Re: diet and violence [POLITICS Rockefeller Foundation...]

[Guest guest]

--- Renate <haecklers@...> wrote:

> This is Young Peltons map of the most dangerous places in

> terms of unrest and violence:

> http://www.comebackalive.com/site3.php?page_id=9

>

> And the following map of where there is the worst overcrowding,

> malnutrition and poverty:

> http://maps.grida.no/go/graphic/global-poverty-biodiversity-map

>

> Notice that there are very few areas that overlap between the

> maximum danger zones and the areas with the most desperate and

> starving people!

Renate, those maps are interesting, thanks for sharing. I'd be

curious if diet might play a role in the violent hot spots, perhaps

fueling irrational extremism. Maybe people who are very malnourished

don't have as much will or energy to fight and that could explain why

some of the most malnourished areas are not hot spots for violence.

But I'm not sure what dietary factors might promote violent extremism.

Barry Groves says veganism often causes irrational and violent

behavior, but most violent extremists are not vegans. Maybe certain

dietary nutrient imbalances might lead to irrational and violent

behavior. I know this topic was quite popular in Weston Price's time

but I haven't researched it.

Any opinions out there?

[Guest guest]

> But I'm not sure what dietary factors might promote

> violent extremism.

> Barry Groves says veganism often causes irrational and

> violent

> behavior, but most violent extremists are not vegans.

The problem is that this argument that dietary factors promote violent extremism

is reductionist and just plain silly. There is no one reason people become

violent extremists. Like most human phenomena the reasons for it will be

overdetermined, which is to say complex, a combined mixture of reasons, a

confluence.

Is anybody here really so silly as to think that the recent horrible situation

in

Gaza could be corrected if we just changed the diet of the Israelis (too many

matzoh balls?)? Did today's cease-fire come about because somebody fed

the Israeli cabinet some bone-broth soup over the weekend?

If you really think in this way, you need to get your nose out of Sally Fallon's

book and your head out of your ass, because you have become too narrowly focused

on nutrition.

Vegetarians could point to Gandhi and say that here was an example that

suggests his vegetarianism had something to do with his non-violence. However,

Luther King, whose birthday we celebrate today, also had a philosophy of

non-violence (largely influenced by the Indian movement for independence) and,

as far as I know, MLK was a meat-eater.

I would like examples of Vegan violence. No doubt there will be examples.

However, there are relatively few vegans. They normally belong to comfortable,

midde-class, post-industrial societies and therefore are statistically

insignificant.

Just as I didn't buy the Twinkie Defense, I don't buy into the notion that diet

(provided one is not terribly undernourished) plays a large role in violent

behavior.

-

[Guest guest]

> But I'm not sure what dietary factors might promote

> violent extremism.

> Barry Groves says veganism often causes irrational and

> violent

> behavior, but most violent extremists are not vegans.

The problem is that this argument that dietary factors promote violent extremism

is reductionist and just plain silly. There is no one reason people become

violent extremists. Like most human phenomena the reasons for it will be

overdetermined, which is to say complex, a combined mixture of reasons, a

confluence.

Is anybody here really so silly as to think that the recent horrible situation

in

Gaza could be corrected if we just changed the diet of the Israelis (too many

matzoh balls?)? Did today's cease-fire come about because somebody fed

the Israeli cabinet some bone-broth soup over the weekend?

If you really think in this way, you need to get your nose out of Sally Fallon's

book and your head out of your ass, because you have become too narrowly focused

on nutrition.

Vegetarians could point to Gandhi and say that here was an example that

suggests his vegetarianism had something to do with his non-violence. However,

Luther King, whose birthday we celebrate today, also had a philosophy of

non-violence (largely influenced by the Indian movement for independence) and,

as far as I know, MLK was a meat-eater.

I would like examples of Vegan violence. No doubt there will be examples.

However, there are relatively few vegans. They normally belong to comfortable,

midde-class, post-industrial societies and therefore are statistically

insignificant.

Just as I didn't buy the Twinkie Defense, I don't buy into the notion that diet

(provided one is not terribly undernourished) plays a large role in violent

behavior.

