Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Wed, 17 Mar 1999 20:08:09 -0600 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
>>>Here a few more recent reports on milk for you to chew on (although
>>>I don't intend to waste my time repeating tons of research reports
>>>every time I open my mouth in this list). I just don't have the
>>>time or the inclination and find mutual personal experiences from
>>>say at least 20 people doing the same thing more reliable anyway.
Kirt:
>>I missed the reference that showed that milk is bad for all people in
>>all cases. I also missed the research showing that fasting for two
>>weeks would be good for everyone. And I missed the research which
>>showed that raw vegans are healthier than the norm.
Alan:
>Seeing as we are here to exchange information rather than petty
>prods and insults, I miss your references to reports which shoot any
>of those reports I mentioned down in flames, or which proove that the
>benefits of cow's milk far outweigh the disadvantages (although
>anything with a disadvantage, including medical drugs, is not worth
>eating). I missed your reference that fasting for two weeks would be
>detrimental to anyone (other than of course the obvious such as the
>starving or those afflicted with metabolic diseases such as diabetes
>etc.). I missed your references to research which shows that cooked
>veggies or cooked or raw meat is also essential in the diet
>and which gives plausible reasons.
Alan, I believe the bones of contention are claims made by you which
does leave the burden of proof on you. I think what Kirt is saying is
that the references that you have come up with do not support the
claims you are making. If you would put a little more effort and
diligence into separating what you perceive as facts and what are your
opinions/beliefs, I think a more constructive dialogue could emerge.
Best, Peter
|
|
|