Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Asthma / August 2005
Nature is striking back!
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Star - 06 Jul 2005 02:23 GMT With mad cow disease still a concern, the bird flu virus may be well on it's way to killing millions of people across the planet. According to a source at NIH (who chooses to rename anonymous for good reason), the goverment is in a near panic over the bird flu virus.
Is Nature finally striking back? There was a time when there was a real need for humans to consume animal flesh. They were uneducated about alternative sources and more often than not, did not have access to protein replacements.
However as humans have evolved, it is way past time to give up flesh eating. There is no excuse for the consumption of animals and poultry. We now know enough about nutrition to seek other forms of protein and we have an abundance of soy products, made to help wean people off their flesh eating habits, fake meats, made from soy products provide us with all we need. Yet many are still slaughtering innocent cows, poultry, deer, hogs, etc. And they are maintained in inhumane conditions and slaughtered in inhumane ways.
How many would actually eat these meats if they had to go out and do the slaughtering? Next time you are in your grocery store, and grab that pack of neatly wrapped and packaged steak, just remember what that animal had to endure to get there.
And if this does not persuade you, please read this:
From: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/gen-info/transmission.htm
Transmission of Influenza A Viruses Between Animals and People
Influenza A viruses are found in many different animals, including ducks, chickens, pigs, whales, horses, and seals. However, certain subtypes of influenza A virus are specific to certain species, except for birds which are hosts to all subtypes of influenza A. Subtypes that have caused widespread illness in people either in the past or the current period are H3N2, H2N2, H1N1, and H1N2. H1N1 and H3N2 subtypes have caused outbreaks in pigs and H7N7 and H3N8 viruses have caused outbreaks in horses. Influenza A viruses normally seen in one species sometimes can cross over and cause illness in another species. For example, up until 1998, only H1N1 viruses circulated widely in the U.S. pig population. However, in 1998, H3N2 viruses from humans were introduced into the pig population and caused widespread disease among pigs. Avian influenza viruses may be transmitted to humans in two main ways: · Directly from birds or from avian virus-contaminated environments to people. · Through an intermediate host, such as a pig. Influenza viruses have eight separate gene segments. The segmented genome allows viruses from different species to mix and create a new influenza A virus if viruses from two different species infect the same person or animal. For example, if a pig were infected with a human influenza virus and an avian influenza virus at the same time, the viruses could reassort and produce a new virus that had most of the genes from the human virus, but a hemagglutinin and/or neuraminidase from the avian virus. The resulting new virus might then be able to infect humans and spread from person to person, but it would have surface proteins (hemagglutinin and/or neuraminidase) not previously seen in influenza viruses that infect humans. This type of major change in the influenza A viruses is known as antigenic shift. Antigenic shift results when a new influenza A subtype to which most people have little or no immune protection infects humans. If this new virus causes illness in people and can be transmitted easily from person to person, an influenza pandemic can occur. It also is possible that the process of reassortment could occur in a human. For example, a person could be infected with avian influenza and a human strain of influenza at the same time. These viruses could reassort to create a new virus that had a hemagglutinin from the avian virus and other genes from the human virus. Theoretically, influenza A viruses with a hemagglutinin against which humans have little or no immunity that have reassorted with a human influenza virus are more likely to result in sustained human-to-human transmission and pandemic influenza. Thus, careful evaluation of influenza viruses recovered from humans who are infected with avian influenza is very important to identify reassortment if it occurs. While it is unusual for people to get influenza infections directly from animals, sporadic human infections and outbreaks caused by certain avian influenza A viruses and pig influenza viruses have been reported. (For more information see Avian Influenza Infections in Humans.) These sporadic human infections and outbreaks, however, rarely result in sustained transmission among humans.
Mike Dobony - 06 Jul 2005 03:10 GMT With mad cow disease still a concern, the bird flu virus may be well on it's way to killing millions of people across the planet. According to a source at NIH (who chooses to rename anonymous for good reason), the goverment is in a near panic over the bird flu virus.
