Reactions to these veggie burgers?

[+ oldNbusted]

I eat meat because I enjoy eating meat, it's not any more complicated than that. It's certainly not because I'm stupid. It's never a good sign when people resort to logical fallacies like argument by assertion and straw men. The synthetics are not as good. Maybe they will get better, but I do doubt they will ever be the same.

 

This post was marked insulting by jtorretto. Now sticking up for straw men, I suppose.

[+ oldNbusted]

Again with the accusations of ignorance.

 

This post was marked insulting by jtorretto.

[+ oldNbusted]

Again with the accusations of ignorance.

 

This post was marked insulting by jtorretto.

[JTtorretto]

Too afraid to answer my question about dog meat OldnBusted?

[JTtorretto]

Too afraid to answer my question about dog meat OldnBusted?

[+ oldNbusted]

Now resulting to accusations of cowardice, a personal insult.

[+ oldNbusted]

Now resulting to accusations of cowardice, a personal insult.

[Cooper]

Admin Note: Lets stay on topic. No personal attacks.

[Cooper]

Admin Note: Lets stay on topic. No personal attacks.

[MikeBiDude]

I’m not feeling a lot of open mindedness on the topic from @JTtorretto on this topic...but this book describes a humane way of raising beef. Yeah...you have to slaughter them before you eat them...no way around that! But as outlined in this book the way the beef are raised, treated, fed, and slaughtered are indeed out of the mainstream.

 

FYI the book is Co-written by founders of Crowd Cow an online source of craft/artisan beef I’ve bought from frequently over the last few years.

[MikeBiDude]

I’m not feeling a lot of open mindedness on the topic from @JTtorretto on this topic...but this book describes a humane way of raising beef. Yeah...you have to slaughter them before you eat them...no way around that! But as outlined in this book the way the beef are raised, treated, fed, and slaughtered are indeed out of the mainstream.

 

FYI the book is Co-written by founders of Crowd Cow an online source of craft/artisan beef I’ve bought from frequently over the last few years.

[JTtorretto]

[JTtorretto]

I’m not feeling a lot of open mindedness on the topic from @JTtorretto on this topic...but this book describes a humane way of raising beef. Yeah...you have to slaughter them before you eat them...no way around that!

 

admin Cooper just said “No more personal attacks” and you then follow up his post by immediately stating that Im “close minded”.

 

??

 

because I don’t find the cruel slaughter of an innocent creature acceptable, especially when it’s completely unnecessary.

[MikeBiDude]

I’m sure we can search the Internet and find many horrible slaughterhouse stories, photos, and maybe even videos.

See, you did exactly what I predicted!

[Guest]

 

Well, this man's video contains lies, so, I'm sorry, but I'm not going to take advice from a liar. "Eggs are full of cholesterol and really bad for you?". I'm sorry, but it's the saturated fat content, not the cholesterol content of food which raises peoples' cholesterol. Eggs are generally considered a healthful food. And what evidence does he have that laying eggs is "stressful" to hens? And for God's sake, "speciesism"? One species serving another? What exactly do you think happens to most herbivores? Most get eaten by carnivores or omnivores (and even most carnivorous animals are also eaten by other animals). It's called the food chain, and the circle of life. There would be massive problems with our ecosystem if there weren't carnivores. I guess one has to decide what standard one has to apply to consider one's eggs cruelty-free. The most exacting standard seems to be that of "Animal Welfare Approved," assuming that one believes that clipping the beaks causes lasting pain (I personally doubt it, but I don't know that it's been studied).

No one can deny the truth that the life of most wild animals involves lots of pain, stress, disease, starvation, injury, and what one might perceive as cruelty. Of course, one can work to reduce unnecessary cruelty in domesticated animals. But one would have to be completely out of touch with reality to believe wild animals don't suffer a lot, because they do.

And comparing egg-raising to slavery--in which human beings were worked to the bone from sunrise to sunset, whipped, flogged, and sometimes lynched--takes the vegan "argument" to a new level of preposterous. It's insulting and insensitive to the memory of slavery, actually.