-

[Guest guest]

> Barry Groves says veganism often causes irrational and violent

> behavior, but most violent extremists are not vegans. Maybe certain

> dietary nutrient imbalances might lead to irrational and violent

> behavior. I know this topic was quite popular in Weston Price's time

> but I haven't researched it.

>

> Any opinions out there?

>

>

There is information on the link between diet and violence in " Lights

Out: Sugar, Sleep, and Survival " that is pretty interesting. Diet can

ratchet up the fight-flight hormones while removing impulse control and

for some people, that exposes anger.

Also an interesting take on domestic violence and diet from DesMaisons:

" Dance of Abuse "

http://www.radiantrecovery.com/resourcecenter/abuse.htm

Not saying diet is 100% the cause but I'm convinced it's in there to a

degree.

Connie

>

[Guest guest]

> --- <oz4caster@...> wrote:

> > But I'm not sure what dietary factors might promote violent

> > extremism. Barry Groves says veganism often causes irrational

> > and violent behavior, but most violent extremists are not vegans.

>

--- Seay <entheogens@...> wrote:

> The problem is that this argument that dietary factors promote

> violent extremism is reductionist and just plain silly. There is

> no one reason people become violent extremists.

, science is all about reductionism, so I guess all science is

silly. I didn't say that diet is the only reason people become

violent extremists, as that *would* be silly. I used the word

" promote " , I didn't say " exclusively cause " . However, I do suspect

that poor diet does contribute to violent behavior, probably in many

different ways. Maybe " contribute " would have been a better choice.

> Like most human phenomena the reasons for it will be

> overdetermined, which is to say complex, a combined mixture of

> reasons, a confluence.

Yes, definitely. But that doesn't mean we can't try to analyze the

situation. Health is very complex too.

> Is anybody here really so silly as to think that the recent

> horrible situation in Gaza could be corrected if we just changed

> the diet of the Israelis (too many matzoh balls?)?

Too many matzoh balls ... LOL! Not likely!

> Did today's cease-fire come about because somebody fed

> the Israeli cabinet some bone-broth soup over the weekend?

I'm thinking more in terms of tendencies, not effects from specific meals.

> If you really think in this way, you need to get your nose out of

> Sally Fallon's book and your head out of your ass, because you have

> become too narrowly focused on nutrition.

I'd suggest that you be a little more open minded and read carefully.

> Vegetarians could point to Gandhi and say that here was an example

> that suggests his vegetarianism had something to do with his

> non-violence.

I don't think Ghandi was a vegan. I do think his strategies are a

great model for non-violent change. The only reason I mentioned vegan

is that Barry Groves hypothesizes that vegans tend to be more violent

in behavior. I don't support the simple hypothesis that all vegans

are more violent.

http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/vegetarian.html

I do, however, suspect that nutrient imbalances could lead to more

violent tendencies and behavior in some people and it is possible that

some vegans could be more likely to have such imbalances in nutrients

because of their diet. But I also suspect that many omnivores may

have imbalances that favor more violent behavior.

> However, Luther King, whose birthday we celebrate today,

> also had a philosophy of non-violence (largely influenced by the

> Indian movement for independence) and, as far as I know, MLK was a

> meat-eater.

Far and away, most humans are omnivores and I believe most of us are

largely non-violent. What I'm curious about are the individuals and

groups that are inclined to use force to coerce and intimidate people

into doing things as dictated by these people, whether it's a robber

that steals your wallet at gun point, or drug gangs beheading people

in Mexico, or mafia assassinating judges in Italy, or suicide squads

killing scores of random civilians in Iraq or India, or nations going

to war - which is the ultimate in terrorism.

> Just as I didn't buy the Twinkie Defense, I don't buy into the

> notion that diet (provided one is not terribly undernourished)

> plays a large role in violent behavior.

I'm sure there are very many factors that lead people to violence, but

I believe diet might be an important factor in some cases, though

certainly not all. My guess is that it's more likely to be an

important factor when a crazed gunman goes out and shoots people

randomly. If you include drugs as part of diet, alcohol certainly is

likely to make some people more violent when they are drunk. Many

other drugs are also suspect in conjunction with poor diet.

