Input on Eating Meat "Sparingly"

[champatsch]

3 hours ago, Calm said:

How do you view the Word of Wisdom then?  If you mentioned this earlier, a link to that post or a hint of which page it is on or time you posted it is fine.

I've followed that aspect of the WoW pretty much my whole life. I don't have a problem with it.

I do see the benefits of increasing meat consumption when needed to improve mental health and heal injuries.

And I do believe in eating meat the right way, from sources where you know the treatment was humane.

In my case, my wife and I raise most of the meat we eat. We raise chickens, pork, beef. 

On caffeine, one of the board-certified MDs I follow in the nutrition space doesn't like it, since the body can mistake it for something else and attack it, biochemically speaking. It's just another thing found in plants that is a cause of concern, like lectins and oxalates. Plants we eat have numerous chemical defense mechanisms that our bodies have to deal with. The bad often outweighs the good.

[champatsch]

3 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I don’t disagree that work should stand or fall on its own merits. Carmack’s claims on EMod, however, are very difficult for the untrained to evaluate. They also lack peer review (for some understandable reasons), and make no sense from a believer’s point of view as well as a non-believer’s point of view (IMO). His willingness to believe pseudo-science here to back his pre-established belief does not prove the EModE claims false, however it is definitely Bayesian evidence against it. This is as far as I will go in this thread to prevent a major derail. 

It doesn't sound to me like you understand the work I do on Book of Mormon English very well. What I do primarily is descriptive work in a historical comparative vein. I look at a syntactic usage or pattern, and I compare it with what might or might not be found in various pseudo-archaic writings, biblical texts, Joseph Smith's own early writings, and English from the 1400s to the 1800s. Maybe a journal would be interested in the data, but they definitely wouldn't be interested in the conclusions I draw from the data. They would only be interested in my conclusions when I find it matches something expected, if Joseph Smith was the author or translator. Yet in so many cases, Book of Mormon syntax matches usage that points away from Joseph Smith as the author or translator. Take a look at my latest paper, just out, and some of my best work, since it is based on comparisons of many relevant datasets.

As for your silly statement about pseudo-science and nutrition, that of course has nothing to do with Book of Mormon English. The main point I've been trying to make is that meat, in and of itself, isn't as bad as we've been led to believe. And if we eschew it entirely, we might experience adverse health outcomes. I've been trying to provoke thought by mentioning that people have thrived and do thrive on a carnivore diet.

The things I've been mentioning in this regard derive from the work of many others, a diverse set of people who are researching in the nutrition space. It is a wide array of research scientists and board-certified MDs who know nothing about the Book of Mormon, and have no interest in it. They certainly are not quacks. They are just intensely interested in getting to the bottom of why health outcomes are so terrible in many regions of the world. They suspect that the dominant Ancel Keys–paradigm is wrong, and they're working very hard to get to the bottom of the biochemistry. Among other things, they're finding increasing evidence, at many different levels – even down to the level of the electron transport chain in the mitochondrial membrane (part of the TCA cycle) – that dietary saturated fat is not the bad agent, but that dietary polyunsaturated fat is.

[sunstoned]

20 hours ago, JAHS said:

 The word "scripture" not only refers to the 4 Standard works of the Church it can also be described as "whatsoever shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost"

2 And, behold, and lo, this is an ensample unto all those who were ordained unto this priesthood, whose mission is appointed unto them to go forth—
3 And this is the ensample unto them, that they shall speak as they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost.
4 And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation. (D&C 68:2-4; cf. 1:38; 2 Pet. 2:21; 2 Tim. 3:16).

Therefore, anyone who is moved upon by the Holy Ghost while speaking in General Conference and recorded for later reading in the Ensign, including the First Presidency messages, are considered scripture, although they would not be included as part of the Standard works of the Church.
As explained in the Book "Gospel Principles":
"In addition to these four books of scripture, the inspired words of our living prophets become scripture to us. Their words come to us through conferences, Church publications, and instructions to local priesthood leaders." (Gospel Principles Chapter 12)

Revelation from God does not have to be included in our cannon of scriptures. That is your opinion that it must be included.

