Mime-Version: |
1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) |
Sender: |
|
Date: |
Sat, 2 Dec 2006 18:30:56 -0800 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
In-Reply-To: |
<007a01c7165e$414c8820$7b01a8c0@medea> |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Dec 2, 2006, at 2:07 PM, Carrie Coineandubh wrote:
>
> *** I hear this argument--milk is for baby cows (or baby whatever
> mammal). Is cow flesh custom made for humans to eat? Is honey? You
> can make the argument that humans have had a longer time to adapt
> to eating cow flesh than they have to drinking cow milk, but I
> don't really buy the argument that we shouldn't drink the milk of
> other species because it is only for babies of that species, but we
> should eat meat from other species.
>
> --Carrie
Thank you! Yes, we don't eat humans, but we drink human milk. We do
eat cows - how is their milk not part of the animal? We eat eggs;
they are designed to nourish developing chicks. There is a certain
amount of opportunism in the carnivorous side of our diet, I think.
If we ate every possible species, including fish, insects, rodents,
etc. we were probably getting exposed to a bunch of biological
products that don't occur in plain ol' steak. I wonder how foreign
any raw protein can be... Something eats every other something.
And, as far as the foreign proteins, an awful lot of the research is
done on pasteurized - in other words - denatured milk, full of not
only proteins altered by heat into indigestible reactive stuff, but
also the dead bodies of all the bacteria - beneficial and harmful -
killed by the pasteurization; the standards for dairy cows are very
lax when the milk is going to be pasteurized. I'd look at this stuff
for the allergens.
ginny
All stunts performed without a net!
|
|
|