Adapted from “Diet for a New America” by John Robbins

Numerous studies, published in the most reputable scientific and medical journals, have compared the strength and stamina of people eating different diet-styles. According to these studies, all of them rigorous, the common prejudice that meat gives strength and endurance, though plastered on thousands of billboards, and drummed into us since childhood, has absolutely no foundation in fact.

THE LAB RESULTS SPEAK

At Yale, Professor Irving Fisher designed a series of tests to compare the stamina and strength of meat-eaters against that of vegetarians. He selected men from three groups: meat-eating athletes, vegetarian athletes, and vegetarian sedentary subjects. Fisher reported the results of his study in the Yale Medical Journal. His findings do not seem to lend a great deal of credibility to the popular prejudices that hold meat to be a builder of strength.

“Of the three groups compared, the . . . flesh-eaters showed far less endurance than the abstainers (vegetarians), even when the latter were leading a sedentary life.”

Overall, the average score of the vegetarians was over double the average score of meat-eaters, even though half of the vegetarians were sedentary people, while all of the meat-eaters tested were athletes. After analyzing all the factors that might have been involved in the results, Fisher concluded that:

“. . . the difference in endurance between the flesh-eaters and the abstainers (was due) entirely to the difference in their diet . . . There is strong evidence that a . . . non-flesh . . . diet is conducive to endurance.”

A comparable study was done by Dr. J. Ioteyko of the Academie de Medicine of Paris. Dr. Ioteyko compared the endurance of vegetarians and meat-eaters from all walks of life in a variety of tests. The vegetarians averaged two to three times more stamina than the meat-eaters. Even more remarkably, they took only one-fifth the time to recover from exhaustion compared to their meat-eating rivals.

In 1968, a Danish team of researchers tested a group of men on a variety of diets, using a stationary bicycle to measure their strength and endurance. The men were fed a mixed diet of meat and vegetables for a period of time, and then tested on the bicycle. The average time they could pedal before muscle failure was 114 minutes. These same men at a later date were fed a diet high in meat, milk and eggs for a similar period and then re-tested on the bicycles. On the high meat diet, their pedaling time before muscle failure dropped dramatically — to an average of only 57 minutes. Later, these same men were switched to a strictly vegetarian diet, composed of grains, vegetables and fruits, and then tested on the bicycles. The lack of animal products didn’t seem to hurt their performance — they peddled an average of 167 minutes.

Wherever and whenever tests of this nature have been done, the results have been similar. This does not lend a lot of support to the supposed association of meat with strength and stamina.

Doctors in Belgium systematically compared the number of times vegetarians and meat-eaters could squeeze a grip-meter. The vegetarians won handily with an average of 69, whist the meat-eaters averaged only 38. As in all other studies which have measured muscle recovery time, here, too, the vegetarians bounced back from fatigue far more rapidly than did the meat-eaters.

I know of many other studies in the medical literature which report similar findings. But I know of not a single one that has arrived at different results. As a result, I confess, it has gotten rather difficult for me to listen seriously to the meat industry proudly proclaiming “meat gives strength” in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

WORLD RECORDS

On the athletic field, as in the laboratory, the endurance and accomplishments of vegetarians makes me question whether we need animal products for fitness. The achievements of vegetarian athletes are particularly noteworthy considering the relatively small percentage of vegetarian entrants. Athletes after all, are not immune from the cultural conditioning that meat alone gives the required strength and stamina. Yet some have adopted vegetarian diets and the results invite scrutiny.

Dave Scott, of Davis, California is a scholar-athlete who is well acquainted with the scientific literature on diet and health. He is also universally recognized as the greatest triathlete in the world. He has won Hawaii’s legendary Ironman Triathlon a record four times, including three years in a row, while no one else has ever won it more than once. In three consecutive years, Dave has broken his own world’s record for the event, which consists, in succession, of a 2.4 mile ocean swim, a 112 mile cycle, and then a 26.2 mile run. Dave’s college major was exercise physiology, and he says he keeps up on the latest developments in the field by reading “an incredible amount” of books and journals. He calls the idea that people, and especially athletes, need animal protein a “ridiculous fallacy.” There are many people who consider Dave Scott the fittest man who ever lived. Dave Scott is a vegetarian.

I don’t know how you might determine the world’s fittest man. But if it isn’t Dave Scott it might well be Sixto Linares. This remarkable fellow tells of the time:

“. . . when I became a vegetarian in high school, my parents were very very upset that I wouldn’t eat meat . . . After fourteen years, they are finally accepting that it’s good for me. They know it’s not going to kill me.”

During the fourteen years that Sixto’s parents begrudgingly came to accept that his diet wasn’t killing him, they watched their son set the world’s record for the longest single day triathlon, and display his astounding endurance, speed and strength in benefits for the American Heart Association, United Way, the Special Children’s Charity, the Leukemia Society of America, and the Muscular Dystrophy Association. So deeply ingrained, however, is the prejudice against vegetarianism that even as their son was showing himself possibly to be the fittest human being alive, his parents only reluctantly came to accept his diet. Sixto says he experimented for awhile with a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet (no meat, but some dairy products and eggs), but now eats no eggs or dairy products and feels better for it.

It doesn’t seem to be weakening him too much. In June, 1985, at a benefit for the Muscular Dystrophy Association, Sixto broke the world record for the one day triathlon by swimming 4.8 miles, cycling 185 miles, and then running 52.4 miles.

Robert Sweetgall, of Newark, Delaware, is another fellow who doesn’t just sit around all day. He is world’s premier ultra-distance walker. In the last three years, Robert has walked a distance greater than the 24,900 mile equatorial circumference of the earth. He says he is a:

“. . . vegetarian for moral reasons; there’s enough food on earth for us not to have to kill animals to eat.”

Though not chosen for its health value alone, Sweetgall’s vegetarian diet doesn’t seem to put him at too much of a disadvantage. After walking a 10,600 mile perimeter around the United States, he set out on a loop that would take him, via about 20 million footsteps, through parts of all 50 states within a year.

Then there is Edwin Moses. No man in sports history has ever dominated an event as Edwin Moses has dominated the 400 meter hurdles. The Olympic Gold Medalist went eight years without losing a race, and when Sports Illustrated gave him their 1984 “Sportsman of the Year” award, the magazine said:

“No athlete in any sport is so respected by his peers as Moses is in track and field.”

