Maine Decides: Right To Food

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
i like having a veggie garden because it's kind of like therapy...when i get a little depressed or pissed, i go out and weed, water, do what needs doin, and by the end of it i usually feel good enough to be able to stand talking to people again, but i understand it doesn't work that way for a lot of people
 

Lucky Luke

Well-Known Member
i like having a veggie garden because it's kind of like therapy...when i get a little depressed or pissed, i go out and weed, water, do what needs doin, and by the end of it i usually feel good enough to be able to stand talking to people again, but i understand it doesn't work that way for a lot of people
No, i prefer a walk along the beach or a bike ride. Vegetable gardens are to much work and like eggs don't cost very much to buy.
 

CatHedral

Well-Known Member
My complaint with gardens is that they are limited to growing “what food eats”. Vegetation, minus a tiny cohort of spices, is entirely “what food eats”. I’ll eat a steak, but not the salad it ate to become one.
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
My complaint with gardens is that they are limited to growing “what food eats”. Vegetation, minus a tiny cohort of spices, is entirely “what food eats”. I’ll eat a steak, but not the salad it ate to become one.
gotta eat from all the food groups to stay healthy...meat is awesome, but it just won't keep you healthy by itself
 

mooray

Well-Known Member
Eating meat versus not is similar to the organic versus direct-element feed argument in our garden. You can feed your plants organic food, meat being the parallel here, but the plant will have to break that organic material down to access the things it actually needs. Or, you can feed the direct elements, fruits/veggies being the parallel here, and bypass the vast majority of the breakdown process. You can bypass the meat/dairy portion of the food groups and get them elsewhere and not miss out on anything. The main difference is just in nutrient density.
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
Eating meat versus not is similar to the organic versus direct-element feed argument in our garden. You can feed your plants organic food, meat being the parallel here, but the plant will have to break that organic material down to access the things it actually needs. Or, you can feed the direct elements, fruits/veggies being the parallel here, and bypass the vast majority of the breakdown process. You can bypass the meat/dairy portion of the food groups and get them elsewhere and not miss out on anything. The main difference is just in nutrient density.
that's true, but it has always seemed to me that the best approach is to go along with how nature and evolution designed us. we've been omnivorous nomadic wanderers for most of our existence, eating a wide variety of foods as we travel along, mostly motivated by the weather.
"modern" humans have been around for close to 200,000 years, and our ancestors were around for about 5 million years before that...we've become a stationary agricultural society only about 10,000 years ago. that's about 500 times as long...you can't expect evolutionary change that quickly
 

CatHedral

Well-Known Member
Eating meat versus not is similar to the organic versus direct-element feed argument in our garden. You can feed your plants organic food, meat being the parallel here, but the plant will have to break that organic material down to access the things it actually needs. Or, you can feed the direct elements, fruits/veggies being the parallel here, and bypass the vast majority of the breakdown process. You can bypass the meat/dairy portion of the food groups and get them elsewhere and not miss out on anything. The main difference is just in nutrient density.
I disagree. Meat is more appropriate human nutrition than what meat eats. Ask the Inuit. Or the Pima. Once starch was added to their diet by an ignorant Uncle Sam, the Pima experienced new things: obesity, heart disease, diabetes. The current food pyramid is upside down, and I believe that the mega ag combines like Archer Daniels Midland were pulling a Facebook or Philip Morris. They knew that poison was money. Lotta politics in nutrition science.
 

mooray

Well-Known Member
that's true, but it has always seemed to me that the best approach is to go along with how nature and evolution designed us. we've been omnivorous nomadic wanderers for most of our existence, eating a wide variety of foods as we travel along, mostly motivated by the weather.
"modern" humans have been around for close to 200,000 years, and our ancestors were around for about 5 million years before that...we've become a stationary agricultural society only about 10,000 years ago. that's about 500 times as long...you can't expect evolutionary change that quickly
I don't expect that, but the trend is telling. Let's not fight where nature and evolution are pushing is, which is a reduction of meat intake.
 

mooray

Well-Known Member
I disagree. Meat is more appropriate human nutrition than what meat eats. Ask the Inuit. Or the Pima. Once starch was added to their diet by an ignorant Uncle Sam, the Pima experienced new things: obesity, heart disease, diabetes. The current food pyramid is upside down, and I believe that the mega ag combines like Archer Daniels Midland were pulling a Facebook or Philip Morris. They knew that poison was money. Lotta politics in nutrition science.
Is starch what meat eats naturally? We give cows skittles fer cryin' out loud. And the things your body processes by breaking down animal proteins, you can get that from what meat eats, or...what meat is supposed to eat anyway.
 

CatHedral

Well-Known Member
Is starch what meat eats naturally? We give cows skittles fer cryin' out loud. And the things your body processes by breaking down animal proteins, you can get that from what meat eats, or...what meat is supposed to eat anyway.
I have never seen a cow graze skittles.

