PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 9 Jun 2006 12:24:55 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (39 lines)
thanks!   (ick)

I'd wonder just how much of this also applies to other animals, especially those raise in lots or contained spaces.

Elaine
-----Original Message-----
>From: Kristina Carlton <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Jun 9, 2006 11:22 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: pork
>
>Supposedly pigs are 80% like humans and therefore it is not healthy to eat
>them - besides the fact that they are scavengers and will eat feces and/or
>their own young among other things.
>
>Here is what Mercola has to say:
>
>"Pigs are scavenger animals and are frequently contaminated with parasites
>that aren't removed through the cooking process. It would be best to avoid
>all ham and pork products. Pork can be heavily contaminated with mold spores
>in its fat and is also used in labs to culture cancer cells, because it
>increases their growth."
>
>On 6/9/06, Jerry Stegenga <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 6/9/2006 10:37:44 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>> [log in to unmask] writes:
>>
>> he's  convinced that pork is toxic to humans....
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I am convinced that it is not!    Maybe he is  Jewish?   Jerry Steg
>>
>>
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2