Petition for the right not to eat animals in French schools

A recent decree by the French government has imposed animal products at each meal in French cafeterias. This means that in schools, universities, enterprises, everywhere meals are prepared for a community, there is no option left for those who do not wish to eat animals.
The French Vegetarians Association, in cooperation with other organizations, is trying to obtain the withdraw of this decree, which is a very hard task because of the huge power of the agribusiness lobbies - first industry in France, above the automobile!

There is a petition online to support the reaction against this decree. I hope many of you will sign it (the text is in English). This is not about making vegetarians those who wish to stay omnivore: it is simply against a discrimination of which we are the victims in the interest of the agribusiness. A large number of signatures from abroad will hopefully be a strong support to our action against this French shame.

The address is of the petition is: http://petition.icdv.info/en/

Thanks in advance for your help!

I don't get it, how can they force you to eat meat? Are you saying every meal prepared in the cafeterias will have animal products in it? What, even salad? Coffee? Beans?

Well, not to worry. You can always move to the U.S. They have the best vegetables available

Originally posted by Muttsfan:

I don't get it, how can they force you to eat meat? Are you saying every meal prepared in the cafeterias will have animal products in it? What, even salad? Coffee? Beans?

Well, maybe not in the salad (although quite often you have tuna salad as the only choice!). But if you have to eat at the cafeteria everyday and the only dish without animal product you can have is a salad, you are left with no choice!
And no, there are no beans!!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/the-beatles/8928192/Sir-Paul-McCartney-attacks-French-school-over-vegetarian-ban.html

Unlucky being French, eh? Now you are right on the Yankee-doodle dandy stuff there Muttsfan what with now adding having the best vegetables on top of everything else best and biggest at?!

First, I'm not at all sure how much the French government would pay attention to us here in the American Midwest. Probably not much, they don't pay a whole lot of attention to us on other issues so why should this be an exception?

Second--- I'm afraid I can't help you much, I'm a wee bit too carnivorous for your purposes. I like meat, so it's unlikely I'd be signing any pro-vegetarian petitions.

I think a better petition would be sustainable meat industry / organic meat and even livestock humaneness.

Cheap meat (especially hormone laden, grain-fed beef) = eating toxic waste + global warming

Real organic is the way to go. The humaneness issue could also be addressed if it's a concern, since it is a hidden problem few seem to care about.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

First, I'm not at all sure how much the French government would pay attention to us here in the American Midwest. Probably not much, they don't pay a whole lot of attention to us on other issues so why should this be an exception?

Second--- I'm afraid I can't help you much, I'm a wee bit too carnivorous for your purposes. I like meat, so it's unlikely I'd be signing any pro-vegetarian petitions.

This is not even about promoting vegetarianism. It's about freedom of choice. You are American, the land of freedom, aren't you?

Originally posted by pincopallino:

You are American, the land of freedom, aren't you?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...you're joking right? You have to be

Maybe you missed it... The US invented freedom.

On topic:

Choose to bring your lunch.

Originally posted by pincopallino:

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

First, I'm not at all sure how much the French government would pay attention to us here in the American Midwest. Probably not much, they don't pay a whole lot of attention to us on other issues so why should this be an exception?

Second--- I'm afraid I can't help you much, I'm a wee bit too carnivorous for your purposes. I like meat, so it's unlikely I'd be signing any pro-vegetarian petitions.

This is not even about promoting vegetarianism. It's about freedom of choice. You are American, the land of freedom, aren't you?

One of the things we choose around these parts is whether or not to sign petitions. In this case, I choose not to.

In order for me to sign, first the petition must affect me in some way. Whether people in France eat meat, or vegetables, does not affect me. Further, before I sign I have to consider any possible repercussions. I learned that a few decades back on a union picket line--- so these days I'm careful what I put my name to. Now, in this case there are no repercussions because there's no possible way this petition can affect me in any way unless I visit France--- which is most unlikely to happen.

Finally-- let's be straight up about this. It is promoting vegetarianism. I don't support it, for reason already stated. If you want to eat nothing but vegetables, have at it... I'm reasonably sure you can find whatever you like at the grocers in your area, and pack a sack lunch like I do.

Originally posted by pincopallino:

A recent decree by the French government has imposed animal products at each meal in French cafeterias. This means that in schools, universities, enterprises, everywhere meals are prepared for a community, there is no option left for those who do not wish to eat animals.

No, it doesn't mean that. Is there, in addition to the decree to include animals, a decree to preclude non-animal protein?

It's a very bad decree. An interesting countermeasure would be to demand a decree that non-animal protein is required to be offered at each meal as well.

Originally posted by ensbb3:

Choose to bring your lunch.

You can't. For "sanitary reasons" you are not allowed to bring in your lunch. Yes, I know it is almost incredible. But that's the situation.

Can't you simply tell the server to hold the meat?

Originally posted by pincopallino:

You can't. For "sanitary reasons" you are not allowed to bring in your lunch. Yes, I know it is almost incredible. But that's the situation.

Your profile says you're age 47... How does this effect you? Oh right, you're just advocating vegetarianism.

Originally posted by pincopallino:

Originally posted by ensbb3:

Choose to bring your lunch.

You can't. For "sanitary reasons" you are not allowed to bring in your lunch. Yes, I know it is almost incredible. But that's the situation.

are we still talking about schools? That'd have to be the strangest thing I ever heard.

This is clearly one of those cases where any other solution but signing this petition is impossible. :-\

Agreed tho, not being allowed to bring your lunch is crazy. That's something more worth fighting to change.

It's difficult to decide whether to support or reject a given petition without an original source explaining the changes that have been made. From a less biased source than the petition organisers, I mean.

This the closest I found:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2011/oct/26/french-government-banning-vegetarianism-schools?CMP=twt_gu

It's worth noting that it appears the ruling doesn't prohibit students bringing in their own food, I guess that's decided on a school-by-school basis. And when they talk about 'animal products', it's not all meat, but includes dairy and eggs. So vegans are the ones most heavily affected by this.

Still, never mind - Sir Paul is here to sort it all out.

At elementary schools you cannot bring your lunch. This is the most problematic point because it does not give you any choice for your children, that cannot be left at the school for lunch, if you are vegetarian. Of course, from high school that's different, kids can go out and eat where they want (at least senior high school for sure).
Hold the meat? Sure, but what is the nutritional content of a meal made by some salad and a couple of boiled vegetables - when there are some? Four days per week (in France school are open only 4 days per week). That's pretty close to starving!

Originally posted by pincopallino:

At elementary schools you cannot bring your lunch. This is the most problematic point because it does not give you any choice for your children, that cannot be left at the school for lunch, if you are vegetarian. Of course, from high school that's different, kids can go out and eat where they want (at least senior high school for sure).

Wow, in the Netherlands (or at least where I grew up) that was the complete opposite at elementary school. If you stayed at school for lunch you had to bring your own lunch or you'd starve. I struggle to find a rationale behind not allowing a child to bring lunch to school and I can't think of any.

Originally posted by pincopallino:

Of course, from high school that's different, kids can go out and eat where they want (at least senior high school for sure).

That's quite expensive, and besides bringing lunch is usually probably the cheaper, healthier option.

Yeah, I could understand the rationale behind, "Here's what we offer, this is what the best medical evidence we have suggests is a balanced diet. If you don't like it, it's your choice to supply your own." (And for the purposes of that, I'm setting aside any of the claims of the government bodies in question being manipulated by the agricultural sector.)

There is no reason schools should provide vegetarian meal. Even offering one alternative, for what amounts to a small percentage that may take it, cost the school money that takes away from educational funds and opens the door for other minorities (religious nutters and whatnot) to claim their special dietary needs should be offered too and taking even more money from books or supplies. Petition the school to let kids bring their lunch if it bothers you so bad. It'd be easier to accomplish I'd think as there is logic in it beyond one groups misguided ideals. At some point you should consider what's best for every one of the kids and not just having something provided to validate some crazy notion the parents have. Let the kids eat for nutrition and don't bother them with ideas that something shouldn't be eaten on principle alone when it is otherwise fine for them. Let them decide for themselves.

