Animals Australia Unleashed
Change the World Who Cares? Videos Take Action! The Animals Community Forum Shop Blog Display
1 2 3
Your E-Mail: O Password:
Login Help     |     Join for Free!     |     Hide This

Post a Reply

The Paleo Diet doesn't prove that killing animals is morally justifiable...

11 - 15 of 15 posts   1 | 2  


RaV3N RaV3N WA Posts: 2152
11 14 Jun 2010
EJay said:
tarkine said:
The argument about whether or not humans are "meant" to eat meat is completely irrelevant, and misses the point.
On top of this: the change in demand and in farming practices have dramatically changed and the changes have impacted the environment and the chemical make-up of the produce.
To begin with, paleolithic-era people would have only started developing very simple agricultural farming techniques, and could only grow crops and raise animals that were a) seasonal and b) local.  
Secondly, there is a huge difference between animal husbandry and factory farming.  The fact that thousands of years ago, my ancestors went and killed a ram is pretty different to the fact that today thousands upon thousands of animals will be indiscriminately slaughtered for human consumption.
I think that they've missed the point with the premise of the diet: food is not as nutritionally dense as it used to be - especially food purchased from a supermarket or other source of mass production.  Meat animals are raised and fed differently than they were in the paleolithic era, and therefore there will be a change in nutritional content.  So, unless followers of this diet are going to raise (and kill) all their own produce, and make sure it is as close to 'original' as possible, it's kind of a moot point.
Last, it doesn't change the fact that animals are not ours to (ab)use.  The fact is that we do actually have different moral systems that 'early man.'  I am a bit loath to say it, but we are morally superior, and therefore should be making morally superior judgments.
Very very true! The good ol' saying of "nothing is as good as used to be" definitely rings true with meat in particular. How could grain fed, factory farmed, steroid pumped meat be anywhere as good as grass fed, free range, and prob well looked after (prior to death) meat? Obviously I'm not advocating a meat diet using the 2nd option - but as a compassion it's almost like apples and oranges.
ReplyQuote

f3xstar f3xstar NSW Posts: 212
12 15 Jun 2010
i dont believe were 'meant' to eat anything specific. i believe in evolution of what can be digested by the human body. i dont believe that we should be eating anything artificial  obviously though.
ReplyQuote

EngineKid EngineKid NSW Posts: 7
13 27 Jun 2010
I decided to use this as a topic on my blog, I'm interested to know what people think...

http://theveganabolitionist.blogspot.com/
ReplyQuote

Ellim Ellim United Kingdom Posts: 480
14 5 Jul 2010
Reading last night, I came across something which reminded me of this thread.  Although this book isn't scholarly, it is well referenced and, I assume, accurate (at least with its use of contemporary source material).  Although it's about an era that is many thousands of years removed from the 'Paleo' it does go some way to demonstrating how different factory-farmed animals are to early-era farmed animals.
Talking about the occasions in which meat (beef, mutton and pork in particular) was eaten:
'The Year 1000', Robert Lacey and Danny Danzinger said:
The relatively small amounts of fat on all these meats would be viewed by modern nutritionists with quite a kindly eye.  Saturated fat, the source of cholesterol with its related contemporary health problems, is a problem of the intensively reared factory-farmed animals of recent years, with their overabundant "scientific" diets and their lack of exercise.  All Anglo-Saxon animals were free range, and the Anglo-Saxons would have been shocked at the idea of ploughing land to produce animal feed.  Ploughland was for feeding humans.  So farm animals were lean and rangey, their meat containing three times as much protein as fat.  With modern, intensively reared animals that ratio is often reversed.
If the nutritional composition of animals has changed that significantly in the last thousand years - imagine how much it has changed in the last ten thousand...
ReplyQuote

JaimieCS JaimieCS VIC Posts: 363
15 5 Jul 2010
There is of course, an ideal diet for humans for optimal health, nutritionally speaking. This diet can be achieved with or without meat and animal products.

traditionally, this was most easily achieved with meat and dairy as large contributors, but in modern societies, the same nutritional balance can be achieved animal free- that's the choice we make.
ReplyQuote

Next >
 [ 1 ]  [ 2 ] 

www.unleashed.org.au