As previously stated the WoW as given by revelation and is in cannon has be changed.  If you believe the D&C is scripture, then the revealed words from God have been changed. Now, I get the idea of continued revelation.  Just show me the revelation that superseded the original WoW revelation.  Please provide a reference where a prophet claimed revelation to change the canonized WoW.  That is all I'm asking.  BTW, the following is what BY had to say about the WoW.  Wise words to be sure, but even he said it was not a commandment.

 

"

Quote

You have read that piece of excellent advice called the "Word of Wisdom." I shall not say you must obey it; you can read it over again and refresh your memories, and I give the privilege to the Elders of Israel to cease using tobacco, and if they will not cease using it, then raise it; and then, also, to cease using spirituous liquors to excess....If you will cease drinking spirituous liquors you will thereby be benefited individually and benefit the community. A man who indulges in any habit that is pernicious to the general good in its example and influence, is not only an enemy to himself but to the community so far as the influence of that habit goes. A man who would not sacrifice a pernicious habit for the good it would do the community is, to say the least of it, lukewarm in his desires and wishes for public and general improvement. Tobacco is not good for man; spirituous liquor is not good for a beverage, but in many cases it is good for washing the body."

Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 10:202.

 

[sunstoned]

On 11/18/2021 at 5:03 AM, Stargazer said:

He wants a "canonized" revelation. I.e. a new section in the D&C, or perhaps an addendum to D&C 89 (or would an "Official Declaration" suffice?). 

Tom, an old friend of mine, once gave me "The Three Questions". Here they are, answered in context with sunstoned's concerns:

1. So what? It doesn't matter to him.
2. Who cares? He doesn't; not really. It's just a convenient cudgel to beat the Church with.
3. What difference does it make? None at all; the Church is still bogus.

I'm just asking the question.  Apparently a question no one can seem to answer.  Modern canonized scripture has been changed.  Yet no one can point to the revelation that changed it. 

[Bob Crockett]

1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

I'm just asking the question.  Apparently a question no one can seem to answer.  Modern canonized scripture has been changed.  Yet no one can point to the revelation that changed it. 

This is the identical argument made by fundamentalists (polygamists). Show me the "thus saith the Lord" revelation rescinding plural marriage.  There isn't one.

In fact, when the Church publishes its scriptures, the scriptures themselves are ex cathedra. Decisions made as to what to publish, or changes made to prior text, are made typically by the inspiration that guides the Twelve.  What is that process?  We don't really know, but the NT teaches that doctrine is established by a quorum of the Quorum of Twelve.  What they say goes, and they claim revelation as their guide.

Up until about the 1920s, the Book of Mormon used to drop a footnote that said that Lehi landed in Chile.  When the Book of Mormon was reorganized, that footnote was dropped.  Who did that?  We don't know.  I have an educated guess that when Talmage put the text into double columns and added a bunch of footnotes, he dropped Orson Pratt's Chile footnote, and the Twelve approved.  But it is no longer Church doctrine that Lehi landed in Chile.  (He may have indeed landed in Chile, but the Church no longer teaches it.) How do we know that?  We can read the text for ourselves. 

Edited November 19, 2021 by Bob Crockett

[Stargazer]

2 hours ago, sunstoned said:

I'm just asking the question.  Apparently a question no one can seem to answer.  Modern canonized scripture has been changed.  Yet no one can point to the revelation that changed it. 

No answer will satisfy you. So enjoy your "Gotcha".

[JAHS]

2 hours ago, sunstoned said:

As previously stated the WoW as given by revelation and is in cannon has be changed.  If you believe the D&C is scripture, then the revealed words from God have been changed. Now, I get the idea of continued revelation.  Just show me the revelation that superseded the original WoW revelation.  Please provide a reference where a prophet claimed revelation to change the canonized WoW.  That is all I'm asking.  BTW, the following is what BY had to say about the WoW.  Wise words to be sure, but even he said it was not a commandment.

 

"

Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 10:202.

 

A prophet doesn't have to preface the teaching of a commandment by announcing it is a revelation. It doesn't have to be included in the scriptures. 
In 1851, President Brigham Young proposed to the general conference of the Church that all Saints formally covenant to keep the Word of Wisdom. This proposal was unanimously upheld by the membership of the Church. Since that day, the revelation has been a binding commandment on all Church members. 
When we sustain the church leaders as prophets, seers, and revelators by raising or hands in conference it means we accept all their teachings as revelations from God that we should follow.
It was revealed to them that we should more strictly follow the word of wisdom in our day and so they have taught us that from the pulpit. It is recorded in many talks in general conference.
 

