#RUMINANTS! like deer cows sheep | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

adamfinchley · 1 year

Text

Let’s understand the defination of good diet

Ruminants are all grazing animals such as cows, sheep, deer and others, that 'chew the cud' and have more than one stomach. In order to get all the nutrients out of the vegetation they eat, they have more than one stomach and in one of these, fermentation takes place. Humans and other primates are a little luckier and survive on a couple or three meals a day, or even much less.

But whatever form of life, very few have no digestive system. Life is only sustainable with a constant top- up of nutrients and for humans that's about thirteen vitamins and sixteen minerals. Oddly enough, many of these essential vitamins were only discovered in the past hundred years.

There is the well-known story about how the English became to be called limeys, when the Royal Navy on long periods at sea developed scurvy. This horrible disease led to rotting gums, teeth falling out and eventual madness. The Navy doctor that suddenly realised the cause as being a lack of citrous fruit and fresh green vegetables, prescribed fresh limes to every sailor with striking results within just one month. The British government, like all politicians asked if it would work as well with lemons, as they were just a bit cheaper than limes. Even back then, in the eighteenth century, the reason it worked was not fully understood. It was only less than a hundred years ago that a chemist identified the vitamin and called it C. All of the essential vitamins are classified as fat or water soluble. The fat ones means our body can store them in our fat for many days or weeks. They include most of the A groups, B,C,D,E and K. One of the mysteries is how it is that the only reliable source of vitamin D is direct sunlight. This vitamin's particular use is that it helps us absorb calcium, magnesium and phosphate through the intestinal lining. In the winter in the UK, where sunshine is in short supply, many elderly people are advised to take a Vitamin D3 5000 iu available as a supplement. It helps keep bones and muscle stronger. And stronger muscles also helps with balance in older people. Important, as the older we get, the more brittle the bones.

Another supplement that is often prescribed for the elderly is B12. This is important for all sorts of metabolic and immune systems. With the NHS falling off the cliff, is it too late to introduce school classes in healthy eating? Obesity in children is generally thought to be the fault of uneducated parents. Understanding, the reasons and sources of nutrients, the difference between probiotic and prebiotic foods, is a start. Avoiding fast food and ultra-processed supermarket ready-made meals would also help. And finally, without meaning to sound patronising, would it not be a good idea to ban electronic devices in school and bring back organised outdoor games?

0 notes

acti-veg · 2 years

Text

The thing to recognise about animal agriculture is that the harm it does to our environment and to animal populations is really difficult to quantify. Just on what we can measure we know it is one of the biggest drivers of climate change and species extinction, that is incontrovertible fact at this point and anyone who contests it is a denier of established climate science.

What we can’t easily measure however, is the harm caused by the wider issues of grazing animals, the loss of predators to protect livestock and the opportunity costs associated with animal agriculture industries. The re-introduction of predators into lands ecosystems that would be drastically improved by their presence almost always meet their strongest resistance from farmers and large land owners who want to protect their livestock profits.

Grazing animals like sheep and cattle have degraded the ecosystems of entire countries to ecologically barren wastelands. How do we measure that in terms of CO2 per year? The forests that could be there if we didn’t ‘need’ to use two thirds of the planet’s entire arable land surface for livestock grazing and feed? 70% of formerly forested land in the Amazon, and 91% of land deforested since 1970 is used for cattle ranching.

It's easy to think of the loss of rainforests as a South American problem, which tends to to be the subject of our 'save the rainforest' campaigns, but here in the UK for example, only tiny remnants of our own rainforests remain.

Most of our once vibrant land is now given over to grazing sheep, and our forested regions can't even naturally regenerate even when they aren’t cut down, because new shoots are almost immediately eaten by grazing livestock and deer whose numbers aren’t kept in check by natural predation. How much carbon could those lands trap, how many species could they support, instead of the methane emitting ruminants who are almost the sole animal occupants of vast tracts of ecologically devastated land?

This one industry has fundamentally altered the landscape of our entire planet. Research tell us that domesticated livestock (mostly cows and pigs), now account for a full 60% of all animal biomass on earth, compared to wild mammals, who total a mere 4%. Birds are similar; biomass of poultry is about three times higher than that of all wild birds combined. We have decimated wild animal populations in order to replace them with the captive animals we want to eat.

How do we even begin to measure harm on that kind of scale? Not only in terms what has been lost, but also in terms of what we could we could have had? More pressingly, how can we continue to support it?

#vegan #environment #ecology #animal agriculture #animals #conservation #original

344 notes · View notes

babbushka · 4 years

Note

I totally get that! Everyone’s experience(s) with their faith (or maybe their life without) is individual to each person! I guess I was curious if there were certain things (like foods) that were reserved for certain days or... okay, I can’t think of what the term would be, but Catholics don’t eat meat on Friday’s during Lent in fasting, or how it’s haram to eat pork in the Muslim faith. (If you don’t feel comfortable answering, I completely understand, and I’m so sorry if that’s the case!)

