• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Meat Ban

Mike D said:
@Guzzler ... oh yes we are. With our export trade in meat, coupled with the sheer size of this country, we're immune from that rubbish.
Click to expand...
Never underestimate the Seventh Day Adventists and their pals Kelloggs and Kraft.
 
Michael Mansfield QC is a political heavy weight, so his influence should not be underestimated. I think the best way to counter this to somehow put meat and dairy on trial, sounds crazy, but they are slaughtering us with strawman arguments and half truths that hit the spot. In a similar way to Professor Tim Noakes case, a trial of some sort would allow all sides to bring their evidence, I know "our" argument is unassailable so it would be the cheapest and most public way to put to bed saturated fat, cholesterol and environmental concerns. Can this be engineered.

I would actually take pleasure in seeing some of the other side shuffle in their seats when things like, our medical results, relative risk unmasking and the quality of the studies is told to millions and adjudicated on in a court of law. Imagine Zoe Harcombe telling the history of the Diet Heart Hypothesis / 7 countries study and so on and how this has shaped the guidelines, followed by the actual rates of heart disease, and the differing levels of cholesterol in hard outcomes. I have listened to all of the big wigs on the other side and their message works until challenged.

Their biggest problem is that the majority of well controlled Type 2's use meat at the heart of their diet (this effectively resolves the diet nonsense) and then on global warming side the results of those who adopt the practices or similar of the Savory foundation https://www.savory.global/. Given the chance where facts count and conjecture does not work the anti-meat agenda would get horse whipped.

It is now time to put up or shut up. Michael Mansfield QC is a highly intelligent individual so either is ignoring our side of the debate or more likely not heard as much (I hope it is the latter). I trust in the British Justice System. A trial could potentially have 3 justices, advocates for the prosecution (meat / dairy - should be banned, causes cancer, heart disease, diabetes and is a cause of global warming), defence (meat / dairy (for those who tolerate) is heart protective, the most nutrient dense food, bio-available to the majority of humans, reverses diabetes and multiple conditions, can be carbon neutral). The jury could consist of several groups such as doctors, cardiologists, dentists, doctors, school teachers, chefs, actors etc - I would like to see 3 to 5 representatives from many areas so that when we win it creates an irresistible tsunami. If you have a better idea to stop this charade it would be good to hear or seriously what is the mechanism that could be used to put diet on trial.
 
It seems that time may be against those who advocate a healthy, species appropriate diet because those 'against' are already highly organised and highly motivated to bring about their version of Global Health.
 
Guzzler said:
It seems that time may be against those who advocate a healthy, species appropriate diet because those 'against' are already highly organised and highly motivated to bring about their version of Global Health.
Click to expand...

It is true "they" are almost at their goal. But Michael Mansfield should be careful about his reference terms as he wants "ecocide" to be criminal and those who commit it to be sanctioned. I say bring it on. The diet he wants causes soil depletion and huge global warming via imports and exports. Again everything is evidence based as correct animal husbandry replenishes the soil and can drive localism - e.g. the milk / yogurt / cream I get is delivered from less than 3 miles away and most of my meat around 6, I buy British berries from either Manningtree market or supermarkets. I am going to have to review nuts as these come under what I would class as the dietary approach with easily the most air miles and issues - brazil nuts for example...be careful what you wish for Michael, the facts might be uncomfortable.

This gent is doing great stuff:
 
Mbaker said:
Michael Mansfield QC is a highly intelligent individual so either is ignoring our side of the debate or more likely not heard as much (I hope it is the latter).
Click to expand...
Michael Mansfield is a vegetarian and patron of the vegan organisation Viva!
 
Mbaker said:
Michael Mansfield QC is a highly intelligent individual...
Click to expand...

I'd be careful in conflating academic intellect with intelligence. I know plenty of supposedly intelligent people who actually can barely tie their own shoes laces. In my book, anyone who doesn't actually properly understand the topic on which they are professing to be an authority is not very smart. Irrespective of how many letters they have after their name or where they got them from.
 

Exactly may I refer you to Cipolla's 2nd law of stupidity.

The probability that a certain person be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person.
 
Mr_Pot said:
Michael Mansfield is a vegetarian and patron of the vegan organisation Viva!
Click to expand...
It would be really interesting to go out to lunch with him (and not just to compare menus). I would like to think that if I was able to show what tipped me into a ragging Type 2 (my so called health kick of Nov 2014, where I ate more oats, grapes, oranges, flour based pancakes, rice pudding, dates and lots of apple / orange juice). And that I tried lots of plants without the same success as focusing on animal fats / protein. Would he have the same attitude if he understood I would down hill on his plans.
 
Well
I reckon he would still think he was right. He would follow the logic that many HCPs still use... If their diet doesn't work you are either an anomaly or weren't following it properly.
 
zand said:
Well

I reckon he would still think he was right. He would follow the logic that many HCPs still use... If their diet doesn't work you are either an anomaly or weren't following it properly.
Click to expand...
How would he argue with watching the meter readings!

If only people like him and hcp and nhs policy makers would actually just take a look at meter readings!
 
His arguments are about climate change from the perspective of a vegetarian, nothing to do with diabetics and the small proportion who use diet to control it. Showing him meter readings would be irrelevant.
 
I see it this way:
If I need meat or non-vegetable protein and/or dairy in order to have a healthy life and I can afford the aforesaid, then for me that trumps any concerns about damage to the environment from not being vegan. Sorry, but I am 68yrs old with (deliberately) no children, so I can afford to be a little selfish!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…