Edited December 3, 2019 by Unicorn

[Rudynate]

Well, this man's video contains lies, so, I'm sorry, but I'm not going to take advice from a liar. "Eggs are full of cholesterol and really bad for you?". I'm sorry, but it's the saturated fat content, not the cholesterol content of food which raises peoples' cholesterol. Eggs are generally considered a healthful food. And what evidence does he have that laying eggs is "stressful" to hens? And for God's sake, "speciesism"? One species serving another? What exactly do you think happens to most herbivores? Most get eaten by carnivores or omnivores (and even most carnivorous animals are also eaten by other animals). It's called the food chain, and the circle of life. There would be massive problems with our ecosystem if there weren't carnivores. I guess one has to decide what standard one has to apply to consider one's eggs cruelty-free. The most exacting standard seems to be that of "Animal Welfare Approved," assuming that one believes that clipping the beaks causes lasting pain (I personally doubt it, but I don't know that it's been studied).

No one can deny the truth that the life of most wild animals involves lots of pain, stress, disease, starvation, injury, and what one might perceive as cruelty. Of course, one can work to reduce unnecessary cruelty in domesticated animals. But one would have to be completely out of touch with reality to believe wild animals don't suffer a lot, because they do.

And comparing egg-raising to slavery--in which human beings were worked to the bone from sunrise to sunset, whipped, flogged, and sometimes lynched--takes the vegan "argument" to a new level of preposterous. It's insulting and insensitive to the memory of slavery, actually.

 

Approximately 30% of the population is sensitive to dietary cholesterol-a very large minority. Those who are positive for the apo e trait, in particular, process lipids differently from the rest of the population and are sensitive to dietary cholesterol. People who have at least one copy of the apo e allele account for about 30% of the population.

[Guest]

Approximately 30% of the population is sensitive to dietary cholesterol-a very large minority. Those who are positive for the apo e trait, in particular, process lipids differently from the rest of the population and are sensitive to dietary cholesterol. People who have at least one copy of the apo e allele account for about 30% of the population.

Where did you get that information regarding dietary cholesterol? Some lying vegan's YouTube blog? This is what the Harvard Medical School's Harvard Health Letter says:

https://www.health.harvard.edu/heart-health/unscrambling-the-message-on-eggs

 

"If your liver makes too much cholesterol, it's usually the result of eating too much saturated fat, which raises blood levels of harmful LDL cholesterol far more than cholesterol-rich foods like eggs do. Meat and full-fat dairy products are the biggest sources of saturated fat, but baked and fried foods also provide a fair amount of saturated fat in the average American diet. But for most people, dietary cholesterol isn't that closely connected to blood cholesterol levels, though for some it can make a large difference. This is reflected in the current Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which dropped its earlier suggestion to limit dietary cholesterol (see "Forty years of hard-boiled advice about eggs")."

"First published in 1980, the Dietary Guidelines for Americans are updated every five years. The original guidelines advised people to avoid consuming too much cholesterol. But it wasn't until 1995 that the report suggested a specific limit — less than 300 milli-grams (mg) per day — for cholesterol. The average large egg contains just under 200 mg of cholesterol, all in the yolk. The 2010 guidelines added an even lower daily limit (200 mg) for cholesterol for people at high risk of cardiovascular disease.

 

However, the 2015 guidelines removed all mention of limiting cholesterol, acknowledging that too much saturated fat and other unhealthy habits likely play a greater role in raising blood cholesterol."

 

From WebMD:

https://www.webmd.com/diet/features/good-eggs-for-nutrition-theyre-hard-to-beat#1

 

"When scientists learned that high blood cholesterol was associated with heart disease, foods high in cholesterol logically became suspect. But after 25 years of study, it has become evident that cholesterol in food is not the culprit -- saturated fat has a much bigger effect on blood cholesterol. Full-fat dairy products and fatty meats are examples of foods that are loaded with saturated fat and which trigger the body to produce cholesterol. With science on our side, we can once again enjoy the wonderfully nutritious egg. Along with milk, eggs contain the highest biological value (or gold standard) for protein. One egg has only 75 calories but 7 grams of high-quality protein, 5 grams of fat, and 1.6 grams of saturated fat, along with iron, vitamins, minerals, and carotenoids. The egg is a powerhouse of disease-fighting nutrients like lutein and zeaxanthin. These carotenoids may reduce the risk of age-related macular degeneration, the leading cause of blindness in older adults. And brain development and memory may be enhanced by the choline content of eggs."

 

In other words, if you are interested in getting accurate nutritional information, ask the experts, rather than listening to lying vegans.