Is Nature finally striking back? There was a time when there was a real need for humans to consume animal flesh. They were uneducated about alternative sources and more often than not, did not have access to protein replacements.
However as humans have evolved, it is way past time to give up flesh eating. There is no excuse for the consumption of animals and poultry. We now know enough about nutrition to seek other forms of protein and we have an abundance of soy products, made to help wean people off their flesh eating habits, fake meats, made from soy products provide us with all we need. Yet many are still slaughtering innocent cows, poultry, deer, hogs, etc. And they are maintained in inhumane conditions and slaughtered in inhumane ways.
*** Evolution has NEVER been proven.. If you can provide objective, measurable, verifiable, scientific proof for evolution then you can be the first to receive the $250,000 reward!
IF your vegitarian were as inexpensive as the real thing then you might have a good option. Also, the animal's purpose on earth is to provide food for mankind. God commanded man to eat meat for several feasts and holy days. The Disciples were commanded to eat ANYTHING that was placed before them, even (GASP!!!!!!!!) pork! ***
How many would actually eat these meats if they had to go out and do the slaughtering? Next time you are in your grocery store, and grab that pack of neatly wrapped and packaged steak, just remember what that animal had to endure to get there.
*** I used to work in a turkey slaughter/processing plant. Still eat turkey! ***
And if this does not persuade you, please read this:
From: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/gen-info/transmission.htm
*** No danger from *properly* cooked and handled meat. Problems come from unsanitary handling, storage, and partially cooked meat.
Proud member of PETA, People Eating Tasty Animals!
Mike D.
Rae - 07 Jul 2005 20:53 GMT The things we now esteem fixed shall, one by one, detach themselves, like ripe fruit, from our experience, and fall . . . The soul looketh steadily forwards, creating a world before her, leaving worlds behind her. RW Emerson
... Rae
| *** | Evolution has NEVER been proven.. If you can provide objective, measurable, [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] | | Mike D. Rae - 07 Jul 2005 21:18 GMT Fwiw Mike,
I don't think the poster was talking about evolution in the sense that you are. If you look the word "evolved" up in the dictionary, I don't think it even refers to the religious argument that's being made these days.
Ever heard that saying, "you are what you eat"?? So you like turkey eh? :)
Just kiddin w ya.
Rae
| *** | Evolution has NEVER been proven.. If you can provide objective, measurable, [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] | | Mike D. Star - 08 Jul 2005 03:32 GMT Mike, Rae was correct in that I was not speaking of Evolution in those terms.
MCS, Excuse me if I violated any copyrights. :) I did not see your post but will look for it.
Also one of the links did not post correctly.
Please see: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/gen-info/avian-flu-humans.htm
It is because of the way poultry has been overcrowed in horrible conditions, eating contaminated feed including dead flesh, that in part at least contributes to the cause of the disease in the poultry who in turn are now passing it on to the people who created these conditions.
ARoberts - 06 Jul 2005 03:12 GMT With mad cow disease still a concern, the bird flu virus may be well on it's way to killing millions of people across the planet. According to a source at NIH (who chooses to rename anonymous for good reason), the goverment is in a near panic over the bird flu virus.
Is Nature finally striking back? There was a time when there was a real need for humans to consume animal flesh. They were uneducated about alternative sources and more often than not, did not have access to protein replacements.
So what did we do to Amanita mushrooms, Hemlock, Nightshade and Thornapples, etc. to deserve their rath?
jackmallory@webtv.net - 06 Jul 2005 15:46 GMT Oh goody! At last a thread where we can have some r e a l valid contention.
Hard to decide where to start.
mcs - 06 Jul 2005 13:36 GMT Hey I was the first one month ago to make these assertions. Of course nature is striking back. We ignore nature or peoples perceptions and we ignore reporting this so special interests are left alone and or we ignore the corrleations and the status quo , not only continues it often gets worse. With mad cow disease still a concern, the bird flu virus may be well on it's way to killing millions of people across the planet. According to a source at NIH (who chooses to rename anonymous for good reason), the goverment is in a near panic over the bird flu virus.