[poptart]

On 11/18/2021 at 3:39 PM, Calm said:

I think those who had heavy physical activity in the past likely could handle the high meat diet better.  Gout being a common disease among the wealthy in a lot of Eng Lit stories I read  is a sign IMO that high meat diet is less than ideal, see below, but maybe it was as common in the underclasses, the wealthy just like to think they were special, even in their illnesses, nonmodern diets is an unknown for me mostly.  
 

Prepared food generally has too much salt or sugar in it, IMO.  And the whole removing the bran and germ is unfortunate, but understandable in former times with storage issues, but now no need for most except long term food storage. The one thing I wish Mom had done was to use brown rice and whole wheat more, don’t know why she didn’t, maybe it wasn’t easily available until my high school years, but just as likely Dad wasn’t a fan…meat and potatoes guy.  It just doesn’t taste right to me when I want my comfort foods.  Mom did make a lot of wild rice, but Uncle Ben’s (now just Ben’s) was everywhere even back then.  Cooking from scratch once you are familiar with techniques is not that time consuming if you keep simple or use pressure cooking/instant pot. Especially if you can afford the prewashed and cut veggies.  Bake or roast rather than fry, even microwaving….though microwaving potatoes is out for me, changes taste a bit and texture majorly…maybe for five minutes to cut down time, but no more.  Got to have the crunch of the skin….I know what I want for dinner now.  And so many speciality items online so one can get any spices and herbs, vinegars and oils, international foods.  And endless recipes, so who needs cookbooks taking up needed space.

I wish I had enough oomph to do Aquaponics, my preferred alternative lifestyle. My sister in law down the street has a beautiful organic garden and raises rabbits.  I am rather jealous even knowing the work she put into it (I wouldn’t have gone the intense searching for bargains route, so quite a bit less work in setup for me).  I could trade her fish for rabbit.  We used to have a poster on here who did Aquaponics that fascinated me when he described his process.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/in-depth/gout-diet/art-20048524

My father was very much a meat and potatoes person, had the gout to prove it.  The alcoholism didn't help either.  

I cook quite a bit, never understood pre-washed veggies, for one you don't know if it's really pre-washed.  That and of course cost, I'm a cheap skate when I can get away with it.  I love my pressure cooker and crock pot, those things have made me so many healthy meals on the cheap, I'll cook stuff, vacuum pack it then into the freezer it goes.  

Aquaponics is work, my hat off to your sister in law.  I see more people doing that as time goes on, raising chickens is getting real popular now.  I'm looking at how costs are going up, supply like disruptions and how some stores have issues with inventory as a bad sign of things to come.

 

[poptart]

On 11/18/2021 at 4:20 PM, Hamba Tuhan said:

Workout routine? If there is work that needs doing, I do it. This includes walking to/from my office most weekdays (2.4km return), housework, gardening on weekends, helping people move house, etc. I also enjoy doing things like walking, hiking, swimming, etc., whenever I can fit them in, but that's not work to me.

I could never quite grasp needing a routine to regularly burn off unneeded energy from having eaten too much food. I think our ancestors would be dumbfounded by such a situation. If I start to pack on kilos, I just adjust what I'm eating until intake/expenditure are back in balance. If I'm doing something intense like a multiday backpacking camp, I'll take a sufficient amount of food with me to fuel that.

If I'm travelling, I tend to eat lunch on Saturdays. If I'm camping, for some reason, I like to have a small breakfast upon waking -- typically a bit of milk and cereal.

Yes, weights, cardio etc.  I keep forgetting, I'm a bachelor so my life is likely different from many of you.  I used to do a lot of marathons, haven't had the chance the past few years, planning on another one next year.  Prepping for those things takes a ton of discipline.

Not just our ancestors, many others in different parts of the world.  I can look at photos of my cousins in Maui vs. ones here in the midwest, huge difference in appearance, it's the diet and lifestyle.  Veggies and fruits (mostly salads and apples, oranges etc.) are my go-to food source through the day, I'll add in some eggs, sunflower seeds and sometimes ham.  I rarely eat out, when I do it's usually a Japanese or Korean restaurant.  Times like this I miss WA, they had so many fantastic Chinese places, knew of one in Belleview that had fantastic Shanghai style dumplings.  