Edited December 4, 2019 by Unicorn

[Guest]

To refute the idea that one species of animal shouldn't be the source of support for another species, one has only to look at the disastrous consequences of sea star wasting disease on the entire kelp forest ecosystem. A vegan might think of sea stars as evil carnivores which eat innocent vegetarian sea urchins (by inverting their stomachs and eating the sea urchins from the inside). But without those sea stars, kelp forests are being wiped out.

https://www.sciencefriday.com/segments/kelp-forest-decline/

"In 2013, an outbreak of sea star wasting disease linked to the warm ocean “blob” led to the mass die-off of 20 starfish species along the West Coast. In California, the disease decimated sea stars from San Mateo to Mendocino counties.

 

A primary food source for sea stars is urchins, which in turn feed on kelp. Without starfish to keep urchin populations in check, the number of purple sea urchins swelled beginning in 2014. The following year, says the analysis in Scientific Reports, “purple sea urchins shifted to a more aggressive feeding behavior,” devouring more layers of the kelp forest.

 

Other Species Affected

The deforestation of Northern California’s kelp affects other species that rely on it for sustenance.

 

For example, in 2017, abalone stocks in the region were down by 80 percent. That led the recreational red abalone fishery to shut down in 2018.

 

“If you envision the land … without the forest, there’d be many animals that would be starving, and that’s what we’re seeing,” Rogers-Bennett says.

 

“We are picking up and detecting what’s happening with the abalone, but they’re just an indicator species of that whole suite of organisms that depend on the kelp forest, that are all starving or have no homes.”

 

Restoring The Forest

One way to help restore the kelp forest, Rogers-Bennett says, is to harvest urchins for human consumption."

[JTtorretto]

Where did you get that information regarding dietary cholesterol? Some lying vegan's YouTube blog? This is what the Harvard Medical School's Harvard Health Letter says:

https://www.health.harvard.edu/heart-health/unscrambling-the-message-on-eggs

 

"If your liver makes too much cholesterol, it's usually the result of eating too much saturated fat, which raises blood levels of harmful LDL cholesterol far more than cholesterol-rich foods like eggs do. Meat and full-fat dairy products are the biggest sources of saturated fat, but baked and fried foods also provide a fair amount of saturated fat in the average American diet. But for most people, dietary cholesterol isn't that closely connected to blood cholesterol levels, though for some it can make a large difference. This is reflected in the current Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which dropped its earlier suggestion to limit dietary cholesterol (see "Forty years of hard-boiled advice about eggs")."

"First published in 1980, the Dietary Guidelines for Americans are updated every five years. The original guidelines advised people to avoid consuming too much cholesterol. But it wasn't until 1995 that the report suggested a specific limit — less than 300 milli-grams (mg) per day — for cholesterol. The average large egg contains just under 200 mg of cholesterol, all in the yolk. The 2010 guidelines added an even lower daily limit (200 mg) for cholesterol for people at high risk of cardiovascular disease.

 

However, the 2015 guidelines removed all mention of limiting cholesterol, acknowledging that too much saturated fat and other unhealthy habits likely play a greater role in raising blood cholesterol."

 

From WebMD:

https://www.webmd.com/diet/features/good-eggs-for-nutrition-theyre-hard-to-beat#1

 

"When scientists learned that high blood cholesterol was associated with heart disease, foods high in cholesterol logically became suspect. But after 25 years of study, it has become evident that cholesterol in food is not the culprit -- saturated fat has a much bigger effect on blood cholesterol. Full-fat dairy products and fatty meats are examples of foods that are loaded with saturated fat and which trigger the body to produce cholesterol. With science on our side, we can once again enjoy the wonderfully nutritious egg. Along with milk, eggs contain the highest biological value (or gold standard) for protein. One egg has only 75 calories but 7 grams of high-quality protein, 5 grams of fat, and 1.6 grams of saturated fat, along with iron, vitamins, minerals, and carotenoids. The egg is a powerhouse of disease-fighting nutrients like lutein and zeaxanthin. These carotenoids may reduce the risk of age-related macular degeneration, the leading cause of blindness in older adults. And brain development and memory may be enhanced by the choline content of eggs."

 

In other words, if you are interested in getting accurate nutritional information, ask the experts, rather than listening to lying vegans.

 

Yes do not listen to the scheming “Lying Vegans” ... ?

 

Sounds as absurd as when our climate denying President cries of “Fake news” from the “liberal media” and the “scum bag FBI” is out to get him from “the Deep State”. ??

