The Higher Taste - BBT Publisher
Chapter 1
Health
and a Meatless Diet
The
central question about vegetarian diets used to be whether it was healthy to
eliminate meat and other animal foods. Now, however, the main question has
become whether it is healthier to be a vegetarian than to be a meat eater. The
answer to both questions, based on currently available evidence, seems to be
yes.
- Jane E. Brody
New York Times News Service
Today,
with increasing evidence of diet's critical effect on good health and
longevity, more and more people are investigating this question: Is the human
body better suited to a vegetarian diet or one that includes meat?
In the
search for answers, two areas should be considered - the anatomical structure
of the human body, and the physical effects of meat consumption.
Since
eating begins with the hands and mouth, what can the anatomy of these bodily
parts tell us? Human teeth, like those of the herbivorous creatures, are
designed for grinding and chewing vegetable matter. Humans lack the sharp front
teeth for tearing flesh that are characteristic of carnivores. Meat-eating
animals generally swallow their food without chewing it and therefore do
not require molars or a jaw capable of moving sideways. Also, the human hand,
with no sharp claws and with its opposable thumb, is better suited to
harvesting fruits and vegetables than to killing prey.
|
|
|
MEAT-EATER
|
HERBIVORE
|
MAN
|
|
Has
claws
|
No
claws
|
No
claws
|
|
No skin
pores, perspires through tongue
|
Perspires
through skin pores
|
Perspires
through skin pores
|
|
Sharp
front teeth for tearing, no flat molar teeth for grinding
|
No
sharp front teeth has flat rear molars
|
No
sharp front teeth has flat rear molars
|
|
Intestinal
tract 3 times body length so rapidly decaying meat can pass out quickly
|
Intestinal
tract 10-12 times body length
|
Intestinal
tract 12 times body length
|
|
Strong
hydrochloric acid in stomach to digest meat
|
Stomach
acid 20 times less strong than meat-eaters
|
Stomach
acid 20 times less strong than meat-eaters
|
Digesting
Meat
Once
within the stomach, meat requires digestive juices high in hydrochloric acid.
The stomachs of humans and herbivores produce acid less than one-twentieth the
strength of that found in carnivores.
Another
crucial difference between the meat-eater and the vegetarian is found in the
intestinal tract, where the food is further digested and nutrients are passed
into the blood. A piece of meat is just part of a corpse, and its putrefaction
creates poisonous wastes within the body. Therefore meat must be quickly
eliminated. For this purpose, carnivores possess alimentary canals only three
times the length of their bodies. Since man, like other non-flesh-eating
animals, has and alimentary canal twelve times his body length, rapidly
decaying flesh is retained for a much longer time, producing a number of
undesirable toxic effects.
One body
organ adversely affected by these toxins is the kidney. This vital organ, which
extracts waste from the blood, is strained by the overload of poisons
introduced by meat consumption. Even moderate meat-eaters demand three times
more work form their kidneys than do vegetarians. The kidneys of a young person
may be able to cope with this stress, but as one grows older the risk of kidney
disease and failure greatly increases.
Heart
Disease
The
inability of the human body to deal with excessive animal fats in the diet is
another indication of the unnaturalness of meat-eating. Carnivorous animals can
metabolize almost unlimited amounts of cholesterol and fats without any adverse
effects. In experiments with dogs, up to one half pound of butterfat was added
to their daily diet over a period of two years, producing absolutely no change
in their serum cholesterol level.
On the other
hand, the vegetarian species have a very limited ability to deal with any level
of cholesterol or saturated fats beyond the amount required by the body. When
over a period of many years an excess is consumed, fatty deposits (plaque)
accumulate on the inner walls of the arteries, producing a condition known as
arteriosclerosis, hardening of the arteries. Because the plaque deposits
constrict the flow of blood to the heart, the potential for heart attacks ,
strokes, and blood clots is tremendously increased.
As early as 1961, the Journal of
the American Medical Association states that ninety-seven percent of heart
disease, the cause of more than one half of the deaths in the United States,
could be prevented by a vegetarian diet.1 These findings are supported by an American Heart
Association report that states, "In well-documented population studies
using standard methods of diet and coronary disease assessment ... evidence
suggests that a high-saturated-fat diet is an essential factor for a high
incidence of coronary heart disease."2 The National Academy of Sciences also reported recently
that the high serum cholesterol level found in most Americans is a major factor
in the coronary heart disease "epidemic" in the United States.3
Cancer
Further evidence of the unsuitability of the human intestinal tract
for digestion of flesh is the relationship established by numerous studies,
between colon cancer and meat-eating.4 One reason for the
incidence of cancer is the high-fat, low-fiber content of the meat-centered
diet. This results in a slow transit time through the colon,
allowing toxic wastes to do their damage. States Dr. Sharon Fleming of the
department of Nutritional Sciences at the University of California at Berkeley,
"Dietary fiber appears to aid in reducing ... colon and rectal
cancer."5 Moreover, while
being digested, meat is known to generate steroid metabolites possessing
carcinogenic (cancer-producing) properties.