I don't understand the vegetarian thing. Do we have stomachs divided into four parts as cows have? are we ruminants? We are an omnivorous species, so our children should be fed that way.
Regarding having vegetarian food for a few children, I remember a group of lunatics that claimed not eating at all since, according them, they could get energy directly from sun light, kind of photosynthesis made with the pituitary gland. They consider eating the source of diseases and the obstacle to immortality. Shall we have no food for the unfortunate children of those people as well?

And remembering that France was the home of Haute Cuisine...

Originally posted by Belfrager:

I don't understand the vegetarian thing. Do we have stomachs divided into four parts as cows have? are we ruminants? We are an omnivorous species, so our children should be fed that way.

To continue on that line of reasoning, does your stomach contain an oven to cook the meat? All that follows from the comparison to cows is that we're not made for eating things like leaves and grass. Just because we can eat meat, doesn't necessarily mean it's the best thing for us. Perhaps the meat that's best suited for our needs comes from insects rather than other mammals. In any case I don't like the flavor of animals raised by factory farming, with the possible exception of salmon raised in captivity.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

To continue on that line of reasoning, does your stomach contain an oven to cook the meat?

Humans can't even digest meat like true carnivore. Nor do they have teeth or claws, nor even the running speed to naturally be able to catch meat.

Hold the pickles, hold the lettuce, special herders don't upset us...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rkg_XojVRcs&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Originally posted by Frenzie:

To continue on that line of reasoning, does your stomach contain an oven to cook the meat?

Humans can't even digest meat like true carnivore. Nor do they have teeth or claws, nor even the running speed to naturally be able to catch meat.

Again, worms and insects.

Anyway, I'm kind of a de facto vegetarian. I don't typically identify as one, and I think it's very strange if people say they're vegetarian "except during Christmas" or some such, but other than some fish now and then I eat very little meat.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Originally posted by Frenzie:

To continue on that line of reasoning, does your stomach contain an oven to cook the meat?

Humans can't even digest meat like true carnivore. Nor do they have teeth or claws, nor even the running speed to naturally be able to catch meat.

That's like saying that a hybrid car can't process petrol like a petrol car, so it's not a real car. We're jacks of all trades, not specially suited to either meat or plants exclusively. It is possible to get all the nutrients you need from plants, but it's not easy, and a vegetarian diet must be carefully planned, using knowledge not available to our forebears.

As for teeth and claws, we humans have much better tools than that - we have, well, tools.

Indeed!

So just out of curiosity, how many of us are signing this petition? I've already said I won't, since it in no way affects me and since I'm omnivorous anyway. Also, I have a suspicion it has to do with children's nutrition and fact is, children need a balanced diet. What you, as an adult, choose to do to yourself is largely your business, but it's a different thing when we're talking about children. Before you think I'm just talking through my hat on this, consider the laws we make concerning drinking alcohol and smoking cigarettes. Adults can drink and smoke themselves to oblivion, children aren't allowed to do it.

Sorry for the mini-rant, but the subject line of this thread smells of militant veganism. Again, what you choose to do as an adult is your business, and the way you raise your children at home is to a large extent your business, but don't necessarily expect the rest of the world to kowtow to your non-negotiable demands.

Jaybro is no Signatory.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Originally posted by Frenzie:

To continue on that line of reasoning, does your stomach contain an oven to cook the meat?

Humans can't even digest meat like true carnivore. Nor do they have teeth or claws, nor even the running speed to naturally be able to catch meat.

I have slaves to catch, kill, and prepare meat for me.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

So just out of curiosity, how many of us are signing this petition?

I'm still not clear on what's happening precisely. If I didn't like what they were serving on Tuesday, I'd just take food along from home on Tuesday. If that's not possible, that's certainly a bigger problem than whatever they're serving, and it's largely unclear to me where vegetarianism comes in. The OP seems to say that only meat is a legallly accepted source of protein — as opposed to things like tofu and bugs, I would presume* — which would be wrong, but... I don't know. I'm not convinced yet.

* I dislike the thought of eating bugs as much as any Westerner, but the simple fact is most of the rest of the world does and it's certainly more energy efficient to keep bugs than it is to keep cattle.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

Also, I have a suspicion it has to do with children's nutrition and fact is, children need a balanced diet. What you, as an adult, choose to do to yourself is largely your business, but it's a different thing when we're talking about children. Before you think I'm just talking through my hat on this, consider the laws we make concerning drinking alcohol and smoking cigarettes. Adults can drink and smoke themselves to oblivion, children aren't allowed to do it.

A balanced diet with meat needs planning just as much as a balanced diet without meat.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

So just out of curiosity, how many of us are signing this petition?

Or how relevant or signature would be if we weren't French...

Originally posted by Frenzie:

A balanced diet with meat needs planning just as much as a balanced diet without meat.

A problem, at least with America, is eating too much meat and not enough vegetables.

Originally posted by tt92:

I have slaves to catch, kill, and prepare meat for me.

And that's keeping you from getting enough exercise, as opposed to doing it yourself. I make my slaves watch as I do it. Yeah, they snicker and call me a sucker of a master when they think I'm out of earshot, but the joke's on their lardasses.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

I'd just take food along from home on Tuesday

Oh, some of the articles about this do indicate that children won't be allowed to do that. Even some American schools are going down that route, such as this one in Chicago. Like you, I'm still not exactly sure what's happening in France, but banning packed lunches isn't unprecedented.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:
So just out of curiosity, how many of us are signing this petition?
Or how relevant or signature would be if we weren't French...

My EU one might be slightly more relevant than an American one, though surely not by much.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Oh, some of the articles about this do indicate that children won't be allowed to do that. Even some American schools are going down that route, such as this one in Chicago. Like you, I'm still not exactly sure what's happening in France, but banning packed lunches isn't unprecedented.

There are tons of things that aren't unprecedented. Doesn't mean I agree with them. I'm also against school uniforms, just to name a thing that's quite popular. Besides I don't even like warm food for lunch.

As often is the case in a discussion like this, the reality gets confused after a number of false arguments. Let me make clear some points.

The new decree forces animal proteins and each meal. This is against freedom of choice. Add that one is not allowed to bring his lunch, and you should understand that there is no choice left but not to go to the canteen. That's fine is one of the parents do not work, but when both have a job, what to do?

The petition is not even about asking vegetarian meals provided by the canteen - that's another affair. It's about removing the obligation of animal products.

About the relevance of signatures by non French: a strong reaction coming ALSO form other countries certainly represents an important pressure.

Nutritional arguments. Children raised on a balanced vegan diet are perfectly healthy and less prone to the diseases of the affluent societies. Have a look at some of the many publications in medical and nutritional journals, no doubt is left. Do whatever you wish with your children, it's your responsibility, but please do not make wrong judgement and statements about ours. We are nutrition aware people who pay much attention to what's in our dishes, precisely because we make selective choices. You just choose on the bases of taste or habits.

And for those who say man is omnivore - although this is not at all the topic of the post - think of your bowel: 12 times as long as your body, like herbivores, instead of 3 times, like carnivores. And look at your teeth: small canines, large molars, again like herbivores. So please keep on your diet but avoid judging others especially when you have no specific nutritional knowledge.

I do wish you'd stop conflating vegetarianism with veganism.

You make sweeping statements about veganism - glossing over the fact that most health organisations recommend that vegans take iron, vitamin D and B12 supplements as these are hard to come by in a diet free from animal products, and in fact many explicitly do not recommend a vegan diet for children.

Comparing bowel lengths doesn't tell you much - the bowel is used for extracting nutrition, not for digestion.

Yes, a vegan diet does go some way to arming you against heart disease and other major Western killers, but it's not the only way, and it comes with it's own set of risks. Moderation in all things.

