| aLkaLiNE said: I wouldn't do it, there are certainly other just as effective ways to change your diet in a positive way. - try weaning yourself off fake sugars, anything that says sucrose or glucose is bad.
|
One gallon of water is on the high side, it would be suitable for a fairly big person living in a warm climate, or moving about a good deal in summer in temperate regions. You get a lot of water through food as well. Now, during summer, on days when I work out, I consume about 2 liters of water during a 1.5 hour training session and then another 1-1.5 litres of liquid the rest of the day, and I'm 6'4" and weigh 240 pounds and have a much higher need for water and liquids than most. My urine is almost always only slightly colored, which is among the primary indicators that you're getting enough fluids, my skin is also healthy, as is my hair.
As for gluten; as long as you don't have celiac disease, there is very, very little in the way of scientific backing for removing gluten from your diet just for the hell of it, but reducing the intake of wheat may be a smart choice since it's not the healthiest grain to consume, especially in large quantities. But the whole "gluten is bad for everyone in any amount" motto is largely created by the industries who sustain themselves on selling gluten-free produce and foodstuffs and there would be no proper health benefit to removing it completely unless there's an actual allergy.
Your microwave theory is topsy-turvy; microwaves are actually better at maintaining and storing nutrients than other forms of heating, mostly due the smaller need for liquids and the overall short timespan of the heating process. As for "scrambling DNA", that's just a weird thing to say since microwaves are not bio-engineers who splice sequences, nor are they evolutionary measures or gene therapy, I don't even understand where you heard such a thing.
As for the OP: mankind is herbivore, we have enzymes that break down protein chains from animalistic sources a lot better, we have a digestive system that needs vitamin B and bodily functions such as healing wounds and maintaining tendons and other, essential structures of our bodies are greatly helped by things like collagen, which is abundant in meat sources. We also have canines and heavy maulers in our mouths and the most powerful jaw muscles of any animal relative to their size and function. It's a biological fact that we are meant to eat all sorts of food, and most vegetarians and vegans need to eat a slew of vitamins and minerals on the side to maintain healthy storages of essentials in their bodies. As for the environmental argument; it seems reasonable at first glance, until you realize that per-calorie worth of vegetables is lower compared to the carbon footprint and producing massive amounts of crops require immense landmass, tending and, inevitable at such a grand scale; widespread use of pesticides and other chemicals (100% eco is simply not possible on a huge scale), not to mention the potential disaster should the weather not play along if a larger percentage of the population become a lot more dependent on vegetables and fruit.
As for the moral part; it's probably the best argument of the lot since it's both one with merit and one that is more subjective and justifiable. However; think about this, in order to grow huge crops, you'd need to slaughter a lot of animals to keep them from ruining crops and vegetation, you would also need to cultivate a lot more land, which would decrease sizes of habitats and biotopes for countless organisms; that means evicting entire species and murdering a bunch of animals simply to prevent them from eathing your food, that's not really any more logical or moral than slaughtering and then eating. Killing an animal for food makes more sense than killing it to save crops, from most point of view's anyway.
Besides; even without all this, there's still the conundrum of biological facts like plant consumption, plants and vegetables sustain themselves on soil, soil is enrichened by bacteria and dead tissue from, you gussed it, animals and other organisms, which means that on a spiritual and moral level, you can't really avoid consuming animals in some form or another, no matter what you do.
Poor animal husbandry and terrible breeding/living conditions are a real issue, one that I myself am concerned about, coming from farmlands and growing up on and near farms, the huge meat industry, and especially chicken breeding, is disgusting. I actually largely avoid chicken, and if I do buy it, I do it mostly from local, small scale farms, it costs quite a bit more but it tastes better (stress can be "tasted" in meat in some cases) and is better for your conscience.
Want to be a vegetarian or a vegan? Fine by me, but don't get stuck in the swamps of moral and health arguments that are either dubious, highly subjective or downright false; it's a personal choice and should be considered as such, and only such. Should you choose it, good for you, I support all vegetarian friends, as well as all my meat-eating friends.