Is Nature finally striking back? There was a time when there was a real need for humans to consume animal flesh. They were uneducated about alternative sources and more often than not, did not have access to protein replacements.
However as humans have evolved, it is way past time to give up flesh eating. There is no excuse for the consumption of animals and poultry. We now know enough about nutrition to seek other forms of protein and we have an abundance of soy products, made to help wean people off their flesh eating habits, fake meats, made from soy products provide us with all we need. Yet many are still slaughtering innocent cows, poultry, deer, hogs, etc. And they are maintained in inhumane conditions and slaughtered in inhumane ways.
How many would actually eat these meats if they had to go out and do the slaughtering? Next time you are in your grocery store, and grab that pack of neatly wrapped and packaged steak, just remember what that animal had to endure to get there.
And if this does not persuade you, please read this:
From: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/gen-info/transmission.htm
Transmission of Influenza A Viruses Between Animals and People
Influenza A viruses are found in many different animals, including ducks, chickens, pigs, whales, horses, and seals. However, certain subtypes of influenza A virus are specific to certain species, except for birds which are hosts to all subtypes of influenza A. Subtypes that have caused widespread illness in people either in the past or the current period are H3N2, H2N2, H1N1, and H1N2. H1N1 and H3N2 subtypes have caused outbreaks in pigs and H7N7 and H3N8 viruses have caused outbreaks in horses. Influenza A viruses normally seen in one species sometimes can cross over and cause illness in another species. For example, up until 1998, only H1N1 viruses circulated widely in the U.S. pig population. However, in 1998, H3N2 viruses from humans were introduced into the pig population and caused widespread disease among pigs. Avian influenza viruses may be transmitted to humans in two main ways: · Directly from birds or from avian virus-contaminated environments to people. · Through an intermediate host, such as a pig. Influenza viruses have eight separate gene segments. The segmented genome allows viruses from different species to mix and create a new influenza A virus if viruses from two different species infect the same person or animal. For example, if a pig were infected with a human influenza virus and an avian influenza virus at the same time, the viruses could reassort and produce a new virus that had most of the genes from the human virus, but a hemagglutinin and/or neuraminidase from the avian virus. The resulting new virus might then be able to infect humans and spread from person to person, but it would have surface proteins (hemagglutinin and/or neuraminidase) not previously seen in influenza viruses that infect humans. This type of major change in the influenza A viruses is known as antigenic shift. Antigenic shift results when a new influenza A subtype to which most people have little or no immune protection infects humans. If this new virus causes illness in people and can be transmitted easily from person to person, an influenza pandemic can occur. It also is possible that the process of reassortment could occur in a human. For example, a person could be infected with avian influenza and a human strain of influenza at the same time. These viruses could reassort to create a new virus that had a hemagglutinin from the avian virus and other genes from the human virus. Theoretically, influenza A viruses with a hemagglutinin against which humans have little or no immunity that have reassorted with a human influenza virus are more likely to result in sustained human-to-human transmission and pandemic influenza. Thus, careful evaluation of influenza viruses recovered from humans who are infected with avian influenza is very important to identify reassortment if it occurs. While it is unusual for people to get influenza infections directly from animals, sporadic human infections and outbreaks caused by certain avian influenza A viruses and pig influenza viruses have been reported. (For more information see Avian Influenza Infections in Humans.) These sporadic human infections and outbreaks, however, rarely result in sustained transmission among humans.
Rae - 11 Jul 2005 20:02 GMT According to metabolic typing, some of us *should* eat some meats. I'd like to eat fish but from what I've been reading, it's more harmful than good now due to all the pollution and there's no way to know what you'll be ingesting. I stopped eating the tuna quite a while ago because of the mercury and now have also pulled fish out of the mix after reading the latest news about it.