Oh yes we have that, it’s called keeping Kosher! There’s a whole long list of rules and regulations on what we’re allowed to eat and more importantly the foods we’re allowed to eat together.

The word “kosher” itself is derived from the Hebrew word “kashér,” which means to be pure or good for consumption. The long list of rules is also referred to as kashrut, and are found in the Torah, which is our Big Book Of Sacred texts lol.

Among these rules are things like no pork and no shellfish any day of week, and no combining meat and dairy ever.

Kosher breaks foods down into three categories: meat (fleishig) which are mammals and birds INCLUDING the things you can get from them, like bones and broth; dairy (milchig) which are things like milk, cheese, butter, and yogurt; and then parave, which is all the other food lol

Traditionally speaking, the combination of meat and dairy is so forbidden that even the utensils pots pans plates and even the sinks where they’re washed must be kept separate. The way my home was built, we have two sets of cabinets for everything, even two silverware drawers -- one for the meat products and one for the dairy. You even have to wait a certain amount of time (depending on which Jewish group you’re a part of) after eating meat before you can eat dairy. It’s very very strict.

Generally speaking, it’s kind of confusing as to what meats and foods are considered Kosher, and what aren’t. There are 6 guidelines to follow when trying to determine if meat is kosher (please forgive me if there are more, I only remember 6 lol):

The meat must come from a ruminant anil with split hooves -- such as cows, sheep, goats, lamb, deer, etc. (pigs, horses, rabbits, etc are Not kosher)

Within those animals, the only cuts of meat that are kosher come from the forequarters of the animal (so no sirloin, short loin, flank, shank, or round steaks!)

Birds are alright lol they get a free pass (except predatory and scavenger birds like eagles or hawks but also maybe don’t eat eagles anyway)

In order for the meat to officially be considered kosher it has to be slaughtered by a shochet (that’s just a special jewish butcher -- go support your kosher butcher shops and delis! even if you aren’t someone who keeps kosher!)

The meat must be properly cleaned before serving

And like I said before only utensils designated for meat can be used to prepare or serve the meat

Fish is also kinda interesting because it’s only allowed to be from an animal that fins and scales, which is why the no shellfish rule exists. But unlike meat or dairy, fish is doesn’t have to have its own separate set of utensils.

And for all my vegetarian friends out there, plant-based foods can be mixed with dairy with no problems! As long as they’re not processed with the same utensils as those used for meat, it’s all good :)

HOWEVER, things are different for Passover (which I strangely saw advertised already even though this year it isn’t until April) where leavened grain products are also forbidden in addition to all the guidelines and rules above. This is why we eat matzo!

TLDR; At the end of it all though, the only big thing to remember is this: if you’re following the rules of Kosher just don’t ever eat pork, and don’t mix your meat and dairy. We live in an age where a lot of people are free to pick and choose how strict they want to follow the kashrut, or if they want to follow it at all! Some people (like myself) only keep kosher in its fullest form during the holidays, and are more lax about it during the rest of the year (although I don’t eat pork). Other people follow it 24/7/365. It all just depends on your personal preference and lifestyle!

#thank you for coming to my ted talk lol #judiasm #jewish things #keeping kosher #i hope this was helpful!#warbound-starchild #cowboy answers

28 notes · View notes

youarebeyoutifulx · 4 years

Text

Why Pork is Haram in Islam

1) A pig is a real garbage gut. It will eat anything including urine, excrement, dirt, decaying animal flesh, maggots, or decaying vegetables. They will even eat the cancerous growths off other pigs or animals.

2) The meat and fat of a pig absorbs toxins like a sponge. Their meat can be 30 times more toxic than beef or venison.

3) When eating beef or venison, it takes 8 to 9 hours to digest the meat so what little toxins are in the meat are slowly put into our system and can be filtered by the liver. But when pork is eaten, it takes only 4 hours to digest the meat. We thus get a much higher level of toxins within a shorter time.

4) Unlike other mammals, a pig does not sweat or perspire. Perspiration is a means by which toxins are removed from the body. Since a pig does not sweat, the toxins remain within its body and in the meat

5) Pigs and swine are so poisonous that you can hardly kill them with strychnine or other poisons.

6) Farmers will often pen up pigs within a rattlesnake nest because the pigs will eat the snakes, and if bitten they will not be harmed by the venom.

7) When a pig is butchered, worms and insects take to its flesh sooner and faster than to other animal’s flesh. In a few days the swine flesh is full of worms.

