My theory on food

[Andro Man]

I know a lot of people will criticise what I say(as they predictably always do) that I'm being a troll yet again coming with a subversive view on things.
Anyways, it's a only theory, nothing written in stone, think what you will.

Ok, this isn't something I've tried for myself at least not to it's logical conclusion, but I wouldn't be surprised if you already know deep inside which food is good for you.

Say if I had to kill for food, I'd somehow have least trouble killing fish. My conscience would suffer if I had to kill a dog, lamb, horse or whatever....or even worse, what some people do as last resort(unless theyre hannibal the cannible). Kill and eat another human being. This by the way is not a very healthy thing to do. Cultures with cannabilism have a lot of strange diseases as a result of it.
The same one can also say, be it to a lesser extent of those other mammels that might be tasty to eat, but IMO at least, would be hard to slaughter yourself.

Fish on the other hand are well known to be good for you. Countries with a diet rich in fish(like Japan)have a longer life span, and a generally good quality health until quite an old age.

But what about insects? They would be even easier to kill than fish. With fish I'd still tend to place myself in the position of the fish that's slowly sufficating to death. Not as much as the above mentioned animals but still....Insects on the other hand, I don't think twice about killing them, could this say something about insects in relation to health?
There's an unlimited amount of them, don't require much to feed, multiply very quickly.......

Anyone?

 

[Mem]

I'd kill off some Nestle Troll house cookies.:biggrin1:

 

[novice_btm]

I'd kill off some Nestle Troll house cookies.:biggrin1:

Suicide isn't the answer. :tongue:



Hmm, if I had to kill something for food... Yeah, probably fish would be easy enough.

 

[2322]

Humans are actually pretty unusual in the animal world. We can eat pretty much anything:

• Meat
• Fish
• Molluscs
• Crustaceans
• Echinoderms
• Nuts
• Vegetables
• Fruit
• Legumes
• Amphibians
• Reptiles
• Berries
• Dairy (beyond infancy)
• Leaves
• Some grasses
• Fungi
• Birds
• Insects
• Arachnids

It's kind of astonishing. Most animals have very narrowly defined diets and any variation can cause severe malnutrition or death, but humans have evolved such that they can consume nearly anything that isn't generally poisonous and even a few that are.

In light of this, I'm not sure there is any default food group that is any better than another. I think our tendency to overindulge and eat processed foods is far more dangerous.

 

[Principessa]

Andro Man what exactly is your question? Are you asking if I had to kill my own food what would skeeve me out the least? Fish would be the easiest to catch but I only like shellfish. I grew up eating venison so if I had access to a gun I could shoot a deer no problem. The truth is I'm kinda lazy, :redface: as long as I had access to fruit and vegetables I'd be cool. If memory serves correct scaling and gutting a fish is only slightly less grody then dressing and butchering a deer. :yuck:

 

[B_Think_Kink]

I'd probably just starve. I get sick at the thought of eating fish. I couldn't even put a worm on a hook, nevermind try and take a fish off. I couldn't kill any animals or eat bugs. Salad is about all I like... and that wouldn't really give me much nutrients.

 

[tim36]

I would probably become a vegetarian instead, I just couldnt kill for food and then eat it, heck I couldnt (and cant) watch animals being killed knowing they are going to be processed for the food we have for the supermarkets and meat markets. If I lived on a farm growing up, personally I would be a vegetarian now.

 

[JustAsking]

Andro,
I'm not sure what your question is, but it reminds me of a fascinating theory about the ideal diet called the Paleolithic Diet. The idea is that it takes at least 10,000 years for a significant change in humans to adapt to a new food source.

For example, not all of us are lactose tolerant nor are we tolerant to certain grains. The genes for these tolerances are easily traced back to areas of the world that first developed agriculture and animal husbandry.

Since we haven't changed that much, the Paleolithic Diet theory is that we should eat roughly what human hunter-gatherers were eating 10,000 years ago. I don't actually subscribe to this diet myself, but I find it fascinating, anyway.

Although you know me as a rabid defender of mainstream science, I am as fascinated by fringe theories as you seem to be.

 

[SpoiledPrincess]

I'm also unsure what your theory is, it seems to boil down to the less dna we share with an animal the easier it is to kill, but I think you're basing this on modern man's squeamishness, I'm sure 100 years ago none of us would have had any more qualms about butchering a lamb or a pig than killing a fish.

 

[simcha]

...what some people do as last resort(unless theyre hannibal the cannible). Kill and eat another human being. This by the way is not a very healthy thing to do. Cultures with cannabilism have a lot of strange diseases as a result of it.

