Re: Here we go again - Monbiot article

December 25, 2002

*sigh*

I think this is one of the guys that writes radical stuff for ZNet. Ho

hum... the myths and truths of vegetarianism on www.westonaprice.org is a

great place to start. I think the primary thing you might be interested in,

is one point-by-point article that specifically deals with this, pointing out

that some land is fit for pasture and some for crops, and in places where

China where meat-pasturing is not utilized it in fact leads to millions of

acres of pasture lying fallow and unused rather than growing grain for humans.

I would also point out the greater usability of animal nutrients. Animals

assemble plant nutrients into a form usable by animals, one of which we

humans are, making it more usable. Check out a recent (in the past month)

Mercola article on macular degeneration and lutein, where he suggests getting

lutein and other caretenoids from dark green leafy vegetables, but also

points out that one egg yolk has one eights the amount of lutein as one

serving of kale, but has the same amount when usability is taken into

account, making the lutein in the egg yolk 8 times more usable than the kale.

Not to mention preformed vitamin A, end-chain omega-3 elongation, etc. While

the animal puts out less calories, it puts out more nutrients and nutrients

in a more usable fashion.

Not to mention grains are bad for you. If his theory is that humans should

eat grains, the 50 articles/studies/abstracts that Mercola compiled a few

weeks ago should be a good place to prove that grains are something that

should be strictly limited rather than increased.

You might also want to point out that there is no world food shortage. What

causes third world poverty and starvation-- something I'm SURE Mr. Monibot

knows quite well-- is international political and economic systems. The IMF

no doubt plays a part! I read that we make 110% of the food needed to feed

the world. What might do it is Americans doing some traditional homecooking

rather than eating out all the time where something like 20% of the food goes

in the trash. Independent economic development for the third world might

help, rather than IMF-driven structural adjustment programs that force people

to turn their farmland into coffee plantations to sell as exports for hard

currency to pay off " debts. "

Ask Mr. Monibot where we are supposed to get DHA and EPA from, short of

super-expensive algel oil capsules. Can the third world poor afford $60 a

month to pay for enough DHA that barely compensates from their omega-6 grain

intake Monibot wants to impose? Short of algel oil, it is left to fish and

cod liver oil, or pastured animal products, or fish, etc.

Anyways, I think myths and truths about vegetarianism is a really good place

to start at the WAPF article. It has a point-by-point refutation somewhere

on there of every vegetarian point.

Chris

____

" What can one say of a soul, of a heart, filled with compassion? It is a

heart which burns with love for every creature: for human beings, birds, and

animals, for serpents and for demons. The thought of them and the sight of

them make the tears of the saint flow. And this immense and intense

compassion, which flows from the heart of the saints, makes them unable to

bear the sight of the smallest, most insignificant wound in any creature.

Thus they pray ceaselessly, with tears, even for animals, for enemies of the

truth, and for those who do them wrong. "

--Saint Isaac the Syrian

December 25, 2002

> Can any of you knowledgeable people out there offer any

> help constructing some response to this article?!

>

> -- Monbiot - Tuesday December 24, 2002 - The Guardian

> http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,864995,00.html

Hi Dedy:

Monbiot, like most vegans (and most non-vegans), knows

nothing about the relationship between nutrition and soil fertility.

Vegans fail to realize the food they eat, like meat and dairy

products, are grown for yield at the expense of nutritional value.

There is a good reason for not eating meat and dairy products the

way that they are produced today and that reason is not because how

badly the animals are treated. The better reason not to eat meat and

dairy products the way they are produced today is that this food is

of low nutritional value and it may contain dangerous pathogens so

it is necessary to pasteurize or irradiate it to protect the

malnourished, unhealthy americans who eat it.

What and other vegan advocates don't realize, is that the

food they eat has also been produced for higher yields per acre at

the expense of nutritional value per acre. More vegan food per acre

is actually less able to sustain life than less vegan food per acre.

But modern agriculture isn't interested in nutrition, as it develops

crops (hybrids) and fertilizer strategies that are designed to

increase yields. These increased yields are obtained at the expense

of nutritional value.

, like most people, probably considers malnutrition to be

caused by a lack of food, starvation. In america, there is now a new

style of malnutrition, malnutrition through abundance. No matter how

much food you eat in america, you can't be well nourished because

the food is of such low nutritional value. In grocery stores in

america you can get almost everything, except nutrition.

The vegan vs. non-vegan arguments and the gmo vs. non-gmo arguments

will never make any sense until the issue in both arguments becomes

nutrition. After all, eating food was not originally intended just

to fill your stomach, eating food was intended to nourish you, and

any species knows this except for one dumb species.

Chi

December 25, 2002

thanks for your response Chi.

would just like to point out that Mr. Monbiot writes, in the last paragraph or

so of the article that he DOES eat meat.

we'll see if he actually chooses to reply to the my e-mail, sent yesterday,

other than the automated reply where he promises he reads them ALL but does not

reply to all.

Dedy

----- Original Message -----

From: soilfertility <ynos@...>

Sent: Wednesday, December 25, 2002 3:30 PM

Subject: Re: Here we go again - Monbiot article