Swine and pigs have over a dozen parasites within them, such as tapeworms, flukes, worms, and trichinae. There is no safe temperature at which pork can be cooked to ensure that all these parasites, their cysts, and eggs will be killed.

9) Pig meat has twice as much fat as beef. A 3 oz T bone steak contains 8.5 grams of fat; a 3 oz pork chop contains 18 grams of fat. A 3 oz beef rib has 11.1 grams of fat; a 3 oz pork spare rib has 23.2 grams of fat.

10) Cows have a complex digestive system, having four stomachs. It thus takes over 24 hours to digest their vegetarian diet causing its food to be purified of toxins. In contrast, the swine’s one stomach takes only about 4 hours to digest its foul diet, turning its toxic food into flesh.

11) The swine carries about 30 diseases which can be easily passed to humans. This is why God commanded that we are not even to touch their carcase (Leviticus 11:8).

12) The trichinae worm of the swine is microscopically small, and once ingested can lodge itself in our intestines, muscles, spinal cord or the brain. This results in the disease trichinosis. The symptoms are sometimes lacking, but when present they are mistaken for other diseases, such as typhoid, arthritis, rheumatism, gastritis, MS, meningitis, gall bladder trouble, or acute alcoholism.

13) The pig is so poisonous and filthy, that nature had to prepare him a sewer line or canal running down each leg with an outlet in the bottom of the foot. Out of this hole oozes pus and filth his body cannot pass into its system fast enough. Some of this pus gets into the meat of the pig.

14) According to Jewish law, pork is one of a number of foods forbidden from consumption by Jews. These foods are known as “non-kosher” foods. In order for a meat to be kosher, it must first come from a kosher animal. A kosher animal must be a ruminant and have split hooves – therefore cows, sheep, goats and deer are all kosher, whereas camels and pigs (having each only one sign of kashrut) are not kosher.

15) Quran, Holy book of Muslims also prohibits consumption of pork

4 notes · View notes

drferox · 5 years

Text

Carnivorous Elk

@esme-lovette said to @ask-drferox: Hey! I was thinking about how elk might adapt to carnivorous lifestyle. Could you give your ideas and evaluate some of the following? - front facing eyes - wider mouth - sharper teeth - stronger jaw Thanks!

Unfortunately (Fortunately?) It would be very difficult for elk to adapt to being carnivorous because of their rumen.

Ruminants, like all deer, giraffe, sheep and our friends the cows, have a multi-chambered stomach which is highly, highly adapted to digesting cellulose.

Although, really I should say it’s highly adapted to fermenting cellulose. Because from a certain point of view, ruminants are just a fancy way of carrying bacteria around.

A ruminant, whether it’s a cow or an elk, eats grass, chews it up, and swallows it into the rumen and reticulum. It then gets mixed into the bacterial soup that resides there and kept at a steady mammalian temperature to ferment. This is why cows burp all the time, and if they can’t burp, they die. They will also pass up mouthfulls of rumen contents for a second chew to help the bacteria fermenting the grass along. We call this chewing the cud.

Eventually this bacterial grass soup will pass through the omasum, and then the abomasum, which is the equivalent of the true, acidic stomach you would be more familiar with, and then into the intestine like normal. This means a couple of things:

The cow (or other ruminant) isn’t really digesting grass. It’s digesting bacteria and the bacteria’s byproducts.

It does not digest anything it eats directly, the bacteria digest it. Then the cow digests the bacteria.

This has a few consequences.

It’s the reason it’s risky to feed fresh lawn clippings to a horse (not a ruminant), but fine for a cow. The horse can get colic and die from the fermenting grass. The cow is not inconvenienced at all.

If you heed higher protein/quality food to a horse, the horse digests it and can use it. If you feed higher protein/quality to a cow, the bacteria digest and use it, and the cow gets whatever she was going to get anyway.

If you feed too high protein or the wrong sorts of protein to a cow/ruminant, she can’t burp, and if she can’t burp, she will die. It’s called Bloat.

The horse is a hindgut fermenter, which means it does all its bacterial fermentation after it’s small intestine. In practice that means the horse takes all its protein and good stuff from its feed before sending the leftovers to the bacteria. The cow and ruminants do the opposite, the bacteria gets to go through everything first, and the cow digests the result.

This means it’s physiologically more likely for a horse (or a rabbit, if you were wondering) to adapt to a carnivorous diet than it is for a ruminant. A ruminant can eat meat if given the opportunity, but it doesn’t get the same immediate nutritional boost as a horse would.

Now if you started feeding your ruminant of choice on a meat slurry, that meat is going to sit in the rumen, which is a big fermentation chamber. I don’t imagine that trying to ferment that much meat is going to go well, nutritionally.

