Health / Exercise / Diet & Animal Rights

[rushingwind]

While I can't seem to locate it right now, I recently read a very in-depth article explaining how locally growing your produce actually increases pollution. Forcing plants to grow in climates where they are not used to growing creates more pollution than actually trucking all those fruit/vegetables in from a long distance away.

It was very eye-opening, as I'd always thought locally grown was better.

[Shee]

At its core, I see no problem with raising animals for slaughter.  If it weren't for the pet relationship and following affinity with my former chicken friends then butchering and eating them would've been a-ok by me.  Obviously what we're all discussing here is the larger scale operations that are often disturbing.  What stood out to me most was the Rat City in Austrailia - similar to http://www.animalsaustralia.org/investigations/broiler-chicken-investigation/

That's a tad different, but just as disheartening.  The advanced breeding of the broilers (meaties) is a serious issue, even in backyard flocks.  Essentially they have to be slaughtered at about 8 weeks or so or else their heart won't be able to support their body and they'll die anyway.  IIRC, the rat city was for eggs, not meat.  Chickens would be in cages, their feet never touch the ground, they never see the sun.  Those that would fall through to the "ground" would be left there to die.  Mounds of shit would be so high that they would literally pile up into the cages.  Rat City got it's name when activists actually turned on the lights and realized there was no ground to walk on, just rats.

Those are just two examples, and not even in the United States.  Obviously my knowledge is best with the chickens, but it can't be any better for other livestock.  So what's next?  Even through all of this I still support eating meat, and the slaughtering of animals to do so.  Since having the chickens I can admit my meat intake dropped a lil bit.  Didn't stop, and have no plans to. Of course things have to change.  HOW?  I honestly don't see a solution through meat companies.  A lot of them say crap like their eggs are "free range" now and all this, basically (with some exceptions) some minor changes were made to appease activists.  Again, IIRC, the United States has loosened up the least in their treatment of chickens.  This info and the rat city stuff was from some chicken forums that I don't frequent that often anymore...(backyardchickens)

So in that case the next possible solution is with the consumers.  No one - no - one - likes being told what to do, or at least what they can't do.  So what....do we just put pictures of some of the horrific abuse and what is now quite frankly industrial waste in the meat aisle at the grocery store?  It feels helpless.  The abuse and also the pollution come from the sheer size of these places.  At least in part, I'd imagine.  So we need those sizes to obviously be reduced, which means less money, and good luck getting that point across.

Z, best of luck with the diet plan.  I'm....not at all a nutritionist.  But from my own experiences variety was the key...ingredient?  (Sorry I couldn't pass up a joke that horrendous.)  The "fitness industry" is all sorts of whack like mentioned, but I have to give it credit for damn near shattering the unintentional comedy scale.  To me it seems like an industry that thrives off of fear and laziness.

Can't add much to genetics and veggies, except that I wholly defend cucumbers and dill pickles.

[ZeaLitY]

I am curious as to what science has demonstrated this. The only remotely scientific information on this topic that I have been able to find are Temple Grandin's observations (now over a decade old), which indicate that the actual killing process of Kosher preparation, when done correctly, does not cause animals distress (the handling processes, on the other hand, can, but as those processes are not dictated by religious law, they have been modified in at least some localities). Likewise, some forms of Halal preparation, although not as quick as in Kosher preparation, allow for stunning the animal first. Of course, the problem with Grandin's observations is that lack of reaction does not necessitate lack of pain.

I followed a reddit comment to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shechita#Animal_welfare_controversies:

Various research papers on cattle slaughter collected by Compassion In World Farming mention that "after the throat is cut, large clots can form at the severed ends of the carotid arteries, leading to occlusion of the wound (or “ballooning” as it is known in the slaughtering trade). Nick Cohen wrote in the New Statesman, "Occlusions slow blood loss from the carotids and delay the decline in blood pressure that prevents the suffering brain from blacking out. In one group of calves, 62.5 per cent suffered from ballooning. Even if the slaughterman is a master of his craft and the cut to the neck is clean, blood is carried to the brain by vertebral arteries and it keeps cattle conscious of their pain." [14]

A cursory search at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halaal#Criticisms located some more. It does seem as if there are more criticisms of the holding and stunning process than the actual killing. I aim to study this further, as to sharpen extra arguments against religious tradition.

