Don't take me out of context please
"without injury to health discernible by their models.."
"without injury to health discernible by their models.."
the sooner we get away from BEEF
- Thread starter killthesunshine
- Start date
regardless, their models suggest, without injury to health, one can eat some meat. This suggests, heck it states, that eating some meat is ok. A logical conclusion to draw is that eating some meat, in accordance with their model, does not cause any injury to health.
This refutes the entire premise of this thread.
This refutes the entire premise of this thread.
Quote from killthesunshine:
Don't take me out of context please
"without injury to health discernible by their models.."
Quote from Fireplace:
regardless, their models suggest, without injury to health, one can eat some meat. This suggests, heck it states, that eating some meat is ok. A logical conclusion to draw is that eating some meat, in accordance with their model, does not cause any injury to health.
This refutes the entire premise of this thread.
"one can eat some meat" and get away with it? is this your argument??
why do you want to get away with something rather than eat healthy
I'm just going off of the models findings, if NO HARM is done to the body then there is no need to give anything up. Very simple, not rocket surgery
No harm = not unhealthy
No harm = not unhealthy
Quote from killthesunshine:
"one can eat some meat" and get away with it? is this your argument??
why do you want to get away with something rather than eat healthy
Quote from Fireplace:
I'm just going off of the models findings, if NO HARM is done to the body then there is no need to give anything up. Very simple, not rocket surgery
No harm = not unhealthy
no harm DISCERNIBLE by THIS model.
what about cumulative harm that's below THEIR radar
does anyone have any evidence as to why we should eat lots of meat? 
Going under the assumption that giving up completely is not necessary, is any REQUIRED?