Having said that, there is a brief period in life of the ruminants where everything they eat bypasses the rumen completely and goes straight to their acidic stomach - when they are still exclusively on milk. If you took a neonate and kept in in isolation, so it never consumes the fiber and bacteria required to stimulate rumen development, you could potentially keep it alive on a meat or meat-slurry diet. That’s just super extreme, highly artificial and probably not the sort of answer you were after.

As for the points you mentioned:

front facing eyes: Only if it’s hunting

wider mouth: I assume you mean able to open it’s jaw wider? Yes, it would need that for bone crunching, and that means the lips pull back so it can get those molars in on the first bite

sharper teeth: Those teeth are pretty sharp at the back already. Plenty of vets have lost the tip of a finger trying to examine a cow’s mouth.

stronger jaw: Again, plenty strong, but in a grinding action. If you want a more powerful bite, you need a bigger temporalis muscle and smaller masseter.

The external shape is only likely to change if these carnivorous elk are obliged to hunt for their food, and it’s going to be a huge leap with big hurdles to go from a highly specialised herbivore to a carnivore. But if they are being artificially induced to be carnivorous then only the digestive system has to change.

#fantasy biology #speculative biology #elk #ruminants #horses #carnivore #herbivore

178 notes · View notes

megagametophyte · 4 years

Text

What comes to mind when you’re driving past a farm and you get a whiff of something unpleasant, to say the least? You’re probably not thinking about the impact of cow farts on climate change, but instead, how much it reeks. Cow farts and burps contain a harmful gas known as methane that is a profound contributor to the progression of global warming as we know it. Who knew cow farts could have such an impact? This gas is one of the “greenhouse gases” and is responsible for a process known as the greenhouse effect. Typically, the greenhouse gas we all think about is carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is produced from fossil fuels and other similar industrial processes such as cement production. Of the greenhouse gases that have the strongest effect on our planet, however, methane gas is one of the more controversial. Some support the belief that methane production is largely a natural process. After all, we can’t control cow farts and burps! Are the emissions of these harmful gases mostly caused by human activity? Perhaps the environmental fallout is the result of natural processes (such as cow farts), and humans account for only a small minority of the aftermath. Unfortunately, the science does not come to this conclusion. According to NASA, before the industrial revolution, many of the effects of global warming could be attributed to radiation from the Sun and the release of volcanic gases. In the present day, we are now seeing trends in warming that simply do not coincide with the natural activity of the planet. Historical climate data has been studied (various fossil records), and the science disagrees with the conclusion that nature is the main cause of global warming.

What is the greenhouse effect and what are the long-term consequences of having these gases in our atmosphere? The Sun’s rays penetrate through our ozone layer and heat the Earth. Some heat is reflected into space (off the water and white snow/ice), while some is absorbed into the Earth. This process is very similar to the way a greenhouse stays warm. Sun shines into the greenhouse throughout the daytime, and the glass prevents the rays from escaping which keeps the temperature consistent throughout the year. The same way it keeps plants warm, the greenhouse effect keeps organisms on Earth warm. The absorption of the Sun’s heat is essential for life; keeping it temperate for organisms to evolve. The problem arises when greenhouse gases fill the air and prevent an excess amount of rays from reflecting into space, resulting in the overall temperature of the globe to increase. Carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases (manmade gases containing fluorine) have the most profound effect on the environment. These gases accumulate when they are released into the atmosphere, perhaps from a cow fart, and cannot discharge into space due to Earth’s gravitational pull. Just like the glass of a greenhouse, the thicker it is (the more concentrated the gases are in the air) the more heat will be trapped. According to the Government of Canada’s 2017 national report, carbon dioxide accounts for 80% of the global greenhouse gas emissions, methane accounts for 13%, nitrous oxide accounts for 5%, and fluorinated gases account for 2%. While carbon dioxide is by far the biggest source of greenhouse gas emissions, the effect of methane should not be overlooked. Methane traps more heat than carbon dioxide; in fact, 25 times more heat! Let us investigate the ways in which methane is produced and what percentage of that is caused by humans.

Figure 1: Mechanism by which methane increases absorption of heat energy from the Sun.

The largest natural source of methane comes from wetlands. In this environment, microorganisms known as methanogens thrive. In wetlands, oxygen is scarce, so methanogens have adapted in such a way that they produce methane as a metabolic by-product when breaking down organic material. Another common habitat for these microorganisms is in the stomachs of a class of organisms known as ruminants which includes animals such as cows, sheep, goats, deer, etc. Methanogens even live inside human digestive tracts! These microorganisms help break down difficult-to-digest plant matter, and in doing so, a chemical reaction takes place known as fermentation. This process ultimately results in the production of methane gas which is then released from our bodies by farting and burping. Methanogens in cattle digestive tracts behave in the same way. Many consider this to be a natural cause of methane production, and it is easy to see why it might be considered as such. Cows inhabit the Earth just as any other animal, but their domestication for agriculture is where the real problem arises. The diary and beef industry are a huge source of methane pollution, outputting approximately 188 million tons of methane globally each year. According to the Global Carbon Project (an organization whose aim is to evaluate the amount of greenhouse gases being emitted and from where), agriculture and waste management is the single highest producer of methane, even in comparison to natural production. Farming produces 5% more methane than the highest natural cause of methane production.