I make oatmeal bars sometimes in the summer, if I'm feeling lazy I just get those nature valley granola bar things and throw em in my backpack.  

 

[mrmarklin]

On 11/19/2021 at 4:45 AM, sunstoned said:

I'm just asking the question.  Apparently a question no one can seem to answer.  Modern canonized scripture has been changed.  Yet no one can point to the revelation that changed it. 

The scripture has not been changed. You are incorrect in determining that this is so, and have not provided any basis for your opinion. 
On or around 1930, the church general authorities, on their own authority AFAIK, changed the way temple recommends are issued. From then on forward, people that use coffee, tea, alcoholic beverages and tobacco were barred from attending the temple. 
The church during my lifetime has campaigned very much against using these items  

In my opinion, this was done to take advantage of Prohibition which was then the law in the US. YMMV as to this. 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, poptart said:

those nature valley granola bar things and throw em in my backpack.

Too sweet, but used to be my go to.  

Edited November 22, 2021 by Calm

[pogi]

On 11/18/2021 at 5:07 PM, champatsch said:

Among other things, they're finding increasing evidence, at many different levels – even down to the level of the electron transport chain in the mitochondrial membrane (part of the TCA cycle) – that dietary saturated fat is not the bad agent, but that dietary polyunsaturated fat is.

Not all saturated fats are created equal:

Quote

But the source of the fat appears to make a difference. That's according to researchers at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, who studied dietary data from more than 90,000 people over an average of 22 years. Heart disease risk was lower when unhealthy saturated fat, refined carbohydrates, or trans fat was replaced by plant-based monounsaturated fat, but not by animal-based monounsaturated fat. Higher intake of the plant-based fats was associated with a 16% lower risk of dying from any cause. In contrast, higher intake of the animal-based fats was linked to a 21% higher risk of dying from any cause.

https://www.health.harvard.edu/heart-health/plant-based-fats-better-for-the-heart-than-animal-fats

Quote

The type of saturated fats we eat can affect our risk of a heart attack, according to a study published in the International Journal of Cardiology. People whose diets contain relatively little palmitic and stearic acid -- saturated fats composed of 16 or more carbon atoms (longer-chain saturated fats) that are typically found in meats -- and eat plant-based proteins instead have decreased chances of myocardial infarction. Moreover, individuals who eat more saturated fats with 14 or fewer carbon atoms (shorter-chain saturated fats) that are typically found in dairy products have lower risk of myocardial infarction.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/01/190128105230.htm

 

 

 

Edited November 22, 2021 by pogi

[ksfisher]

14 hours ago, mrmarklin said:

The scripture has not been changed. You are incorrect in determining that this is so, and have not provided any basis for your opinion. 
On or around 1930, the church general authorities, on their own authority AFAIK, changed the way temple recommends are issued. From then on forward, people that use coffee, tea, alcoholic beverages and tobacco were barred from attending the temple. 
The church during my lifetime has campaigned very much against using these items  

In my opinion, this was done to take advantage of Prohibition which was then the law in the US. YMMV as to this. 

 

By 1915, President Joseph F. Smith instructed that no one was to be ordained to the priesthood or given temple recommends without adherence.[9] Heber J. Grant became President of the Church in 1918, and he continued the policy of Word of Wisdom observance; after that time temple attendance or priesthood ordination required obedience to the principle. Thus, the Church membership had eighty-five years to adapt and prepare for the full implementation of this revelation.[10] By 1933, the General Handbook of Instructions listed the Word of Wisdom as a requirement for temple worship, exactly 100 years after the receipt of the revelation by Joseph Smith.[11]

 

This long period of patience on the part of the Lord was necessary for all—from the newest member to even the leaders. Joseph F. Smith observed:

The reason undoubtedly why the Word of Wisdom was given—as not by 'commandment or restraint' was that at that time, at least, if it had been given as a commandment it would have brought every man, addicted to the use of these noxious things, under condemnation; so the Lord was merciful and gave them a chance to overcome, before He brought them under the law.[12]

 

 

These are notes I made for a lesson on the Word of Wisdom I gave 7 or 8 years ago.  At the time the footnotes linked to sources in another document that I've since lost.

 

In addressing your comment that "the church general authorities, on their own authority AFAIK, changed the way the temple recommends are issued I would point out that Joseph F Smith in 1915 was the sustained prophet, seer, and reveleator and president of the church sustain by the membership of the church,  He held all priesthood keys that had been restored to the earth.  What more authority did he need?

