Deborah said:
>This experience with Zephyr has left me tending to believe that in
>today's world, it's inappropriate to be other than a vegan or
>vegetarian.
I do not see the logic. Fact is the majority of health conscious people
are able to eat animal foods - raw or cooked - without major
consequences. However, after your horrifying ordeal, I do not blame you
for turning your back on animal foods.
> We're not out on the savanna; we don't need to kill to survive;
This is true. But I want more than just survive. If nothing else 25
years as a nutrient-starved vegan/vegetarian has taught me that.
>our animal sources are too contaminated;
This is can be a problem, which is why we always should choose the
highest quality RAF''s.
>the animals may have sent a message for us now through Zephyr's
>illness about who eats who these days.
If anything he should probably be increasing his consumption of RAF's,
but if there indeed is a message, I believe it is more about *how* he
goes about his diet than about what category of foods he chooses to
consume.
>It's the lowest life forms eating the highest!
This remark truly hurt the feelings of my cat. ;-)
>And I now think less highly of instincto. Our food selections are
>too abundant and too hybridized; our emotional imprints too
>entrenched to surmount; and our neocortex exists for good reason --
>to be integrated into instinct rather than shunned and denigrated.
>I'm sick of food philosophies used as battering rams, badges of
>identity, and snobbish elitism.
Let us not throw the baby out with the bath water. I agree that
integrating the neocortex with the instinct is what it is all about,
and I am very gratified to see how the many proficient instincto
contributors to this list are making sincere attempts to make this
manifest.
>Basically, Dr. Klaper feels the essential unity of all life, and does
>not feel it appropriate at this stage of the game that humans be
>predators. He doesn't see humanity's place as being like that of the
>large carnivores, who weed out the old and sick from animal
>populations. So his first objection is spiritual or ethical.
I think that Klaper could benefit from reading "The Tender Carnivore"
by Paul Shephard.
>He is also fully aware that some vegans fare better after
>reintroducing animal foods into their diet, and because of that, has
>created a study designed to ascertain exactly what factors cause some
>people to "need" meat in their diets, and what is it in meat that
>they need. And, are these needs able to be met by plant-based
>sources? He has gathered 50 long-time genuine vegans doing very well
>as vegans, and 50 long-time genuine vegans doing very poorly as
>vegans, and designed a very sensitive questionnaire and a whole
>battery of lab tests in order to isolate these factors and better
>understand this conundrum. Although we have plenty of anectodal
>evidence on both sides of the issue, there is no hard science on it,
>and that's what he's after.
Good for Michael who has been my favorite vegan for years. I look
forward to hearing the outcome of this study. I would find it very
interesting to compare the health of the vegans doing well with that of
the reformed (ex)vegans.
>He told Zephyr that from a parasite risk, domestic, instinctive
>quality herbivores are safer to eat raw than wild carnivores. But
>risk still exists; human influences come into play during slaughter
>and processing, and who knows how these instinctive quality
>herbivores are really being raised, what they're eating, and what
>microorganisms are in their environment. Of course, one can get
>fanatic about this, like never driving a car because an accident
>might occur, but Klaper feels that raw meat is a significant physical
>risk, akin to Russian roulette.
Just like I would not go to a nun for sexual advice ;-), with all due
respect to Michael Klaper I do not expect a vegan MD to have the last
word on RAF's. I wonder how he explains the many reported healings from
cancer and the likes from people eating RAF's?
>Dr. Klaper impressed me as one of = the finest human beings I've ever
>met; a truly caring, knowledgeable,
>and brilliant physician. I cannot recommend him more highly. Thank
>you, Fred, for bringing him into our lives. His visit was very
>reassuring to Zephyr; he conveyed to him that the worst is definitely
>over, and gave us concrete details about rebuilding a fragile system
>that came very close to death.
He cannot be praised enough for how he handled Zephyr's crisis.
>Following is a letter in which Fred conveys his impressions of the
>visit between Zephyr and Dr. Klaper. In particular, Fred describes
>his reaction to the moment when Zephyr tearfully expressed to Dr.
>Klaper the belief that he, Zephyr, in practicing his animal-killing
>and flesh-eating ways, was "doing the best that I can".
Fred said:
>There is a response that takes place in the face of one who is
>suffering. When Zephyr cried, I too had tears in my eyes. But then I
>thought to myself, "He's not crying for the animals he killed, for
>the lives he slaughtered. He's crying for himself, for his own pain,
>not for the pain he inflicted on the other." It may be that that is
>all he is capable of. I am too chronically upset to feel much
>sympathy for he who causes unnecessary suffering to another.
>Especially when that other is as defenseless as the animals that
>populate this orb. Anyway, that's how I feel.