Another source of methane production is the burning of vegetation. “Biomass burning” releases smoke contains methane that diffuses into our atmosphere because of the chemical compound’s volatile nature. Of course, humans can be attributed to a portion of this, but what about wildfires that occur naturally? While there are wildfires that occur naturally from lightning, the frequency and duration of these events have increased over time as a result of global warming.

On top of these examples of seemingly natural origins of methane emissions, there are even more human-caused sources. Rice paddies, for example, are semi-aquatic crops that produce up to 100 million tonnes of gas annually. Coal mining, landfill gases, and fossil fuel production are additional ways humans contribute to methane production. Approximately 60% of the methane we see in our atmosphere is due to human activity, leaving the remaining 40% originating from nature.

Another popular opinion among climate change skeptics is that nature can mitigate the methane being produced. To an extent, that is true. Chemical reactions occurring in the atmosphere and in the soil can process most of the methane and convert it to water and carbon dioxide. Unfortunately, more methane is being produced than can be consumed, and the by-product of the conversion reaction is also a greenhouse gas (CO2). Currently, there is research being done to mitigate these emissions more than just relying on natural “sinks”. Several different approaches to lessen the emissions in cattle agriculture include breeding and genomics, feeding strategies, and infrastructure management. Selective breeding for cows that produce more milk and less methane is an example of a genetic approach. Giving cows antibiotics, vaccines, and nitrates is said to reduce methane by 5-20%. Supplementing their diets with oils and fats reduces methane by 15-20%. Finally, adding other natural supplements to their feed such as an experimental red algae supplement called “Future Feed” claims to reduce methane by an astounding 80%.

So, while it is true that there are sources of natural methane production and natural methane “sinks”, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released an estimate of global methane emissions based on several studies in 2001. The researched focused on both natural and manmade causes for methane emissions. The results of these studies showed undeniable agreement that most of the methane has been created by humans, and nature cannot manage it all. It is so important to consider all the potential sources of greenhouse gas emissions. As inhabitants of this beautiful planet, it is in our best interest to explore ways in which we can reduce our negative impact on the climate and bring awareness to these pressing issues. Maybe next time you’re driving past that farm, you’ll consider not only the stench from cow farts, but also their unanticipated impact on climate change.

Further Reading:

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/GlobalWarming/page4.php

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data

https://www.nrdc.org/stories/global-climate-change-what-you-need-know

https://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/research/energy/downloads/methaneuk/chapter02.pdf

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0145/8808/4272/files/A4131-01.pdf

https://www.globalcarbonproject.org/methanebudget/index.htm

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

https://www.csiro.au/en/Research/AF/Areas/Food-security/FutureFeed

https://www.agric.wa.gov.au/climate-change/carbon-farming-reducing-methane-emissions-cattle-using-feed-additives

http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/news-from-agriculture-and-agri-food-canada/scientific-achievements-in-agriculture/reducing-methane-emissions-from-livestock/?id=1548267761377

https://www.gatesnotes.com/Energy/My-plan-for-fighting-climate-change

https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/climatesciencenarratives/what-is-the-greenhouse-effect.html

https://www.sightline.org/2019/02/12/calling-natural-gas-a-bridge-fuel-is-alarmingly-deceptive/

https://www.sightline.org/2019/02/12/methane-climate-change-co2-on-steroids/

https://www.sightline.org/2019/02/12/study-methane-life-cycle-critical-pacific-northwest/

http://www.zeroco2.no/capture/sources-of-co2/stationary-point-sources-of-co2#industrial-sources

https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/climate-change/greenhouse-gas-emissions/sources-sinks-executive-summary-2019.html

#biol4272 #climate change #global warming #methane

1 note · View note

extreme-technicality · 4 years

Text

HEY IM GONNA RAMBLE ABOUT COWS

Ok so cows are. So weird. First off they’re not nearly as docile as media would have you believe, watch your FUCKING step around those bitches (and yeah, I mean that literally in every way possible), steer clear of bulls, yada yada yada but what I WANTED to infodump about is their digestive systems

Cows eat grass. Not unusual, everybody knows that, but how? See, cows have four stomachs. Technically four chambers, one stomach, and each chamber does something slightly different to break down the cellulose.

