So Chilly! 8 degrees. I woke up freezing my tush off wondering how on earth the aborigines say a few hundred years ago out in the bush coped on mornings like these. Or nights like those. In any case I don't think they'd be wearing leaves. *Maybe* they could've weaved cloth from whatever plant stuff (how warm would that really be..?), but I think if it was me I would be using a fur blanket.
Then personally, come to think of it, having caught an animal for its fur, I wouldn't want to waste the rest of a creature which has given it's life for my warmth. So I would probably cook it up, make some kind of a stew, eat it, be nourished by it. I would also use the bones, to make some kind of a soup base. And I would eat or save the fat to use, or even turn some of the fat into soap so I could wash myself, by mixing it with the fire's wood-ash (lye). As for the internal organs, I would eat most of those also, and probably first, because they have very high concentrations of vitamins necessary for good reproductive health.
Perhaps it's only modernization and the whole industrial revolution thing that has brought humanity to a point where we can consider being so virtuous as to reject the notion of using and consuming animal products altogether completely (and criticise those who choose to, with animal product consumption today giving you a somewhat negative/irresponsible/uncaring image) . The wonders of globalisation has made available all kinds of alternatives to even our most hard-to-replace animal products, a lot of them natural products too.
Not necessarily superior however. I am just not able to believe that those non-animal products, in particular food products will have the same
nutrient density, or in particular that an adult human consuming around 2000 calories a day would get the equivalent amount of nutrients from a purely non-animal diet. Especially not without relying on fortified processed foods in order to match it.
I'm not saying you can't live or survive without animal products, however personally I think it's hard enough to match the RDIs in nutrients on a daily basis (even when totally trying) as is, let alone cutting out all animal products. See for yourself, check out
www.nutritiondata.com, you can compare two meals that you create on there against each other too and make up your own mind. I just don't think cutting them out is
optimal.
Which brings me to my stance on saturated fats not being the demons they have been portrayed as throughout the last 30 years.
As I see it, saturated fats were consumed for 1,000s of years and in the absence of substantial quantities of vegetable-based oils, would have been the main source of fat.As far as I'm aware the high levels of heart problems and maybe even cancer have only been such an issue and a public concern since the introduction and widespread adoption of vegetable oils in the last 100 years or less.
I know many studies have been done to supposedly "prove" saturated fats are the bad fats, particularly in the last 40 years, but I am not willing to accept any data where the actual fats used in the studies are not named by exact source/type - eg. "pig fat/lard" or "cottonseed oil", which cuts out most studies done.
I will also not accept any studies carried out by industry-related groups, environmental or vegetastic groups. Come to think of it I would love to think a study can be un-biased, but perhaps human nature is to skew things. Especially if you're trying to prove a point, and let's face it, none of the above groups would
not have a (hidden?) agenda.
Why am I being a pain in the neck? Well,
studies done in the last 30 years before the differences were understood too widely between trans fat and saturated fat, have considered partially hydrogenated vegetable oils to be saturated fats. That would therefore imply that most studies that poopoo saturated fats might actually just be proving what is becoming widely known today, and that is that trans fats (from vegetable sources) are the bad guys.On top of that,
polyunsaturated vegetable oils have been found to make up 47% of atherosclerotic lesions in people who have died from heart problems, and also are very potent immune inhibitors. As well as this, they've only been consumed en masse in the last 100 or so years, so I'd rather stick to the fats that have allowed humanity to continue living until this day without defibrulators: saturated fats. I don't care whether this means animal fat or coconut or palm fats (vegetable-based true saturated fats): if they were eaten 1000 years ago, they're in. (
As for exercise, that is another matter completely.)
What about animal protein and the multitude of studies proving a link between cancer/heart disease and meat consumption? I have a few questions to use when evaluating those studies:
Firstly, how were the animals raised that were being consumed in the studies? It's time to stop pretending production methods don't influence meat quality and therefore our bodies when we consume it.
Was it the trans fats produced from frying the UNsaturated UNstable fats within the meat due to GRAIN feeding practices? Thing is,
saturated fats are stable at much higher heats than polyunsaturated fats or monounsaturated fats, and while all fats are a combination of polys, monos and saturates, the higher the amount of saturates the more stable a fat is for cooking with. In addition,
smoking fats are damaged fats and are very carcinogenic to boot (polyunsaturates smoke very quickly at even low heat), which is why I'd rather not eat them as part of my steak (I would rather cook with saturated fat).
I might also point out that for 1000s of years the fat was consumed with the meat because it was tasty - meat was not eaten as lean steaks, so maybe fat should be eaten with the meat, and indeed many studies exist saying exactly that. Were they eating the fat along side the meat in the studies? Of course if it were
not organic then the fat would concentrate pesticides, so that raises the question, if they
were eating the fat with the non-organic meat, was it the
pesticides increasing cancer incidence?
By the way while we're on the issue of fats, if I'm going to eat a salad, I use organic extra virgin cold-pressed olive oil (best to eat some fat with it so you can absorb any fat soluble vitamins in your salad). If I'm going to bake some cookies or whatever I now use organic extra virgin coconut oil (doesn't really add any flavour to baked stuff like that) or sometimes organic butter. If I'm going to bake dinner rolls I use lard or chicken fat (whichever I have leftover). If I am going to fry/simmer something something I'll either use some stock, organic butter or coconut oil. If I'm going to butter my bread, that's what I will do, butter it with organic RAW butter (and definitely
not margarine of any sort).
Most oils in Coles or Woolworths or other commercial outlets are hexane & solvent-extracted, unless labeled extra virgin, and the final oils may be allowed to contain a certain amount of the solvent/hexane, which could have adverse health affects like those of pesticides in non-organic stuff.
And getting back to meat, there are of course the ethical questions to meat consumption - after all, most of us in the western world aren't aborigines living on the land, or in very poor circumstances and whatever we can catch. We have access to plenty of legumes and fresh vegetables. I do not deny this.
My personal opinion on this is formed from these points:
1) Animals can be raised on land unsuitable for growing crops on, making more quality food per square metre than crops grown on such land
2) Animals produce manure which can improve soil quality so that crops can be grown. Soil needs to be maintained.
3) I see humans as part of the ecosystem: as in any ecosystem when one part is missing other parts become out of balance. (Admittedly I do not think we have acted responsibly for our part in this system, and in many ways we have upset balance.)
4) Farm animals should be given a decent carefree life where they are free to roam and eat grasses, they shouldn't be caged up and fed soybeans or totally grains (or biproduct slurry or city waste or concrete waste or faeces or blood of other animals). They have the right to be out in the sunlight, to have shelter at night, to have trees and shade. To have access to clean water.
My final point is just that when consuming animal products, I believe we should be thankful for it, and as with other food, not wasteful. Ideally I also believe in being connected as close as possible to the production of your food - including animal products - not just for health reasons but for a deeper understanding, thankfulness and appreciation that it would bring. It's one thing to trot down to coles to buy your steak and not think about it's production: the animal's life, the farmer, whether you would have had the balls to process that meat yourself; the list goes on, but I think people would see it as more of a gift if they had to DIY from start to finish, and hence, be less wasteful.
Tonight I made two huge pots of pumpkin soup from an absolutely massive pumpkin that Andy's greek grandmother grew and kindly gave to us. I fiddled with the flavours a bit and came up with Masala Curry Pumpkin Soup and another flavour for the other pot, Coconut Pumpkin Soup.
