• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Is vegetarianism unnatural?

Is vegetarianism unnatural?

  • No

    Votes: 5 10.6%

  • Yes

    Votes: 30 63.8%

  • Nature has no intentions

    Votes: 9 19.1%

  • I don't kow

    Votes: 1 2.1%

  • Other

    Votes: 2 4.3%
  • Total voters
    47
clownboy said:
Another problem with vegetarians - it requires a vast amount of [correct] knowledge just to eat right. You obviously don't have that knowledge.
Click to expand...

A vast amount of knowledge? It guess we gauge knowledge differently, and unlike most conservatives, I am not intimidated by its pursuit.
 
Amadeus said:
You can make that argument, but the fact remains that we don't have canines in the sense that dogs or other carnivores do. We chew with blunt teeth, which are actually more suited for legumes and vegetables. We can eat meat, sure, but we do not have a set of chompers like this:

tiger-teeth2.jpg
Click to expand...

Your incessant attempts at trying to move goalposts aside, you once again overlook the fact that canines (which we have) are NOT for chewing. They are for tearing, you know like what one would do with meat.

The tigers chompers are irrelevant, we have teeth called canines, and these are specifically there for tearing. Just because ours are not as pronounced as a tigers does not change their function. Also the tiger uses his canines for things other than tearing meat, such as you know taking down prey and severing their windpipe to kill them. We do not need that feature.
 
Amadeus said:
You can make that argument, but the fact remains that we don't have canines in the sense that dogs or other carnivores do. We chew with blunt teeth, which are actually more suited for legumes and vegetables. We can eat meat, sure, but we do not have a set of chompers like this:

tiger-teeth2.jpg
Click to expand...

Those are for removing the meat from it's source, quite often through tough hides. Hopefully, most people don't have to do that anymore.

Pretty kitty! :mrgreen:
 
Gathomas88 said:
You couldn't eat grass even if you wanted to. The appendix is for all intents and purposes a useless relic.

This is not the case with meat. We know that a certain degree of carnivorism is necessary to sustain a healthy lifestyle.
Click to expand...

Our canine teeth evolved for tearing raw meat. We don't eat that now as a general rule, thus our canines have become smaller and are more or less vestigial, like our appendix.

I'm still waiting for anyone to state that they think the 'naturalness' of something is an indication of whether something is better. Why does it matter that something is natural or not?
 
Last edited:
GottaGo said:
Since my opinion is based on my health needs, a lower carb source of protein such as meat at 5g is better than rice and beans at 46g for me. I do eat a fair amount of nuts, but they also carry a carb load, with certain fats that can accumulate quickly if they are consumed in any bulk.
Click to expand...

Are you diabetic or something?
 
Manc Skipper said:
Vegetarianism is less unnatural than eating meat at every meal, or even daily.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. Depends if you believe in evolution in the human species. If you do then you know that at one point raw meat was indeed a large part of our diet and all that protein lead to a bigger more complex brain. Once we developed fire, digestion was easier and over the course of time we evolved somewhat back towards a grassland type diet becoming omnivores with meat as a staple.

Modern meat is a problem as we have changed the composition and content of the meat through chemicals, hormones and breeding. Still, home grown organic meats are available and a diet including them is highly preferrable to a diet of all vegetables.

When talking about vegetarianism my comments are targetted at true vegetarians, not the hyphenated cheats. If you're eating cheese, milk products or eggs you are not a vegetarian.
 
there are and have been societies that were vegetarian, so clearly it can exist and work over the long term. But veganism seems more questionable and highly dependent on modern technology and science
 
clownboy said:
For humans yes. Our bodies accept meat as the perfect protein. With vegies, specific and exact combos must be employed to come close enough to a protein chain our bodies will accept. We have some need for the blood and urea in the meat and the fats keep our coat nice and silky smooth.

Name a vegetarian, outside of fiction who has lived to over 100 and I can name many more who weren't.
Click to expand...

animal proteins can be acquired through both dairy and egg
 
GottaGo said:
Type 1. Carbs are everything.
Click to expand...

Yours is obviously a more unique situation, though it could be accounted for on a vegetarian or vegan diet (I'm not saying you should...just a comment).
 