(Right, plants have cell walls made of cellulose–that’s where all that starch and sugar and Good Energy Stuff is stored, and THAT is what cow (and other quadrupedal herbivores like deer and sheep and goats) digestive systems break down for sustenance.)

Thing is, cellulose is hard to break down. More specifically, cellulose is hard to break down into a usable form– there’s a reason we eat leafy greens for vitamins and not for pure energy. We literally, physically cannot do that sustainably. Even cows and goats and shit have trouble breaking down the cellulose, hence the four chambered stomach bullshit (heh, accidental cow pun). Where was I?

Right, cellulose is a bitch and a half to eat. So, cows do it in steps. First, they chew their food just enough to swallow and store in the first two chambers. And then they let it sit. And sit. And sit. And then they literally vomit it back up and chew it again. See, round 1 of digestion did some of the “harvesting sugars” heavy lifting, but there’s still so fucking much in that sweet, sweet cellulose that the digestive system just can’t let go. So the cow (or goat, or deer, or sheep, or…) vomits it back up, chews it more thoroughly, and swallows again– this time, sending it to the last two chambers where it’s fully broken down (or as fully broken down as anything can be in an organic system, given that there will always be bullshit in the world :D). Some of the broken-down, nummy goodness goes to the udders to make cow’s milk, and isn’t that a wonderful thought? The rest of it is used as sustenance and fuel for the cow itself, and anything that couldn’t be used passes as waste product (piss and shit).

Fun facts!!

Regurgitated grass and other assorted leaf product is called cud. The process of cows rechewing cud is called rumination, and yes it is related to the verb “ruminate” which means “to think something over”. That’s also why cows and deer and anything else that as this specific digestive system is called a ruminant!! So cows are ruminants and deer are ruminants and goats and sheep and probably horses, too.

Completely unrelated to the (doubtlessly riveting) monologue above, pigs are TERRIFYING. So are chickens. And turkeys are mean bastards. So are geese. And swans? Bitch don’t get me STARTED on fucking SWANS. Ducks are cool though, just don’t get in between them and their nests/eggs/ducklings (and don’t feed them bread). Also, if you’re ever feeding a horse an apple or a carrot or something small enough to fit in the palm of your hand, make sure you cup your hand just enough to keep the tasty treat in the middle of your palm and AWAY from your fingers. Horses are very big and very very bad at telling the difference between fingers and food (I had to learn that the hard way).

#kingdomheartstrashmouth #literally the whole reason i got on this topic is cuz i was talking to myself in the bathroom again and related the way i digest information #to the way ruminants digest plant matter #i take in new information. i let the information sit. i throw it back up (by ranting about it to other people). i reread my ramblings.#it made me cackle and then it made me remember how much i know about cow digestive tracts and I Had To Yell

2 notes · View notes

fumblebeefae · 6 years

Note

This might seem like a weird question, but could you talk a little bit about veganism? Is it really better for our bodies/environment? Is it really true that the strongest animals eat plant-based? Is the teeth thing a true sign that we shouldn't eat meat? I feel like there isn't enough information about it and I know you are a pretty reliable source. :)

Not a weird question at all. You may like to look through this tag here that’ll give you better, longer answers I’ve written up before. This is only to be a massive post so I’m going to put it under a read more.

Is it really better for our bodies/environment?

No veganism isn’t better for our bodies. (That’s why most vegans need to take supplements). We’re omnivores. We’re meant to eat meat and other animal products. The key is balance; eating protein + veggies and not over doing it with the more fatty meats.

I’m always iffy when people talk about how “scientists say in new study [insect food] is bad and horrible for you and will cause or increase your chance of getting [insect disease]” mostly because that’s not what most of the studies actually conclude or say (just the media scaremongering as usual).

And because that’s not how science works. Just because one paper reached one conclusion doesn’t mean it’s 100% fact just because it’s the newest paper to come out. You gather evidence, and if you start to get the same results / conclusions from different papers then you can start to draw wider conclusions.

Alot of the health issues around meat is actually about beef (a more fatty meat) or processed meats. And the fact is a lot of environmental and health issues come down to beef. Cattle farming produces more than 80% of all methane gases produced by agricultural processes, majority of all land clearing (for ag processes) and environmental issues (for ag processes). If we reduce the amount of beef we consume and find alternative and sustainable sources of meat other than cattle / beef we’ll be better off health and envrio. wise.

Is it really true that the strongest animals eat plant-based?

I’ve never heard this one before so that’s I new one! I’d have to say a very hard NO. Firstly what is meant by “strongest” are we talking the physically strongest animals? Because they’re all carnivores, as predators need the strength in order to hunt and eat.

Are we talking the most successful animals? Because those would be insects (they make-up more than 80% of all animal species)! More specifically; Coleoptera (beetles) which make up 40% of all insect species. And coleoptera have a range of diets; some are herbivorous, but some are also carnivores, omnivores, ect.