Nah, I think it's like pork or poultry. So long as you cook the human thoroughly then there shouldn't be a problem. And besides, vegetarians are tasty, especially vegans...:biggrin1:

 

[SpoiledPrincess]

There's strong archeological evidence that all early societies were cannibalistic to some extent (it may have been limited to ritualistic cannibalism) but in times of war and famine it's likely that all societies resorted to cannibalism much more easily than we'd expect.

 

[Andro Man]

What I was trying to do was to equate the healthiness of foods to your own innate willingness to kill something. I know things like steak, hamburgers etc are all more or less part of your culture. But the slaughter of these animals is kept well out of sight. And we're conditioned to eat it and not even think about it, and yes it's tasty.
But say you had to kill a pig or lamb or whatever yourself. Not only would it be hard(so yes I concur with the prehistoric diet as well that our bodies aren't really suited for it that they would only eat those things out of necessity, rarely) but I think ppl would have a (innate) resistance in doings so. Unless they were trained for it(butcher), like most ppl probably
have trouble killing another human being unless theyre trained for it.

But say we step back from the conveniences of modern life and pretend that(as your ancestors)you had to do all the killing yourself. I personally wouldn't have so much trouble with catching and killing fish.

But maybe there is a reason for that. Just like a cow knows which grass to eat and wouldn't even think about killing another animal for food coz it instinctively knows what its body needs.Maybe humans are the same.
That it isn't taste that should guide us(yes I like a juicy steak once in a while)but our own willingness to kill what we eat. If you would be able to kill a horse or lamb or whatever no problem, then i'm obviously preaching to the wrong crowd.
Anyways if you take this to its logical conclusion the (variety) insects might be one of the healthiest things we could eat. It might be the food of the future for the reasons I mentioned above. But yes, we're conditioned to get sick of the thought. But I don't know a lot of ppl that would think twice about killing an insect.

This isn't about the world becoming vegetarian, although I did read somewhere that our digestive system resembles that of herbivor more than that of a carnivor. Yet it's also true that especially vegans have to resort to supplements to get all the essential nutrients.This is why I don't believe humans are exclusively herbivor either.

If you compare the meat of fish with that of other animals you will notice a difference in its texture and you can see how your body would have much less of a problem digesting it. Besides, fish oil is rich in all kinds of omegas and helps against a wide range of ailments.Some would even go so far in saying that eating fish helped man evolve, expanded our brain size...This however is only a theory But it can't be mistaken that fish is an excellent food.

And yes I agree eating varied is important and that we as humans can eat just about anything. But just as the most obvious one and most unnatural one, namely eating another human being is possible it's definitely not a very healthy thing to do. And so it, to a lesser extent for those other animals, that are possibly the cause of a lot of different cancers and hearttrouble(as opposed to fishmeat,-oil). If you look say at red meat, its texture and toughness you might understand why our digestive system would have more trouble with this than fish.

 

[wldhoney]

We have a strong instinct to survive, which humans have shown in all kinds of situations. If you are starving, chances are you are going to find something to eat.

Most military training programs, such as Army Rangers, send their troops into the woods where they are expected to live on bugs, plant life, and what they can kill.

I hate hunting. I won't even date a hunter. Don't care what the reasons or justifications are behind it, and any reference to where meat, even eggs, I am eating comes from and my appetite is immediately gone. However, if I was starving to death I am sure my instinct to live would kick in. I have to say, if I had a choice I would rather eat meat then a bug.

 

[B_seancelticfc200]

hiya

 

[B_seancelticfc200]

hi

 

[D_Humper E Bogart]

Then again, the west is just too clinical. Now there are more people living outside of cities who depend on the "mass genocide of wittle aminals" and they're doing fine.

Considering how violent and war-like the US is, it's interesting how some Yanks haven't got a taste for non-human blood. But all foods are hidden away from sight and mass packaged and process and "tarted up" with chemicals to look and taste more appealing. The main issue is that westerners (for the most part) sympathise with animals more than people.

Reminds me of a cruel question, who would people cry more about: 1000 blacks dead, or 10 dogs?

 

[Osiris]

I actually kind of think Andro states a pretty interesting theory here.

 

[headbang8]

I know two female vegetarians who turned carnivore. They both say that eating meat makes them feel better.

 

[SpeedoGuy]

Post to wrong thread, sorry.

 

[Andro Man]

Then again, the west is just too clinical. Now there are more people living outside of cities who depend on the "mass genocide of wittle aminals" and they're doing fine.

Considering how violent and war-like the US is, it's interesting how some Yanks haven't got a taste for non-human blood. But all foods are hidden away from sight and mass packaged and process and "tarted up" with chemicals to look and taste more appealing. The main issue is that westerners (for the most part) sympathise with animals more than people.

Reminds me of a cruel question, who would people cry more about: 1000 blacks dead, or 10 dogs?

Haha fuck, there goes my theory

But seriously, I know of very few countries that eat their dogs, probably on the scale of countries that have cannibalism