Discussion Board

Overfeeding a child the wrong food is unwise and dangerous but I would hardly call it sexual abuse. That is really stretching a bit. There are pedophiles and others out there doing all kinds of horrible things to kids and to put unwise parents in the same category is, you will forgive me, the height of ridiculous. For parents to feed their kids the very foods that the government provides for school lunches and food which schools sell in order to make money is putting the blame on the wrong people. When the politicians discover a moral compass, then maybe lobbyists for agribusiness will lose the power to dictate policies which are detrimental to the health of all of us. In some places it is actually illegal to grow fruits and vegetables on land that is reserved for crops receiving subsidies like corn, soy, cotton, sugar and maybe one or two others.

Not to mention that there is absolutely no reason to believe that any parent is sure to feed her family a plant based diet when there are so many different types of diets that different people promote as healthful. I am quite sure that a vegan diet might seem a ridiculous fad to most people who are responsible for making food decisions for the family. Even after my heart attack, no one responsible for my medical care suggested I give up meat, dairy, fats or even rich dessert. After my mom's by pass surgery, her food list had her eating one chicken leg, an egg every other day, milk, toast with butter or jam etc. So who is going to tell parents how to feed their kids the most healthful diet?

Didi

I'm sure he can. It's also possible you may be seeing stuff that's not there and frying him for no reason. It's those durn buzzwords. Powerful little beasties. They can bring up all kinds of old associations, emotions, etc.. When that happens, we're no longer talking about what's in front of us. We humans can make anything into a controversy and chase it in circles if that's what we choose to do. I don't see Dr. McDougall as the dictator type. If he were, he would have forbid his children from eating junk food when they went outside the home, and the punishment for non-compliance to his law probably would have been swift and severe.



Hope is the thing with feathers
That perches in the soul,
And sings the tune without the words,
And never stops at all,

And sweetest in the gale is heard;
And sore must be the storm
That could abash the little bird
That kept so many warm.

I've heard it in the chillest land,
And on the strangest sea;
Yet, never, in extremity,
It asked a crumb of me.

~Emily Dickinson

Yes, those buzzwords are powerful, as you say. But language also reveals who we are, and I believe McDougall has exposed his own political views way beyond diet (and I, for my part, have responded to the certain points previously mentioned as being faulty). I don't consider that I'm "frying" him (there's a durn buzzword if there ever was one!) But I am calling him out on a few points, as well as his logic flaws. Not agreeing with someone isn't the same as frying them.

Thanks for posting the Emily Dickinson poem, by the way!

You're welcome. I used "frying" because you used "hot-seat" and that reminded me of electric chairs. LOL Dontcha just love free association?

This video sums up Dr. McDougall's views pretty well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHCCNvJagKI

Great video, Thanks for the link Gramma Jackie!

Here is a link to another string of posts that discusses freeing up land for more crops so that more people can be fed.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29547

OK, I know I should stay out of this, but it's kind of irritating and maybe this response will be irritating enough to put an end to it once and for all. Who did Marx force? And what was it he forced him to do?
To borrow from a familiar expression, ideas don't oppress-people do. That's why we have a first amendment. Or is the second amendment the only one that is socially acceptable these days? Talk about oppression!

Sorry, but all of your examples of the evils of collectivism will not discharge you of your responsibility to the society that nurtured you. And, it's been a while since I was an altar boy, but at the time I think the threats implicit in Christ's communications were a lot more compelling than anything Marx/Nietzche/Hitler/Pol Pot ever said. Maybe you should try reading the Divine Comedy some time.

It always amazes me to see people on public forums decrying people like Dr. McDougall who are working for the better of the collective. If you believe all of us to be islands, entire of ourselves, why would you frequent a place like this?

Mark

Maybe she's an Ayn Rand devotee.

Funny how we're all people just trying to get along and help each other out.... until politics come into the picture.

Once politics come into the picture we no longer have honest differences of opinion... we become enemies. We start to suspect every opinion someone has. We question every motive. We view everything about a person through the colored lens of our own political bias.

Politics is all about dividing people. These forums are all about bringing people together. Dr. McDougall is spot on in regard to health and nutrition. I for one refuse to let anyone's politics... his, mine, or yours..... detract from his message of good health and happy living.

-Norm

Well said, Norm!

This reply is to simply point out the naïve economics of the suggestion. But we can certainly give Dr. McDougall points for having his heart in the place we want our doctors have their hearts.

As a country we are the "haves" because our economy affords the amount of meat production that it does.

The suggestion beleives this means we can afford to switch that meat production to starch production and feed the "have nots" of the entire world. It is fun to point out the physical ability to do so but the economic ability does not exist.

If meat production were halted the market would simply change to reflect those values and the costs of other necesities would rise as the providers of those necesities seek to obtain a greater share of our now increased disposable income that is not being spent on meat.

This is why we have high energy prices today. The oil companies said to themselves, look at all the money that is spent on entertainment, luxuries, and indulgences. People don't need those things. Therefore they can obviously afford to pay more for oil.

If you are paying more for gas it doesn't hurt the oil companies if you buy an economy car instead of a gas guzzler. The oil companies make even more money because the cash flows more directly to them, in the form of higher gas prices, instead of the money going to a higher priced car.

Globalization makes it dificult for a country to use monopoly laws against oil companies that are international. The most reasonable answer our current system offers is very high taxes on oil that will increase our prices but we would get something for it, such as better public schools, public recreation facilities, and so on.

And because it is becoming expensive to squeeze oil out of tar sands. Most of the oil imported into the US comes from a tarry goo, beneath the earth's surface coming out of Alberta. It first has to be super heated with tonnes of water before it even remotely resembles something liquid. After that, the toxic water goes into a toxic tailing pond.

Access to good quality oil almost all gone now. Expensive to recover (both in terms of cost to ourselves and cost to the planet) oil is all we have left.

Yes lets get government politics and special interests out of the choosing winners in the food buisness.

http://pcrm.org/media/news/usdas-new-my ... th-federal

If government did not provide large subsidies to the dairy and meat industries than the price of meat and dairy would go up substancially. People would eat less meat and dairy. Health costs would go down, the budget could be balanced and young girls may mature later.

Why did Obama choose ex-monsanto officials for key positions

"After his victory in the 2008 election, Obama filled key posts with Monsanto people, in federal agencies that wield tremendous force in food issues, the USDA and the FDA"
Jon Rappoport
Infowars.com
April 29, 2013

Why does goverment let coporate industry have such large influence on food and health reccomendations? Why does the same orginization that has a mission to promote meat and dairy be the one that reccommends what we eat?

This is the kind of government manipulation that needs to stop.