I'm not sure how one's metabolic type can be conclusively determined but if I am of the mixed type, which it sounds like from Kelley's work and others, I'm screwed.
I can't *bear* to go back to eating meat and seafood is now just too polluted.
You can take a free metabolic type test at: http://www.mercola.com/forms/mt_test_subscribe_complete.htm
It's not really designed for vegetarians though since I can't remember how I felt after eating meat. It seems far too simplistic to be of any value even for meat eaters.
Rae
| Of course nature | is striking back. We ignore nature or peoples perceptions and we ignore | reporting this so special interests are left alone and or we ignore the | corrleations and the status quo , not only continues it often gets worse. 00doc - 13 Jul 2005 00:31 GMT > According to metabolic typing, some of us *should* eat some meats. > I'd like to eat fish but from what I've been reading, it's more [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > of > the mix after reading the latest news about it. Sure, the pollutants are a concern and a reason to limit fish consumption - especially types that tend to be high in mercury. However, the fact remains that eating some fish is associated with many good health outcomes and longer life so I don't think the "more harmful than good" comment can be defended.
"Metabolic typing" is an improtant area of current research but it usually refers to drug metabolism. The practice of many alternative practitioners of tayloring a diet specifically to certain people base don things like blood type is totally without any scientific rationale or suppart and probably bunk. Some day we will probably do a lot depending on phenotypes, certainly with prescriptions of drugs and probably even with diet, but that bears little resemblance and should not be confused with what is currently being done.
Probably everyone should eat some meat. It has a lot of trace nutrients that would be hard to get from other sources. The key, as it usually is, is in moderation.
> You can take a free metabolic type test at: > http://www.mercola.com/forms/mt_test_subscribe_complete.htm Yeah - Mercola - nothing more need be said.
 Signature 00doc
Rae - 13 Jul 2005 02:56 GMT They had some news out a few weeks ago about how the government is concerned about the contaminants in fish but didn't know what to do about it and are therefore doing nothing rather than cause a panic and hurt the fish industry. How do you know what you're getting now days? So, I think I'll stick the fish oil supplements.
Know nothing about Mercola. Just did a search for a free test and his site came up. Some want to charge you to take one and I just wanted to see what kind of questions they ask. I think this type of testing approach is probably bunk as you say but if there was indeed a way to determine it, it would be great.
You heard of Kelley's work in this? What's your opinion of him?
Rae
| However, the fact remains that eating some fish is associated with | many good health outcomes and longer life so I don't think the "more [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] | | Yeah - Mercola - nothing more need be said. 00doc - 13 Jul 2005 04:10 GMT > How do you know what you're getting now days? Do you have any idea how ironic it is to have a person who propounds all kinds of alternative treatments ask this?
 Signature 00doc
Rae - 13 Jul 2005 13:45 GMT Not ironic at all. These are two entirely different things. But I am not surprised you would view it that way.
Rae
| > How do you know what you're getting now days? | | Do you have any idea how ironic it is to have a person who propounds | all kinds of alternative treatments ask this? Bob - 13 Jul 2005 14:58 GMT >Know nothing about Mercola. Just did a search for a free test and his site >came up. Some want to charge you to take one and I just wanted to see what [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Rae Kelley was a dentist, who made some cancer cure claims in the 60's, which tells us what? He probably wasn't a very good dentist either.
"We have maintained throughout this treatise that cancer is nothing more than a pancreatic enzyme deficiency. The greatest cause of this deficiency is the amount of cooked protein (mutated amino acids) fed into the body. The pancreas simply cannot manufacture enough enzymes to digest the large volumes of pasteurized milk and cheese and cooked meat we eat and have any enzymes left over to digest the foreign protein we know as cancer. If people would not eat protein after 1:00 p.m., 86% of cancer in the United States could be eliminated."
http://educate-yourself.org/cancer/kellymetabolicdiet13dec02.shtml
Don't you just love how these nutritional "gurus" come up with such specific percentages of cure rates, (given the monumental complexity of this issue), and then proceed with the unmitigated gall to pronounce with such aplomb that cancer is really such an easy no-brainer to figure out. Hint: Quack Quack Quack..
