Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives

Message board

* FAQ    * Search   * Register   * Login 



This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.
Author Message Previous topic | Next topic
Napero
GedankenPanzer

Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 4:16 pm
Posts: 8540
Location: Finland
PostPosted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:00 pm 
 

I eat raw meat beef practically every time I cook something out of it. I've been doing it for over a decade. Never had a problem. Pork is not very good raw, though, and I lack the balls to eat liver raw and wrapped around a pickled cucumber, like the girlfriend of a friend does. I eat as much raw fish as I eat cooked fish. Raw things are more tasty than cooked, and unless there's a need to behave exceptionally well, when the waiter asks the classical "well done/medium/rare" question, the correct answer is "cut off the horns and wipe the butt".

With the current hygiene levels of meat products, there's no reason to avoid raw beef, really. And if you think about the primitive stone age man, he ate everything right after he killed it, and there are few as sterile things in nature as freshly killed meat is. The first medical manuscript from Egypt 4000 years ago mentions several times that an open wound should be covered with a fresh piece of meat, and when I asked a doctor friend of mine, he said that well, that's about certainly the thing with least bacteria they had around, and that as long as you remembered to change the "bandage" often enough, it was actually a good idea.

Eating carcasses left by lions, things that died naturally or of a disease, or roadkill is a different matter, naturally.
_________________
Chest wounds suck (when properly inflicted).
-Butch-

Top
 Profile  
Under_Starmere
Abhorrent Fish-Man

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:00 pm
Posts: 4417
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 7:04 pm 
 

That's interesting... I have heard of people eating raw beef habitually, and it never seemed to do them altogether much harm, though I figured they were just taking a risk doing that. Intuitively it seemed to me that raw meat straight from a kill wouldn't be full of microbes and bacteria and what have you, that it would be relatively clean, but some people/sources seem to be pretty quick to be sort of alarmist about the health hazards of raw meat, so I wasn't quite sure what to take as general wisdom. Eh, I guess the longer the meat sits out, naturally the more sketchy it's going to be.

In my experience, though, cooked meat is far tastier than raw. Especially fish. Sashimi is among the most boring of foods for me.
_________________
Visual Art: The Illuminated Night
Drone: IA
Shop: House of the Black Wolf

Top
 Profile  
Terri23
Metalhead

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:53 am
Posts: 2111
PostPosted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:25 pm 
 

MalignantThrone wrote:
I used to eat raw potatoes on a near-weekly basis as a child, and I don't appear to have suffered any problems because of it. :scratch:


This is debatable :p

Napero wrote:
Bachmann's issue is with making sex safe, I think.... Sex is supposed to be dirty, painful, disgusting and definitely not desirable. She's worried that a vaccine that protects people from harmful side-effects of sex will mean more fornication, and turn America into Gomorrah. As if turning it into anything was necessary.

Her point does, however, have a tiny speck of truth in it, in a way that almost makes me agree with her on a very narrow level, as far as we only discuss the differences between HPV and polio: HPV is usually transmitted in sexual contact, while polio's transmission is not dependent on such behaviour. Thus, opposing HPV vaccination is, well, OK in my eyes, as it can be mostly avoided by sensible sexual behaviour, and the vaccination is centered on protecting the individual, not eradicating the disease. In polio's case, the refusal to be vaccinated is a huge disservice to the whole mankind, and simply prevents getting permanently rid of one of the most horrifying diseases. Which would be quite feasible and even affordable.

Fuck religions. All of them. Including yours.


The Church's problem is that it tries to run many aspects of our lives for us, in the pretence they know best, because He says so. Take casti connubii for example, the document authored by Pius XI that preaches the Church's stand on birth control. The most important point in it is that no form of birth control be used during the act of intercourse. This in itself today is a sick, and wildly out of touch view with the real world. Many diseases, especially the HIV virus, are rampant in 3rd world countries - countries which also have a phenomenal number of religious people - and this ruling does its utmost to help spread this virus. We also have an ever growing population, and especially in countries where education is limited, again 3rd world, this population is forcing parents to sell their kids into slavery, or abandon them altogether - leaving them to certain death.
The other point related to this I want to mention is that the people enforcing these rules are supposed to be celibate. By definition, they have no idea what it is like to be involved with a partner. Because of this, they can't understand that procreation can be an incredibly enjoyable experience for both partners, and that partners want to do this freely, without having to worry about the complications unprotected sex can have.
_________________
metaldiscussor666 wrote:
American isn't a nationality

Riffs wrote:
It's been scientifically proven that appreciating Black Sabbath helps increase life expectancy, improves happiness, bumps your salary by 11 thousand dollars annually, helps fight cavities and increases penis size.