Edwin Moses is a vegetarian.

Paavo Nurmi, the “Flying Finn,” set twenty world records in distance running, and won nine Olympic medals. He was a vegetarian.

Bill Pickering of Great Britain set the world record for swimming the English channel, but that performance of his pales beside the fact that at the age of 48 he set a new world record for swimming the Bristol Channel. Bill Pickering is a vegetarian.

Murray Rose was only 17 when he won three gold medals in the 1956 Olympic games in Melbourne, Australia. Four years later, at the 1960 Olympiad, he became the first man in history to retain his 400 meter freestyle title, and later he broke both his 400 meter and 1500 meter freestyle world records. Considered by many to be the greatest swimmer of all time, Rose has been a vegetarian since he was two.

You might not expect to find a vegetarian in world championship body-building competitions. But Andreas Cahling, the Swedish body builder who won the 1980 Mr. International title, is a vegetarian, and has been for over ten years of highest level international competition. One magazine reported that Cahling’s:

“…showings at the ‘Mr. Universe’ competitions, and at the professional body-building world championships, give insiders the feeling he may be the next Arnold Schwarzenegger.”

Another fellow who is not exactly a weakling is Stan Price. He holds the world record for the bench press in his weight class. Stan Price is a vegetarian. Roy Hilligan is another gentlemen in whose face you probably wouldn’t want to kick sand. Among his many titles is the coveted “Mr. America” crown. Roy Hilligan is a vegetarian.

Pierreo Verot holds the world’s record for downhill endurance skiing. He is a vegetarian.

Estelle Gray and Cheryl Marek hold the world’s record for cross-country tandem cycling. They are complete vegetarians, not even consuming eggs or dairy products.

The world’s record for distance butterfly stroke swimming is held jointly by James and Jonathan deDonato. They are both vegetarians.

If you wanted to be an evangelist for the “meat gives strength” cult, and were looking for a 97-pound vegetarian weakling to pick on, you’d probably be better off staying away from Ridgely Abele. He recently won the United States Karate Association World Championship, taking both the Master Division Title for fifth degree black belt, and the overall Grand Championship. Abele, who has won eight national championships, is a complete vegetarian, who eats no meat, eggs, or dairy products.

The list goes on and on. Toronto, Canada, is the home of a national fitness institute that tests all the top athletes in that country. For a number of years tennis pro Peter Burwash consistently ranked between 50th and 60th. Then as an experiment, he switched to a vegetarian diet, though he thought at the time that vegetarians were emaciated, unhealthy creatures. Now, however, he knows better. One year after making the switch, Peter Burwash was tested at the institute and found to have the highest fitness index of any athlete in any sport in the entire country of Canada.

Another man you might have a hard time convincing that a meat diet-style yields superior physical performance is Marine Captain Alan Jones of Quantico, Virginia. I would never have believed that one could be a vegetarian Marine, but Jones is managing to do it, and his health doesn’t seem to be suffering too much for his efforts.

Although crippled by polio when he was five years old, Jones is another candidate for world’s fittest man and has amassed a record of physical accomplishments unmatched by any human being that ever lived. Not only does he hold the world record for continuous situps (17,003), but in one particular 15-month period he accomplished possibly the most remarkably array of physical achievements ever attained by a human being:

September, 1974 — Lifted a 75-pound barbell over his head 1,600 times in 19 hours

February, 1975 — Made 3,802 basketball free throws in 12 hours, including 96 out of 100

June, 1975 — Swam 500 miles in 11 days through the Snake and Columbia Rivers, from Lewiston, Idaho to the Pacific Ocean

September, 1975 — Skipped rope 43,000 times in five hours

October, 1975 — Skipped rope 100,00 times in 23 hours

November, 1975 — Swam over 68 miles in the University of Oregon swimming pool, without a sleeping break

December, 1975 — Swam one-half mile in 32F (0C) water, without a wet suit, in the Missouri River near Sioux City, Iowa

January, 1976 — Performed 51,000 situps in 76 hours

Meanwhile, across the Pacific Ocean, the Japanese are every bit as serious and fanatic about baseball as are Americans. So, in October 1981, when Tatsuro Hirooka took over as manager of a professional team who had finished in last place the previous season, he knew some changes had to be made. But the changes he made were not the ones most of us would expect. He told the players on the Siebu Lions that meat and other animal foods increase athletes’ susceptibility to injury, and decrease their ability to perform. Therefore, said the new manager, like it or not, they were all going on a vegetarian diet.

The Lions took quite a ribbing during the 1982 season. One rival manager sneered they were “only eating weeds,” and made some rather derogatory remarks about their masculinity. But the sneerer had to eat his words when the Lions beat his team for the Pacific League Championship, and then went on to defeat the Chunichi Dragons in the equivalent of our World Series. Lest anyone think this was a fluke, the vegetarian Lions came back the next year, and once again trounced the opposition, winning again both the League and National Championship.

Please note that I have not provided this listing of athletic accomplishments of some vegetarians because I think this in itself proves the vegetarian diet superior. It doesn’t. It proves only that for these given individuals, with their specific biochemical individualities, a vegetarian diet worked superbly at a particular time.

But when we couple the experiences of Dave Scott, Edwin Moses, Murray Rose, Alan Jones and all the rest, with the data from systematic laboratory research published in reputable scientific journals, then, perhaps, we might have serious grounds to doubt the widely held prejudice that assumes greater weakness as an inevitable consequence of a vegetarian diet.

What Advantage it Offers to a Vegetarian or a Vegan

“Kosher” is meant for observant Jews. How can it help any Hindu or Jain?

The answer is, that the word “Parve” (also spelled as “Pareve” or “Parevine”) is very functional. It means a guarantee that the food product does not contain any meat or dairy products, and it has not come in contact with either. So it is very useful for all the vegetarians, and vegans.

It is also important to know and to understand that it has some limitations.

This article is based upon a talk given by Rabbi Yoel Levy, at a workshop sponsored by the Natural Products Expo West, at Anaheim, CA, March 1995. Rabbi Levy is the Kashruth Administrator of the Organized Kashruth Laboratories, or Circle K.