 

[2BizE]

I think a question to ask is why doesn’t the counsel to eat meet sparingly have the same weight as the counsel to avoid hot drinks? Why isn’t this a specific for temple recommend interviews?

[Calm]

Just now, 2BizE said:

I think a question to ask is why doesn’t the counsel to eat meet sparingly have the same weight as the counsel to avoid hot drinks? Why isn’t this a specific for temple recommend interviews?

Practicality imo.
 

Easier to measure obedience to avoiding a forbidden beverage than to measure how well someone is using meat sparingly. Yea or nay vs. the necessity at looking at personal circumstances and the science finding a point where one side is sparingly and the other is not. 
 

If coffee or tea was allowed so many cups a week based on personal need, thinking that wouldn’t be used either. 

[ksfisher]

2 minutes ago, 2BizE said:

I think a question to ask is why doesn’t the counsel to eat meet sparingly have the same weight as the counsel to avoid hot drinks? Why isn’t this a specific for temple recommend interviews?

Sparingly is subjective.  You could have two people eat the same amount of meat per day and answer the question differently.

The counsel to abstain from coffee and tea can be answered yes or no. 

More  on what the Lord means by sparingly may come at a later time when the Lord feels we're ready.

[2BizE]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

Practicality imo.
 

Easier to measure obedience to avoiding a forbidden beverage than to measure how well someone is using meat sparingly. Yea or nay vs. the necessity at looking at personal circumstances and the science finding a point where one side is sparingly and the other is not. 
 

If coffee or tea was allowed so many cups a week based on personal need, thinking that wouldn’t be used either. 

The question of the change from recommendation to commandment was defined by Joseph Fielding Smith as it had been taken to the congregation at conference by BY in 1851.

Interesting is that it appears the women adopted to follow the avoidance of “tea, coffee, etc”, however, the men adopted to follow “all things mentioned” in word of wisdom.

“It is in this rather surprising context in a church conference of September 9, 1851, that Brigham Young addressed a theme to which he would periodi- cally return over the coming years and re-emphasized the guidelines set forth in the Word of Wisdom. The published proceedings of that conference, as recorded in Orson Hyde's Frontier Guardian and repeated in the Millennial
Star, reveal that President Young indeed called for a vote on observance of the Word of Wisdom:
President Young rose to put the motion and called on all the sisters who will leave off the use of Tea, Coffee, etc., to manifest it by raising the right hand; seconded and carried.
And then put the following motion; calling on all the boys who were under ninety years of age who would covenant to leave off the use of Tobacco, Whiskey and all things mentioned in the Word of Wisdom to manifest in it like manner, which was carried unanimously.4
President Young also reportedly said that
Those who go with me, will keep the Word of Wisdom, and if the High Priests, the Seventies, the Elders, and others will not serve the Lord, we will sever them from the Church. I will draw the line and know who is for the Lord and who is not, and those who will not keep the Word of Wisdom, I will cut off from the Church; . . . 5”

It appears men have eat meat sparingly to be in compliance with the WoW, whereas women do not.

I guess less Turkey is needed this Thanksgiving than previously thought.

 

https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V14N03_68.pdf

[Calm]

53 minutes ago, 2BizE said:

Interesting is that it appears the women adopted to follow the avoidance of “tea, coffee, etc”, however, the men adopted to follow “all things mentioned” in word of wisdom.

Alcohol and smoking not likely to be an issue for the vast majority of women back then.  
 

Eating meat has the connotation in my experience of men, meat and potatoes was always a label for men, women portrayed as more into veggies.  Guys filling their plates with meat at buffets is just taking advantage of a situation, women doing it is weird…at least with my family and friends until Atkins showed up, but even then women would be expected to be eating smaller portions of meat.  Women I know who went Atkins did it with high protein shakes.  I know quite a few who tried it in my extended family as well as my mom.  Also friends.  Discussion on which shake tasted best was frequent for a time.

