Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site lanl-a.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!harpo!floyd!cmcl2!lanl-a!jlg
From: jlg@lanl-a.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.veg
Subject: Re: Question (and an Answer)
Message-ID: <300@lanl-a.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 3-Jan-84 21:17:56 EST
Article-I.D.: lanl-a.300
Posted: Tue Jan  3 21:17:56 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 4-Jan-84 05:17:31 EST
References: <1601@utcsstat.UUCP>, <3016@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 24

The reasons given in a previous note require some additional comment.

1. Religious:  well, not much to say here.  I would rather kill a trout for
               food than kill a tree for firewood.

2. Health:  I know several people who are vegetarians.  Without exception they
            have health problems and are advised by their physicians to take
            SOME meat (or poultry, fish, etc.).  Note: I just met some more
            people who are vegetarians and I don't know wether 'Without  
            exception' is still true, the point is that many vegetarians
            have dietary problems.  This should be no surprise after several
            million years of evolution with a diet including meat.

3. Social/Moral:  Of course, cattle, pigs, deer, fish, etc; can metabolize
                  foods that humans can't; can live in environments that
                  aren't suited for agriculture; and provide a much more
                  concentrated form of nutrition than their vegetable 
                  counterparts.

I am not against vegetarians.  It's just that any unsupported claims, on any
subject, tend to bother me.  Most of the vegetarians I know, despite their
moralizing, don't eat meat because they don't like it.  Just that simple.
Why they think they need a further excuse is beyond me.