The word ‘Kosher’ actually means ‘fit’ or ‘spiritually fit’, as described in the books of Deuteronomy and Leviticus. As a result of kosher supervision, kosher products are scrupulously clean, and the word Kosher has become synonymous with premium quality. Kosher requirements are far more stringent than U.S. Department of Agriculture requirements.

There are three segments to the Kosher inspection: (1) ingredients, (2) processing, and (3) equipment.

The Organized Kashruth Laboratories maintains a computer data base of 40,000 primary ingredients that come from certified kosher sources. Before visiting a manufacturing plant that has applied for kosher certification, the rabbi checks their ingredients and other factors in the manufacturing process to determine if there is something blocking the products from being certified kosher.

No one thinks of stainless steel equipments as absorbing an odor and therefore being to absorb a non-kosher material, but such is not the case. A stainless steel pickle vat will have a vinegar odor until it is cleaned by boiling water or steam. Vinegar is not necessarily treife (non-kosher), but it proves the point.

Strange situations may arise in the rabbi’s inspection while tracing the finished product to its primary ingredients. A tanker ship carrying cooking oil had been properly cleaned with boiling water but its cargo had to be transferred to a shallow water barge tanker, as the ship could not unload in a shallow water port. The barge had previously carried disinfectant. No kosher law had been violated, but after the rabbi discovered the contamination the manufacturer wisely chose not to accept the cooking oil.

A common food product may contain all kinds of kosher as well as non-kosher ingredients. For example, seaweed is a plant product and therefore considered not subject to kosher requirements, but that is not always correct. The seaweed may contain tiny bits of seahorses, which do not have fins or scales, and are therefore treife. A vegetarian does not wish to ingest parts of a seahorse! Therefore, look for the Kosher Parve symbol! Extracts and flavors do not have to be listed on the label as ingredients, but they may be treife. An example is that of a red coloring that may come from an insect and be described as natural.

Fermented products such as miso or soy sauce present such a complex problem that the certifying rabbi must also be a food chemist. For the initial inoculation to start the fermentation process, peptones are needed. These peptones can be of animal origin or soy origin. Soy peptones are made by either the use of hydrochloric acid or enzymes. If enzymes are used, there are 2 types. One is made from papaya, which is a vegetable source, and the other is made from pepsin, which comes from the stomach of swine. The bacteria used in fermentation is stored in a medium of glycerin. The glycerin can be of animal origin, vegetable origin, or synthetic.

Kosher certification is an on-going process. The plant is subject to inspection at any time, (the rabbi has a key), and the entire process has to be repeated at least once a year.

Some Important Limitations

1. Kosher Parve products are allowed to contain, according to Jewish laws, eggs, honey, and fish. So you still need to READ THE LABEL! In this matter, Jews Kosher does not concur with Hindu and Jain Ahimsa. But still it is a good help for buying processed food.

2. Classification “Kosher Dairy” or “D.E.” signifies that dairy equipment was used. Still the product may contain no dairy product. Read the label!

3. Not every single item in a generally Kosher Parve product line from a manufacturing plant is necessarily Kosher Parve. Learn the symbols below, and look for one on each product.

The above article is reprinted, with kind permission, from Jewish Vegetarian Newsletter, Spring 1996 issue. For subscription, please write to Isreal Mossman, 6938 Reliance Road, Federalsbufg, MD 21632. For a free sample copy, send a self-addressed envelope with 55 cents stamp. Below is a compilation of several kosher symbols.

Some more hidden cruelties behind closed doors in silk industry
Purnima Toolsidass — Compassionate Friend, Monsoon-Winter 1997 — Beauty Without Cruelty India

When Sargunam needed Rs 5,000 to pay for an operation to remove her uterus, she did what people in her village near the town of Kancheepuram had been doing for generations — she mortgaged her eleven-year-old son Ravi Kumar to raise the money.

Similarly, Chinakuzhantha, thirty-eight years old, pledged her twelve-year-old daughter Ramani to pay her husband’s medical bills. Earlier, she had mortgaged her elder son to clear other debts.

Leela borrowed Rs 2,000 to carry out urgent repairs to her house two years ago. As collateral, she offered her ten-year-old son Muthu and committed him to work for twelve hours a day in one of the local silk handloom units to pay off the debt. His tasks included stretching the warps for the looms and manually feeding the threads for the intricate designs of silk saris for which he earned a paltry sum of Rs 10 per day.

‘Advance’ money for child labour is easily available in the flourishing silk industry of Kancheepuram in Tamil Nadu. As the quantum offered — ranging from Rs 2,000 to Rs 15,000 — is the highest than in any other industry, parents are inclined to succumb and lease out their children as a matter of routine.

Although the majority of families providing child labour for bondage belong to the “below-poverty-line” category, in many cases the lust of parents for money rather than their poverty is the main reason behind the ongoing anachronism. The mothers in each case express remorse and regret, but they do it anyway.

“My husband earns so little and I have two smaller children to feed,” was Kannimma’s explanation for pledging her daughter Satya, aged twelve, for a sum of Rs 2,000.

A new dimension to the silk industry has been unfolded courtesy the Asian Age newspaper. Added to which The Times of India has reported that it is a practice for contractors to fleece farmers in Jammu and Kashmir by purchasing silk cocoons for as little as Rs 150 per kilogram.

Those with vested interests will, undoubtedly argue that if we stop buying silk, it will only add to the poverty of these people. Think hard: had such patronage (over generations) improved their lot, would these poor people have continued to mortgage their twelve-year-olds to twelve hours of labour Rs 2,000? Even if you do not have a 12-year-old child, but you have a heart and a conscience, do please, stop using silk, be it Kancheepuram or Kashmir silk, or any other. By using an alternative material, you will be helping one of the smallest of God’s creatures — the silk-worm, the unfortunate children of the most evolved — man, and most of all yourself!

If you do not wish to use Silk… because you’d be indirectly supporting child-labour, or simply because to produce a single gram of woven silk, fifteen silk-worms in their cocoons are boiled alive, Beauty Without Cruelty can help you with an informative new leaflet The Silk Moths Undoing which explains the untold killing in silk production. The leaflet lists the varieties and different materials and things which contain and do not contain silk. For those who would like to have a free copy, please send a Rs 2 postage stamp. Please also indicate if you would like it in English or Hindi.