 

 

what do u believe is the goal of vegans; to make the world less fun?

 

No.

 

It’s to make it less cruel & less damaging on the environment.

 

Additionally, the health benefits have been proven and many of the supposed “Nutrition experts” who’ve claimed fraudulently that meat ? & eggs are “nutritionally healthy” have been debunked and exposed for being prior employed as paid “consultants” of the agriculture lobby [“big aggro”].

 

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2728487

[Guest]

Yes do not listen to the scheming “Lying Vegans” ... ?

 

Sounds as absurd as when our climate denying President cries of “Fake news” from the “liberal media” and the “scum bag FBI” is out to get him from “the Deep State”. ??

 

 

what do u believe is the goal of vegans; to make the world less fun?

 

No.

 

It’s to make it less cruel & less damaging on the environment.

 

Additionally, the health benefits have been proven and many of the supposed “Nutrition experts” who’ve claimed fraudulently that meat ? & eggs are “nutritionally healthy” have been debunked and exposed for being prior employed as paid “consultants” of the agriculture lobby [“big aggro”].

 

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2728487

First of all, associations do not imply causation. Carrying matches is associated with lung cancer. But carrying matches doesn't cause lung cancer. Secondly, even if one just looks at the association, the adjusted absolute risk difference was 3.24%. You really believe the Harvard Health Letter writers are paid by the agriculture lobby? What's the evidence of that? Climate change is something virtually all scientists agree on.

What do I believe is the goal of vegans? Same as any other religion. I believe the goal is to convert, and in order to do that, they promote their cause like other religions do, by spouting off half-truths and outright lies. Vegans sound like any other religious kooks. Beliefs that rest on faith and self-delusion.

[JTtorretto]

First of all, associations do not imply causation. Carrying matches is associated with lung cancer. But carrying matches doesn't cause lung cancer. Secondly, even if one just looks at the association, the adjusted absolute risk difference was 3.24%. You really believe the Harvard Health Letter writers are paid by the agriculture lobby? What's the evidence of that? Climate change is something virtually all scientists agree on.

What do I believe is the goal of vegans? Same as any other religion. I believe the goal is to convert, and in order to do that, they promote their cause like other religions do, by spouting off half-truths and outright lies. Vegans sound like any other religious kooks. Beliefs that rest on faith and self-delusion.

 

Referring to vegans as kooks is yet another childish insult and I’m not sure why you are getting away with name calling.

 

Interesting how you totally ignored the study that I posted from a more respected scientific study source [Journal American Medical Association].

And speaking of consensus in the scientific community, ponder this statement from a news article (not from a medical study itself) but referring to a fraudulent study that was conducted by a scientist who had previously been paid by a conflict of interest trade group.

 

“It leads back to this misconception that nutrition is hard and confusing, that we don’t know how to eat, that doctors can’t agree,” says Jennifer Lutz, executive director of True Health Initiative. “We do know the best diet for human health and also the planet: plant-based. We are not a vegan or vegetarian organization. We have council members who are paleo. We believe in the spectrum, that there’s more than one way to be healthy. This idea we’re arguing is nonsense. There’s disagreement, but there is consensus.”

 

Consensus amongst doctors that plant-based is the best diet for human health and also the planet.

 

Dozens of researchers, experts, and governmental authorities say to cut back on red and processed meat, to protect your own health and the planet’s. “There’s nothing new here, no breakthrough. We know over 80% of preventable illness and chronic disease can be improved or prevented by lifestyle intervention,” says Lutz.

 

 

https://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20190930/controversial-studies-say-its-ok-to-eat-red-meat

[Rudynate]

Where did you get that information regarding dietary cholesterol? Some lying vegan's YouTube blog? This is what the Harvard Medical School's Harvard Health Letter says:

https://www.health.harvard.edu/heart-health/unscrambling-the-message-on-eggs

 

"If your liver makes too much cholesterol, it's usually the result of eating too much saturated fat, which raises blood levels of harmful LDL cholesterol far more than cholesterol-rich foods like eggs do. Meat and full-fat dairy products are the biggest sources of saturated fat, but baked and fried foods also provide a fair amount of saturated fat in the average American diet. But for most people, dietary cholesterol isn't that closely connected to blood cholesterol levels, though for some it can make a large difference. This is reflected in the current Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which dropped its earlier suggestion to limit dietary cholesterol (see "Forty years of hard-boiled advice about eggs")."