I'm with OOdoc on this one. Metabolic typing is really in its infancy and you're probably better off just doing your own diet elimination testing than relying on one of the many and often contradicting theories put forth as gospel by some dentist or psychologist or whoever has written a book on the subject.
NorthShoreCEO - 13 Jul 2005 15:38 GMT I've looked at several of his articles in the past, and know he practices about twenty minutes away from me, but I know nothing more about him. What's the problem with Mercola?
> Yeah - Mercola - nothing more need be said. NorthShoreCEO - 13 Jul 2005 00:41 GMT Rae, I think you'd have a better understanding about what to do to achieve good health if you'd read a book called, "You: The Owners Manual". There are several fish you can eat to maintain good health, and as long as you don't eat tuna more than once a week, the mercury isn't going to impact you either. Salmon is actually a good fish to eat if one has cancer.
> According to metabolic typing, some of us *should* eat some > meats. I'd like [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > | corrleations and the status quo , not only continues it often > gets worse. Rae - 13 Jul 2005 02:57 GMT Hi there,
I like and do have some wild Alaskan salmon now and then. Uncooked salmon salad and sometimes cooked. Of course now that they're going to start drilling there, so it'll probably become too polluted to eat in time as well.
Will take a look at that book. Regarding tuna, the light tuna is less dangerous but I like the white & don't like the light so have just given it up. Sardines of all things, have some of the best fish oil. There hasn't been much written about whether it too is now risky or at least I haven't read anything on it. Tried some the other day and it tasted like tuna to me.
Rae
| Rae, I think you'd have a better understanding about what to do | to achieve good health if you'd read a book called, "You: The [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] | > | corrleations and the status quo , not only continues it often | > gets worse. xandy13 b - 12 Aug 2005 20:01 GMT I am hearing about bird flu for some time. But had not found any case of this disease in USA, Canada. Do we really need to worry so much? Rgds.
>Hey I was the first one month ago to make these assertions. Of course nature >is striking back. We ignore nature or peoples perceptions and we ignore [quoted text clipped - 81 lines] >sporadic human infections and outbreaks, however, rarely result in >sustained transmission among humans. Bob - 06 Jul 2005 15:27 GMT >Is Nature finally striking back? There was a time when there was a real >need for humans to consume animal flesh. They were uneducated about >alternative sources and more often than not, did not have access to >protein replacements. "Nature" is not fighting back. Nature could care less. Animals, including humans, survive to the degree they can adapt to their environment and reproduce. This argument has next to zero to do with eating animal flesh.
>However as humans have evolved, it is way past time to give up flesh >eating. Horsefeathers. Take away your food for several weeks, and you'd fight for the scraps off a rhinoceros carcass, just like anyone else would who is trying to survive.
>There is no excuse for the consumption of animals and poultry. There are reasons, however. Because I like it and I want it and I can get it. And it tastes good, and it makes me feel satiated and energized, ready to reproduce and survive and thrive! Rahrrrrrrrrrrrr.....
>We now know enough about nutrition to seek other forms of protein and >we have an abundance of soy products, made to help wean people off >their flesh eating habits, fake meats, made from soy products provide >us with all we need. What makes you think that soy is such a great protein replacment? You want the estrogenic qualities of soy?
>Yet t many are still slaughtering innocent cows, >poultry, deer, hogs, etc. And they are maintained in inhumane >conditions and slaughtered in inhumane ways. Right. We should only be slaughtering the guilty cows, poultry, deer, hogs, etc. Most animals that we eat are treated humanely, with care to keep them healthy and as stress free as possible. I'd be much more concerned about the inhumane treatment of humans, and we don't even eat them.