Where I can completely get behind vegetarianism is in the ethical angle - the treatment of animals in mass production, and in fact the wastage of resources associated with it, is simply shocking.

Anyway, back to the subject at hand - what are the rules in place for kids with medical dietary requirements? Allergies, and so on? Are they catered for, or are they simply recommended not to eat at school?

Originally posted by Frenzie:

There are tons of things that aren't unprecedented. Doesn't mean I agree with them. I'm also against school uniforms, just to name a thing that's quite popular. Besides I don't even like warm food for lunch.

Oh, I agree.

Originally posted by pincopallino:

The petition is not even about asking vegetarian meals provided by the canteen - that's another affair. It's about removing the obligation of animal products.

Pretty much the same thing, no? Yes, I know the difference between vegetarian and vegan. However, a cheese sandwich without meat still has an animal product, but can be considered vegetarian. This is part of why it's confusing. You want the children to be able to choose not to eat animal products, but aren't asking for vegan alternative meals? I guess the vegan kids can ask for the rice and broccoli (with no butter or many types of margarine or cheese sauce, of course) That's not balanced. If want a different protein source such as beans or peanut butter, you're straight back to asking for complete vegetarian meals.

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

Yes, a vegan diet does go some way to arming you against heart disease and other major Western killers, but it's not the only way, and it comes with it's own set of risks. Moderation in all things.

So no eating the 8000 calorie burger this place has, than? The article does outline a success story of a 400 pound woman who switched to a vegan diet. The doctors were threatening her with amputating her leg due to infection and needed 200 units of insulin a day. Within 30 days of her new diet, she was off insulin. So there is definitely something to be said for well planned vegan diet. I checked some vegan websites and it does seem fairly easy to get those nutrients you mentioned, but again it requires planning.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

Yes, a vegan diet does go some way to arming you against heart disease and other major Western killers, but it's not the only way, and it comes with it's own set of risks. Moderation in all things.

So no eating the 8000 calorie burger this place has, than? The article does outline a success story of a 400 pound woman who switched to a vegan diet. The doctors were threatening her with amputating her leg due to infection and needed 200 units of insulin a day. Within 30 days of her new diet, she was off insulin. So there is definitely something to be said for well planned vegan diet. I checked some vegan websites and it does seem fairly easy to get those nutrients you mentioned, but again it requires planning.

Undoubtedly, if you have that kind of extreme health problem caused by overindulgence (and I agree totally that it's a growing problem) then an extreme move in the opposite direction will get results. But for most, simply eating less meat is enough to see health benefits, moreso than a complete lifestyle change.

As for the subject in hand, does anyone have an estimate of how much extra it costs to provide alternatives for children whose parents have dictated that they should have a different diet to their peers?

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

As for the subject in hand, does anyone have an estimate of how much extra it costs to provide alternatives for children whose parents have dictated that they should have a different diet to their peers?

Depends on what it is, of course. In some cases, it might be cheaper than the meat meals. For example, this veggie burger recipe, which is basically some beans, flour and common spices is probably cheaper than a regular hamburger; especially if you soak dried beans instead of using canned.

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

But for most, simply eating less meat is enough to see health benefits, moreso than a complete lifestyle change.

And simpler for most people. I understand that woman's decision, though. She saw that her old lifestyle was literally killing her.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Depends on what it is, of course. In some cases, it might be cheaper than the meat meals. For example, this veggie burger recipe, which is basically some beans, flour and common spices is probably cheaper than a regular hamburger; especially if you soak dried beans instead of using canned.

I don't mean only supplying a veggie menu, I mean having to prepare veggie (or even vegan) dishes alongside meat ones, also taking into account any requirement for vitamin or iron supplements.

Originally posted by pincopallino:

Nutritional arguments. Children raised on a balanced vegan diet are perfectly healthy and less prone to the diseases of the affluent societies. Have a look at some of the many publications in medical and nutritional journals, no doubt is left. Do whatever you wish with your children, it's your responsibility, but please do not make wrong judgement and statements about ours. We are nutrition aware people who pay much attention to what's in our dishes, precisely because we make selective choices. You just choose on the bases of taste or habits.

With "don't like" I meant anything from "I hate the flavor and consistency of spinach à la crème" to "I don't think this pizza overstuffed with cheese looks very healthy." I'm not a picky eater (the primary things I dislike tend to be too much fat, salt and sugar — apparently opposite of most people), but it seems pretty obvious to me that what people do and don't like is an important practical consideration. You don't like meat. Whether you do that because you're against animal suffering (one of my own primary reasons for not eating much meat of the type I do like either), because of health reasons, or simply because you don't like the flavor doesn't strike me as particularly significant for my argument.

The type of reason only strikes me as important once you leave the domain of taking food from home and move on to what schools should serve. Then a simple "don't like the flavor" is a rather paltry argument.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Then a simple "don't like the flavor" is a rather paltry argument.

Children didn't like the flavor of school lunches ever since they were invented

If there's primarily a bunch of overcooked carrots and peas in the canteen, who can blame 'em?

I remember cafeteria lunches from when I went to school. Some of it was OK, but some of it made starvation look like the easy way out. If you really wanted to make trouble, make a vegan meal the only choice--- .

Originally posted by Frenzie:

If there's primarily a bunch of overcooked carrots and peas in the canteen, who can blame 'em?

Or the overcooked, mushy broccoli. There's few things worse than that

If there is French food problem let them take a lesson from their own history.....let them eat cake?

Cakes can be vegan! You can replace eggs with applesauce.

Originally posted by ensbb3:

There is no reason schools should provide vegetarian meal.

There are a few good reasons. Maybe not strong enough reasons to convince you, but there are certainly reasons: health and expense.

Originally posted by ensbb3:

Even offering one alternative, for what amounts to a small percentage that may take it, cost the school money ... consider what's best for every one of the kids and not just having something provided to validate some crazy notion the parents have. Let the kids eat for nutrition...

Millions of people in societies where vegetarianism (or veganism?) is the norm are perfectly healthy. Non-animal protein doesn't have high levels of unhealthy fats. It is only a challenge to make a healthy vegan diet if you live in a society where hardly anyone knows how to cook that way. Vegetarian diet can be healthier and more nutritious than one with meat.

Raising vegetables for protein uses fewer resources than raising animals for protein. The only way meat can cost less is if it's subsidized by government... money which could be used for schools. It's obvious that the decree to provide animal protein is all about supporting French animal farmers. It is not about health or saving money.

Societies with high-meat diets have certain health problems. Societies with primarily vegetarian diets have their own health problems.

That's the problem with fad diets. They have health risks and the proponents of the diets don't always level with us about those risks.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

That's the problem with fad diets. They have health risks and the proponents of the diets don't always level with us about those risks.

I'm not sure veganism counts as a fad diet, however.

As was said before, it is entirely possible to create a balanced vegan diet - however this involves more that school dinners, and the school can't be sure that other dietary requirements are being met.

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

Societies with high-meat diets have certain health problems. Societies with primarily vegetarian diets have their own health problems.

And those who eat 'the body of Christ'? Catholic cannibalism.

Originally posted by aefields:

There are a few good reasons. Maybe not strong enough reasons to convince you, but there are certainly reasons: health and expense.

It would only be cheaper to provide vegetarian meals if they provided only vegetarian meals. Providing more choice is what really costs more — labour is far more costly than food bought in huge bulk quantities. Then with more choice, there would be more waste too.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

That's the problem with fad diets. They have health risks and the proponents of the diets don't always level with us about those risks.

From what I've been reading, there are actually few health risks to a carefully planned vegetarian diet, including the protein issue that people bring up all the time.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

From what I've been reading, there are actually few health risks to a carefully planned vegetarian diet, including the protein issue that people bring up all the time.

