RE: [fukuoka_farming] Re: Cattle
- None of us, jb, has the absolute truth about nutrition. You go by
what makes sense to you and what works for your body, and I do
likewise. When it comes to what people should eat, neither scientists
nor gurus can agree.
Dr. Price's book consists mostly of observations. The conclusion you
come to, whether it's the same as Dr. Price's or not, has to fit with
what he observed to make sense. Have you read the book yourself?
I'd like to know about these biological inconsistencies with human
physiology that you talk about. Perhaps, since this is getting pretty
far off the topic of Fukuoka, you'd like to continue this back
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jbmc@... [mailto:jbmc@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 10:17 AM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re: Cattle
> Ms, Carol wrote:
> > Personally, I believe that human nutrition cannot work in the long
> > term without animal foods, whether those animals be cattle, birds,
> > fish, insects, or whatever. A very interesting book on
> this topic is
> > Nutrition and Physical Degeneration by Weston A. Price. I can't
> > recommend it highly enough.
> Perhaps, Ms. Carol, You should review
> Your "belief",
> for i have "experimented" upon myself - for long enough
> now - that
> Human nutrition cannot possibly be achieved, without incurring in
> pathological effects, through the means of
> "concentrated substan-
> ces" - be these of animal or vegeterian sources - for
> these are bio-
> logically inconsistent with Human physiology. If Dr.
> Price believed
> what You believe, then He was obviously wrong, as wrong are
> the quasi totality of His present day colleagues.
> > I also believe that having too many humans is THE core
> problem this
> > planet has right now. If there weren't so many of us,
> every mistake
> > we make wouldn't have such huge effects. Tribal Americans weren't
> > perfect in their relation to the earth, but there weren't
> enough of
> > them, in relation to the amount of land they had, for
> their mistakes
> > to cause lasting problems.
> Fewer Humans, obviously, would
> constitute a lesser
> problem, but a problem nevertheless.The core problem is
> our failure
> to identify the "root-why" we have come to a
> confrontational rela-
> tionship with Nature. As long as we fail to find "the"
> answer to this
> "why", i'm afraid we will be wasting our time in talking
> about and
> acting upon simptoms, Human overpopulation being one of them.
> Best regards,
> "Foliar Vegetarianism": "the" pathway back to "Pure
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
- Hi all,
I just need to briefly interject one point. While yes I agree there are too
many people in the world, a bigger problem is overconsumption by the few in
the so-called developed world, many of whom actually believe all this stuff
is what they need and are used to, and our push to have the rest of the
world desire and also be dependant on lots of our junk vs. meeting basic
needs naturally and locally without destruction and disrespect.
It is an important note, because it actually places blame and belittles the
rest of the world and is usually us white folks or other from the "developed
world" who focus it that way. Meanwhile we consume 40% of the world's
resources and cause major environmental destruction, depletion, etc. etc.
Someone told me that every one American born is equivalent to 10 individuals
in terms of consumption, etc. I believe it.
I find it important daily to question that which us privileged and spoiled
believe to be reality in terms of needs, actions, thoughts, etc.