Feeding kids meat ...

[AndyHB]

' ... is child abuse', according to the animal rights group PETA.  They have paid to have an advert to this effect placed in Merthyr Tydfil.  Whilst they are entitled to their view, and they say that it is aimed at the problem of obesity, do you think this undermines the concept of child abuse?  After all, humans are designed to consume both meat and vegetables.

[tranchiebabe]

PETA are oddballs in my opinion, the other week they thought leather cricket balls should be banned!

Children need a healthy diet including lean meat.

[JJ]

' ... is child abuse', according to the animal rights group PETA.  They have paid to have an advert to this effect placed in Merthyr Tydfil.  Whilst they are entitled to their view, and they say that it is aimed at the problem of obesity, do you think this undermines the concept of child abuse?  After all, humans are designed to consume both meat and vegetables.

...designed...?

[AndyHB]

...designed...?

Yes, if you look at the various anatomical and chemical systems in our body, we are clearly designed (chosen since I don't believe that we exist by evolutionary accident) to be able to eat both forms of food source.  However, we are not designed to eat grass, and I'm told that the conversion rate of a purely vegetarian diet (and I'd live on one quite happily) is not as good as that of a combined diet.

[Jan]

If feeding kids meat is child abuse then obviously this is a serious matter as over time, a lot of people have been abused. Our bodies are capable ('designed' even) to process and digest meat and (some) plant life.

All physical matter was once hydrogen at some time - including all the building blocks of life - made in stars (just thought I would share that)

[AndyHB]

All physical matter was once hydrogen at some time - including all the building blocks of life - made in stars (just thought I would share that)

So, does that mean that we ought to be living on a diet of hydrogen, Jan       

[Jan]

In a way we are already doing so Andy - it is just a  'quark' of our physical reality 

[JJ]

...designed...?

Yes, if you look at the various anatomical and chemical systems in our body, we are clearly designed (chosen since I don't believe that we exist by evolutionary accident) to be able to eat both forms of food source.  However, we are not designed to eat grass, and I'm told that the conversion rate of a purely vegetarian diet (and I'd live on one quite happily) is not as good as that of a combined diet.

I don't agree at all about design.  What's best for the species at present is a result of conditions over time.
The species evolves to deal with the conditions which it's born into. And as most of our development happened in pre cooked grain times it seems like our bodies are suited to meat nuts, berries, and wild vegetables.  Then when cooking became commonplace thus increasing the calories available from any given foodstuff then our brains developed inordinately.  And then settled groups developed farming of grain, and we became fat!

[AndyHB]

And then settled groups developed farming of grain, and we became fat!

Ah, so its the vegetarian diet that's to blame for our obesity problem?

[Jan]

...designed...?

Yes, if you look at the various anatomical and chemical systems in our body, we are clearly designed (chosen since I don't believe that we exist by evolutionary accident) to be able to eat both forms of food source.  However, we are not designed to eat grass, and I'm told that the conversion rate of a purely vegetarian diet (and I'd live on one quite happily) is not as good as that of a combined diet.

I don't agree at all about design.  What's best for the species at present is a result of conditions over time.
The species evolves to deal with the conditions which it's born into. And as most of our development happened in pre cooked grain times it seems like our bodies are suited to meat nuts, berries, and wild vegetables.  Then when cooking became commonplace thus increasing the calories available from any given foodstuff then our brains developed inordinately.  And then settled groups developed farming of grain, and we became fat!

I am thinking though that 'design' can and does evolve over time. We 'adapt' and that is part of our 'design'

The film Wall E comes to mind with the last bit of your post JJ (lol)

[JJ]

Etymology of the English word design

the English word design
derived from the Latin word designare (earmark, choose; appoint; mark; point, mark)
derived from the Latin word signare (mark, stamp, designate)
derived from the Late Latin word signum (battle standard; indication; seal)
derived from the Latin word secare (to cut; cut, sever; decide)
derived from the Proto-Indo-European root *sek-
derived from the Proto-Indo-European root *sekʷ-
using the Late Latin prefix de-
derived from the Latin word de (away; down)
 

I would say 'adapt' is a better word for the way we have evolved to survive by eating certain foods. 

[AndyHB]

I would say 'adapt' is a better word for the way we have evolved to survive by eating certain foods. 

But isn't that part of the problem, jj?  We haven't adapted.  Apparently, we still consume the amount we consumed 50 - 100 years ago; we've adapted in other areas, but actually how much has our underlying diet cahnged in the last few centuries?

[administrator]

I very much doubt we were designed   to eat as many processed food stuffs as we do, which is probably where a lot of our dietry problems come from.

Are you a raw foods only kinda person  JJ?

[JJ]

I would say 'adapt' is a better word for the way we have evolved to survive by eating certain foods. 

But isn't that part of the problem, jj?  We haven't adapted.  Apparently, we still consume the amount we consumed 50 - 100 years ago; we've adapted in other areas, but actually how much has our underlying diet cahnged in the last few centuries?

Yes I am, unless there's a Melton Mowbray pork pie on offer clarkie. 

Keep it real here.  We are talking about evolution over thousands of years of a pick and catch diet aren't we?  Not about bars of Dairy Milk and Instant Whip and oranges.  So hardly any time for adaptation.  Think scientifically. 

[Jan]

mmmmm ... chocolate - er yeah sorry - where were we?

I guess we have had to adapt you know depending on what was available (we survived an Ice age didn't we?).

Interesting article here JJ

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090116073211.htm

For years researchers have puzzled over whether adaptation plays a major role in human evolution or whether most changes are due to neutral, random selection of genes and traits. Geneticists at Stanford now have laid this question to rest. Their results, scheduled to be published Jan. 16 online in Public Library of Science Genetics, show adaptation-the process by which organisms change to better fit their environment-is indeed a large part of human genomic evolution.

Still on the science thing - did anyone else catch the Horizon program 'Are we still evolving'?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzpbDVjO_nw&feature=related