This alleged protein issue is mostly bs anyhow. I repeat, eating a balanced vegetarian diet takes no more or less effort than eating a balanced diet with meat.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

I repeat, eating a balanced vegetarian diet takes no more or less effort than eating a balanced diet with meat.

Oh I agree with you. The trouble in America is eating an unbalanced diet that's too meat heavy. So I think the issue would be that many Americans wouldn't knew how to properly switch, or even just reduce meat consumption, even though there are plenty of online resources for doing so.

Yesterday, I stopped by El Pollo Loco (literally the Crazy Chicken) and realize how easily one could not only make the chicken bowls at home, but even make a veg version of it. (It's basically beans, rice, salsa and cilantro (coriander) and little bit of chicken) Even without replacing the chicken with something else, it's still pretty balanced and inexpensive.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

The trouble in America is eating an unbalanced diet that's too meat heavy.

And consequently the average American diet is also about 2-5 times too protein heavy iirc. Given my experience in American restaurants I can believe that. I usually ended up with enough leftovers for two or sometimes even three days, and I'm far from a small eater. In any case the meat vs. vegetable balance was even worse than in many Dutch and Belgian restaurants, and I've got to say it's too meat-heavy here as well — a reason why I often already ordered vegetarian in restaurants. In fact the couple of months I spent in America did a great deal to push me toward vegetarianism (though as I've said, I'm not a vegetarian; I just eat like one most of the time).

Originally posted by Frenzie:

I repeat, eating a balanced vegetarian diet takes no more or less effort than eating a balanced diet with meat.

However, eating a balanced vegan diet definitely takes a lot more effort.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Yesterday, I stopped by El Pollo Loco (literally the Crazy Chicken) and realize how easily one could not only make the chicken bowls at home, but even make a veg version of it. (It's basically beans, rice, salsa and cilantro (coriander) and little bit of chicken) Even without replacing the chicken with something else, it's still pretty balanced and inexpensive.

Yup. How do you know the rest of the world calls cilantro coriander?

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Yup. How do you know the rest of the world calls cilantro coriander?

Raccoons eat funny mushrooms that makes their minds transcendental and allows their souls to travel anywhere in the universe while engulfed in a purple haze, yup a whole species of shamans. OK, real answer, in my sojourn in Mexico, I stayed with a couple Brits at the hostel that called cilantro coriander. One them asked me why I called coriander cilantro, so I just said "How many Mexicans do we have?" (not a slur against immigrants, just a fact) In America, coriander is the seeds instead of the leaves.

And has it's own hate group! You can't make this stuff up.
http://ihatecilantro.com/taste.php

Coriander's the plant, if you want to refer to parts you say coriander seeds or coriander leaves.

(Besides, cilantro is the Spanish name of the plant, not solely the leaves.)

But yeah, in basically every other language (and English outside America) it's coriander.

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

And has it's own hate group!
http://ihatecilantro.com/taste.php

I quite like cilantro. Alas, neither iquitelikecilantro.com nor ilovecilantro.com exist to serve my needs.

Despite the bad-mouthing of cilantro that site is making me hungry.

I genuinely had no idea they were the same thing. I did wonder why cilantro seemed to be something we didn't have over here.

Yup. It adds a nice touch, especially to Mexican-style dishes. For example most store bought "taco" seasoning in America is chili powder, cumin, maybe some garlic powder and taste a little flat. Add cilantro and the taste becomes much more interesting and better.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Alas, neither iquitelikecilantro.com nor ilovecilantro.com exist to serve my needs.

There is Fuck Yeah Cilantro, but it's just somebody's blog :/

Damn it, I'm just going to eat some peanut butter now. (By which I mean on bread.) I wonder if I should add cilantro to it...

Go for it. I can't guarantee the results though

I'll have to try the addition of cilantro some later time.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

But yeah, in basically every other language (and English outside America) it's coriander.

We don't speak English here.

<Brit1> This lad comes in here, he's speaking all Americanese, and expects people to understand him.

<Brit2> Someone needs to teach that git proper English.

I, for one, like Americanese.

Originally posted by Pesala:

Originally posted by aefields:

There are a few good reasons. Maybe not strong enough reasons to convince you, but there are certainly reasons: health and expense.

It would only be cheaper to provide vegetarian meals if they provided only vegetarian meals. Providing more choice is what really costs more — labour is far more costly than food bought in huge bulk quantities. Then with more choice, there would be more waste too.

Mmmmh. Yeah, I can see how variety leads to waste. If leftovers become waste, then the more variety one has, the greater the potential to have waste.

It shouldn't be that way.

Hmmm... why would labor be more expensive unless waste were greater? It's possible to coordinate so as to provide variety without sacrificing efficiency. If leftovers were always used...

Originally posted by aefields:

Originally posted by Pesala:

Originally posted by aefields:

There are a few good reasons. Maybe not strong enough reasons to convince you, but there are certainly reasons: health and expense.

It would only be cheaper to provide vegetarian meals if they provided only vegetarian meals. Providing more choice is what really costs more — labour is far more costly than food bought in huge bulk quantities. Then with more choice, there would be more waste too.

Mmmmh. Yeah, I can see how variety leads to waste. If leftovers become waste, then the more variety one has, the greater the potential to have waste.

It shouldn't be that way.

Hmmm... why would labor be more expensive unless waste were greater? It's possible to coordinate so as to provide variety without sacrificing efficiency. If leftovers were always used...

Hmmmm...... Have you ever tried feeding children? Especially a veggie diet? I can well imagine the high level of waste in such a thing. Now add in the idea of serving leftovers at school--- oh, boy, the food fights on leftover day--- the levels of waste would be astronomical.

Originally posted by Pesala:

Providing more choice is what really costs more — labour is far more costly than food bought in huge bulk quantities.

It is bulk quantities, at least here. For the Clark County school system (311,417 students as of 2008, 5th largest in the country), all the food is all made in a central location and transported to individual schools for lower costs. Just a little more on that If 175,000 lunches a day isn't bulk quantities, I don't know what is.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

Originally posted by aefields:

Originally posted by Pesala:

Originally posted by aefields:

There are a few good reasons. Maybe not strong enough reasons to convince you, but there are certainly reasons: health and expense.

It would only be cheaper to provide vegetarian meals if they provided only vegetarian meals. Providing more choice is what really costs more — labour is far more costly than food bought in huge bulk quantities. Then with more choice, there would be more waste too.

Mmmmh. Yeah, I can see how variety leads to waste. If leftovers become waste, then the more variety one has, the greater the potential to have waste.

It shouldn't be that way.

Hmmm... why would labor be more expensive unless waste were greater? It's possible to coordinate so as to provide variety without sacrificing efficiency. If leftovers were always used...

Hmmmm...... Have you ever tried feeding children? Especially a veggie diet? I can well imagine the high level of waste in such a thing. Now add in the idea of serving leftovers at school--- oh, boy, the food fights on leftover day--- the levels of waste would be astronomical.

Oh, yes, feeding children... as parents at home... totally different subject. If they choose not to eat they choose to be hungry. Very low waste.

And it can be done at school with very low waste. You waste, you lose next days lunch. Done.

Originally posted by aefields:

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

Originally posted by aefields:

Originally posted by Pesala:

Originally posted by aefields:

There are a few good reasons. Maybe not strong enough reasons to convince you, but there are certainly reasons: health and expense.

It would only be cheaper to provide vegetarian meals if they provided only vegetarian meals. Providing more choice is what really costs more — labour is far more costly than food bought in huge bulk quantities. Then with more choice, there would be more waste too.

Mmmmh. Yeah, I can see how variety leads to waste. If leftovers become waste, then the more variety one has, the greater the potential to have waste.

It shouldn't be that way.

Hmmm... why would labor be more expensive unless waste were greater? It's possible to coordinate so as to provide variety without sacrificing efficiency. If leftovers were always used...

Hmmmm...... Have you ever tried feeding children? Especially a veggie diet? I can well imagine the high level of waste in such a thing. Now add in the idea of serving leftovers at school--- oh, boy, the food fights on leftover day--- the levels of waste would be astronomical.

Oh, yes, feeding children... as parents at home... totally different subject. If they choose not to eat they choose to be hungry. Very low waste.

And it can be done at school with very low waste. You waste, you lose next days lunch. Done.

It's never going to happen. Schools operate differently than the family table, and enforcing the same rules at school that you might try at home--- nope, ain't agoin' to happen. If it could be done that way, then much of the debate we Christians have with the schools would stop. The schools would teach our children the same things we do at home and in the church--- end of debate right there. But, it's not going to happen so the debate rages.

It's never going to happen. Schools operate differently than the family table, and enforcing the same rules at school that you might try at home--- nope, ain't agoin' to happen. If it could be done that way, then much of the debate we Christians have with the schools would stop. The schools would teach our children the same things we do at home and in the church--- end of debate right there. But, it's not going to happen so the debate rages.

Thank Dog for that.

A state religion for schools? Are you serious?

Move to France.

Oops, the French don't support religious indoctrination in funded schools. Très bien!

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

A state religion for schools? Are you serious?

Yeah. The founding fathers were wise in the separation of church and state. Where I used to live there was an issue of the teacher being a Christian teaching Christian children. But ooops, what teacher was saying didn't jibe with the parent's brand of the religion. Yeah mjmsprt40 is incorrect in thinking that Christian debate with schools would stop; it would merely change form.

So, being France, is horse meat on the menu or not?

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

So, being France, is horse meat on the menu or not?

Not sure. Being vegan, I do not look at meat menu. But I do remember seeing petitions against hippophagia: this suggests that horse meat is indeed consumed, although I can't say how widespread it is.

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

So, being France, is horse meat on the menu or not?

Yum, horse meat.

(this goes back to what I said before about factory farming — horses typically aren't factory farmed, ergo their meat tends to taste better)

But RC's eat Jesus?!

But Jesus was a vegetarian, and if you eat a vegetarian then… oh, wait.

Nah, you missed the boat on this one Frenzie! Timeous to remind that Roman priests according to Transubstantiation dogma, by some rather odd mystical power, actually physically change the bread (in their case, wafer style) and wine into the body of Christ. Whereas we heretics only do in it remembrance as of the Last Supper and a symbol. "This do in remembrance of me" - that was all actually.We Prots don't dabble in mystic powers and cannibalism. Don't know if Weightwatchers have anything to counter so much of that feast?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Don't know if Weightwatchers have anything to counter so much of that feast?

Well it just a little bit of the old boy, so not enough calories to worry about I've had a RC monk tell me some years that "they" did tests and found the consecrated communion wafer was human heart tissue, therefore the transubstantiation did happen. It's probably utter bs though.

Here's another story for your amusement. Apparently, in Poland a wafer was dropped on the floor during Mass.

In the case in Poland, another procedure was followed. The wafer was placed in water to dissolve it. However, a few days later, it was still somewhat intact and a red spot had appeared on it. This caused a stir among the faithful, and two doctors were asked to examine the spot. Low and behold, they claimed their tests indicated heart muscle tissue! Since the wafer had been made into “Jesus,” then the tissue must be Jesus’ own heart.

Of course, if I saw a red spot on the communion wafer, my first thought would be some mold...

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Well it just a little bit of the old boy, so not enough calories to worry about I've had a RC monk tell me some years that "they" did tests and found the consecrated communion wafer was human heart tissue, therefore the transubstantiation did happen. It's probably utter bs though.

It's amazing how much work "they" do - shame "they" never seem to write any of it down...

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Here's another story for your amusement.

Indeed.

There “Jesus” was, lying helpless on the floor. Obviously, one cannot just pick him up and go on by inserting him into someone’s mouth. That would be unsanitary.

i wonder what the world would be like if eveyone turns a vegetarian.

Well it has been one long history johnnysaucepn of fairground hype. Statues that cry or bleed, bread and wine turing into flesh, lassies seeing visions, outlines of religious icons in food items, shrines, holy this or that. Bones kept or a bit of someone from centuries ago that will make you better and we have the nerve to complain about witch doctors? Better smiling at it all because treating it seriously would be out of intellectual never mind normal amusing kilter?

Years ago there was a funny joke circulating here. It was that Billy Graham was on a preaching tour of Ireland and as a break one afternoon took a walk along the nearby cliffs on the coast for some fresh air. Then he noticed a young boy yanking back and forth on a rope and another boy at the far end spluttering as he splashed about trying to get out the water. Graham recognising the 2 boys and the one holding the rope at the clifftop was a Protestant and the wee lad on the wet end an RC, remarked how great that act was crossing the religious divide until the boy yanking the rope said "Well seeing you know nothing about shark fishing." (!).

Meanwhile. Jivelissie, if everyone turned vegetarian the Vatican would make the biggest turn around in history! As for the French, how come chips became 'French fries'. Or is that part of the would-be made up glory of France? (yawn).

Human were meant, meaning we have the stomach, teeth, and digestive track, to eat meat and plants. Why must this be made harder than what it needs to be?

Vegetarian:Animals were meant to live, killing them is wrong.
Me: So your saying we should just let them live and take pills to get our nutrition, eat plants when our body's are meant to take both?
Vegetarian: Yes its wrong to kill animals.
Me: So then your saying its murder?
Vegetarian: yes.
Me: Ok. Animal.

^this is whats wrong with our world. We assume that people will always get what they want, thats the sad mentality of America, well humans in general, however, thats why leaders are there, to tighten the leash when you get cocky and when your mouth starts writing check your ass cant cash. We instead bend to everyone elses whim cause we insulted them or they are wronged. Well I'm sorry but fuck off. You dont like what I'm doing look the other way. We must cater to everyones way cause they are special.

The french are actually being smart about this one and have the right to do so. "Don't like our Country? GTFO then."

Originally posted by Virusboy:

Human were meant, meaning we have the stomach, teeth, and digestive track, to eat meat and plants. Why must this be made harder than what it needs to be?

Because it is more complicated than that. We have some capability to be omnivorous, but we're nowhere near as suited to the task as other omnivore species.

And your perceptions of vegetarian arguments is cartoonish at best.

What's wrong with the world is that there are many people that refuse to reconsider the assumptions they make, or think through their arguments.
For example, who makes up the 'us' in 'our country'? Is someone born in France better suited to debate nutrition than one who is not? My mother is Scottish, but born in India. My grandmother was Canadian. If I don't like a decision made in Scotland, do I have to GTFO?

I would say that the French are right if they say they don't have to listen to what people in the United States say about their school lunch programs. That was the faulty premise of this thread: That anything I, an American citizen living in a suburb of Chicago might say, should have any bearing on what the French government decides in the provisions made in their program. I can write my name on petitions all day long, and the French are well within their rights to point at me and laugh.

For the rest: We can argue about the merits of a strictly veggie diet, or one with some meat, or even a strictly carnivorous diet until the cows come home. Have fun doing it. But,don't expect the French to pay a nickel's worth of attention to this forum.

I'm still confused at the difference between vegetarian cheese & normal cheese eating.

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

And your perceptions of vegetarian arguments is cartoonish at best.

Quite. Here's some the real arguments for vegetarian diet. This article focus on the nutritional aspects, specifically protein. It argues there's no need to take supplants for protein, and, indeed, Americans would well be taking too much protein (citing that a typical American breakfast contains 4X your needed protein and too much protein can cause kidney damage)

The article goes on to explain about the hormones and antibiotics and the enormous number of calories in meat.

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

We have some capability to be omnivorous, but we're nowhere near as suited to the task as other omnivore species.

It's obvious that humans have the ability to be omnivorous (although without tools, catching must types of prey would be futile since humans lack claws, running speed, sharp enough teeth, etc) , but a quick reference breaking down why humans are biologically herbivores

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Americans would well be taking too much protein (citing that a typical American breakfast contains 4X your needed protein and too much protein can cause kidney damage

I eat frosted Mini Wheats, thus operating at a protein defect. Maybe I should finish them off with duck a l'orange.

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Americans would well be taking too much protein (citing that a typical American breakfast contains 4X your needed protein and too much protein can cause kidney damage

I eat frosted Mini Wheats, thus operating at a protein defect. Maybe I should finish them off with duck a l'orange.

I eat Vegemite on toast & Black Pudding, thus operating on a taste aesthetic defect. Speaking of duck; I never eat anything that can fly and swim. Or, for that matter, anything with antennae, eyes on stalks, excessive multiple pairs of legs or without a backbone. Especially if it is orange!

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

I eat Vegemite on toast & Black Pudding

Jesus, bless this misguided man.

What, no Bubble & Squeak?

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

I eat Vegemite on toast & Black Pudding

Jesus, bless this misguided man.

I don't think that Jesus ate pork products much ...

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

What, no Bubble & Squeak?

What, for breakfast? Are you mad?

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

What, for breakfast? Are you mad?

Ask around. Most would say, "Yes!" Emphatically, I'd guess.

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

What, for breakfast? Are you mad?

Ask around. Most would say, "Yes!" Emphatically, I'd guess.

I doubt it old chap, it just isn't cricket you know. Tea, dinner, even an early supper, but never breakfast ... it's just not done.

Bubble and squeak gets its name from the sound it makes as it is cooking. It is a popular breakfast or supper dish in England

http://www.whats4eats.com/breakfast/bubble-and-squeak-recipe
Don't ask me, I just post here.

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

Bubble and squeak gets its name from the sound it makes as it is cooking. It is a popular breakfast or supper dish in England

http://www.whats4eats.com/breakfast/bubble-and-squeak-recipe
Don't ask me, I just post here.

Yeah, like I'll believe an American website.

I am English & I personally have never known anyone eat bubble & squeak for breakfast. I've never known anyone intentionally buy warm beer in a pub either. You shouldn't believe everything you read on US websites probably designed by people who couldn't find the UK on a map. I used to live in Wales & regularly ate bara lafwr for breakfast. I'm betting you'll have to google that!

This is what a traditional English breakfast looks like.

OK, I will admit a lot of people probably just eat cornflakes.

Oh yeah, I forgot ... I also lemon marmalade on toast for breakfast.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

we're not made for eating things like leaves and grass

Not only are we suited to eat seeds of grasses, there is a strong argument that our civilisation is based on it. If it hadn't been for the amazing success of grasses, there might not be the amazing success of the human species.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Wow, in the Netherlands (or at least where I grew up) that was the complete opposite at elementary school. If you stayed at school for lunch you had to bring your own lunch or you'd starve.

In Norway as well, bring your own food in greased paper or don't eat at all.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Quite. Here's some the real arguments for vegetarian diet. This article focus on the nutritional aspects, specifically protein. It argues there's no need to take supplants for protein, and, indeed, Americans would well be taking too much protein (citing that a typical American breakfast contains 4X your needed protein and too much protein can cause kidney damage)

No, that's not an argument again eating meat. It's an argument against the 'typical' American breakfast, if that's really what it is. Too much of anything is likely to cause damage. That's why it's called 'too much'.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

And your perceptions of vegetarian arguments is cartoonish at best.

It's obvious that humans have the ability to be omnivorous (although without tools, catching must types of prey would be futile since humans lack claws, running speed, sharp enough teeth, etc) , but a quick reference breaking down why humans are biologically herbivores

Um, that's not much better.

Typical American breakfast...hogwash.

The last time I had bacon was for our evening meal. Any questions?

Originally posted by jax:

Not only are we suited to eat seeds of grasses, there is a strong argument that our civilisation is based on it. If it hadn't been for the amazing success of grasses, there might not be the amazing success of the human species.

Of course, but I was talking about leaves of grass, like many of our domestic animals do. But we are certainly more adept at picking up grains than hares. I often used to see hares pulling down the sticks in the middle of the grass with the seeds on it so they could munch on the seeds.

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

I've never known anyone intentionally buy warm beer in a pub either.

It depends on what you mean by warm. If you're used to beer with a temperature of 1°-7°C (fridge temperature), then beer at 12-16°C is "warm." As far as I'm concerned decent beer and wine is best enjoyed at "cellar temperature," roughly meaning the 12°-16°C I just mentioned. Of course warming up beer or wine that's too cold is easily done by laying your hand upon the glass, while putting ice cubes in beer or wine that's too warm is… questionable. I would add that in America I would always have to ask for a glass after ordering a bottled beer.

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

Typical American breakfast...hogwash.

That reminds me of Shredded Wheat, which is an alleged breakfast cereal in the UK. It seems to consist of just dry wheat & ran with an advertising slogan of 'Nowt tek'n owt' (nothing taken out) it may help if you understand that there are a plethora of regional accents in England & this was almost certainly a southern idea of what northern accents sound like. I'm just surprised that they didn't mention whippets, brass bands & euphoniums. Anyway, we're too busy eating proper breakfasts in the North to take any notice of poncey southern advertising campaigns. As for 'nowt tek'n owt', I believe you actually have to have substance to a product before you can actually remove anything from it. Perhaps they were referring to various bugs or mould growths that were left included for taste. Either way, Shredded Wheat is crap to fry up with eggs & bacon.

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

The last time I had bacon was for our evening meal. Any questions?

Do you eat *bacon sarnies with **HP Sauce?

*Bacon sarnies can be eaten at any time of course.

**I actually prefer Daddies Brown Sauce.

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

That reminds me of Shredded Wheat, which is an alleged breakfast cereal in the UK. It seems to consist of just dry wheat & ran with an advertising slogan of 'Nowt tek'n owt' (nothing taken out) it may help if you understand that there are a plethora of regional accents in England & this was almost certainly a southern idea of what northern accents sound like. I'm just surprised that they didn't mention whippets, brass bands & euphoniums. Anyway, we're too busy eating proper breakfasts in the North to take any notice of poncey southern advertising campaigns.

No, that was Allinson's Bread. Voiced by Brian Glover, an actual Yorkshireman.

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

That reminds me of Shredded Wheat, which is an alleged breakfast cereal in the UK. It seems to consist of just dry wheat & ran with an advertising slogan of 'Nowt tek'n owt' (nothing taken out) it may help if you understand that there are a plethora of regional accents in England & this was almost certainly a southern idea of what northern accents sound like. I'm just surprised that they didn't mention whippets, brass bands & euphoniums. Anyway, we're too busy eating proper breakfasts in the North to take any notice of poncey southern advertising campaigns.

No, that was Allinson's Bread. Voiced by Brian Glover, an actual Yorkshireman.

There's always bloody one, isn't there? OK smart arse, so what was the slogan for Shredded Wheat?

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

There's always bloody one, isn't there? OK smart arse, so what was the slogan for Shredded Wheat?

The closest would be Ian Botham (a cricketer, for those across the pond) telling us that Shredded Wheat is made from 100% whole wheat.

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

There's always bloody one, isn't there? OK smart arse, so what was the slogan for Shredded Wheat?

The closest would be Ian Botham (a cricketer, for those across the pond) telling us that Shredded Wheat is made from 100% whole wheat.

Oh OK. You watch far too much television btw. Get out more.

EDIT: I've just remembered what Botham is most famous for & he probably had the munchies so bad he would actually eat the stuff himself!

The only decent breakfast is the Continental one.
Coffee, croissants, brioche and toasts with fresh butter and assorted fruit jam. Orange juice.
Civilization can't get better than this.

Originally posted by Belfrager:

The only decent breakfast is the Continental one.

Yes, I've eaten it: Smelly coffee, stale bread & dodgy looking preserves. Urgh!

Originally posted by Belfrager:

Civilization can't get better than this.

There is no civilisation left on the Continent. I know, I've drank pasteurised Continental lager beer (I will admit it is better than US beer).

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

I've never known anyone intentionally buy warm beer in a pub either.

It depends on what you mean by warm. If you're used to beer with a temperature of 1°-7°C (fridge temperature), then beer at 12-16°C is "warm." As far as I'm concerned decent beer and wine is best enjoyed at "cellar temperature," roughly meaning the 12°-16°C I just mentioned. Of course warming up beer or wine that's too cold is easily done by laying your hand upon the glass, while putting ice cubes in beer or wine that's too warm is… questionable. I would add that in America I would always have to ask for a glass after ordering a bottled beer.

WTF?

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

WTF?

I'm saying that I doubt many would buy actually warm beer (i.e. 18+°C), but depending on your point of reference, plenty of people buy "warm" beer. I wouldn't want to ruin a good English ale by overchilling it. The Miller/Heineken public probably wouldn't understand, and they'd be the ones who'd say I sometimes drink warm beer.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

WTF?

I'm saying that I doubt many would buy actually warm beer (i.e. 18+°C),

I've never intentionally bought warm beer in an English pub. A few weeks ago, at my local, the barmaid forgot to turn the chillers on, the IPA was a bit warm in that case.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

but depending on your point of reference, plenty of people buy "warm" beer.

No they don't.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

I wouldn't want to ruin a good English ale by overchilling it.

I should hope not!

Originally posted by Frenzie:

The Miller/Heineken public probably wouldn't understand, and they'd be the ones who'd say I sometimes drink warm beer.

I can't speak for the Miller/Heineken drinkers, they only have my commiseration. I was referring to most Americans, who consistently seem to inform me that the entire English race drink warm beer.

I refuse to believe anyone with any sense of taste drinks pasteurised lager beer, warm or cold, anyway.

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

Originally posted by Frenzie:

but depending on your point of reference, plenty of people buy "warm" beer.

No they don't.

Right now it's 9°C out: it's warm. If it were 9°C in July, it'd be freezing. It's relative to a point of reference, as well as hyperbolic. I'm just saying you likely mean different things with the word warm, in order to hopefully forge some kind of mutual understanding between you and the presumably annoying Americans who say English people drink warm beer.

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

I can't speak for the Miller/Heineken drinkers, they only have my commiseration. I was referring to most Americans, who consistently seem to inform me that the entire English race drink warm beer.

Eh, my opinion is that the less chilled Heineken is, the worse it is to drink. My experience with Miller suggests it's a lot worse than Heineken, which is quite an accomplishment. Aldi sells el cheapo übercrappy German lager that's better than either of them.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

Originally posted by Frenzie:

but depending on your point of reference, plenty of people buy "warm" beer.

No they don't.

Right now it's 9°C out: it's warm. If it were 9°C in July, it'd be freezing. It's relative to a point of reference, as well as hyperbolic. I'm just saying you likely mean different things with the word warm,

No, warm beer has been left out in the sun too long.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

in order to hopefully forge some kind of mutual understanding between you and the presumably annoying Americans who say English people drink warm beer.

I think that you are over-thinking this, we are talking about Americans. Most Americans I have spoken to believe we drink warm beer. I know Americans personally who still can't get over the fact that they can go into an English pub & buy beer (of any description) that isn't warm.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Eh, my opinion is that the less chilled Heineken is, the worse it is to drink. My experience with Miller suggests it's a lot worse than Heineken, which is quite an accomplishment.

I wouldn't freeze either of them into a lollipop.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Aldi sells el cheapo übercrappy German lager that's better than either of them.

Aldi's cheap whiskey isn't bad either.

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

I think that you are over-thinking this, we are talking about Americans. Most Americans I have spoken to believe we drink warm beer. I know Americans personally who still can't get over the fact that they can go into an English pub & buy beer (of any description) that isn't warm.

Well, my personal experience with Americans is the opposite.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

I think that you are over-thinking this, we are talking about Americans. Most Americans I have spoken to believe we drink warm beer. I know Americans personally who still can't get over the fact that they can go into an English pub & buy beer (of any description) that isn't warm.

Well, my personal experience with Americans is the opposite.

Why doesn't this surprise me?

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

Aldi's cheap whiskey isn't bad either.

I forgot to say, but I'm sure you inferred, that Aldi's beer is like a third or a fourth of the price of Heineken.

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

Why doesn't this surprise me?

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

Aldi's cheap whiskey isn't bad either.

I forgot to say, but I'm sure you inferred, that Aldi's beer is like a third or a fourth of the price of Heineken.

Yeah, ALDI rocks (well, as much as a supermarket chain can rock).

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

Why doesn't this surprise me?

Edit: since many are very confused, my bad. This should help, We have evolved to eat meat without issue.

Originally posted by Virusboy:

Edit: since many are very confused, my bad. This should help, We have evolved to eat meat without issue.

If I eat meat, I'm pretty sure it gives me an issue. Brussels Sprouts are worse though. The plain fact of the matter is that human beings can survive on a pure vegetable/fruit diet, but we can't survive on a pure meat diet for very long, well, unless you don't mind scurvy. Technically we are omnivores.

Yeah, raw meat is full of bacteria you don't really want to insert into your body. I guess that might not be an issue if you eat it directly after you caught it or something, but can humans really do much besides scavenge for meat without tools?

A raw vegetarian diet isn't recommended either due to things like osteoporosis, although it's not really clear to me why that would be. Sure, you can't eat things like kidney beans, potatoes or Brussels sprouts without cooking 'em, but are they really that important in that regard?

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Yeah, raw meat is full of bacteria you don't really want to insert into your body. I guess that might not be an issue if you eat it directly after you caught it or something, but can humans really do much besides scavenge for meat without tools?

Cooking meat precedes modern humans.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

A raw vegetarian diet isn't recommended either due to things like osteoporosis, although it's not really clear to me why that would be. Sure, you can't eat things like kidney beans, potatoes or Brussels sprouts without cooking 'em, but are they really that important in that regard?

Nuts?

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

No, that's not an argument again eating meat. It's an argument against the 'typical' American breakfast, if that's really what it is. Too much of anything is likely to cause damage. That's why it's called 'too much'.

True. The article was trying to address the common question of how vegetarians get their protein by saying that a vegetarian get all the protein he needs from plant sources and pointing out that Americans actually get too much.

Sorry, we all have our off days, I guess


Mini-Wheats? This a little funny.

From the Strawberry Mini-Wheats site

Allergens

CONTAINS WHEAT INGREDIENTS

Whew..at least people allergic to wheat will know not to eat Mini-Wheats....

You don't know who to listen to these days in practice. Things we were told are good for you then out comes a report to say the opposite. Recently one such investigation said apples could be bad for you.....

I dunno about apples themselves being bad, but what I did hear is that so many pesticides, etc are used in growing them that you do need to make sure to wash the fruit thoroughly before eating. Whole wheat is definitely good for you, unless you have a allergies of course. For a while there was a sort of hysteria about "carbs", resulting in fast food places such as Carl's Junior offering hamburgers wrapped in lettuce instead of rolls as if it was the bread making people fat instead of the 1/3 - full pound burger, mayonnaise, 2 pieces of cheese, bacon (optional) that made people fat

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

I would say that the French are right if they say they don't have to listen to what people in the United States say about their school lunch programs. That was the faulty premise of this thread:

Eh... it's true that whatever petition non-French make doesn't have to influence the French. On the other hand, if lots of people protest something you're doing, it might be worth reviewing your decisions.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

You don't know who to listen to these days in practice. Things we were told are good for you then out comes a report to say the opposite. Recently one such investigation said apples could be bad for you.....

If there's one favour I could ask of you, it's this - please, please take anything you read in science reporting in newspapers with a pinch of salt. The process of getting research to the page goes something like this (not a real example, not sure which apple story you've seen):

• Researchers (usually universities) do some research, come up with some minor result - for example, that a certain enzyme extracted from apples, concentrated 1000-fold and applied to bacterial cultures, causes a change in reproductive frequency.
• The university press office, generally staffed by non-scientists, and keen for promotion and publicity, puts out a hysterical press release that they've made the breakthrough that an enzyme in apples is bad for fertility.
• The newspapers pick up the release, are desperate for column inches to fill, and don't have the scientific training, inclination or time to go to the original story, speak to the authors and find out what the story really is - they just run with APPLES WILL MAKE YOU INFERTILE, SAY BOFFINS.
• Everyone tuts over these silly scientists and their nonsense.

This is definitely one area where you should shoot the messenger.

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

If there's one favour I could ask of you, it's this - please, please take anything you read in science reporting in newspapers with a pinch of salt.

Absolutely not! Salt is bad for you. I read that in a newspaper recently.

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Yeah, raw meat is full of bacteria you don't really want to insert into your body. I guess that might not be an issue if you eat it directly after you caught it or something, but can humans really do much besides scavenge for meat without tools?

Cooking meat precedes modern humans.

It would certainly make sense. Cooking meat makes it usable for much longer periods of time, ergo those who'd be able to process cooked meat better would have a competitive advantage, much like how our more recent ancestors thrived thanks to milk.

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

Originally posted by Frenzie:

A raw vegetarian diet isn't recommended either due to things like osteoporosis, although it's not really clear to me why that would be. Sure, you can't eat things like kidney beans, potatoes or Brussels sprouts without cooking 'em, but are they really that important in that regard?

Nuts?

Are you saying it's crazy or that people attempting a raw vegetarian diet should eat a lot of nuts?

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

I dunno about apples themselves being bad, but what I did hear is that so many pesticides, etc are used in growing them that you do need to make sure to wash the fruit thoroughly before eating.

I doubt that helps; such pesticides integrate themselves into the skin of fruit and vegetables. But no matter how bad it is, chances are it's not as bad in the EU as in the US. For example, in my youth you could store potatoes for a long time, possibly even months. You had to peel the skin because of pesticides. Now potatoes only keep a few weeks at most, but they say you should keep the skin on because it contains many good things. All I know is that it tastes good to keep it on, and what tastes good (to me) is usually good for you.

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

Absolutely not! Salt is bad for you. I read that in a newspaper recently.

I read on some very trustworthy-looking site ("you have won" and such it told me) that in China, they sell salted, fried humps of newspaper with some chicken flavor added as snacks.

I ate a live squirrel for breakfast.

The Grand Rapids Press is barely fit to read, let alone eat.

Squirrels are best electrocuted first - it improves the taste of the fur I believe.

Having returned now from a bout of extended eating over Christmas and the New year (and last year come to that), I've decided to go on a Dinosaur Diet.

A Dinosaur diet, in case you don't know, is where you eat birds, they having evolved form the larger earlier Dinosaur variants.

Not live though.

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

If there's one favour I could ask of you, it's this - please, please take anything you read in science reporting in newspapers with a pinch of salt.

Absolutely not! Salt is bad for you. I read that in a newspaper recently.

That's no way to speak of the salt of the earth.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Yeah, raw meat is full of bacteria you don't really want to insert into your body. I guess that might not be an issue if you eat it directly after you caught it or something, but can humans really do much besides scavenge for meat without tools?

Cooking meat precedes modern humans.

It would certainly make sense. Cooking meat makes it usable for much longer periods of time, ergo those who'd be able to process cooked meat better would have a competitive advantage, much like how our more recent ancestors thrived thanks to milk.

From what I have read, drinking (cows) milk was not easy for our ancestors & was only through necessity. Many were so allergic to it, it was probably fatal. Some human races now still have dubious lactose tolerance.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

Nuts?

Are you saying it's crazy or that people attempting a raw vegetarian diet should eat a lot of nuts?

I was just thinking about nuts in general. There seem to be quite a few around.

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

From what I have read, drinking (cows) milk was not easy for our ancestors & was only through necessity. Many were so allergic to it, it was probably fatal. Some human races now still have dubious lactose tolerance.

Perhaps they started out of necessity, but it wasn't so long ago that someone linked to an article that said the ancestors of the Europeans came from the Middle East with their cows and thus outcompeted the native population that had migrated here a little while before.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

From what I have read, drinking (cows) milk was not easy for our ancestors & was only through necessity. Many were so allergic to it, it was probably fatal. Some human races now still have dubious lactose tolerance.

Perhaps they started out of necessity, but it wasn't so long ago that someone linked to an article that said the ancestors of the Europeans came from the Middle East with their cows and thus outcompeted the native population that had migrated here a little while before.

They had competitive cows?

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

They had competitive cows?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowes_Week

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

Originally posted by OperaBloke:

They had competitive cows?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowes_Week

Hmmm ... more like a cock & bull story if you ask me.

If anyone's interested here's a quick breakdown of the nutritional differences cow's milk and soy milk. Both have nutritional advantages and disadvantages.

Soy, less calories and cholesterol, but no vitamin D and little A, and a lot more copper ( One early sign of osteoporosis is a deficiency in copper.) Cow's more protein (but as pointed out above, it might not be needed), a lot more calcium (but less than 12% of magnesium needed to use all that calcium) and "Each cup of whole cow's milk has the cholesterol equivalent of 17 slices of bacon. Clogged arteries, anyone?"

www.notmilk.com

Originally posted by string:

Squirrels are best electrocuted first - it improves the taste of the fur I believe.

Having returned now from a bout of extended eating over Christmas and the New year (and last year come to that), I've decided to go on a Dinosaur Diet.

A Dinosaur diet, in case you don't know, is where you eat birds, they having evolved form the larger earlier Dinosaur variants.

Not live though.

New Evidence Suggests Noah's Sons Rode Flying Dinosaurs CREATION SCIENCE BREAKING NEWS For years, Creation Scientists have disputed how Noah was able to quickly collect millions of indigenous animals from remote, inaccessible regions of the world for a 40-day ride in his ark. New evidence from an archeological find in China supports the long held Christian belief that Noah's sons rode giant flying dinosaurs to transport duck billed platypuses from Australia, and penguins and polar bears from the Antarctic, to name a few. "Those must have been some mighty big flying dinosaurs," says Pastor Deacon Fred. "Imagine the look on Noah's face when his sons flew in for a landing with a pair of Hippos strapped to the back of one of them things! Glory to God!"
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0605/flyingdinos.html

That will appeal to Rj, who wants to take up arms in the Southern cause.

God bless the darkness!

Careful, don't let the real Christians see that. They might fly with it.

Originally posted by pincopallino:

www.notmilk.com

As you know, I get all my health and nutrition advice from Alicia Silverstone:

Originally posted by http://www.notmilk.com/sstone.html:

Alicia was asked what happened to her body when she stopped consuming milk and dairy products.

"My skin became, like, completely glowy. I lost all this weight. I started pooping right."

Case closed!

Detox From Milk: Seven Days Can you maintain this most important change in your life for just seven days? That is your challenge and goal, for during that seven day period of abstaining from all milk and dairy, one gallon of mucus will be expelled from your kidneys, spleen, pancreas, and other internal organs. If you still eat cheese, ice cream, milk chocolate, and yogurt, your one-week experience will be as if an internal fog has been dispersed from inside of you. Most people successfully weaning themselves from all milk and dairy products immediately observe dramatic physical and emotional changes. Better sleep, more energy, fewer mood swings, more sexual energy. Just seven days to a new you.

The 'more sexual energy' part won me over. I now use beer on my morning cereal.

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

I started pooping right."

Case closed!

Indeed, the case is closed. just discovered that I was pooping all the wrong way this whole time. You don't wanna know...

People who stop eating chocolate and ice cream become healthier? Who would have thought it?

Also, if you have mucus coming out of your kidneys, I'd get yourself to a hospital.