"First published in 1980, the Dietary Guidelines for Americans are updated every five years. The original guidelines advised people to avoid consuming too much cholesterol. But it wasn't until 1995 that the report suggested a specific limit — less than 300 milli-grams (mg) per day — for cholesterol. The average large egg contains just under 200 mg of cholesterol, all in the yolk. The 2010 guidelines added an even lower daily limit (200 mg) for cholesterol for people at high risk of cardiovascular disease.

 

However, the 2015 guidelines removed all mention of limiting cholesterol, acknowledging that too much saturated fat and other unhealthy habits likely play a greater role in raising blood cholesterol."

 

From WebMD:

https://www.webmd.com/diet/features/good-eggs-for-nutrition-theyre-hard-to-beat#1

 

"When scientists learned that high blood cholesterol was associated with heart disease, foods high in cholesterol logically became suspect. But after 25 years of study, it has become evident that cholesterol in food is not the culprit -- saturated fat has a much bigger effect on blood cholesterol. Full-fat dairy products and fatty meats are examples of foods that are loaded with saturated fat and which trigger the body to produce cholesterol. With science on our side, we can once again enjoy the wonderfully nutritious egg. Along with milk, eggs contain the highest biological value (or gold standard) for protein. One egg has only 75 calories but 7 grams of high-quality protein, 5 grams of fat, and 1.6 grams of saturated fat, along with iron, vitamins, minerals, and carotenoids. The egg is a powerhouse of disease-fighting nutrients like lutein and zeaxanthin. These carotenoids may reduce the risk of age-related macular degeneration, the leading cause of blindness in older adults. And brain development and memory may be enhanced by the choline content of eggs."

 

In other words, if you are interested in getting accurate nutritional information, ask the experts, rather than listening to lying vegans.

 

 

 

Your own evidence implies as such- "Though for some it can make a large difference."

[Guest]

...

Interesting how you totally ignored the study that I posted from a more respected scientific study source [Journal American Medical Association].

...

Actually, it was you who not only ignored the study that you posted, but also my response to it. As I said previously, your study linked showed only a very small association between egg consumption and cardiovascular mortality, NOT CAUSALITY. There could be a lot of differences between those who eat eggs regularly and those who don't, other than the eating of eggs. I don't eat eggs except on those occasions when I eat out for breakfast (most commonly I eat a bagel with lox for breakfast). Those people I know who eat eggs for breakfast tend to have a lot of unhealthful habits, both dietary and otherwise. Eggs take a lot of time to prepare, and I suspect that people who regularly eat eggs for breakfast tend to lead more sedentary lives, and probably not even work. The association with eggs is likely a red herring, and, even if it isn't, the association is very small. Again, your reaction is typical in that you look only at the weak "evidence" that supports your belief system, but ignore more substantial facts. For example, there are also associations between more fish consumption and lower rates of sudden cardiac death, cancer death, and total mortality, but you wouldn't look at those studies, because they don't fit your narrative:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9424039

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10393143

 

One of the best examples of giving too much significance to associations as opposed to causality is the Women's Health Study. Prior to that study, there was a large number of studies which showed a very strong association between estrogen use after menopause and a decrease in cardiovascular mortality. The association was so strong that it was almost a dictum to put most women on estrogen after menopause. Then the Women's Health Study actually did a randomized clinical trial, which is the only way to determine causation. When that was done, the results were the complete opposite of what the case-control studies showed--women who took estrogen actually had a slightly higher rate of cardiovascular mortality (although overall mortality was the same between those who took and didn't take estrogen). No one knows why the prior studies showed such an association for cardiovascular benefit for post-menopausal estrogen use. Maybe these women went to the doctor more often, were more physically active, or did something else which improved their health.

BTW, JT, if you disagree with a posting, it's more mature and effective to present an intelligent (and, hopefully, truthful) counter-argument, if you're able to do so, rather than simply putting a thumbs-down on the posting.

Edited December 18, 2019 by Unicorn

[+ FreshFluff]

Guys, ive found thr cause for declining sperm counts.

Edited December 29, 2019 by FreshFluff

[+ Reisr30]

I tried both the impossible burger and the beyond meat burger and they weren’t my cup of tea. They still tasted a bit artificial.

 

Is it weird that when I first read about the impossible burger and the beyond meat company I thought of the movie Soylent Green? Lol