|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:55 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Bigfeet wrote: |
| Let the market sort it out. If the world start eating more meat and the supply can't keep up, prices will rise so some will eat less. |
Yup. And synthetic meats are likely on the way as well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_vitro_meat
I eat meat, but must less than most North Americans. I'll prolly go veggie one day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nicholas_chiasson
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Location: Samcheok
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
I have long thought we were headed back into the Middle Ages. If meat becomes so expensive that only the rich can afford it, won't that just be one more indication that us peasants are screwed? |
Pork can be fed off garbage, and in areas with long winters, pigs had to were butchered in the fall. This pork has often been quite cheap. Also pigs could be herded, and live well off a diet of field mice, acorns, and the occasional snake. People will turn into eating more and more pork as time goes on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rteacher
Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 3:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| You are what you eat. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nicholas_chiasson wrote: |
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
I have long thought we were headed back into the Middle Ages. If meat becomes so expensive that only the rich can afford it, won't that just be one more indication that us peasants are screwed? |
Pork can be fed off garbage, and in areas with long winters, pigs had to were butchered in the fall. This pork has often been quite cheap. Also pigs could be herded, and live well off a diet of field mice, acorns, and the occasional snake. People will turn into eating more and more pork as time goes on. |
Follow a chicken around. Watch it eat its own shi... 
Last edited by bacasper on Sat Jun 21, 2008 11:46 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SirFink
Joined: 05 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Temporary wrote: |
What has really led North America to obesity is Carbs, over abundance of grains, sugars and starches, also plant oils and fats from animals.
Every veg head I have ever met has either been overweight themselves or malnutritioned. |
I only disagree about the fats. Dietary fat doesn't make you fat. That's a major myth which has been dispelled by a handful of doctors who have actually cared to research the issue. Most are too busy putting plastic boobs in women to pay much attention to nutritional science.
And it's more than just obesity: diabetes and a host of other auto-immune disorders are most likely caused by a diet high in grains, sugars, glutens, etc. Vegetarians are not only often fat but are often plagued with weakened immune systems, arthritis, acne, chronic heartburn, etc. It has nothing to do with a lack of protein. It has everything to do with eating enormous amounts of grains.
If I ever meet a vegetarian whose diet is 90% fruits and vegetables (real vegies, corn and beans don't count!) and healthy fats (i.e. nuts and avocadoes) then I'll gladly shake their hand. But how can living on sugary muffins, pancakes, cookies, "veggie" pizza, etc be healthy? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fishead soup
Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I can't understand why a Vegan would live in Korea. There's actually almost no really vegan food here. Considering that they put fish sauce or tiny sprimps in almost everything. When you consider that even the Kimchi in Tofu Kimchi is not consided vagan. If your considering vaganism in Korea. Your stay will not only be extremely inconvient. But you will be banished to being a Wankta
That being said Korean barbeques are the best. Not only the taste but the atmosphere is awesome. In comparison alot of their more vegatarian style meals are pretty revolting. How aften are you willing to eat trays of rotten fermented vegetables with too much salt and chilli sauce.
I love the thick layers of fat and skin on the Samgyup sal. There's no way you can make tofu mimic that. At best tofu is just a poor substitute to meat. I've never seen it spit and crackle on the fire either.
I like that scene in King of the Hill. Where they rescue the townpeople from a cult by barbequing some steaks outdoors.
Mrs Hill says
" There's nothing like the smell of red meat" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TexasPete
Joined: 24 May 2006
Location: Koreatown
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| daskalos wrote: |
I'm curious about the stats on how much land it takes to raise a kilogram of meat. Is this an average? Because I know that it takes far less land in the fertile greenery of, say, the southeast US than it takes in the scrubby, arid southwest. I know farmers in Maine who pasture a small herd on just less than an acre. Or are we counting multiple hayings per acre during the growing season as many multiples of acres?
Don't get me wrong. I think eating less meat is probably healthier for all concerned. Truth be told, though, my real concern is for human health, but then I belong to PETOP (People for the Ethical Treatment of People). Until we get that squared away, animals must remain a lesser priority for me.
I also think turning food into simulated gasoline is an incredibly stupid strategy (though I've heard good things about hemp's capacity in this regard - oh, what can't that miraculous give us?)
Just, that statistic - 20-some-odd square meters of land for a kilo of meat - seems far-fetched to me, even as an average. Working out my friends' farm, I make it roughly out to 1 meter per kilo for three steers slaughtered per year, still more than an equivalent of lima beans, say, but far more satisfying, both in terms of protein yield and flavor.
A link to the source of this stat? So very ofen, a statistic is only as trustworthy as the axe that grinds it out. |
The problem with biofuels is the crops they pick to make the stuff. Corn? No way, jose'! Too many people want to eat that stuff. There are plants such as switch grass in the US Midwest which are basically weeds which can be turned into biofuels, but nobody's doing it.
As for the resources required to raise cattle? There's this source for what it's worth:
http://www.vegsource.com/articles/pimentel_water.htm
And another:
http://everything2.com/e2node/Beef%253A%2520it%2527s%2520what%2527s%2520for%2520starvation
Raising livestock for food is probably one of the least efficient methods to get food out there. I've been veggie for over 4 years and my health is not lacking in any way, shape or form. I also must say that every time i go to a veggie dinner party, the non veggies are just slack jawed the the variety and quality of the food on the table.
