[extropy-chat] More upsides to meat than meet the eye.

[Ensel Sharon]

Hello,

On Sat, 23 Sep 2006, The Avantguardian wrote:

> > My own well being and positive results suggest I
> > will continue to remove
> > meat, and animal products in general, from my diet,
> > but I'd like to have a
> > better grasp of what I am giving up, and what, in
> > most basic terms, meat
> > is good for.  All comments appreciated.
> 
> Actually in retrospect, my original answer to your
> question was more historically oriented which I think
> is less relevent to your own decision to cut animal
> products from your diet. Now that you have heard the
> conventional wisdom of eating meat, I will now tell
> you some the unconventional wisdom regarding meat.


Yes - thank you.  That was exactly what I was trying to get at ...


> The best thing I can say in the defense of meat from a
> longevity stand point is that it has a glycemic index
> of zero. This means that no insulin is used to process
> it into energy. Type II diabetes, which is a form of
> premature aging, seems to be brought about in part
> from excessive carbohydrate consumption which I feel
> many vegetarians are prone too. While many vegetables,
> the high fiber-low carb ones like celery, spinach, and
> such are good for you, some like carrots and potatoes
> seem to be really bad.


(snip)


> Omega-3 fatty acids in fish oil help prevent
> cholesterol oxidation which how free radicals turn a
> vital nutrient into an artery clogging poison. It also
> helps prevent inflammation and type II diabetes. Of
> course you can get omega-3s from vegetable sources as
> well. Nuts and seeds are good sources.


Ok, great - that helps.  I think I was leaning more specifically to:

a) creatine, taurine and other micronutrients that _only_ come from meat

b) second and third order side effects of meat such as increased
testosterone production, increased aggressiveness and greater
strength/mass from causes other than just the protein in the meat itself.

It would seem that (a) is not that significant or necessary, and certainly
not for longevity, and that (b) is highly speculative and difficult to
prove - and perhaps even undesirable.  But be that as it may, those were
the areas of speculation I was trying to reach...

Many thanks - and thanks in advance for any additional comments you may
have...