Beauty Without Cruelty, India 4 Prince of Wales’ Drive

Wanowrie, Pune 411-040

The New York Times on the Web —- By Mindy Sink

After seeing the movie “Babe” at age 9 and realizing the source of what was on her plate, Lauren Pierpoint of Boulder, CO, decided to stop eating meat. At age 6, Nathan Kessel of Boston, MA, was given a choice by his parents between a vegetarian diet and eating meat regularly; he has been a vegetarian for three years now. With a finicky toddler who would spit out any type of meat, Heidi Feldman of Norcross, GA, decided “almost overnight” to put her entire family on a vegetarian diet. School lessons about endangered species combined with a visit to the zoo persuaded 7-year-old Laura Grzenda of Boulder to stop eating meat.

“Every time I put a piece of meat in my mouth, I felt like the animal was talking to me,” Laura, now 12, said. “It was saying ‘Moo, don’t eat me.'”

For Mrs. Feldman, the choice was a compromise. “Eating became a battleground and it was difficult for me to cook two different meals — one for the three of us who ate meat and a vegetarian meal for Nicole,” she said.

Vegetarian diets for children have become more accepted in recent years by some parents, pediatricians, nutritionists and even the renowned child care authority Dr. Benjamin Spock. In the seventh edition of “Baby and Child Care,” published shortly after his death, in 1998, Dr. Spock recommended that a vegetarian diet begin at age 2, with fortified foods, drinks and daily vitamin and mineral supplements. Dr. Spock believed his own health improved after he switched to a vegetarian diet late in life.

Although Dr. Spock’s push for a nearly lifelong vegetarian diet generated some controversy among his peers, it did not settle the matter of whether a meatless diet was ideal at any age, particularly in children and adolescents.

Yet pediatricians in Colorado and elsewhere said in recent interviews that they were seeing more children and adolescents choosing vegetarian diets.

‘I would say there is definitely a trend toward meatless diets,’ said Johanna Dwyer, a professor at Tufts University School of Nutrition and the director of the Frances Stern Nutrition Center at the New England Medical Center

The term vegetarian generally means a person who does not eat meat, and instead favors a diet of foods from plant sources. A lacto-vegetarian is someone who eats dairy products but no eggs, meat, fish, poultry or seafood; an ovo-vegetarian eats eggs but no meat, fish, poultry or seafood; a pesco-vegetarian will eat fish but no other meat; a pollo-vegetarian eats chicken but no other meat. One of the more strict diets is the vegan (pronounced VEE-gun), in which someone eats food only from plant sources and may also avoid eating honey or taking animal-based supplements and immunizations or wearing leather clothing.

Ms. Pierson’s daughter, Phoebe, became a vegetarian at 13 after seeing an animal rights movie, where she learned the origin of veal. “I called it ‘veal to zeal’ and immediately I expected it to last maybe a week,” Ms. Pierson said.

At Ms. Pierson’s house in South Salem, NY, meal times can be chaotic with a pot roast for her husband and stir-fried rice with tofu for her daughter. “Everybody in the family eats different stuff, but I try to have some sit-down meals together,” she said.

Ms. Pierson said her daughter ate a lot of hummus and pita bread, as well as rice and beans, veggie burgers and noncheese pizza for meals and bagels, guacamole and fresh fruit for snacks. Some experts believe these types of healthier eating choices with low-fat, high-fiber foods should be introduced early. “Raising children as vegetarians has the advantage that we as adults tend to continue the diet we’re raised on,” said Dr. David Levitsky, a professor of nutrition and psychology at Cornell. “I find it almost impossible to make a nutritional argument against it.”

The American Dietetic Association has taken the position that “appropriately planned vegetarian diets are healthful, are nutritionally adequate and provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases.”

The younger the children are, the more careful the parents need to be with their diets, said Dr. Nancy Krebs, co-director of Coordinated Nutrition Services at Children’s Hospital in Denver. “Growth can easily be impacted, along with energy and nutritional requirements.” Concern lies with those who do not get enough protein, vitamins B12 and D, iron, calcium and zinc in their diets. All of these nutrients are found in animal sources, in which they are more easily absorbed by the body. Children need all of those elements for energy, cognitive thought and achieving maximum growth potential with proper tissue and bone density. When children are lacking essential nutrients, they can develop malnutrition, rickets, anemia and lack of menstruation in girls.

Adequate caloric intake is an issue in any diet for children. “The big risk for growing children is getting enough calories in,” said Dr. Nanci Grayson, a nutritionist in Boulder, who is raising her two children as vegetarians. “Because children have smaller stomachs, and they need to eat a great deal more bulk of legumes, nuts, grains, soy, beans and other foods. “

To reduce fat in school lunches, the United States Department of Agriculture recently lifted restrictions on how much soy could be used in federally subsidized lunches. Soy, a popular protein source in vegetarian diets, can be found in tofu; soy cheese and milk and other soy foods are also available. Sloppy joes might be replaced by veggie burgers or tofu-filled ravioli in school lunches. Whether it is the choice of the parent or the child not to eat meat, there seems to be increasing support, in children’s books with vegetarian characters, in restaurant and school cafeteria menu choices and in Internet chat rooms. The Vegetarian Resource Group has recently started a parents’ network on its Web site where people can exchange recipes and advice.

“Data show that young adults who consume a vegetarian diet are just as healthy or more so than those who are not, and the key is sufficient variability,” Dr. Levitsky said.

Recycling of Dead Animals and Slaughterhouse Wastes

Huge mass killing in modern slaughterhouses create a big pile of carcasses. Rendering plants are developed to get rid of them and other stuff from various sources. Let’s take a peak at them…

Rendering Plants:

Rendering plants perform one of the most complementing functions for modern slaughterhouses. They recycle dead animals, slaughterhouse wastes, and supermarket rejects into various products known as recycled meat, bone meal, and animal fat.  These products are sold as a source of protein and other nutrients in the diets of dairy animals, poultry, swine, pet foods, cattle feed, and sheep feed.  Animal fat is also used in animal feeds as an energy source.

Besides, without running rendering plants nearby each modern slaughterhouse, our cities would run the risk of becoming filled with diseased and rotting carcasses.  Fatal viruses and bacteria would spread uncontrolled through the population.