Herbivores also get very little nutritional energy from plants. Ever wondered why herbivores spend majority of their time grazing? Well ruminant herbivores (like deer, sheep, cows, ect.) require complex and long digestive systems in order to break down plant-matter (as cellulose is tough to digest) and have four-chamber stomach, as well as symbiotic microorganisms within the stomach that break down the cellulose for the animal, so they are able to digest it.

Compare this to a monogastric (simple or one stomach) animal like a carnivore or omnivore and you can see the digestive system is a lot shorter and simpler. This is because animal protein is easy to break down and digest. It’s also full of energy, hence why carnivores can go so long between meals.

Is the teeth thing a true sign that we shouldn’t eat meat?

God the “dental anatomy means we should be vegan / vegetarian!” is such bullshit and it does nothing but highlight how these people know literally knowing about biology.

Firstly, animals aren’t categorized on diet based on dental anatomy. And anyone that thinks so is ridiculous and deluded, twisting biology to fit into what they think humans should be in order to fit their personal morals.

An onmivore / herbivore / carnivore, ect. are animals that are anatomically and physiologically adapted to eat that certain diet. There’s a huge number of criteria that is used to determine if which category an animal belongs to.

So you get stupid claims like this picture below made be vegans that claim chimps are herbivores. Chimps are omnivores, humans are also omnivores.

Here’s a good diagram (below) showing the basic differences between dental antimony (of course there’s much more variation but this is just basic).

And if you compare herbivore teeth (this case a horse) even more closely to human teeth and you can clearly see herbivores typically have homodont dentition (teeth that are all similar in type, size, shape) while humans, omnivores and carnivores have heterodont dentition (different teeth; ossess incisors, canines, premolars, and molars ect.).

I’ve also seen some vegans claim (after the whole claiming chimps and humans are herbivores) moving on to claim that because chimps are omnivorous frugivores (this means their primary diet consists of fruits) and have similar dental anatomy that humans are therefore also omnivorous frugivores (example below which adds some weird comparisons that have nothing to do with digestion??? Like why are you comparing sweat glands and “mouth openings” and how alkaline our urine is???? anyways).

So despite these people completely ignoring the other anatomical and physiological evidence that humans are NOT frugivores, and just hanging on to this teeth thing, (and ignoring the fact most of them need to take protein supplements or eat a ridiculous amount of non-meat foods to make up the protein they need).

Just because we have similar dental anatomy to chimps doesn’t mean we are chimps…. we don’t have the same digestive systems, lifestyle or nutritional requirements. So humans are 100% no doubt about it OMNIVORES.

#Anonymous #vegan #zoo ask #biology

89 notes · View notes

foragehawaii-blog · 6 years

Text

Q&A: Greenhouse Gases Associated with Beef

Jess, Just read something about beef requiring much more resources than pork or chicken and also the amount of methane from cattle, does that make beef less environmentally friendly? Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Livestock I love this question because climate change and livestock is poorly understood by most people who write about it. Not to say I am an expert by any means but it doesn't take much effort to dive into the scientific literature and find the bigger picture. To begin with I would like to define a term: Reductionist: analyzing and describing a complex phenomenon in terms of its simple or fundamental constituents. This is one of my biggest fears. It is why I often find it hard to get points across without going on for days. It is why I spend hours upon hours researching answers to my questions. This short blog will by no means account for the complexity involved in this answer but I hope to spark some curiosity and better understanding of the subject. As a quick side note: Keep in mind that Makaweli Beef is 100% grass-fed, no hormones/antibiotics/steroids and uses all hydroelectric renewable energy. Their inputs are minimal to say the least. Spend a few hours checking out the Savory Institute if you're interested in the land requirements and feasibility of raising large amounts of beef or other livestock on pasture.

Lets take a look at the emissions of beef to begin answering this question. The three main greenhouse gases associated with livestock are: 1. Methane (CH4) 2. Carbon Dioxide (CO2), and 3. Nitrous Oxide (NO).