Edited November 22, 2021 by Calm

[Thinking]

When I go out to eat at a restaurant, I order the 6 ounce steak instead of the 10 ounce steak. 🙂

[champatsch]

On 11/22/2021 at 11:53 AM, pogi said:

Not all saturated fats are created equal:

Quote

But the source of the fat appears to make a difference. That's according to researchers at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, who studied dietary data from more than 90,000 people over an average of 22 years. Heart disease risk was lower when unhealthy saturated fat,

It's stated as a given, that saturated fat is unhealthy, but here's a large umbrella study of many meta-analyses:

Fat or fiction: the diet-heart hypothesis (https://ebm.bmj.com/content/26/1/3)

Quote

Introduction

The concept that diet, serum cholesterol and cardiovascular disease are causally related gave rise to the diet-heart hypothesis nearly 70 years ago. This hypothesis postulates that reducing dietary saturated fat reduces serum cholesterol, thereby reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease. Today, this concept has been transformed from a hypothesis into public health policy as current guidelines recommend reducing the intake of dietary saturated fat.1 Not all practitioners agree, however, and a reappraisal of the evidence may help resolve this controversy.

An abbreviated history

Dr Ancel Keys first proposed the diet-heart hypothesis in the 1950s. Several years later, he published the Seven Countries Study that reported a strong correlation between dietary fat and coronary mortality in seven countries.2 His hypothesis rapidly gained support and by 1977 the US Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs formally recommended that Americans should reduce their consumption of total and saturated fat.3 Many scientists disagreed and a vitriolic debate soon followed.4 Presently, the American Heart Association recommends ‘lowering intake of saturated fat and replacing it with unsaturated fats, especially polyunsaturated fats’ to reduce cardiovascular disease.5

Now, the dietary guidelines have prescribed and still prescribe the paradigm you point out, and Americans have been following the guidelines for 40 years, generally speaking, decreasing SFA intake and increasing PUFA intake, and metabolic health has worsened.

I don't know about you, but I feel more comfortable ingesting stable SFAs with vitamins and minerals and not ingesting unstable industrial PUFAs with no nutrients, made with hexane and other harsh solvents, and which break into nasty metabolites that can even shut down mitochondrial function.

[pogi]

4 hours ago, champatsch said:

It's stated as a given, that saturated fat is unhealthy, but here's a large umbrella study of many meta-analyses:

Fat or fiction: the diet-heart hypothesis (https://ebm.bmj.com/content/26/1/3)

Now, the dietary guidelines have prescribed and still prescribe the paradigm you point out, and Americans have been following the guidelines for 40 years, generally speaking, decreasing SFA intake and increasing PUFA intake, and metabolic health has worsened.

I don't know about you, but I feel more comfortable ingesting stable SFAs with vitamins and minerals and not ingesting unstable industrial PUFAs with no nutrients, made with hexane and other harsh solvents, and which break into nasty metabolites that can even shut down mitochondrial function.

  I'm not sure what this has to do with anything I have said, or with meat consumption.  I am not opposed to saturated fats in general, and I agree that the general recommendations to avoid "saturated fat" is too simplistic and generalized.  I do believe it is good guidance to reduce intake of all kinds of fats from land animals (saturated and monounsaturated) though, as these are shown to increase heart disease and risk of death, as demonstrated in these studies with over 90,000 people over 22 years.  While these same types of fats (saturated and monounsaturated) from plant sources are shown to do the opposite - reduce heart disease risk and reduce risk of death.    You seem to be demonizing polyunsaturated fats, but there are plenty of healthy dietary sources of polyunsaturated fats.  In fact polyunsaturated fats are "essential" fats for brain health and cell growth which our bodies do not produce on their own and must to be consumed from diet - these include omega 3 and omega 6 fatty acids.   

Edited November 24, 2021 by pogi

[champatsch]

The current US dietary guidelines are problematic and influential. They still say to substitute butter with vegetable oil (p.22). Yet most of the vegetable oil consumed in the US (and many other countries) isn't a healthy variety. And these bad seed oils are ubiquitous, hard to avoid in many foods we buy, even bread. The damage and oxidative stress they cause at the cellular level is increasingly known, and we see it in a relentless increase of linoleic acid in adipose tissue in the population (historically <5%, now often >20%) and the worsening health of the population.

[mrmarklin]

On 11/22/2021 at 12:37 PM, 2BizE said:

The question of the change from recommendation to commandment was defined by Joseph Fielding Smith as it had been taken to the congregation at conference by BY in 1851.

Interesting is that it appears the women adopted to follow the avoidance of “tea, coffee, etc”, however, the men adopted to follow “all things mentioned” in word of wisdom.