No plant has the perfect nutrient mix of 73% ground beef.
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
I disagree. Meat is more appropriate human nutrition than what meat eats. Ask the Inuit. Or the Pima. Once starch was added to their diet by an ignorant Uncle Sam, the Pima experienced new things: obesity, heart disease, diabetes. The current food pyramid is upside down, and I believe that the mega ag combines like Archer Daniels Midland were pulling a Facebook or Philip Morris. They knew that poison was money. Lotta politics in nutrition science.
it's hard to get enough C, E, boron, calcium, potassium, lithium, polyphenols, myo-inositol, and fiber from an all meat diet. eating a lot of fish helps some, but not enough to avoid deficiencies...organ meats also help with some of these, but eating enough organ meat to make up what is missing can lead to vitamin a poisoning, and other problems.
if it works for you, go with it i guess, just does not seem like a good plan to me
 

mooray

Well-Known Member
Also think this stuff is relative to what type of life you're living. If someone is trying to live any type of sustainable lifestyle, gotta take energy wherever you can.
 

nuskool89

Well-Known Member
I disagree. Meat is more appropriate human nutrition than what meat eats. Ask the Inuit. Or the Pima. Once starch was added to their diet by an ignorant Uncle Sam, the Pima experienced new things: obesity, heart disease, diabetes. The current food pyramid is upside down, and I believe that the mega ag combines like Archer Daniels Midland were pulling a Facebook or Philip Morris. They knew that poison was money. Lotta politics in nutrition science.
i used to think similarly (went full paleo for almost a year) and then when I had a physical my cholesterol was high in all the wrong places. I explained my diet and the logic/data behind it and my doctor politely asked me what the average lifespan of a caveman was.

Inuit are not really a logical example as over countless generations and natural selection their genetic adaptations are vastly different than many populations. They intake an extreme amount of saturated fats but have non existent cardiovascular issues. They still have a much shorter life expectancy than the average Canadian by over 10 years.

I’m still very mindful of diet but pay more attention to what oils and fats I intake. I really like the greek approach to food ratios.

If you could avoid anything that is truly “foreign to our digestive system” cut out processed sugars and eat more low glycemic fruit. One can of coke has the equivalent of 10-12 inches of sugar cane. It would have taken ancient man half a day to chew through that much sugar; but we can flood our bodies with it in seconds now.
 

CatHedral

Well-Known Member
i used to think similarly (went full paleo for almost a year) and then when I had a physical my cholesterol was high in all the wrong places. I explained my diet and the logic/data behind it and my doctor politely asked me what the average lifespan of a caveman was.

Inuit are not really a logical example as over countless generations and natural selection their genetic adaptations are vastly different than many populations. They intake an extreme amount of saturated fats but have non existent cardiovascular issues. They still have a much shorter life expectancy than the average Canadian by over 10 years.

I’m still very mindful of diet but pay more attention to what oils and fats I intake. I really like the greek approach to food ratios.

If you could avoid anything that is truly “foreign to our digestive system” cut out processed sugars and eat more low glycemic fruit. One can of coke has the equivalent of 10-12 inches of sugar cane. It would have taken ancient man half a day to chew through that much sugar; but we can flood our bodies with it in seconds now.
My cholesterol went down, and my blood lipid ratio improved a lot. But I had to be strict and keep daily carbs below two grams. When I crept it past ten, I started gaining weight.

I do not eat fruit. Cannot stand the stuff.
 

nuskool89

Well-Known Member
My cholesterol went down, and my blood lipid ratio improved a lot. But I had to be strict and keep daily carbs below two grams. When I crept it past ten, I started gaining weight.

I do not eat fruit. Cannot stand the stuff.


everyone’s genetic makeup and bacterial flora is different so if you’re doing well, do your thing.

no one fall for genetic diet tests though please*
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
i don't talk about this a lot, but i have a diet that would kill a normal person...
i have severe issues with my stomach, and live on yogurt...i take supplements and add protein and sugar to the yogurt, but thats really about 90% of my diet, about 5 pounds of it a day. i add the sugar to get close to 2000 calories a day, otherwise i start to slowly lose weight. i weighed 240 pounds at my largest, then i got a hernia which allowed a Volvulus to happen, which is your stomach or intestines twisting. my stomach got strangulated in the hernia, but then popped back in. i thought that was good, but when it popped back in, it got turned somehow. i got pretty sick, almost died, but they operated, removed a large part of my stomach due to tissue damage from the volvulus stopping blood flow, and the result is that i can't digest anything much solider than yogurt. i also developed a gluten allergy somewhere in there, no idea if that was coincidental or caused by the sickness.
so i live on protein and carbohydrates and sugar, almost no fat. i get fat free yogurt, honestly just because yogurt with a noticeable amount of fat tastes bad to me, almost rancid. i do like ice cream, and can eat it as long as it doesn't have pieces of things i can't have in it, fruit, nuts, flour like cookies and cream, or brownie chunks...i take a multi vitamin every day, and B12 and E on the advice of my doctor. i also take enough protein supplement daily along with the yogurt to bring my total to 100 grams, and enough sugar to get to at least 2k calories per day. also take fiber every day, couple of spoons full, as i get none from my diet.
i've discussed this with more than one doctor, a couple of them have told me that that my diet would be very bad for a normal person...to which i usually reply "yeah, but..."
so you can adapt to almost anything...but being able to isn't a reason to...
 
Last edited:
Top