Overall, I suspect that the world today is less violent than in the

past. Maybe it's wishful thinking to hope that proper diet might help

to make the world more peaceful and less violent.

[Guest guest]

--- Connie <cbrown2008@...> wrote:

> There is information on the link between diet and violence in

> " Lights Out: Sugar, Sleep, and Survival " that is pretty

> interesting. Diet can ratchet up the fight-flight hormones while

> removing impulse control and for some people, that exposes anger.

>

> Also an interesting take on domestic violence and diet from

> DesMaisons: " Dance of Abuse "

> http://www.radiantrecovery.com/resourcecenter/abuse.htm

>

> Not saying diet is 100% the cause but I'm convinced it's in there

> to a degree.

Connie, it does make sense that excess sugar and alcohol consumption

tend to make many people more cranky, irritable, and short-tempered.

That could obviously lead to more violent and abusive behavior on a

personal scale. I'm not so sure I'd include refined starchy foods in

the list, although over-consumption could lead to many nutrient

deficiencies that might contribute. Some food additives might have a

small but significant contribution, like MSG and aspartame, and some

food colorings, for instance. Some types of pharmaceutical and

recreational drugs could have major influences, especially when

combined with poor diet.

[Guest guest]

Maybe not directly, but it brings to mind that experiment with the

mice where the ones fed junk food turned on each other and the

experiment had to be ended when they ate several of their cagemates

overnight; or Pottenger's Cats where the cats fed the diet deficient

in taurine and other factors became much more difficult to handle and

antisocial toward each other. So would people in the Middle East

be less violent if they switched from brown rice to white rice??

Probably not enough to end their conflicts, but would it contribute

to emotionally healthier offspring who may be able to find a way to

peace eventually?

I'm listening to the book on Blackwater (that's the title, too) and

it's pointing out just now that a lot of the contractors going over

there felt they missed out when they got their training to be Seals

or whatever and then didn't get to kill any bad guys. They went over

there because they WANTED to kill people. Is that healthy

psychology? Is that kind of thinking contributing to OUR warlike

actions or unnecessary use of force or violence to solve problems?

Is it partly due to their parent's SAD diet of Crisco and fast food

or whatever they grew up on?

>

>

> > But I'm not sure what dietary factors might promote

> > violent extremism.

> > Barry Groves says veganism often causes irrational and

> > violent

> > behavior, but most violent extremists are not vegans.

>

>

> The problem is that this argument that dietary factors promote

violent extremism is reductionist and just plain silly. There is no

one reason people become violent extremists. Like most human

phenomena the reasons for it will be overdetermined, which is to say

complex, a combined mixture of reasons, a confluence.

>

> Is anybody here really so silly as to think that the recent

horrible situation in

> Gaza could be corrected if we just changed the diet of the Israelis

(too many matzoh balls?)? Did today's cease-fire come about because

somebody fed

> the Israeli cabinet some bone-broth soup over the weekend?

>

> If you really think in this way, you need to get your nose out of

Sally Fallon's book and your head out of your ass, because you have

become too narrowly focused on nutrition.

>

> Vegetarians could point to Gandhi and say that here was an example

that suggests his vegetarianism had something to do with his non-

violence. However, Luther King, whose birthday we celebrate

today, also had a philosophy of non-violence (largely influenced by

the Indian movement for independence) and, as far as I know, MLK was

a meat-eater.

>

> I would like examples of Vegan violence. No doubt there will be

examples.

> However, there are relatively few vegans. They normally belong to

comfortable, midde-class, post-industrial societies and therefore are

statistically insignificant.

>

> Just as I didn't buy the Twinkie Defense, I don't buy into the

notion that diet (provided one is not terribly undernourished) plays

a large role in violent behavior.

>

> -

>

[Guest guest]

I believe in a good diet, but I'm much more inclined to blame the

propaganda system than diet for American's behavior in the world. I

think that this stuff gets really silly after awhile.

> Maybe not directly, but it brings to mind that experiment with the

> mice where the ones fed junk food turned on each other and the

> experiment had to be ended when they ate several of their cagemates

> overnight; or Pottenger's Cats where the cats fed the diet deficient

> in taurine and other factors became much more difficult to handle and

> antisocial toward each other. So would people in the Middle East

> be less violent if they switched from brown rice to white rice??