For any veggies out here in Korea looking desperately looking for some fake meats or something nice and easy to cook after a long day of dealing with the kids, check out:
www.vegefood.co.kr They deliver and have some yummy stuff. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CentralCali
Joined: 17 May 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 9:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fishead soup wrote: |
| I can't understand why a Vegan would live in Korea. |
I'm vegetarian, not vegan; however, I'm not having that much of a problem finding totally vegan stuff when I seek it out. It just takes knowing the vocabulary for it.
Last edited by CentralCali on Sun Jun 22, 2008 9:53 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fishead soup
Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 9:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I really think a lot of the people who write this stuff are not living on the same planet as us. In case you haven't noticed Koreans aren't big meat eaters. The average family probrubly only eats beef once or twice a month. Even the average foreigner working at a public school or hogwan doesn't eat a lot of beef. I can count on my one hand the amount to time I had beef this year. When I do have it. It's usually a small amount and it's treated as a splurge.
From the crap these hippies write you'd think we were all overweight pigs with High blood pressure and hearts that are ticking time bombs
Beam me up Scotty there's no intelligent life down here |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, just looking at one of your links, TexasPete. Another thing that gets very little attention is the extraordinary amount of water that goes into producing meat. In an age where water scarcity is about to become a very serious issue (and already has in places like Australia), it surprises me that there is not more discussion about this.
| Quote: |
March 1, 2001 -- To date, probably the most reliable and widely-accepted water estimate to produce a pound of beef is the figure of 2,500 gallons/pound. Newsweek once put it another way: "the water that goes into a 1,000 pound steer would float a destroyer."
Not surprisingly, the beef industry promotes a study that determined, using highly suspect calculations, that only 441 gallons of water are required to produce a pound of beef.
(The cattlemen's study applied liberal deductions from water actually used, reasoning that water was evaporated at points during the process, or was "returned" to the water table after being used to grow plant feed, or was returned to the water table via urea and excrement from cows. Thus, study authors reasoned these waters were not "lost" but "recycled" and therefore could be subtracted from gross amount of water actually used in beef production. Of course, evaporation and cow dung don't go very far in replenishing water pumped from acquifers which took thousands of years to fill. It's interesting to consider that if the same fuzzy math were applied to calculating how much water it takes to grow vegetables, potatoes would probably only require about 2 gallons of water per pound.)
Bestselling author and vegetarian trailblazer John Robbins has examined in detail a variety of estimates and who worked on them, and some of his observations are in his new book Food Revolution (see here).
So what's the beef with beef, when it comes to water?
Simply put: it's wasteful and irresponsible to squander our precious resources on a luxury item like meat.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fishead soup wrote: |
I really think a lot of the people who write this stuff are not living on the same planet as us. In case you haven't noticed Koreans aren't big meat eaters. The average family probrubly only eats beef once or twice a month. Even the average foreigner working at a public school or hogwan doesn't eat a lot of beef. I can count on my one hand the amount to time I had beef this year. When I do have it. It's usually a small amount and it's treated as a splurge.
From the crap these hippies write you'd think we were all overweight pigs with High blood pressure and hearts that are ticking time bombs
Beam me up Scotty there's no intelligent life down here |
Most people I know eat meat every day. My husband usually eats it at least twice a day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rteacher wrote: |
| You are what you eat. |
 Hello. My name is Mr Twejji Galbi. Nice to meet you. 
I'm not sure if anyone's yet adressed this very serious issue, though: Meat is just damned delicious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Bobster wrote: |
| Rteacher wrote: |
| You are what you eat. |
Hello. My name is Mr Twejji Galbi. Nice to meet you.
I'm not sure if anyone's yet adressed this very serious issue, though: Meat is just damned delicious. |
So is sugar. And that's something you shouldn't be eating huge quantites of either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 10:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
Yeah, just looking at one of your links, TexasPete. Another thing that gets very little attention is the extraordinary amount of water that goes into producing meat. In an age where water scarcity is about to become a very serious issue (and already has in places like Australia), it surprises me that there is not more discussion about this.
| Quote: |
March 1, 2001 -- To date, probably the most reliable and widely-accepted water estimate to produce a pound of beef is the figure of 2,500 gallons/pound. Newsweek once put it another way: "the water that goes into a 1,000 pound steer would float a destroyer."
Not surprisingly, the beef industry promotes a study that determined, using highly suspect calculations, that only 441 gallons of water are required to produce a pound of beef.
(The cattlemen's study applied liberal deductions from water actually used, reasoning that water was evaporated at points during the process, or was "returned" to the water table after being used to grow plant feed, or was returned to the water table via urea and excrement from cows. Thus, study authors reasoned these waters were not "lost" but "recycled" and therefore could be subtracted from gross amount of water actually used in beef production. Of course, evaporation and cow dung don't go very far in replenishing water pumped from acquifers which took thousands of years to fill. It's interesting to consider that if the same fuzzy math were applied to calculating how much water it takes to grow vegetables, potatoes would probably only require about 2 gallons of water per pound.)
Bestselling author and vegetarian trailblazer John Robbins has examined in detail a variety of estimates and who worked on them, and some of his observations are in his new book Food Revolution (see here).
So what's the beef with beef, when it comes to water?
Simply put: it's wasteful and irresponsible to squander our precious resources on a luxury item like meat.
|
|
My spidey sense is tingling. Why, oh why, do I get the feeling that this is not what most people would consider a non-biased source? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