As a vegan omnivore I can relate to both sides of this issue. However,
karma has it that next time Fred is sick with a vegan health challenge,
he might find a paleo-diet fanatic at his bedside lecturing him on how
his betrayal of his own biological heritage not only is causing the
deterioration that he is experiencing of his own health but also
furthering the spiritual alienation and decline of the planet. ;-)
>Yes, the visit with Michael Klaper was a high point in this ongoing
>saga. It does seem that Zephyr was touched by Michael and what he
>represents.
He is a good man, but I have yet to see anybody spiritually transformed
from a vegan life-style. Odds are that he was also a good man before
his veggie days.
> It will be interesting to see what happens as Zephyr regains his
>ability to forage for flesh at the grocery store. Neither of us
>holds out much hope for a change in behavior. But you never know.
>As always, I send you my love.
>He Who Is Without Sin
The concept of sin is perhaps the greatest "sin" of all.
>At least, in my experience, compassion is not exclusively felt by
>humans for only other humans. It is possible to experience this
>quality in relation to other forms of life. Perhaps you are able to
>feel this way towards trees and plants.
>However, I maintain that somehow, for reasons I can only speculate
>about, you do not, as a rule, feel compassion for the animals you
>kill. I don't think you could kill them if you did.
Sentimental posing in my opinion. The real question is to what degree a
man in denial of his true nature can feel compassion.
>As you know, I am profoundly disturbed by the fact that humans-
>the all-powerful, mighty, invincible conquerors of this planet,
>display callous indifference at best and heinous violence at worst
>toward all other animal species. Why do I want to protect animals, not
>just as species, but as individual beings with exquisite bodies and
>souls, amazing social communities, astonishing abilities to survive
>everything that both the ancient and the modern world throws at them?
>In one word- compassion.
No matter how nobel their ideas might seem, vegans do not have the
patent on compassion. To believe so is blind self-righteousness that
only will cause more conflict in a world already satiated with strife
and conflict.
>I don't know if perhaps you're a young soul, or maybe your mother and
>father were absent and unwilling to nurture you, and that's why you
>can hunt these exquisite creatures down and slaughter them.
Or maybe Fred was violated and traumatized as a child and now is
displacing these experiences on to the vegan cause?
>Or maybe it's true that you really don't want to kill but your
>instinct for survival tells you need their flesh to be healthy and
>feel good. I don't know.
I will settle for that.
>As for the idea that you're more noble for killing the animals
>ourselves, I don't accept that.
I disagree. I see killing the animal oneself and eating it raw as an
expression of the highest integrity.
>I would rather someone be in denial of the brutality they support with
>their flesh purchases, because I believe there is hope for that
>person. But to confront the reality of flesh-eating as you have and to
>then embrace it- that is for me taking two steps backward.
Hope in denial? That is a concept I as an ex-vegan no longer can
accept. It is in its ultimate refusal to face up to the responsibility
of what it means to be a human being, I see vegan philosophy as
cop-out & betrayal of the human spirit.
>I would like to believe that your present diseased state is not the
>result of a fundamentally flawed vision of the way things are. You
>would like to think that you merely made a slight mistake, and the
>bulk of your philosophy can remain intact. No major revision
>necessary, you hope.
A major revision is called for but I doubt it will lead to a vegan
transformation.
> Well, I don't know. Maybe you can continue eating fishes, lambs,
>deer, cows and any other animals you believe to be "clean".
>Maybe you won't ever again get parasites. Maybe, maybe, maybe....
If he stays away from raw carnivores the odds are probably in his
favor.
>In the meantime, our souls suffer. We crave something, anything that
>can give our lives greater meaning. Something IS going on, I'm almost
>certain. Something extraordinary, though I can't put my finger on it.
Something is always going on. I have yet to meet somebody who have
freed themselves from the wheel of karma.
>And when that something draws near, there will be much to cry about.
Maybe the time is drawing near for you to heal some inner wounds and
start to eat some animal food again. From my own experience I know that
it will make the tears flow.
>But until then, the game goes on.
Until we are able to stop it.
Deborah said:
>He became increasingly obsessed, manipulative,
>miserable, and petulant about his need for RAFs. Finally, yesterday
>I decided to give him what he wanted and let him suffer the
>consequences, if any. So far, they've been only positive during
>these two days he has eaten RAFs (a pound of T-bone steak yesterday,
>a pound and a half of prime rib today). He feels sated, calmer, more
>flexible in his body, and stronger. He is much kinder and more
>nurturing towards me. Who knows what it all means? Life goes on,
>and I'm so grateful he is still in it.
>Thanks for listening.
Deborah, you are a very courageous woman - thank you so much for
trusting us enough to share all your tribulations & doubts with us.
Best, Peter
[log in to unmask]
|