> Probably not enough to end their conflicts, but would it contribute

> to emotionally healthier offspring who may be able to find a way to

> peace eventually?

>

> I'm listening to the book on Blackwater (that's the title, too) and

> it's pointing out just now that a lot of the contractors going over

> there felt they missed out when they got their training to be Seals

> or whatever and then didn't get to kill any bad guys. They went over

> there because they WANTED to kill people. Is that healthy

> psychology? Is that kind of thinking contributing to OUR warlike

> actions or unnecessary use of force or violence to solve problems?

> Is it partly due to their parent's SAD diet of Crisco and fast food

> or whatever they grew up on?

>

>

> >

> >

> > > But I'm not sure what dietary factors might promote

> > > violent extremism.

> > > Barry Groves says veganism often causes irrational and

> > > violent

> > > behavior, but most violent extremists are not vegans.

> >

> >

> > The problem is that this argument that dietary factors promote

> violent extremism is reductionist and just plain silly. There is no

> one reason people become violent extremists. Like most human

> phenomena the reasons for it will be overdetermined, which is to say

> complex, a combined mixture of reasons, a confluence.

> >

> > Is anybody here really so silly as to think that the recent

> horrible situation in

> > Gaza could be corrected if we just changed the diet of the Israelis

> (too many matzoh balls?)? Did today's cease-fire come about because

> somebody fed

> > the Israeli cabinet some bone-broth soup over the weekend?

> >

> > If you really think in this way, you need to get your nose out of

> Sally Fallon's book and your head out of your ass, because you have

> become too narrowly focused on nutrition.

> >

> > Vegetarians could point to Gandhi and say that here was an example

> that suggests his vegetarianism had something to do with his non-

> violence. However, Luther King, whose birthday we celebrate

> today, also had a philosophy of non-violence (largely influenced by

> the Indian movement for independence) and, as far as I know, MLK was

> a meat-eater.

> >

> > I would like examples of Vegan violence. No doubt there will be

> examples.

> > However, there are relatively few vegans. They normally belong to

> comfortable, midde-class, post-industrial societies and therefore are

> statistically insignificant.

> >

> > Just as I didn't buy the Twinkie Defense, I don't buy into the

> notion that diet (provided one is not terribly undernourished) plays

> a large role in violent behavior.

> >

> > -

> >

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

--- Renate <haecklers@...> wrote:

> They went over there because they WANTED to kill people. Is that

> healthy psychology? Is that kind of thinking contributing to OUR

> warlike actions or unnecessary use of force or violence to solve

> problems? Is it partly due to their parent's SAD diet of Crisco and

> fast food or whatever they grew up on?

Renate, I think Weston Price would probably agree with you. Here's

what he says in the intro to NAPD:

=================================================================

Applying these methods of study to our American families, we find

readily that a considerable percentage of our families show this same

deterioration in the younger members. The percentage of individuals so

affected in our American communities in which I have made studies

varies through a wide range, usually between 25 per cent to 75 per

cent. A certain percentage of this affected group has not only these

evidences of physical injury, but also personality disturbances, the

most common of which is a lower than normal mental efficiency and

acuteness, chiefly observed as so-called mental backwardness which

includes the group of children in the schools who are unable to keep

up with their classmates. Their I.Q.'s are generally lower than normal

and they readily develop inferiority complexes growing out of their

handicap. From this group or parallel with it a certain percentage

develop personality disturbances which have their expression largely

in unsocial traits. They include the delinquents who at this time are

causing so much trouble and concern because of evidence of increase in

their numbers. This latter group has been accounted for largely on the

basis of some conditioning experience that developed after the child

had reached an impressionable age. My investigations are revealing a

physical structural change and therefore, an organic factor which

precedes and underlies these conditioning influences of the

environment. The fact that a government survey has shown that 66 per

cent of the delinquents who have been treated in the best institutions

and released as cured, later have developed their unsocial or criminal

tendencies, strongly emphasizes the urgent necessity that if

preventive methods are to be applied these must precede and forestall

the primary injuries themselves.

=================================================================