Alan:

> > Although I can't prove it, I
> > am pretty sure that even if the whole EEC turned to organic
> > agriculture, there would in principle be enough land to feed the
> > entire population.
> >
> Did you mean to say what you said here..or is there a typo in
> there somewhere?

No Typo. Organic agriculture is about as productive than
conventional. As for meat, based on statistics for France (in 1985, 57
million inhabitants ate on average 90 kg meat per person, 60% of which
consisting of beek or pork; there were 23 million bovines and 11
million pigs in the country; etc):

 -suppose we want to feed everyone with 90 kg pork/year. Then, we need
about 1 animal for every two humans, that is 30 million pigs. Allowing
each of these a space of about 20 square meters, the total occupied
surface would be 600 sq. km, that is one thousandth of the country's
total surface.
 -suppose we want to feed everyone with 90 kg chickens/year. Then, we
need about 25 animals for every human. But chickens need less space,
perhaps 2 square meters or even less, so they would occupy no more
than 5 thousandths of the total surface.
 -suppose we want to feed everyone with 90 kg beef/year. Considering
that we need about 1 animal for every human, and that we allow the
bovine population to take about 5% of the land, then 10 animals would
graze on an area the size of a soccer (football) field. Whether this
is too much or not, I don't know, but remember that this estimate was
based on 90 kg beef. A shortage of beef would result in increased
prices, and thus people would eat more pork or chicken and less beef.
 -the population density is lower in France than in Germany, but
again, pigs and chickens don't take a lot of space.

> > My theory is then than lions don't _need_ to stay awake more than 4
> > hours a day, since they spend comparatively little time on hunting and
> > feeding, and they have no reason to waste their energy walking around.
> >
> So you think that we humans..as well as chimps etc. ought to follow
> their example..like live in a dream world except for waking for
> bouts of eating?

No. Humans need to stay awake because they are social animals, the
communicate (talk), educate their children, etc. I was just pointing
out that the number of hours of sleep an animal needs has nothing to do
with the energy spent on digesting meat. By the way, slothes sleep 20
hours/day. Would you conclude that eating vegetation demands
considerable digestive energy?

> Can't comment on the watery stools as I don't each too much
> fruit. I only eat fruit (and fruit alone) for breakfast.
> Helmut Wandmaker (a fruitarian) hasn't experienced watery
> stools as far as I am aware.

Well, if he did, would he brag about it?

> It would indicate to me that
> one is not getting enough roughage (fiber). There is plenty
> of fiber in fruit..unless of course you juice more than you
> eat whole..unless of course you are talking about a case of
> diarrhoea.

On the contrary, I think that watery or unformed stools are caused by
excessive fiber, which accelerates transit time. Non-fibrous foods
(e.g. white rice) tend slow down transit. I get watery/unformed stools
whenever my fruit intake reaches or exceeds 50% (and no juices). With
100% fruit I get diarrhea after a few days.

> I do that..but there are some..like Helmut Wandmaker..who don't
> and don't have problems.

Perhaps they don't have problems, but that doesn't prove their diet is
suitable for most people. You will always find healthy SADers, but
that doesn't prove SAD is good for you.

> I can get my aminos
> pure from my diet and see no reason why I should have to
> waste digestive energy breaking down animal protein into its
> constituent aminos first.

To give your statement any credibility, you would need to supply
 -the number of calories needed to chew/digest one gram of protein
from meat
 -the number of calories needed to chew/digest one gram of protein
from vegetables.

> Germany (because of their love for raw pork as described above) is
> said to have the highest incidence of tapeworms in all the western
> countries. Carcasses are all inspected of course, but the
> examination is usually confined to a surface inspection. Meat
> sampling to examine the deep muscle is only carried out
> sporadically on relatively few carcasses.

I personally eat very little raw pork, but when I do, it is certified
organic (and therefore much safer).


--Jean-Louis Tu <[log in to unmask]>