One estimate states that some 40 billion pounds of slaughterhouse wastes like blood, bone, and viscera, as well as the remains of millions of euthanised cats and dogs passed along by veterinarians and animal shelters, are rendered annually into livestock feed.  This way they turn dairy cows, other cattle and hogs, which are natural herbivores (vegetarians), into unwitting carnivores (non-vegetarians).

This is a multibillion-dollar industry, and these facilities operate 24 hours a day just about everywhere in America, Europe and other parts of the world.  They have been in operation for years.  Yet so few of us have ever heard of them.

Raw Material:

The dead animals and slaughterhouses waste which rendering plants recycle includes:

•   Slaughterhouses waste such as heads and hooves from cattle, sheep, pigs and horses, blood, bones, etc.

•   Thousands of euthanised cats and dogs from veterinarians and animal shelters

•   Dead animals such as skunks, rats, and raccoons

•   Carcasses of pets, livestock, poultry waste

•   Supermarket rejects

Along with the above material, the rendering plants unavoidably process toxic wastes as indicated below.

Toxic Waste:

The following menu of unwanted ingredients often accompany with dead animals and other raw material:

• Pesticides via poisoned livestock

• Euthanasia drugs that were given to pets

• Some dead animals have flea collars containing organophosphate insecticides

• Fish oil laced with bootleg DDT

• Insecticide Dursban in the form of cattle insecticide patch

• Other chemicals leaked from antibiotics in livestock

• Heavy metals from pet ID tag, surgical pins and needles
• Plastic from:
  •       Styrofoam trays from packed unsold supermarket meats, chicken and fish

  •       Cattle ID tags

  •       Plastic insecticide patches

  •       Green plastic bags containing dead pets from veterinarians

Skyrocketing labor costs are one of the economic factors forcing the corporate flesh-peddlers to cheat.  It is far too costly for plant personnel to cut off flea collars or unwrap spoiled T-bone steaks.  Every week, millions of packages of plastic-wrapped meat go through the rendering process and become one of the unwanted ingredients in animal feed.

Recycling Process:

The rendering plant floor is piled high with ‘raw product’ all waiting to be processed.  In the 90-degree heat, the piles of dead animals seem to have a life of their own as millions of maggots swarm over the carcasses.

First the raw material is cut into small pieces and then transported to another auger for fine shredding.  It is then cooked at 280 degrees for one hour. This process melts the meat away from bones in the hot ‘soup.’  This continuous batch cooking process goes on non-stop for 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

During this cooking process, the soup produces fat of yellow grease or tallow (animal fat) that rises to the top and is skimmed off.  The cooked meat and bone are sent to a hammermill press, which squeezes out the remaining moisture and pulverizes the product into a gritty powder.  Shaker screens remove excess hair and large bone chips.  Now the following three products are produced:

• Recycled meat
• Yellow grease (animal fat)
• Bone meal

Since these foods are exclusively used to feed animals, most state agency spot check and test for truth in labeling such as: does the percentage of protein, phosphorous and calcium match the rendering plant’s claims; do the percentages meet state requirements? However, testing for pesticides and other toxins in animal feeds is not done or is done incomplete.

Recycled Products and Usage:

Every day, hundreds of rendering plants across the United States truck millions of tons of this ‘food enhancer’ to dairy industry, poultry ranches, cattle feed-lots, hog farms, fish-feed plants, and pet-food manufacturers.  This food enhancer is mixed with other ingredients to feed the billions of animals.

Rendering plants have different specialties.  Some product-label names are: meat meal, meat by-products, poultry meal, poultry by-products, fishmeal, fish oil, yellow grease, tallow, beef fat and chicken fat.

A 1991 USDA report states that approximately 7.9 billion pounds of meat, bone meal, blood meal, and feather meal was produced by rendering plants in 1983. Of that amount:

• 12 percent was used in dairy and beef cattle feed

• 34 percent was used in pet food

• 34 percent was used in poultry feed

• 20 percent was used in pig food

Scientific American cites a dramatic rise in the use of animal protein in commercial dairy feed since 1987.

The Story of North Carolina

In an article entitled “Greene County Animal Mortality Collection Ramp”, states that: “With North Carolina ranking in the top seven states in the U.S. in the production of turkeys, hogs, broilers and layers, it has been recently estimated that over 85,000 tons of farm poultry and swine mortality must be disposed of annually.

To meet this disposal need, in 1989 the Green County Livestock Producers Association began using an animal carcass collection site.  Livestock producers bring the dead animal and bird carcasses to the ramp and drop them into a water-tight truck with separate compartments for poultry and other livestock parked behind the retaining wall.

A local farmer, contracted by the Livestock Association, hauls the animal and bird mortality to the rendering plant each day and maintains the collection site.  The rendering plant pays the Livestock Association each week based on the current prices of meat, bone, feather meal, and fat.

During the first 16 weeks of operation in 1989, over 1 million pounds or a weekly average of 65,000 pounds of dead animals and birds (mortality) were collected and sent to the rendering plant.

The end result of this very successful project is that Greene County livestock and poultry producers have a convenient, safe, and economical alternative to disposal of animal and bird mortality.

Now it must be very evident that the dairy cows are no longer vegetarian animals.  The dairy industry feeds them recycled meat products, which is derived by recycling slaughterhouses waste and other dead animals such as millions of euthanised cats and dogs from veterinarians and animal shelters.  Hence the milk produced by cows contains non-vegetarian elements.

Please send your feedback to author, Pravin K. Shah:
[email protected]

A Deadly Progression by Representative Connie Morella (R-8th District, Maryland)

Animal Guardian, Vol. 11, No. 3, 1998 – Doris Day Animal League

A 15-year-old Oregon student slaughtered his parents and a classmate and left 23 students injured in a shoot-out at his high school. He had a history of abusing and torturing animals.

A 16 year-old from Mississippi stabbed his mother to death, then shot and killed two classmates and injured seven others. In his diary, he confessed to burning and torturing his dog, Sparkle, to death. Two Arkansas elementary school boys shot and killed four fellow students and a teacher during a faked fire drill at their school. Classmates reported that one of the boys shot dogs with a .22 all the time.

