Let's have mechanically separated chicken for dinner tonight.

[kentonio]

Very few Americans eat a balanced diet, but that doesn't mean that pink slime is to blame.

Very few Americans eat a balanced diet but we shouldn't blame the bad stuff they eat that just happens to be generally far cheaper than healthy alternatives, far more convenient and is mass marketed on TV's, billboards and radio across the country 24/7?

[Fake Boris]

Logic says that 200,000 years ago evolution had not yet adapted us to cooked foods, yet cooking added such an advantage that we never stopped.

Until hippies showed up and declared it "un-natural".

1) Very possibly natural selection singled out humans not adapted to cooked food.
2) As I said, it is very likely that most new chemicals are harmless; we simply lack the research, most importantly, about the wealth of possible combinations.
3) People should be free to eat whatever they want, as long as food is labeled.

[Lorizael]

(AFAIK)

Good enough for me.

[The Mad Monk]

Significant difference in health levels.

It was significant. Current theory suggests that cooking gave us such a boost that we stopping mucking about with basic stone axes and got on with jewelry, language and evything that followed.

[Fake Boris]

Good enough for me.

Yes, you lost, the only thing left for you is to nitpick over side-issues for which I have the honesty to admit I don't know much.

[Fake Boris]

It was significant. Current theory suggests that cooking gave us such a boost that we stopping mucking about with basic stone axes and got on with jewelry, language and evything that followed.

So you admit that rule #5 (exception for cooked food) is logical?

Thanks.

And come back with your evidence that pink slime is a major contributor to the cause of civilization.

[Felch]

Here are two studies that indicate raw food has dangers.

Dental erosions in subjects living on a raw food diet.

[T]he results showed that a raw food diet bears an increased risk of dental erosion compared to conventional nutrition.

Consequences of a long-term raw food diet on body weight and menstruation: results of a questionnaire survey.

The consumption of a raw food diet is associated with a high loss of body weight. Since many raw food dieters exhibited underweight and amenorrhea, a very strict raw food diet cannot be recommended on a long-term basis.

[Lorizael]

3) People should be free to eat whatever they want, as long as food is labeled.

Labeled how? With all ingredients, regardless of quantity? With the ingredients news stories say are dangerous? With the ingredients your instincts say are dangerous?

Remember that if we go for option 1, we're going to have to start performing mass spectrometry on all our foods, because it's essentially guaranteed that there are very, very dangerous trace elements in everything humans touch.

[regexcellent]

Very few Americans eat a balanced diet but we shouldn't blame the bad stuff they eat that just happens to be generally far cheaper than healthy alternatives, far more convenient and is mass marketed on TV's, billboards and radio across the country 24/7?

Whether or not this is even true, why should I give a **** what other Americans eat? They can eat asbestos for all I care; it's their business.

[The Mad Monk]

So you admit that rule #5 (exception for cooked food) is logical?

Thanks.

And come back with your evidence that pink slime is a major contributor to the cause of civilization.

No, I'm saying that it disproves point #1, and is not an exception.

[Fake Boris]

Here are two studies that indicate raw food has dangers.

Dental erosions in subjects living on a raw food diet.

[T]he results showed that a raw food diet bears an increased risk of dental erosion compared to conventional nutrition.

Consequences of a long-term raw food diet on body weight and menstruation: results of a questionnaire survey.

The consumption of a raw food diet is associated with a high loss of body weight. Since many raw food dieters exhibited underweight and amenorrhea, a very strict raw food diet cannot be recommended on a long-term basis.

There's also evidence that barbecued meat is carcinogenic, etc.

The flaw with many studies about diets is that they study "de facto" how people who claim to have the diet manage it, not how it could possibly be done.

[Fake Boris]

No, I'm saying that it disproves point #1, and is not an exception.

So you think that a process that has been there for 200,000 years has not been there long enough?

[Lorizael]

Yes, you lost, the only thing left for you is to nitpick over side-issues for which I have the honesty to admit I don't know much.

The central issue is that you believe your instincts are superior to science when it comes to biology. And my instincts tell me that biology is a science.

[Felch]

Very few Americans eat a balanced diet but we shouldn't blame the bad stuff they eat that just happens to be generally far cheaper than healthy alternatives, far more convenient and is mass marketed on TV's, billboards and radio across the country 24/7?

It's a lean meat that would otherwise be wasted. The centrifuge separates the meat from most of the fat, so it's probably better for you than most ground beef. Americans do eat too much meat, but pink slime shouldn't be singled out.

So you admit that rule #5 (exception for cooked food) is logical?

Thanks.

Your fifth rule wasn't logical, it was merely correct.

[Felch]

The flaw with many studies about diets is that they study "de facto" how people who claim to have the diet manage it, not how it could possibly be done.

No ****. That's why fad diets sometimes do better than average, because the average American diet is terrible.