Top
 Profile  
Napero
GedankenPanzer

Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 4:16 pm
Posts: 8540
Location: Finland
PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:26 am 
 

You really think most of them have been celibate? Their propaganda department seems to be doing an excellent job.
_________________
Chest wounds suck (when properly inflicted).
-Butch-

Top
 Profile  
Terri23
Metalhead

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:53 am
Posts: 2111
PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:46 am 
 

The words I used were "supposed to be celibate". Undoubtedly, at any rate, some are. Its the equivalent of having a virgin who is terrified of sex lecturing a group of school kids on sexual education.
_________________
metaldiscussor666 wrote:
American isn't a nationality

Riffs wrote:
It's been scientifically proven that appreciating Black Sabbath helps increase life expectancy, improves happiness, bumps your salary by 11 thousand dollars annually, helps fight cavities and increases penis size.

Top
 Profile  
mindshadow
Echoes in an empty cranium

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 8:36 am
Posts: 2004
Location: Panopticon
PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:36 am 
 

Ahem back on topic, bloody religion

When we foraged for food I guess the amounts we consumed didn't stretch our stomachs - allowing us to eat more without feeling full? Where food is plentiful and easily obtained, especially in the west we are getting bigger.

Didn't a lot of our problems as in digestion and intolerance start when we started farming and consuming wheat and some other grains? Would Celiac disease and gluten intolerance support this?
I eat gluten free pasta now.
_________________
D - Fens

Top
 Profile  
MacMoney
Man of the Cloth

Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2002 10:17 pm
Posts: 2008
PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:46 am 
 

Byrain wrote:
MacMoney wrote:
Well, there is fruits and berries... Of course, there isn't nearly as much sugar in them as there is in chocolate bars or sweet pastries or cookies or cake, but there's sugar.


Those are different kinds of sugars...


Sure, but we were just talking about sugar, not different forms of it. And you can make chocolate bars, sweet pastries, cookies and cake with fructose if you want. It's just cheaper and easier with sucrose so the industry uses that and pushes it on people. There's a trend here in Finland to flavor soft drinks with fructose instead of other sugars these days. As someone pointed out, fruits are of course much healthier because they're not as rich in calories, but are much more rich in vitamins and minerals, but again, that was not the question, the question was whether the caveman had sugar or not as part of his diet. And well, he did, just not nearly to the extent as it is part of most people's diets today.

As for eating raw meat, well, eating raw poultry or pork isn't probably the best idea, especially the former (also, it tastes fowl), even if - depending on where you live - there's a diminishingly small chance of actually getting any parasites or diseases from it. Raw beef or game is another thing, especially if cured (though I'm not sure if it's actually raw anymore at that point). The thing is though, poultry and pork are farm animals that are kept. The caveman hunted, well, game. A lot of the parasites and bacteria that pork and poultry might carry are spread because they are housed close together so it's easy for them to spread. In the wilderness, not so much. Of course, the sicklier animals of the herd were easier to catch, but there were other hunters besides humans as well.

Napero wrote:
you'll have a very healthy diet left: meat, eggs, vegetables, berries, fruit, nuts, fish, root vegetables, insects (!), shellfish, all sorts of greens... Suddenly, even if you try, you will have very hard time actually overeating enough to gain weight, at least if you do even moderate exercise.


Oh, I could do this easy, at least with the supermarkets of today. Just bring me a huge bowl of peanuts and I'll go from t here. Or if money isn't a problem... Well, then it's just super easy.

Napero wrote:
Eating fructose in fruit is different from eating honey. If you can't see the difference, at least from the point of energy density, there's no point in discussing this further. The point is that if you ever end up in a discussion on this, promoting the idea I outlined above, someone is going to defend a manic candy habit of a pound a day with that reasoning. If a primitive man got more than a spoonful of honey annually, he was either a lucky bastard or a bee-stung pin cushion with an incredible pain threshold. He did eat natural fruit, probably, but that combines a moderate amount of fructose and glucose with plenty of bulk, fiber, nutrients and, well, effort.


Of course there's a difference between stuffing yourself with honey and stuffing yourself with fruit. Was just pointing out that the caveman did use sugar too. Just not to the extent that it is generally used today.