As
research continues, evidence linking meat-eating to other forms of cancer is
building up at an alarming rate. The National Academy of
Sciences reported in 1983 that "people may be able to prevent many common
cancers by eating less fatty meats and more vegetable and grains."6 And
in his Notes on the Causation of Cancer, Rollo Russell writes,
"I have found of twenty-five nations eating little or no flesh, none had a
high rate."7
Some of
the most shocking results in cancer research have come from exploration of the
effects of nitrosamines. Nitrosamines are formed when secondary amines,
prevalent in beer, wine, tea, and tobacco, for example, react with chemical
preservatives in meat. The Food and Drug Administration has labeled
nitrosamines "one of the most formidable and versatile groups of
carcinogens yet discovered, and their role ... in the etiology of human cancer
has caused growing apprehension among experts." Dr.
William Lijinsky of Oak Ridge National Laboratory conducted experiments in
which nitrosamines were fed to test animals. Within six months he found malignant
tumors in one hundred percent of the animals."The cancers," he said,
"are all over the place; in the brain, lungs, pancreas, stomach, liver,
adrenals, and intestines. The animals are a bloody mess."8
Dangerous
Chemicals in Meat
Numerous
other potentially hazardous chemicals, of which consumers are generally
unaware, are present in meat and meat products. In their book Poisons in
Your Body, Gary and Steven Null give us an inside look at the latest
gimmicks used in the corporate-owned animal factories. "The animals are
kept alive and fattened by the continuous administration of tranquilizers,
hormones, antibiotics, and 2,700 other drugs," They write. "The
process starts even before birth and continues long after death. Although these
drugs will still be present in the meat when you eat it, the law does not
require that they be listed on the package."
One of
these chemicals is diethylstilbestrol (DES), a growth hormone that has been
used in the U.S. for the last twenty years despite studies that have shown it
to be carcinogenic. Banned as a serious health hazard in thirty-two countries,
it continues to be used by the U.S. meat industry, possibly because the FDA
estimates it saves meat producers more than $500 million annually.
Another popular
growth stimulant is arsenic. In 1972 this well-known poison was found by the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to exceed the legal limit in fifteen
percent of the nation's poultry.9
Sodium
nitrate and sodium nitrite, chemicals used as preservatives to slow down
putrefaction in cured meat and meat products, including ham, bacon, bologna,
salami, frankfurters, and fish, also endanger health. These chemicals give meat
its bright-red appearance by reacting with pigments in the blood and muscle.
Without them, the natural gray-brown color of dead meat would turn off many
prospective consumers.
Unfortunately,
these chemicals do not distinguish between the blood of a corpse and the blood
of a living human, and many persons accidentally subjected to excessive amount
have died of poising. Even smaller quantities can prove hazardous, especially
for young children or babies, and therefore the United Nations' joint FAO/WHO
Expert Committee of Food Additives warned, "Nitrate should on no account
be added to baby food." A.J. Lehman of the FDA pointed out that "only
a small margin of safety exists between the amount of nitrate that is safe and
that which may be dangerous."
Because
of the filthy, overcrowded conditions forced upon animals by the livestock
industry, vast amounts of antibiotics must be used. But such rampant use of
antibiotics naturally creates antibiotic-resistant bacteria that are passed on
to those who eat the meat. The FDA estimates that penicillin and tetracycline
save the meat industry $1.9 billion a year, giving them sufficient reason to
overlook the potential health hazards.
The
trauma of being slaughtered also adds "pain poisons" (such as
powerful stimulants) into the meat. These join with uneliminated wastes in the
animal's blood, such as urea and uric acid, to further contaminate the flesh
the consumers eat.
Diseases
in Meat
In
addition to dangerous chemicals, meat often carries diseases from the animals
themselves. Crammed together in unclean conditions, force-fed, and inhumanely
treated, animals destined for slaughter contract many more diseases than they
ordinarily would. Meat inspectors attempt to filter out unacceptable meats, but
because of pressures from the industry and lack of sufficient time for
examination, much of what passes is far less wholesome than the meat purchaser
realizes.