METHANE Methane is a potent greenhouse gas that has been emitted into the atmosphere for millions of years. Decomposing organic matter releases gases, including methane. Fracking (gas and oil extraction) is responsible for the largest share of the world's rising methane emissions. Wetlands and rice paddies also contribute to a large portion of global methane emissions, as does food waste in landfills (this is not the case with properly composted food waste.) Believe it or not, termites actually produce more methane than cattle by weight. The main source of methane emissions from cattle is from liquified manure storage, but for some reason it is more fun to talk about cow farts than poop lagoons (manure lagoons don't exist with pasture raised cattle.) Ruminants, like cattle, emit methane through the unique digestion process of converting nutrient rich grasses into high quality protein. All ruminants, including buffalo, deer, sheep, antelope, giraffe, and the extinct mega-fauna, breathe out, burp, and occasionally fart methane. This process evolved 90 million years ago in a symbiotic relationship with the earth. Methantrophs (methane consuming bacteria) flourish in healthy soils and diffuse methane emissions from the atmosphere as well as the atmospheric free radical (OH). The biological function of grazing animals is to encourage the growth of these, and trillions of other bacteria that make up healthy soil. As David Wong said to me today, "All life comes from soil." As you can imagine, industrial agriculture has stripped soil of its methane consuming potential through tillage, fertilizers, pesticides, and mono cropping. It has also been demonstrated through research, that methane emitted from cattle can be reduced by half when adding certain proteins, salt licks, and algae to their diet of high quality fresh forage. It is important to note that the decomposition of plant matter would emit methane whether or not the animal digests it. Methane Emissions of Conventional Beef vs Grass-Fed Here is where the reductionist thinking singles out beef regardless of how it is raised. They look at the gross methane emissions and unrightfully blame cattle for being these awful climate change creating beasts that don't deserve a place in our ecosystem. By estimating an output they fail to calculate the ability grazing has to reduce atmospheric methane. They also don't subtract the methane emissions resulting from factory farming. They simple point out that grass-fed cattle often live an extra year longer than feedlot cattle and therefore emit more methane. Feedlot cattle does indeed have net positive methane emissions, which include the methane emissions from hay, corn, and soy feed. Our local beef graze on fresh, lush, green pastures and have the ability to contribute to methane and carbon loss from the atomosphere, cancelling out their emissions. CARBON DIOXIDE I could spend a lot of time on this specific greenhouse gas that cattle is blamed for, but because it is mainly associated with factory farmed beef, I will just touch briefly on it. First off, the number that gets repeatedly cited (even though it has been denounced by the scientific community) is from a 2016 FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) report that blamed livestock for 18% of greenhouse gas emissions, with the majority of it coming from cattle. The report also specifically encouraged moving towards industrial poultry and pork and away from grazing animals, which is widely believed to be the author’s agenda. The methods used to calculate this number have been widely criticized and retracted by the same organization and scientific community. The number currently agreed upon by the UN Environment Program for ALL agriculture is 8-11% (this includes plant crops.) The majority of carbon emissions calculated for cattle comes from deforestation in South America to grow soy, and the carbon emissions associated with growing soy and corn feed. Heres the catch, American Beef consumption is not associated with deforestation and less than 1% of our feed is imported from those areas. Not to mention, 100% Grass-fed beef on fresh pasture doesn't require feed. There is also the powerful ability of livestock to sequester carbon into the soil. This is another one of mother nature's ecological creations. I went over this in a previous newsletter about perennial grasses and livestock grazing. The amount of carbon sequestered into soil by properly managed cattle has been shown by research to offset carbon and methane emissions of the animals. NITROUS OXIDE This gas accounts for 5% of total greenhouse gases in the United States. Three quarters of nitrous oxide emissions in agriculture result from the use of man-made fertilizers, also not associated with 100% grass-fed beef. My Take I personally believe that properly raised beef is one of the best sources of food to eat with regards to climate change. Monocropped plant agriculture is incredibly fossil fuel dependent and is unsustainable in the long run as it survives only off inputs and strips the soil of life. Conventional pigs and chickens live their entire life confined indoors with massive amounts of fossil fuel inputs and unnatural feed, antibiotics, hormones etc. At least feedlot beef spend the majority of their life on pasture and get to see the light of day. That being said, there are poultry and pork sources that minimize their greenhouse gas contribution and are wonderful protein sources that also have external benefits. I'm so excited to share with you more information on David Wong's pig farm, which tackles some of these issues so well. Chicken would get my last stamp of approval for multiple reasons but I include it in my menu often because its delicious and is sourced from a local farm that is making an effort to use better methods of raising, especially compared to conventional. The other thing to consider is that none of us can avoid eating foods that play a role in global warming. Sunny Savage on Maui is the closest thing I know to reducing her footprint. She sources wild invasive plant and animal species primarily in her diet. But what emissions take the place of meat if you eliminate it from your diet? Is it more righteous to eat mono cropped plant species shipped from across the sea? Or pesticide ridden greens? Animals are one of the best way to improve soils without fertilizers and they have incredible potential to offset emissions by sequestering carbon into soil. Unfortunately mainstream media doesn't get much attention when talking about soil, but that is the beginning of the solution. Soil is life and we are losing it at an alarming rate, which has scientists considering loss of topsoil as one of the greatest threats to global warming. Quitting beef or meat has far less impact on climate change than switching to well-raised beef or meat. Reducing food waste should be first in line if you wish to reduce your ecological impact.

1 note · View note