Excon said:
It would be very very difficult to be a vegetarian without modern logistics.
Click to expand...

most of india has been doing it for hundreds of years
 
afr0byte said:
Do you have some sort of source for this? It may be a bit more planning, but these people seem to be in pretty good shape: Vegan Bodybuilding & Fitness
Click to expand...

I've worked with body builders, that is not a healthy lifestyle to begin with (bulk and strip takes a toll). They SEEM to be is right. Heart, liver, and all sorts of other problems live behind those massive cut bodies you highlight.
 
Baralis said:
A strictly vegetarian diet is something primitive man probably never had the luxury to chose. They had to eat anything and everything that they could find. However many primitive cultures did not eat nearly as much meat as we do today. We as Americans eat meat pretty much every meal and many times the meat is our primary dish. We are not meant to have this much meat in our diets.

If you look at our last surviving tribes of hunter/gathers you will find that their diets consist largely of plant matter. Anytime people are heavily hunting animals in an area, animal numbers can become sparse and meat hard to acquire so they must rely heavily on plant foods. This is probably very indicative of early man.
Click to expand...


the problem with this is those "last surviving tribes" exist in relatively unique and extreme environments and never had much success as a culture (hence their isolation)
 
Amadeus said:
A vast amount of knowledge? It guess we gauge knowledge differently, and unlike most conservatives, I am not intimidated by its pursuit.
Click to expand...

typical partisan hack. WTF does political lean have to do with this discussion?
 
marduc said:
Your incessant attempts at trying to move goalposts aside, you once again overlook the fact that canines (which we have) are NOT for chewing.
Click to expand...

I overlooked something which I've repeatedly stated? Interesting.

They are for tearing, you know like what one would do with meat.
Click to expand...

You mean these 'canines'?

Fundora-Before.jpg
 
OscarB63 said:
typical partisan hack. WTF does political lean have to do with this discussion?
Click to expand...

The same thing that human eye teeth have to do with mastication.
 
GottaGo said:
That paints quite a picture. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

What can I say? I'm a man who likes his steak. :lol:

IMO, the human 'canines' aren't so much for actually removing the flesh from the source because of their length, but tearing it as it is masticated to help break it down.
Click to expand...

That is true. Honestly, the human jaw and molars are where the difference is most apparent anyway. In comparison to most primates, our jaws (and the muscles connecting to them) are absolutely puny, while our molars are quite sharp.

This would seem to imply that our skulls were not primarily built for dealing with hard to chew plant materials but softer animal tissues.

chimp-vs-human.jpg

Chimpanzees, for instance, are technically omivores, but they are far more adapted for vegetarianism than we are. As such, their anatomy tends to be so much more readily adapted towards intensive chewing that their skulls require an extra ridge along the top to accomodate the oversized muscles which connect to the jaw.

200432431.jpg

Gorillas, on the other hand, are basically pure vegetarians. These structural features are massively more pronounced on their skulls to say the least.

Amadeus said:
You can make that argument, but the fact remains that we don't have canines in the sense that dogs or other carnivores do. We chew with blunt teeth, which are actually more suited for legumes and vegetables. We can eat meat, sure, but we do not have a set of chompers like this:

tiger-teeth2.jpg
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but we are not the same kind of predator. You also have to look at how human anatomy compares to the rest of our close biological relatives which actually are vegetarians.

Comparatively speaking, we simply have far more features in common with carnivorous species than the reverse.
 
Last edited:
GottaGo said:
1 scrambled egg is 5g protein
1 chicken breast is 23.5 g
1 oz of beef is 7g

Thats alotta eggs to equal what's in meat.
Click to expand...

and?

<~~~~~~>
 
afr0byte said:
Do have some source evidence for this? What's imperfect about the proteins that's not made up for by paired proteins? Generally vegetarian protein sources are either deficient in lysine or methione. That's why vegetarians or vegans are encouraged to eat paired proteins or from varied sources. What's special about the meat protein?
Click to expand...

It is the complete protein chain (meat) in terms of what the human body can accept and use. Miss one link in that chain in your combo and it is not accepted as protein in the human body and is disgarded. Vegetables vary from plant to plant and from crop to crop as to the amount of these human acceptable protein precursors, meat, it's the perfect protein for our bodies. It's what we're designed to ingest. It's what got us here to the top of the food chain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom