Some of us have killed & prepped the animals we eat. I had a great aunt that made me slaughter chickens, skin the rabbits and squirrels she killed, gut and clean the catfish from the pool, do it or go without dinner. Everything I know about living that is worth knowing I learned from her.
Carnivore claims about plant foods
Alpha
(Omar)
#289
I never was able to kill animals.
My younger brother does it but he was trained by my father at young age.
I tried and I wanted to kill animals but I could not do it.
FrankoBear
#290
You could ask him. I asked Gary Taubes a question the other day (about deafness) and he replied.
benjamin_bikman@byu.edu Better than speculation.
FrankoBear
#291
Crikey, I thought sea lion, initially, was a suggestion as a source of protein.
Good call 6d ago.
The debate does feel “led on”.
I had to look the term up, following up on the suggestion that the primary author could do some of their own research online rather than peppering the forum with questions, ( Internet , slang ) To intrude on a conversation with disingenuous questions in an attempt to engage in unwanted debate as a form of harassment.
Not sure it is harassment. Or unbound curiosity to interrogate the knowledge and belief of forum users game enough to reply. My feeling is that currently suspended G_whistler knows/knew more than they were letting on. But I can’t cite a paper on that.
I can’t see why that would then gain the title sea lion. They seem like quite nice critters and only sometimes raid lobster pots.
Thanks for boosting my forum vocabulary.
atomicspacebunny
(Bunny)
#293
What is so fascinating about metformin is the smallest dose possible seems to have that hepatic inhibition of mTORC1 which inihibit and prevent the onset of liver cancer tumors and has other anti-aging affects and properties. But too much metformin can lead to hyperlactatemia or metabolic (lactic) acidosis (reduced blood PH) which feed cancer cells in reverse?
MarkGossage
(bulkbiker)
#294
New one on me too but informative and highly likely in this case to be correct as the person in question has been here before under diff names and on other fora too…
I was accused of “gaslighting” on twitter which I found to mean
Which was another new one and all I did was to suggest he reread what I had written… poor fragile soul…
I think I’m getting to old for all this new language…
atomicspacebunny
(Bunny)
#297
A few words about this, I think when talking in the context of Vitamin C (high in raw glandular adrenals of animals and other raw organ meats) and trying to compare a modern day zero carb carnivore to traditional Inuits and the explorations of Stefansson is like comparing apples with oranges? Two entirely different subjects?
Bottom line, traditional Inuits were never deficient in ratios of vitamin C according to level of intake and if so not for very long[1]?
The human body can mistake (or use) high amounts of glucose for vitamin C[4]?
Vitamin C is highest in chili peppers and the outer bitter skin of fruits like orange peels!
From the evolutionary perspective humans and other life forms lost their ability to naturally produce vitamin C where the GULO enzyme gene once resided (mutation) in the liver or the kidneys[2][3]!
References:
[1] “…Meat products are not perceived or marketed as a source of vitamin C, perhaps due to the limited consumption of organ meats which may contain levels above 18 mg/100 g. According to Stefansson (1946), disbelief was the reaction of health professionals at John Hopkins to his recount of a year’s survival in the Arctic on a meat-based diet, absent in fruit and vegetables. The physicians and nutritionists firmly believed that only fruit and vegetables could supply the anti-scorbutic properties of food (Stefansson 1946). Stefansson provided evidence that a diet containing fresh meat alone was sufficient to ward off scurvy. There have been no studies to my knowledge that have explored the potential adaptation of people of the circumpolar areas to a diet containing vitamin C at levels below those established for the general population based on kinetic studies in males (Arroyave 1971). …” …More
[2] “…Humans do not produce Vitamin C due to a mutation in the GULO (gulonolactone oxidase) gene, which results in the inability to synthesize the protein. …” “…This then spontaneously forms Ascorbic Acid (Vitamin C). However without the GULO enzyme, no vitamin C is produced. …” …More
[3] “…The neutrality of vitamin C loss is a function of the environment in which species lives. Individuals from a species which have lost the ability to make their own vitamin C will not be selected against as long as their diet contains sufficient quantities of vitamin C. This is why the function of the GLO gene has been lost repeatedly during evolution. However, individuals from such a species will develop scurvy if their diet changes so as to no longer contain sufficient amounts of vitamin C. Such diet changes occurred repeatedly during human history, causing the death of millions of people [65, 66]. Vitamin C loss is therefore only neutral when sufficient quantities of vitamin C are part of the diet. …” …More
[4] “…Vitamin C is structurally similar to glucose and can replace it …” …More
Ilana_Rose
(mole person)
#298
This one is not at all new. It stems from an old movie called “Gaslight” where a husband is trying to make his wife and everyone else believe she is crazy in order to get her committed. Great movie. Anyhow, the term “gaslighting” has been in use for several decades.
PaulL
(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing)
#299
Oh, it definitely is. The admins’ consensus is that G_Whistler is the third forum incarnation of the same character, who appears to delight in stirring up trouble. There is some value, however, in permitting these discussions to continue for a while, since they generate useful information that can benefit others.
Gaslight, starring Charles Boyer and Ingrid Bergman, directed by George Cukor. Good film—have a watch.
djindy
#300
I’m going to say, I’m rather on the Sea Lion’s side in that comic, other than when they enter someone elses house at night. The dude did just straight up insult and express hate for their entire species and was unwilling to give any reason for so doing at all, and the Sea Lion was polite on the matter.
Calling someone a sealion like that seems like it would be against the community guidelines though, considering that’s simply name calling.
anon2571578
#301
The point of the whole thing is that you don’t want to attract the sealion’s attention because it will do nothing but waste your time arguing in circles while it pretends to be clueless, knowing full well that it’s intentionally trying to do nothing more than wear down your patience. All the while being as “polite” as possible, so when you inevitably do lose your temper, they consider it a “win.” It has no interest in the topic at hand, why you “don’t like sealions,” it knows why you don’t like sealions, it just wants to leech your emotional energy.
And calling a troll a troll hardly constitutes namecalling.
djindy
#302
I think if you insult someone’s species, they very much have an interest in the topic. You’re lucky if all they do is politely ask you for some sort of reasons for your blanket hatred of them, their family, and anything related to you, rather than just attacking you outright or trying to publicly expose you for a bigot. They are likely trying to be as charitable to you as possible for them in attempting, instead, to use reason to sway you from your hatred, and to deter others from such unfounded hatred. If you won’t even give the attempt of either apologizing for your remarks against their species or supporting what you believe is true, they are being continually more patient with you than you are with them. Indeed, by ignoring them you are rather clearly increasing the insult by deeming them, and presumably their entire species, unworthy of even speaking to or justifying your hatred of them to.
And calling a troll a troll is absolutely name calling too, which is against the community guidelines explicitly.
carolT
#304
Valid point, but it may be of interest here to note that the creator of the comic says that interpretation is not what was originally intended.
The sea lion character is not meant to represent actual sea lions, or any actual animal. It is meant as a metaphorical stand-in for human beings that display certain behaviors. Since behaviors are the result of choice, I would assert that the woman’s objection to sea lions — which, if the metaphor is understood, is read as actually an objection to human beings who exhibit certain behaviors — is not analogous to a prejudice based on race, species, or other immutable characteristics.
PaulL
(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing)
#305
I do not like thee, Doctor Fell,
The reason why – I cannot tell;
But this I know, and know full well,
I do not like thee, Doctor Fell.
djindy
#308
No one said racist, though certainly that would be a reasonable analogy.
Intentional or not, I’m going to have to side with the sea lion because of what is actually presented.