Increasingly, women in battered women’s shelters report that their abusers victimize the family pet in order to control their behavior or their children’s behavior. The abusers either threaten to harm or kill the animals. Not surprisingly, children raised in such homes often learn that cruelty to animals is acceptable behavior. In turn, this behavior becomes the first step in repeating a legacy of violence toward family members.

These are all reasons why I joined with Congressman Tom Lantos in introducing a resolution in the House of Representatives to raise awareness of the link between cruelty to animals and domestic violence, child abuse, and other forms of violent behavior. The bill urges social workers, teachers, mental health professionals, and others to be aware of the connection between animal cruelty, and the evaluate and closely monitor individuals who have a history of animal abuse.

The legislation also urges federal research concerning the connection between animal and human violence in order that appropriate intervention methods be developed and that local law enforcement officials take seriously all incidences of animal cruelty.

The legislation reflects growing awareness — and growing concern — that violence perpetrated on animals is a symptom of violence that will escalate in time to violence against humans. This spring, at a congressional briefing, Kim Roberts, who is with The Humane Society of the United States’ “First Strike Campaign,” so called because that violent first strike is frequently against the family pet, spoke about how such violence is “often used to control, manipulate, or terrorize family members. It is a ‘warning sign’ that the violence is escalating. Taking animal cruelty seriously offers an opportunity to intervene in violent households and with violent individuals. Cross-reporting and cross-training of humane investigators and those charged with investigating child abuse and domestic violence are also valuable tools in the identification of current and possible victims of violence, both human and animal.”

But there are some in our society who dismiss animal cruelty as inconsequential or as “boys being boys.” FBI Special Agent Allan Brantley, who also spoke at the briefing, strongly disagrees. “Violence against animals is violence and when it is present it is considered by the people I work with to be synonymous with a history of violence. In many cases we have seen examples whereby violence against animals is a prelude to violence against humans. Some offenders kill animals as a rehearsal for targeting human victims and may kill or torture animals because to them the animals symbolically represent people.”

Agent Brantley continued, “Animal violence does not occur in a vacuum. It is highly predictive in identifying children at risk for committing future acts of violence but also in identifying children being abused and cases of spousal abuse.”

Whether we live in cities, small towns, suburbs or in rural areas, whether we are parents, teachers, neighbors, whether we are young or old, we must all work together to confront such violence in our homes, in our schools, and in our communities.

But what can the average person do to help?

• Write to your member of Congress and ask that he or she recognizes the link between animal cruelty and violence against
       humans. We need this important tool for anti-violence advocates.

• Become an advocate for strong, anti-cruelty to animal laws and for strong enforcement of these laws in your state. These laws      should include stiff penalties, fines, and jail sentences, require restitution and reimbursement, and provide for

       psychological examination and counseling, and offer intervention strategies for offenders.

• Always report incidents of animal cruelty to your local humane society or to your local police department. Intentional cruelty to
       animals is always serious. If the perpetrator is a child, contact the child’s parents, school teacher or principal as well.

• Contact the ASPCA’s Family VISION Program (Violence, Information Sharing, Intervention, and Observation Network), the
        Humane Society of the United States First Strike Campaign for information about these programs.

• Get Involved with your local antiviolence coalition.

There are many ways you can contribute your time and talent to raise awareness about the connection between animal cruelty to animals and violence against humans.

“Ahimsa” by American Vegan Society — Malaga, NJ — (609) 694-2887

We are occasionally asked by concerned vegetarians or vegans, about the various Kosher symbols used on packages of food, and what value they might have as reliable guides to acceptability for vegie or vegan use.

For a study of the variety of Jewish teachings of kindness to animals over several thousands of years, see Judaism and Animal Rights (edited by Roberta Kalechowski), and Judaism and Vegetarianism (by Richard H. Schwartz), or contact your nearest Jewish Vegetarian Society.

In keeping with certain injunctions there arose a system designed partly to spare food-animals unnecessary suffering, partly for human health, and partly for ritual reasons. It may be regarded as a considerable advance, given the considerable advance, given the conditions of those times. But Judaism is a living, evolving religion, and most of our Jewish vegetarian and vegan friends seem to recognize that those early teachings were made as a compromise with human failings, and do point to vegetarian or even vegan practice as a great further improvement over what people were (in some instances) merely permitted or tolerated to do at that time de to the “hardness of their hearts” or other human frailties and short-comings.

In regard to the injunction against eating meat and dairy items together, Schwartz (ibid, p19) cites three identical references, forbidding boiling “a kid [young goat] in the milk of its mother.” (Exodus 23:19, 34:26, Deuteronomy 14:21.)

Schwartz continues: “Commenting on Exodus 23:19, Rashi notes that the repetition of this prohibition in three different biblical passages implies a three-fold ban: milk and meat must not be eaten together; they must not be cooked together; and it is forbidden to benefit from food containing a mixture of milk and meat.

“Some Torah commentators saw the above law as a rejection of an ancient pagan practice. Ibn Ezra viewed boiling a kid in its mother’s milk as an example of extreme barbarism. The Rashbam (1080-1174) considered the practice as denoting gross insensitivity and cruelty.”

In their beautiful work of The Jewish Vegetarian Year Cookbook, Kalechowsky and Rasiel lament on “Modern Realities: Some Unpleasant Facts” about the complexities of modern shopping:

“…. Today many of us feel that we need an advanced degree in chemistry to go shopping. Moreover, trust in the labels — when you can decipher them — has broken down because the rules change constantly as the processing systems change, and as food becomes more technologically engineered. Trust in the foods we eat has all but evaporated. We do not know what is `safe’ and `not safe,’ much less ‘clean’ and `not clean.’ There are over a hundred different kosher labels listed by Kashrus Magazine (November, 1994). Rabbi Lipschutz’ compilation and designation of food additives is forty pages long (Kashrut: a Comprehensive Background and Reference Guide to the Principles of Kashrut).

