can probably do this at home. Get some litmus paper, hyrochloric acid (as highly concentrated as you can, since you'll be diluting it), and some freshly cooked meat (don't sabotage the experiment by leaving it out or cooking it wrong!). Add hydrochloric acid to a glass container, and dilute it until the litmus shows a pH between 1 and 2 (yes, it's between 1 and 2. Some vegan here incorrectly stated that it wasn't. And you might not even have to add water to get to this pH if it's not highly concentrated HCl). Once this is completed, put the meat in your mouth and chew. This should be the best part of the experiment. Then spit it out, put it into the hydrochloric acid (carefully, don't let it splash or get on you!), and seal. Try and keep it around the temperature of the body.
Leave it in there for a day.

I'm currently looking for a way to test for molecular compounds normally found in spoiled meat. I'll get back to you, or you can find it yourself.

Frankly, most flesh-eaters live in euphemistic ignorance. Anyone who is arguing you can't survive on a vego diet is full of c**p.

EATING FLESH IS NOT A QUESTION OF SURVIVAL,
IT IS A QUESTION OF ETHICS.

End of story.

The story source is not exactly the best when I look for "proof". I will continue my regular diet.

Originally posted by jalien
screaming "BIBLE THUMPERS" because they are to inept to discuss the topic rationally.

I certainly was not screaming as this is type written text...and please point out HOW my discussion was irrational in nature?
I was giving an answer to a question by another poster.....and your jumping on 2 words I typed and making suppositions of those 2 words.

I am asking you to be specific in pointing out my IRRATIONAL points of the conversation.
You can only be speaking to me as I was the ONLY PERSON who used the words 'Bible Thumpers' in my attempt at answering the posted question....I am rather offended at your telling me I am inept at conversation as what I added to the thread was clearly more insightfully thought out than your addition where you lash out at me.

...so please............go on and tell me what, if anything was irrational about what I said.


[edit on 15-6-2008 by theRiverGoddess]

Originally posted by Shar_Chi
Frankly, most flesh-eaters live in euphemistic ignorance. Anyone who is arguing you can't survive on a vego diet is full of c**p.

EATING FLESH IS NOT A QUESTION OF SURVIVAL,
IT IS A QUESTION OF ETHICS.

End of story.

Again you shoud check which forum you're in. This is the survival forum, you could not survive a British winter using only wild plant sources. I know about survival and i have plenty of knowledge about the plants in Britain that can be used for food. So when i say you can't survive ona vegan diet i mena actual survival situations, not modern living. Don't get the two confused.

Hate to say I told ya so, but I did. No matter how many facts you give they will tell you, you are wrong. They have been told on numerous occasions this is not the place for this type of discussion but there superior I am better then you attitudes still keep cramming it down our throats.

As for the list of smart vegaterians a few pages back. Take a good look at that list. Sure there is some brilliant people on there but there all on the nutty side.

There is no balance with out balance something is gonna give. In the case of the people on the list it was there full grasp on sanity.

I also noticed that it went from a discussion on meat which includes poultry and fish to just a slam fest against red meat. venison is considered a good meat for humans. its red, so is buffalo. so is it just cows your against.

I ask for proof that red meat does rot in the gut. We omnivores can match you expert for expert. We how ever have some thing else on our side. History. It has been proven with out a doubt that we have always ate meat.

I am curious, what is the difference is between vegaterions and vegans. Truthfully I did not relies there was a difference.