>How many would actually eat these meats if they had to go out and do >the slaughtering? This is so silly. You would, if you were hungry enough.
>And if this does not persuade you, please read this: > >From: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/gen-info/transmission.htm > >Transmission of Influenza A Viruses Between Animals and People
>These sporadic human infections and outbreaks, however, rarely result in >sustained transmission among humans. What does this have to do with eating animals?
Rae - 06 Jul 2005 16:15 GMT Bob:
NOW who is the naive one??
Rae
| Most animals that we eat are treated humanely, with care | to keep them healthy and as stress free as possible. Bob - 06 Jul 2005 16:45 GMT >Bob: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >| Most animals that we eat are treated humanely, with care >| to keep them healthy and as stress free as possible. I said most animals, not all. Certainly, there are instances of inappropriate handling of animals, but not to the extent that this mission poster is purporting the problem to be.
NOW, I have heard that in Japan, they suspend cows in slings so that they never use their muscles, which renders their meat very tender and marbled.
Rae - 06 Jul 2005 17:16 GMT Oeeiii! I'm actually sorry I heard that! It's very upsetting.
I'm sure you know how our baby cows here are kept in tiny stalls too small to move to get veal? At least some meat eaters even draw the line on eating veal on principal because of that.
There are a lot of things they do to the bulls and poultry (ripping off horns and beaks) and other animals without sedatives or painkillers routinely and I don't even want to go into it. Anyone who really wants to know how the animals that arrive at our super markets are treated can go online and find the answers. It's pretty gruesome and I would say in most, not just some cases. It's one of the reasons I became a vegetarian, not just for the health benefits.
But U.S., as bad as it is, is still stratospheres ahead of some other societies on the planet when it comes to animal rights and protections.
Tho 3 states, La., I know is one (but then they are pretty much a foreign country anyway aren't they? :) and I think Texas and New Mexico maybe?? not sure - still have cock fighting as legal.
Rae
| >Bob: | > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] | they never use their muscles, which renders their meat very tender and | marbled. Bob - 07 Jul 2005 01:24 GMT >But U.S., as bad as it is, is still stratospheres ahead of some other >societies on the planet when it comes to animal rights and protections. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Rae Yeah, they shouldn't let those little peckers do that.
Evgenij Barsukov - 06 Jul 2005 22:16 GMT >>Is Nature finally striking back? There was a time when there was a real >>need for humans to consume animal flesh. They were uneducated about [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > environment and reproduce. This argument has next to zero to do with > eating animal flesh. What happened to "plants and bacteria" rights? Common sense considers bacteria to be more "alive" than plants because they can move, but in reality plants are a lot more complex than bacteria and just as complex beings as animals - for that very reason that they had even longer period of evolution than anymals. They existed longer so they evolution was longer too.
Why make noise about anymals while cruely killing (and in many cases eating alive!) all these plants... At least animals themselfes are guilty of killing plants too, while plants are completely innocent as they get all their energy from the non-violent source - the sun.
Regards, Evgenij
Michael Halliwell - 07 Jul 2005 03:11 GMT > With mad cow disease still a concern, the bird flu virus may be well on > it's way to killing millions of people across the planet. According to [quoted text clipped - 77 lines] > sporadic human infections and outbreaks, however, rarely result in > sustained transmission among humans. I love this arguement...I have it all the time with one of the local PETA people up here. "Vegetarian is the way to go!" she cries..."Save Bambi!" Meanwhile, I have never received an answer from her about the overall ecological damage her california veggies getting trucked up to Alberta Canada all (looooong) winter do vs. my going out and getting myself a deer in the neighbour's "back 40." She labels me a barbarian, but as an environmental engineer, I know I do less harm tan she does.
Personally, I think humans should be trying to remember that they are omnivores (as in meat and veggie eaters) and should get back into the woods a little more. It is people who only know movies that don't really appreciate the animals we eat for food.
Just a little thought,
Michael Halliwell
|
|
|