You might want to look into what vegetables you are eating. There are many that, depending on your genetics, will never taste good. I hate cilantro, which appears to be because I am a super-taster for some of the aldehydes in it. My wife, on the other hand, loves the stuff but can't stand broccoli, again, it seems, because of her genetics. A surprising number of vegetables are this way: you might want to research some of the ones you eat often to see if there are others who dislike them and if it might be a genetic revulsion.

I can't wait to undertake this. I recall some kind of fluffy news story years ago that vegetables evolved bad taste to deter being eaten. Probably an overgeneralization and a case of bad pop science, but damn; I've wanted to run with a scientific basis for bad taste ever since. I guess now, I'm honestly hoping my taste will change with enough effort. My diet was so bad for a long time... Rather than alcohol or drugs, my chosen recreational substance endorphin-generator is sugar. After all, for a pricey drink, you could be so much candy and soda it's ridiculous! ZUcchini and yellow squash slices do seem to taste great, but I always worry that thoroughly boiling something removes the flavor and the nutrients. More study is needed. More study is needed. On so many topics. Ugh. What I'd fucking give for a device that could stop time and aging and let me research all kinds of things for a long time before resuming.

texture than taste

Bell peppers destroy me with this. They're so bizarrely fleshy. I force myself to eat the red ones, though. More Vitamin C than oranges? Who knew?!

A person who likes dogs won't feel comfortable when he/she sees someone trying to eat them, no matter how many people think that is acceptable.  But how to take action is another story, it could be really hard.

Yeah, that's hard for me. More than other animals, and sometimes with cases of human-on-human crime in the news, dog abuse destroys me. I guess I've got a case for dogs of whatever 4chan has for cats. These are loyal, domesticated, dependable animals with an inkling of consciousness somewhere down in there and a capacity for emotion and friendship, no matter how small or dim. And they are completely at the mercy of human civilization and their masters, like other pets. Those who would abuse or neglect them...it brings me to tears, and makes self-control nearly impossible in thirsting for blood.

Also, Nutella. But that is an import

Oh, my god. I shared that love after discovering it. Sadly, I ate so much in a short period that it's been relegated to mid-tier status. That aversion wears off in time, though  my friend also got me to try eggplant-based stuff. I've flirted with Czech garlic toast, but my confidence level is still near zero. More time, more time...

I've used Rippetoe videos a lot as a reference for form; I really need to get my hands on Starting Strength, because he is definitely one of the most reliable-seeming people I've found in the free weights world, and because a) I can't afford a personal trainer and b) a personal trainer may not know what they're talking about anyway, and I don't want to pay that much money to find out!

Oh, I've read some of his blog and Q&As about personal trainers, and he often waxes angrily on the fitness industry and explains the origins of this evil. You're probably already aware if you've read any of his works, but for others... In the 1970s, Nautilus machines debuted with such effective marketing and charm that many gyms purchased them to recruit more casual strength-training customers. The machines created a powerful image of working muscles in isolation on futuristic equipment, with little attention to form or technical execution. Add in 30 years of saturation, marketing, and word of mouth, and you have a populace that believes Nautilus machines are the norm. The kinesiology intelligentsia is fragmented and decentralized; there are thousands of specialists who draw upon the generalized norm of these machines for strength training. There are few robust intellectuals to carry the truth outward (probably hampered by the attraction of "meatheads" to the fitness industry). It's a perfect storm of unfortunate ignorance. My own Health & Wellness book, produced only from scientific studies and consensus, advocated machine-training with little attention to free weights or dieting for mass-building.

"New Rules of Lifting for Women,"

Ooh, I read that too! Rippetoe outlines an "advanced novice program" at the end of Starting Strength, after which I want to try some of the NROL programs. Those superset requirements are sick, though, in terms of claiming equipment or working in. Have you had to deal with running two or three alternating exercises, yet? I'm not sure how this is going to be possible at my local gym. My aforementioned friend is also going to start NROL + Female Body Breakthrough soon; she's curious if you've already seen results and how the diet's worked out for you so far.

I'm not sure the meaningfulness and fullness of one's life is worth the sacrifice. You have to strike some kind of balance between being passionately invested in the world around you and your own, well, psychological survival.