“It is in this rather surprising context in a church conference of September 9, 1851, that Brigham Young addressed a theme to which he would periodi- cally return over the coming years and re-emphasized the guidelines set forth in the Word of Wisdom. The published proceedings of that conference, as recorded in Orson Hyde's Frontier Guardian and repeated in the Millennial
Star, reveal that President Young indeed called for a vote on observance of the Word of Wisdom:
President Young rose to put the motion and called on all the sisters who will leave off the use of Tea, Coffee, etc., to manifest it by raising the right hand; seconded and carried.
And then put the following motion; calling on all the boys who were under ninety years of age who would covenant to leave off the use of Tobacco, Whiskey and all things mentioned in the Word of Wisdom to manifest in it like manner, which was carried unanimously.4
President Young also reportedly said that
Those who go with me, will keep the Word of Wisdom, and if the High Priests, the Seventies, the Elders, and others will not serve the Lord, we will sever them from the Church. I will draw the line and know who is for the Lord and who is not, and those who will not keep the Word of Wisdom, I will cut off from the Church; . . . 5”

It appears men have eat meat sparingly to be in compliance with the WoW, whereas women do not.

I guess less Turkey is needed this Thanksgiving than previously thought.

 

https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V14N03_68.pdf

Interesting anecdote, if true. BY certainly didn’t follow his own advise. He had quite the wine decanter collection in his St George summer home.  It’s still on display AFAIK. 

Edited November 26, 2021 by mrmarklin

[Mike Drop]

On 11/17/2021 at 9:25 AM, The Nehor said:

This is insane. It is arguing that safety is somehow the ultimate win. It is like arguing that solitary confinement is actually a good thing because it means that you will never get rained on, no one else can hurt you, and they even have air conditioning in there. I mean, the inmates are probably are laughing at us as they enjoy their luxurious safety.

Of course with the animals the safety lasts until they are ready to be killed and then they die.

I am not opposed to killing animals as food but making them live a life of torment is a bit much. Doesn’t strike me as letting them fill the measure of their creation and probably involves little of joy.

Dude! You have no idea what you’re talkin about. And the only thing “insane” around here is that you think all animals want to be in the wild fending for themselves. Let’s take a look at the life of the wonderful and playful wild rabbit! On average the life span of the wild rabbit is 1 to 5 years. During that time, the wabbit will constantly be worried and most definitely scared of being eaten by snakes, fox, coyotes, mountain lion, bears, hawks, eagles, Bigfoot, yeti, wolverines,honey badger and many other predators. Their cute fluffy teeny tiny itty-bitty little offspring are usually eaten within the first 2or3 months after being birthed on the cold wet ground. Now!! Imagine you’re a wild wabbit and a thunderstorm rolls in! You’re in your little wabbit nest when all of a sudden it starts pouring 🐱 and 🐕. Your little wabbit nest has sprung a leak and you spend the next 9 hours huddled up tryin to stay warm but end up with hypothermia. The  ☁️ clear, the ☀️ comes out, you venture outside and when you look to the right you see a coyote named Wile E running as fast as he can, his jaws are wide open, there’s coyote saliva dripping from his teeth, you can tell he’s starving because he can’t catch that damn road runner so now he’s coming after you!!!!  You try to run as fast as you can but your muscles ache because you have hypothermia from sitting in the rain for 9 hours. 2 seconds later you find yourself being torn apart by very sharp coyote teeth. For 2 minutes youre still alive while Wile E tears you limb from limb. In horror, you watch your mangled body parts being swallowed down the coyotes throat.

       As you’re going in and out of consciousness because you’re being torn limb from limb,  you think about your cousin, the domestic rabbit that you met at the last family reunion and start wishing you could of lived the life his care takers gave him. Your cousin was given the name,  Rabbit DeNiro ! He has his own shelter with a roof. His caretakers bring him food and water in pretty little containers. They bring him hay and carrots to snack on. And when he’s old enough to procreate, he gets to have sex with multiple females,  much like the early Mormons living in the mid 1800s. At night his caretakers leave the TV on so he doesn’t get lonely and if he’s lucky there will be a Ricky Lake talk Show marathon on.  
         