Quote:
I'm not following you. Why shouldn't we eat cabbages and beans?
Cabbage has loads of vitamin C (super essential for humans as we can't synthesize it) and glutamine. Beans are loaded with vitamin B9, complex sugars, iron, and fibres.
You can argue that too much cabbage is bad for you, but like someone else said, too much water can kill you as well. Humans learn what is good for them and in roughly what amounts. If a certain food is able to keep us alive without making us sick too often, chances are it shouldn't be a problem if it were part of our regular diet.


Why would you think that cabbage would be forbidden in the paleodiet? You can very well eat it raw. In fact, coleslaw, one of the best side dishes in the world, features raw cabbage. Also, aside from a flatulence and a bad breath and body odor, I don't think cabbage causes very serious problems. Unless you really go overboard.

Quote:
Nah, two things. One, there are chemical differences between the fructose in the peaches and the sucrose in the candies (fructose is a monosaccharide and sucrose is a disaccharide). Your body has to use an enzyme to break sucrose down into fructose and glucose. In other words, sugar from fruits is immediately available for use in the cells, but sugar from candies has to be digested a bunch first. Two, more importantly, the candy is calorie-dense and nutrient-sparse. The peach is calorie-sparse and nutrient-dense. So, in other words, while they do both have sugars in them, the fruit sugar is simple for our bodies to utilize and comes alongside a bunch of vitamins, minerals, fiber, etc. The candy just comes with a more complex sugar and nothing else, except artificial color and flavor and crap.


Funnily enough, more than half of the sugar in a peach is sucrose instead of fructose or glucose. Yes, sucrose has to be broken down, but it is done by the gastric acids as well as enzymes in the intestine so it is a rather quick process. It's the fact that the candy bar has such a huge load of the sugars packed into tiny space that makes it such a wallop. Candy bars give a big surge of energy after consumed, but blood glucose levels crash quickly from that surge as well.

Top
 Profile  
somefella
Veteran

Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 11:57 pm
Posts: 2646
Location: Singapore
PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2011 5:23 am 
 

RaudtOgSvart wrote:
TheExodusAttack wrote:
Corn is king.


That's Corn. Strong on his mountain.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA FUCK

Ahem, yes that was funny.

Top
 Profile  
nekuomanteia
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:37 pm
Posts: 577
PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 7:53 pm 
 

I never steam my vegetables and was wondering what are the benefits as opposed to stir frying them with olive oil. I've read olive oil is good for you but would it be better to just steam and leave out the oil altogether? I also once in a while like to boil my brown rice with or without veggies then do a quick stir fry in a little bit of oil which I do just for flavor. I used to make a lot of French and Italian food and can't seem to leave out my olive oil.

Top
 Profile  
John_Sunlight
President Satan

Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 4:41 am
Posts: 4731
PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 7:54 pm 
 

Cooking with olive oil isn't going to hurt you.
_________________
"Since that time, I have received highest level confirmations that such organizations not only exist but are rooted in satanic ritual murder and extend across America’s political landscape into nearly every community."

Top
 Profile  
soul_schizm
Metalhead

Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2011 8:55 am
Posts: 658
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 12:08 am 
 

Stir frying in oil may add a little fat, but compared to crappy fast food?

I say go for it.

Top
 Profile  
snakehead
Metal newbie

Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:10 am
Posts: 229
PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2013 4:53 pm 
 

Thashierthanthou wrote:
If that's what you really believe, then you are beyond hope. May god have mercy on your soul.


You can't seriously be this naive.
_________________
People who are afraid of snakes and spiders need to have a shovel rammed up their vaginas.

Top
 Profile  
iamntbatman
Chaos Breed

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:55 am
Posts: 7834
Location: Innsmouth
PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2013 5:10 pm 
 

You can't seriously be replying to a two year old post.
_________________
Exigence wrote:
I love hearing Six Feet Under's covers of classic songs.


COMA VOID | GLOAMING | FAUSTIAN ORBS

Top
 Profile  
Napero
GedankenPanzer

Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 4:16 pm
Posts: 8540
Location: Finland
PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2013 4:53 am 
 

snakehead, listen to the dude above. No, not god himself, but iamntbatman.
_________________
Chest wounds suck (when properly inflicted).
-Butch-

Top
 Profile  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies. Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Foulchrist, Funeral Frog, Subrick, Xeogred and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

 
Jump to:  

Back to the Encyclopaedia Metallum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group