Ah, yeah; I forgot to reply in that other thread. I have a hard time comprehending the virtue of perfect altruism for this very reason. I've tried to align my long-term desires and short-term motivations in a way that maximizes the raw pleasure of fighting for justice, but there is only so much a person can do. Do you really believe there are perfectly altruistic people out there who freely martyr themselves? In history, there's always another factor; the martyr's a religious fanatic, or enjoyed a life of royalty and was quite fulfilled before opting to surrender everything, and so on. I'm really curious if there are people wired to give all of themselves to others, as it slightly influences my own ethical self-image. I once read a reliable scientific study that those with extremely high or low ethical opinions of themselves enjoyed greater decisiveness and overall emotional strength. Whether I'm "selfish" or not... There's still a lot of beautiful anti-hero quality to being selfish if altruism is the gold standard of character. Haha, I guess it's impossible to escape narratives in explaining life and oneself.

There's another thread to this, though. I sometimes worry, what if the overall course of civilization and impact on the environment will be enough to destroy humanity if action is not taken immediately? What if my actions would constitute the thinnest margin that makes or breaks the future? It's rather "far out", but still, motivation for making a difference often comes down to faith in the meaningfulness of one's actions.

It feels helpless.

Yeah. I guess there's positivity in that we're at least up to this point. Civilization's already tackled a lot of huge problems, so now we're at the insidious, complex, hard to beat ones. I had no idea about rat city, my god... I want to resort to education somehow. I guess shock images are always a double-edged sword, but somehow, people should be taught where their food is coming from. Down to the earliest step in the chain. Kind of like how people should be educated about puppy mills.

I have to give it credit for damn near shattering the unintentional comedy scale.

Haha, truth. Fuck, dude, I wish I lived in LA sometimes. I could be another body in the crowd for your shows. That nasty system of "how many friends and acquaintances can you pack in night after night to fake a crowd and pay cover" sounded really ugly. I want to help even the playing field.

[Thought]

The only case I know of veggies being genetically unappealing to some people is that of cilantro...

Are you sure? Do you recall tasting a strip of filter paper covered with PTC in science class at some point? While that chemical doesn't occur naturally in foods, other thioureas compound do. As such, it seems fairly common for teachers who cover that lab in class to also note what foodulant items people will react to. Broccoli, brussel sprouts, cabbage, and other foods in the same family can taste bitter. The exact range of the bitterness can vary by person, other diet, and cooking methods, but it can still be sufficient so as to cause an individual to not like those foods.

This is certainly not to say that genetics are the root of all veggie dislike. Rather, that if one finds one's self disliking vegetables after extended periods of trying to like them, experimenting with a wider range of vegetables might be a prudent course of action.

While I can't seem to locate it right now, I recently read a very in-depth article explaining how locally growing your produce actually increases pollution.

By any chance do you recall any specifics of it that might help find it? I've been trying to tract that down, as it sounds really interesting, but I don't quite know what to look for.

I followed a reddit comment to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shechita#Animal_welfare_controversies...

I saw that when I was looking for Temple Grandin's name ("Temple" is a name that sticks with me, "Grandin" not so much). Unfortunately I haven't been able to actually figure out what the "research papers on cattle slaughter" actually are. Compassion in World Farming is not a scientific organization, so the meaningfulness of their meta-analysis of the research is unclear. The Farm Animal Welfare Council, on the other hand, seems more scientific in nature but it has released statements that seem to indicate that a bias still runs through it (the FAWC chair, Dr. Judy Clark, for example completely dismissed the possibility of making an incision that does not cause pain and suffering).

One of the things I really like about the proposed law is that it focuses on the animals, rather than human sensibilities. If the animals are killed in such a way so as to minimize pain and suffering, it doesn't really matter what the method is.

ZUcchini and yellow squash slices do seem to taste great, but I always worry that thoroughly boiling something removes the flavor and the nutrients.

You might find that you better enjoy vegetables that are blanched, then. I love blanched green beans, for example, because they retain the delightful crispness of their raw state while being not-chewy. A good indicator of the cooked state of a vegetable is its color. Blanching will make the color of many vegetables bright. But if the color of the food starts to dull or, worse yet, starts to turn brown, that is overcooked.