“For Jews, living in urban centers as most people in industrialized societies do, a label of `kosher’ no longer simplifies, but adds to the complexity, for the label, particularly when it comes to meat, does not necessarily reflect any more health, safety or mercy than other labels. `Kosher’ meat reflects a technical ritual determination of how the animal was killed and whether there we certain proscribed blemishes on its lungs. A `blemish’ defined halachically, does not convey information about the hormones and pesticides that were fed to the animal, and whether or not the animal was irradiated or genetically altered. Kosher food animals, except for a few Jewish farming communities who raise their own animals, are raised the same way that all commercially raised food animals are.” (pp 11,12)

In Defining Vegetarian, Vegan, Pareve, they note that “Vegan foods may often be the same as pareve foods, but not always. They may overlap, but they are not synonymous. It is possible for a processed vegan food which has no animal products in it to have been prepared in pots that contained animal products so that it is not pareve. On the other hand, some products could be pareve, but not acceptable to a vegan.

“For instance marshmallows made from gelatin produced from animal bones which may not have been ritually slaughtered, can be considered Pareve, because the bones have been so altered in the manufacturing process that the definition of kosher no longer applies to them.” (ibid. p184)

We think it is pertinent to note in passing, that confusion among meanings is not confined to any single dietary system. The book above states that its recipes “all are vegan…” (p.16), but includes honey in some, a fairly common problem that ranks it among the many other “near-vegan” cookbooks.

It is clear that the various Kosher symbols have no specific relation to ethical vegetarianism or veganism, but are designed partly to certify that animals meet certain standards of slaughter, and largely for keeping the meat and dairy products in separate meals, not primarily from a desire to avoid them altogether.

Moreover, the degree of strictness certified by the symbols is far too lax to be dependable for vegetarian or vegan purposes. For example, in the Kosher system, fish and fish products are not considered “animal” and thus can be included where you might not expect animal products. (This may or may not also be true of egg derivatives, perhaps even chicken if birds were seen as on a par with fish; not sure about this. It would surely be as reasonable to consider the proverbial chicken soup as “meatless” — if not exactly a pharmaceutical product — as is the belief of perhaps 90% of Americans who “consider themselves vegetarian” including that legendary dietary ingredient “justalittlechickenandfish.”)

Just as bad (as Kalechowski and Rasiel do state), when an ingredient or product that is clearly of animal origin has passed through some degree of processing, it may be considered acceptable. Thus, JELL-O brand of animal gelatin is passed as “Kosher-Pareve” because it isn’t quite “meat” as such, and therefore can be eaten with meat or dairy dishes.

The manufacturer is happy to enlighten us on the reasoning:

“Source and Processing of Gelatin: Popular JELL-O Brand Gelatin is a fruit flavor gelatin product, manufactured to strict specifications in General Foods plants.

“The production of the gelatin starts with the refinement of collagen-bearing tissues of any animal that was raised and slaughtered for food purposes. The principal collagen-bearing tissue used is hide trimmings. Theses materials are carefully soaked in alkalies and/or acids and washed in clean water to remove almost all non-collagen constituents, including meat. During this soaking period the collagen is converted to gelatin. The treated materials are than cooked gently in pure water to extract the gelatin, which is further refined by filtration. The gelatin extract is then evaporated and dried to produce gelatin of the highest grade. (Contrary to common belief, gelatin is not manufactured from horns or hooves or meat of animals, for these do not contain the necessary collagen).

“It is interesting to note that during the manufacture of gelatin, chemical changes take place so that, in the final gelatin product, the composition and identity of the original material is completely eliminated. Because of this, gelatin is not considered a meat food product by the United States government. The plant is under supervision of the Federal Food and Drug Administration. If the government considered gelatin a meat food product, the plant would operate under the Meat Inspection Branch of the Department of Agriculture.

“JELL-O Brand Gelatin is certified as Kosher by a recognized orthodox Rabbi as per enclosed RESPONSUM. In addition to being kosher, JELL-O is also Pareve, and can be eaten with either a meat meal or a dairy meal.

“NOTE: The most important use of plain gelatin in the food industry is in the manufacture of gelatin desserts. It is also used by bakers in cake icings, in the manufacture of chiffon-type pies, for candies, marshmallows, and ice cream. Substantial quantities of gelatin are also used in the manufacture of medicines, for coating pills, making capsules and other preparations.”

Parenthetically, we realize that the U.S. Government is kindly disposed toward agribiz interests, though their supervision and inspections leave much to be desired; and they inspire little confidence when it comes to keeping the consumer’s best interests at heart. Regulations on labeling seem designed to permit all sorts of swill to slip in under such euphemisms as “natural flavorings,” “certified colors,” etc.

(On the other hand, the Emes Co. uses neither animal-gelatin nor bone-refined sugar in their marshmallows etc. but labels its agar-gel as simply “Kosher Gelatin” to reach a wider market. Their phone is 630-627-6204.)

When we investigated beef-bone char used to filter most refined cane sugar, a sugar-firm executive was very understanding about our concerns. Jewish himself, he assured us that bone char is accepted in the Kosher system as “non-animal” because it is sufficiently processed-animal, although he agreed it wouldn’t meet ingredient standards of strictness largely sought and practiced by vegetarians and vegans.

It is rather like the advocates of organic bone-meal tablets who, some years ago, advised with a straight face that “vegetarians can rest assured that all the meat has been removed before the bones are ground up”!

Presumably much of the arsenal of ingredients that may be processed from meat or milk (or egg) derivatives (such as the mono and diglycerides, lactates, stearates, lecithin, etc.) might slip into the “neither meat nor milk” category, and be Kosher certified as acceptable for use with meat or dairy.

Clearly, for vegie/vegan purposes, a Kosher symbol of any type, is at best a vague signpost for you that a prepared food might be non-animal, and may bear further examination. It still requires a very close reading of the ingredients, exactly what we recommend doing as a start in each instance anyway; and even this might not reveal the ultimate origin of some of the esoteric but widely-used stuff.

In that case you can simply leave it alone, or contact the individual manufacturer with your inquiry about a specific ingredient — and make sure that they understand that animal-once-removed is not the same as non-animal, for your purposes.

Is it possible to do good and do well at the same time?

Bob LeRoy, RD — North American Vegetarian Society — (518) 568-7970

Few food nutrients have been persistent “household words” in the 20th century, but protein is certainly one. Schools and government agencies which are usually inept at making nutrition education messages “stick” in people’s minds, have been fabulously successful in instilling lifelong fears of not getting enough protein… but at the same time the researchers the world over have become increasingly clear, year by year, that human protein needs are vastly less than had previously been claimed.