      Now your dead. The coyote isn’t full so he goes to your nest so he can snack on your 7 little babies. As your spirit travels up to rabbit heaven you can see them being eaten one by one. You remember back to the family reunion when your cousin, Rabbit DeNiro, told you about how his care takers humanely and ethically dispatch them without them even knowing it’s going to happen. It’s a quick and efficient death. A death that every wabbit deserves. 
 

You see Nehor! You have no idea what you’re talkin about. Wild animals live a miserable life and more often than not they suffer a horrible and gruesome death. Maybe that’s why Joseph Smith said to eat meat sparingly. Maybe he belonged to PETA!

    

Edited November 26, 2021 by Mike Drop

[BlueDreams]

1 hour ago, Mike Drop said:

Dude! You have no idea what you’re talkin about. And the only thing “insane” around here is that you think all animals want to be in the wild fending for themselves. Let’s take a look at the life of the wonderful and playful wild rabbit! On average the life span of the wild rabbit is 1 to 5 years. During that time, the wabbit will constantly be worried and most definitely scared of being eaten by snakes, fox, coyotes, mountain lion, bears, hawks, eagles, Bigfoot, yeti, wolverines,honey badger and many other predators. Their cute fluffy teeny tiny itty-bitty little offspring are usually eaten within the first 2or3 months after being birthed on the cold wet ground. Now!! Imagine you’re a wild wabbit and a thunderstorm rolls in! You’re in your little wabbit nest when all of a sudden it starts pouring 🐱 and 🐕. Your little wabbit nest has sprung a leak and you spend the next 9 hours huddled up tryin to stay warm but end up with hypothermia. The  ☁️ clear, the ☀️ comes out, you venture outside and when you look to the right you see a coyote named Wile E running as fast as he can, his jaws are wide open, there’s coyote saliva dripping from his teeth, you can tell he’s starving because he can’t catch that damn road runner so now he’s coming after you!!!!  You try to run as fast as you can but your muscles ache because you have hypothermia from sitting in the rain for 9 hours. 2 seconds later you find yourself being torn apart by very sharp coyote teeth. For 2 minutes youre still alive while Wile E tears you limb from limb. In horror, you watch your mangled body parts being swallowed down the coyotes throat.

       As you’re going in and out of consciousness because you’re being torn limb from limb,  you think about your cousin, the domestic rabbit that you met at the last family reunion and start wishing you could of lived the life his care takers gave him. Your cousin was given the name,  Rabbit DeNiro ! He has his own shelter with a roof. His caretakers bring him food and water in pretty little containers. They bring him hay and carrots to snack on. And when he’s old enough to procreate, he gets to have sex with multiple females,  much like the early Mormons living in the mid 1800s. At night his caretakers leave the TV on so he doesn’t get lonely and if he’s lucky there will be a Ricky Lake talk Show marathon on.  
         
      Now your dead. The coyote isn’t full so he goes to your nest so he can snack on your 7 little babies. As your spirit travels up to rabbit heaven you can see them being eaten one by one. You remember back to the family reunion when your cousin, Rabbit DeNiro, told you about how his care takers humanely and ethically dispatch them without them even knowing it’s going to happen. It’s a quick and efficient death. A death that every wabbit deserves. 
 

You see Nehor! You have no idea what you’re talkin about. Wild animals live a miserable life and more often than not they suffer a horrible and gruesome death. Maybe that’s why Joseph Smith said to eat meat sparingly. Maybe he belonged to PETA!

    

You obviously have done little research on factory farm practices. 
you mentioned chickens first…so I’ll mention chickens.

depending the chicken, they’re often extremely overcrowded. To reduce problems with this, caged chickens especially have part of their beaks cut off to not peck their neighbors to death. Their male counterparts are killed soon after birth. Egg-laying hens are usually nutritionally deficient because they were bred to lay far more eggs than their less inbred counterparts…you can sorta tell just by the weak-sauce shell, anemic colored yolks, and poorer flavor and reduced micronutrients of cheapo eggs. Meat chickens on average live 42 days. Far shorter than the potential lifespan of several years they should be living. They’re genetically chosen to grow and the growth can be so fast that they struggle to do basic functions.  As in walking, breathing and having the heart pump. Ammonia levels are notoriously high. Many will die before they make it to slaughter from the pressures of their own body and the environment they’re crammed into. 
 

personally, if I had a choice between “wile e” and that, I think I’d choose wile e and the  chance to breath and walk and live for longer than 42 days. 

with luv, 

BD