A 1972
USDA report lists carcasses that passed inspection after the diseased parts
were removed. examples included nearly 100,000 cows with eye cancer and
3,596,302 cases of abscessed liver. The government also permits the sale if
chickens with airsacculitis, a pneumonia-like disease that causes pus-laden
mucus to collect in the lungs. In order to meet federal standards, the
chicken's chest cavities are cleaned out with air-suction guns. But during this
process diseased air sacs burst and pus seeps into the meat.
The USDA has even been found to be lax in enforcing its own
low standards. In its capacity of overseeing federal regulatory agencies, the
U.S General Accounting Office cited the USDA for failure to correct various
violations by slaughterhouses. Carcasses contaminated with rodent feces, cockroaches,
and rust were found in meat-packing companies such as Swift, Armour, and
Carnation.10 Some inspectors
rationalize the laxity, explaining that if regulations were enforced, no
meat-packers would remain open for business.
Nutrition
Without Meat
Many
times the mention of vegetarianism elicits the predictable reaction, "What
about protein?" To this the vegetarian might well reply, "What about
the elephant? And the bull? And the rhinoceros?" The ideas that meat has a
monopoly on protein and that large amounts of protein are required for energy
and strength are both myths. While it is being digested, most protein breaks
down into its constituent amino acids, which are reconverted and used by the
body for growth and tissue replacement. Of these twenty-two amino acids, all
but eight can be synthesized by the body itself, and these eight
"essential amino acids" exist in abundance in non-flesh foods. Dairy
products, grains, beans, and nuts are all concentrated sources of protein.
Cheese, peanuts, and lentils, for instance, contain more protein per ounce than
hamburger, pork, or porterhouse steak. A study by Dr. Fred Stare of Harvard and
Dr. Mervyn Hoarding of Loma Linda University made extensive comparisons between
the protein intake of vegetarians and flesh-eaters. They concluded that
"each group exceeded twice its requirement for every essential amino acid
and surpassed this amount by large margins for most of them."
For many
Americans, protein makes up more than twenty percent of their diet, nearly
twice the quantity recommended by the World Health Organizations. Although
inadequate amounts of protein will cause loss of strength, excess protein
cannot be utilized by the body; rather, it is converted into nitrogenous wastes
that burden the kidneys. The primary energy source for the body is
Carbohydrates. Only as a last resort is the body's protein utilized for energy
production. Too much protein intake actually reduces the body's energy
capacity. In a series of comparative endurance tests conducted by Dr. Irving
Fisher of Yale, vegetarians performed twice as well as meat-eaters. By reducing
the non-vegetarians' protein consumption by twenty percent, Dr. Fisher found
their efficiency increased by thirty-three percent. Numerous other studies have
shown that a proper vegetarian diet provides more nutritional energy than meat.
Furthermore, a study by Dr. J. Iotekyo and V. Kipani at Brussels University
showed that vegetarians were able to perform physical tests two to three times
longer than meat-eaters Before exhaustion and were fully recovered from fatigue
in one fifth the time needed by the meat-eaters.
References
- "Diet and Stress in
Vascular Disease," Journal of the America Medical Association,
June 3, 1961, p. 806.
- "Diet and Coronary Heart
Disease," a statement developed by the committee on Nutrition and
authorized for release by the Central Committee on Nutrition and
authorized for release by the Central Committee for medical and Community
Programs of the American Heart Association, 1973.
- "Diet and Coronary
Heart Disease," Journal of the American Medical Association,
vol. 222, no 13, (Dec. 25, 1972), p. 1647.
- Michael
J. Hill,
M.D., "Metabolic Epidemiolgy of Dietary Factors in Large Bowel
Cancer," Cancer Research, vol. 35, no. 11, part 2 (Nov.,
1975). pp. 3398-3402; Bandaru S. Reddy, Ph.D. and Ernest L. Wynder, M.D.,
"Large-Bowel Carcinogenesis: Fecal Constituents of Population with
Diverse Incidence Rates of Colon Cancer," Journal of the National
Cancer Institute, vol. 50, 1973, pp. 1437-41.
- Dr. Sharon Fleming, personal correspondence,
Feb. 26, 1981.
- Los Angeles Herald Examiner.
- Quoted from Cancer and Other Diseases from
Meat Consumption, Blanche Leonardo, Ph.D., 1979, p. 12.
- Statement of Dr. William Lijinsky, U.S. House
of Representatives' hearing "Regulation of Food Additives and
Medicated Animal Foods." March 1971, p. 132.
- "Arsenic in Chicken
Liver to Be Reviewed by Agency," Wall Street Journal, Jan. 13,
1972.
- Jean Snyder, "What
You'd Better Know About the Meat You Eat," Today's Health,
vol. 19, Dec. 1971, pp. 38-39.
