We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
9. The Paleo diet reflects man's origins. http://press.uchicago.edu/pressReleases/2015/August/150806_qrb_hardy_et_al_paleo_diet.html
10. Animal protein is a dietary necessity. Especially eggs, about which there is never any negative research and the associated special interests are pure as the driven snow. https://www.youtube.com/user/NutritionFactsOrg/search?query=egg
11. And meat-eaters are science-oriented objectivists who never go looking for isolated, conditional justification.
I begin to understand. You think that what you just did is reasoning.
The bad motives of your opponents are relevant only after you have proven them wrong. Every true thing is believed by some bad people and all of us have mixed motives. Therefore, finding bad motives is trivially easy, and valuless.
I simply snarked about how biased meat zealots have become.
But since you're projecting my intent, I'll say this. No, I don't really care about your views or those of others like you to the point of laboring to debunk them. The counter-data is copiously available and if it interested partisans objectively they'd find and know it. Lastly, arguing with a meat zealot has never in my experience produced reason or factuality, at least by their part. Consider Bliss's one-note refrain.
Judged by the above, evidently there's more to this than animal agriculture zealots are apparently aware of. I happen to think their zealotry is somehow part and parcel of an odd contemporary conservativism; almost as a final bleat before they lose what they thought they were politically fighting for. At least they can defend their traditional roots from liberal vegan urbanistas, goes the apparent instinct. The noble rural farmer, etc.
Except that today's animal consumption isn't a traditional belief or lifestyle at all. It's a 21st century affection that has vastly more to do with major Western brands and markets and lifestyle addictions of another kind. It's retail culturalism and really, as a presumed statement of independence, it's a weak thumb in the left's eye.
Plus it's scientifically wholly questionable and suspect, even self-contradictory and ignorant.
I grew up on the SAD and have had recurrent apthous ulcers monthly from as early as I can remember. Occasionally, I'd have 3 or 4 in my mouth at a time.
In about 2006, I read info on gluten sensitivity and thought I'd give it a try for no real reason. Six months later, it occurred to me that my apthous ulcers went away.
Over the past 10 yrs, I indulge in gluten foods every now and then, and whenever I get an ulcer, it's a day or two after a gluten-y meal, but I don't know enough about gluten to know if it's actually gluten that I'm sensitive to, or if it's another protein, chemical, etc that often accompanies gluten in a food. For example, one or two home made cookies or a bit of homemade cookie dough doesn't do anything, but store bought cake, deli pizza, Cheetos, etc gives me ulcers.
I agree with Dr Bliss's viewpoints on nutrition for the most part, though I suspect non-celiac gluten (gliadin, or other) sensitivity is an entity and the cause of recurrent apthous ulcers in some people (I'm an MD as well). As an aside, one co-worker who is celiac by lab and endoscopy results had a similar hx of apthous ulcers until her switch to being gluten free.
We have the safest food in history and considering the choices available to us the healthyiest food as well. The thing is not all humans are the same and many of those differences are reflected by how various foods affect them. No one questions that some people are allergic to peanuts or shellfish. There is no movement to ban all shellfish or peanuts because of a few allergies. But for whatever reason diet issues that don't even rise to the same level of seriousness that a peanut or shellfish allergy does cause some people to lose all common sense.
By all means if you cannot tolerate wheat, milk, or any food item than don't eat it. But don't conflate your problem (real or imagined) with a specific food as some indication it is unsuitable for everyone. Eat what you like, don't eat what you don't like. Avoid fad diets and if you cannot avoid them do us all a favor and avoid telling us that everyone should follow the latest fad diet. Stop rationalizing that since paleo man never ate carrots that therefore carrots must be bad for you (or whatever food item you choose to abhor is bad for you). If your doctor is treating you for some real health problem and recommends a specific diet than by all means follow his advice. If your doctor seems to be into fad diets than get a different doctor. There is no food in our supermarkets or restuarants that is "bad" for you and it is probably true there is no magical food either.