In fact, if there were as much international consensus about political and economical matters as there is about protein requirements, then world peace would be at hand. Policy-makers at the United Nations and at national nutrition boards throughout the globe have for years agreed that people need to derive about 8 percent of their food calories from protein in normal life. This is the simple, reliable conclusion that never seems to “trickle down” to the U.S. general public, which rather is pushed to pile up arbitrary numbers of “grams” of protein, and is warned that animal-derived foods are supposedly crucial to protein nutrition. Results? People cannot comprehend the unwieldy “protein-gram” concept, and end up consuming great protein excesses. The U.S. population has in recent generations taken in 12 to 14 percent of its calories from protein, an inflated share due to sizable meat, fish, poultry, dairy and egg use. Because animal-product industries comprise the largest part of the food economy, and because maximizing protein intake at all costs has long been one of their key marketing messages, it is unlikely that Americans will soon hear news about actually needing only 8 percent of calories from protein.

It is now universally acknowledged that protein deficiency disease is basically nonexistent in the world except where calories are deficient (where people simply don’t have enough food). For the most part, the exercise physiology profession now accepts that complex carbohydrates are the body’s prime and ideal fuel for athletics, and that training regimens do not call for a greater share of protein in the diet (as calories get added, protein just increases proportionately). The medical profession now even accepts that therapeutic diets for the various types of diabetes should draw most calories from complex carbohydrates, and the previously recommended ultra-high-protein diets have been abandoned. As soon as these secrets leak out, we will leave the era of “protein paranoia.”

Protein-calorie-percents for fish range from 30 to 78 percent; those for chicken, eggs, beef, lamb and pork average 43 percent, 33 percent, 29 percent, 21 percent and 11 percent respectively; those for skim and whole cow’s milk average 43 and 23 percent. These foods obviously promote a protein glut in the diet, helping increase risk of osteoporosis and other degenerative diseases. Since all their remaining calories are from animal fat, their protein even carries with it other baggage highly undesirable for human health.

It is noteworthy that human milk contains only about 7.5 percent of its calories from protein, about one-third the content of cow’s milk and close to the overall recommended 8 percent. As the chart below suggests, you can effortlessly take in at least 8 percent of your diet’s calories from protein without using any animal product at all; any random, varied assortment of whole vegan foods will easily provide this. In fact, people who emphasize specialized foods such as soy products at the expense of greater diversity, may find they too consume large excesses of protein though avoiding animal foods.

PROTEIN-CALORIE-PERCENTS

Compiled from data published in Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Handbook of Amino Acid Content of Food and Biological Data on Protein.

61.2 Tofu 11.1 Cashews 39.4 Soyabeans, whole 11.0 Pistachio nuts 36.0 Cauliflower 10.9 Sesame seeds 33.7 Peas, fresh 9.6 Almonds 28.4 Broccoli 7.9 Brazil nuts 25.6 Spinach 7.5 Strawberries 24.4 Lettuce 7.3 Corn 24.3 Mung beans 6.1 Oranges 20.0 Lima beans 5.7 Peaches 19.5 Chickpeas 5.2 Apricots 17.7 Green cabbage 4.3 Bananas 16.3 Peanuts 4.2 Papayas 14.2 Okra 3.9 Coconuts 13.4 Tomatoes 3.9 Avocadoes 13.1 Wheat, whole grains 3.5 Grapes 13.0 Cucumbers 3.4 Mangoes 12.7 Eggplants 3.1 Dates

11.8 Barley, whole 2.3 Apples

Compassionate Friend, Spring 1998 — Beauty Without Cruelty India

Goat meat or mutton, despite its poor quality, is the most popular meat in India. 95% of raising goats and sheep continues to be on traditional lines. These animals are owned by landless farmers who migrate from place to place with their herds which feed off mainly wasteland grass, also garbage. 60% of the animals, numbering over 16 million — one-third of which are kids, die due to untreated diseases and the remaining 40% are slaughtered for their meat and skins. Ailing animals or those below optimum weight and age are sold in the market to middlemen for slaughter and are subjected to the same cruelties as other slaughter animals. Lambs and young goats are also slaughtered for meat. Goat hair and the fleece of sheep is used by the wool industry; and goats’ horns are commonly utilized for making buttons.

Sensing financial reward in raising goats intensively, several company have decided to turn the unorganized shepherd-centered activity into an industrial-scale business. We request readers not to invest in the so-called lucrative goat livestock ventures. Without sufficient patronage such projects will not be taken up or flourish.

The Central Institute for Research on Goats has organized seminars for making this ‘poor mans’s cow’ into ‘rich man’s kamdhenu’ in spite of the mortality rate in farms being almost double than what it is in free-grazing conditions. Under new technology plans, training will be imparted for higher productivity, crossbreeds and broiler goats (like broiler chickens) will be created, and eventually goat producers’ co-operatives will be established. If we do not protest now, ‘goatery’ in our country will follow in the footsteps of poultry and we will see the setting up of a National Goat Development Board.

The Nimbakar Agricultural Research Institute, Phaltan in Maharashtra, has imported South African Boer goats with whose semen Indian goats are artificially inseminated. The result is a creature with a goat’s head and a cow’s body — the aim being to ‘grow’ more meat.

Those who care do not eat meat, nor use leather. Footwear is the most common application for leather. It is also the only use of leather that is often defined as a need by vegetarians. The average leather footwear utilizes several animals’ skins: tough cattle hide for the sole, thinner and differently tanned and processed calf leather for the upper, still thinner goat skin for the inside lining and machine pressed leather fining made into a leather board for giving appropriate strength and flexibility placed in between the outer and inner soles.

Leather, hide and skin are also used in garments, belts, gloves, handbags, wallets, purses, watch and other straps, linings, trimmings. Most of it is from slaughtered cows and bulls although 20% of the world’s goat skin is from India. About eighteen square feet of leather is obtained from an average sized cow or bull in India. For example, a leather jacket is made from approximately ten square feet representing 55% hide of a single cow or bull and if also lined with leather, the skin of two medium-sized goats; and a leather briefcase from five and a half square feet representing 30% hide of a single cow or bull together with the entire skin of approximately three small goats used for the inside lining and the compartments.

If ever you are tempted to eat meat or use leather, remember Dr Albert Schweitzer’s words:”I am life, which wills to live, in the midst of life, which wills to live.”