[tushantin]

I stumbled upon this by accident. Been a while since I tried this, but here we go!
http://keeptrying.wordpress.com/2006/07/23/sunday-brunchchole-batura/

[HeadlessFritz]

When I look at my cat, I just can't believe people are killing and eating them in China. However, I think animals eating animals is part of nature, and we can't run away from it since we are animals (the most intelligent,but still..). Remove proteins and lipids from your alimentation totally, and you will die. Remove glucids, and you will not. I think going vegetarian is just unnatural. I've begun a low carb diet last month and I really enjoy it so far. It's just more natural to me to eat meat than salad or berries, even though I include a smart portion of these. After all, when we were hunters-gatherers meat was our primary food.

[tushantin]

Yeah, it's weird. I was playing along with this little kid the other day, where I pointed at a dog and asked her if she'd like to eat that animal, and she was like, "Nooo, it's a cute little puppy! How can I eat a puppy!"

Then I asked her what Chicken was. She said, "Food! You stupid... bighead."

[Syna]

Rushingwind, I'd love to read that article. I've often wondered about the growth of non-native crops in local farms and the environmental impact that has. The "go local" movement has my support for various reasons -- in general I think our societies need more localization and support for local businesses, which will increase the quality of our cultures and help diminish our environmental impact -- but it's true that the movement is full of a lot of hogwash and politicking.

Along those lines, here's a link that may be useful to some; it's the Meat Eater's guide from the Environmental Working Group: http://breakingnews.ewg.org/meateatersguide/a-meat-eaters-guide-to-climate-change-health-what-you-eat-matters/
(Alas, my beloved cheese is 3rd most impacting of all animal products. )

Now, when the EWG came out with a guide to sunscreens awhile back, there was a lot of controversy. A lot of it was, very tellingly, from the companies that produce sunscreens, and I would expect a similar response from the meat industry, which is very powerful. However, they are objectively prone to overstating some things so if you're interested in using the guide, looking into the debate would be wise.

There are few robust intellectuals to carry the truth outward (probably hampered by the attraction of "meatheads" to the fitness industry). It's a perfect storm of unfortunate ignorance. My own Health & Wellness book, produced only from scientific studies and consensus, advocated machine-training with little attention to free weights or dieting for mass-building.

Augh augh augh. That depresses me so much. I wish that people were more accustomed to analyzing studies and recognized that a lot of science of this sort is economically motivated. Fitness needs intelligensia and wise interpreters like any other field, people with a big-picture sense of how all the data fits together and in the larger context of our lives. Instead, people see "scientific study" as a pass for intellectual laziness.

All your supplement needs to sell is the phrase "weight loss" and "abs" somewhere in the tag line and a study that says (implicitly) that if you take the supplement for the rest of your life you will lose 0.0000010% body fat. My book actually talks about how slapping the word "Abs" on an article will make your magazine sell a huge raft more copies, regardless of content.

Fitness advertisers (or unintentional comedians, as Shee says) have the easiest jobs on the planet.

Those superset requirements are sick, though, in terms of claiming equipment or working in. Have you had to deal with running two or three alternating exercises, yet? I'm not sure how this is going to be possible at my local gym.

Therein you have the reason that I only lift twice a week. Running around doing supersets just isn't possible until the crowd has thinned. Even then I have to drop them and focus on one exercise pretty frequently. I've gotten some weirded-out looks from other lifters when I go from one end of the gym to the other for six sets straight (sometimes NINE, Cosgrove is a little bit of a sadist I think).

My aforementioned friend is also going to start NROL + Female Body Breakthrough soon; she's curious if you've already seen results and how the diet's worked out for you so far.

She'll probably want to consult Rippetoe since the descriptions of each exercise are a bit inadequate; for instance, the book says you should stop with your knees parallel when you squat, and Rippetoe gives a very convincing argument to stand with your legs a little wider and go further down.

However I've been really happy! I am way stronger and fitter, and I was healthy and decently fit to begin with. I'm not being nearly as strict about everything as I could be and I've definitely had gains. Regarding the diet, I haven't gained any weight despite developing more muscle mass, which is what I wanted. They assume that you want to lose weight or maintain, so if she's interested in that the book will be good; if she wants to gain or bulk and cut she may need to seek out other advice.

Once I finish this up, I'll likely move onto New Rules of Lifting proper, or the new Abs one (which is a product of that "for abs" trend I mentioned, lol, I hear it covers way more than that!).