Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 49

Thread: John Stossel - Natural Is Not Always Better - Grass-fed beef page

  1. #1
    Luch76's Avatar
    Luch76 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3

    John Stossel - Natural Is Not Always Better - Grass-fed beef

    Primal Fuel
    Wanted to get thoughts on this...

    http://www.creators.com/opinion/john...ys-better.html

    Specifically his statement ""There is absolutely no scientific evidence based on that [claim that the more naturally raised animals are healthier to eat]. Absolutely none," she replied. "There is some very slight difference in fatty acids, for example, but they are so minor that they don't make any significant human health impact.""

    Note that Stossel shares some things in common with PB concepts... Government should butt out of driving our health guidelines, they end up wrongly condemning fat in favor of sugar/carbs, etc.

  2. #2
    Primal Babe's Avatar
    Primal Babe is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    198
    I think it's a load of shit personally... His claim that "everything" has chemicals & hormones in it is a poor arguement to buy factory farmed meats of ANY kind! Just one more reason to eat as much organic food as possible if you ask me! So you DO avoid the poison the government puts in so many of our "foods"!

  3. #3
    Andtckrtoo's Avatar
    Andtckrtoo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Bay Area California
    Posts
    292
    I keep thinking of a comment on another thread about something like this that said, "Well, maybe we're not measuring the right things." We keep thinking we can segment out parts of a whole and prove it's the same. We don't have the big picture. Eating an orange will always be healthier than popping a vitamin C pill. The orange is much more than just vitamin C, and we do not know what part those other things play, but nature does nothing without reason.

    So to me to say that there is no difference, means that we are simply measuring the wrong things.
    Christine
    Wag more, bark less

  4. #4
    jspradley's Avatar
    jspradley is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    907
    It tastes a lot better so even if it's not better then I don't give a rats ass!

  5. #5
    Bushrat's Avatar
    Bushrat is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,685
    Grass feed beef has a omega 6 to 3 ratio of 3:1. Grain feed beef has an omega 6 to 3 ratio of 16:1. That ought to be a big enough reason to prefer grass fed.

    Further, grass fed beef also has more iron (hence the redder colour).

    If you are interested in environmental issues then you ought to buy grass fed because cattle shitting all over the pasture is good for the soil, but growing grains to feed cattle just rapes the soil and turns it into a dustbowel.

    I suspect that whoever this guy is he has an agenda, or maybe he is just an idiot.

  6. #6
    Debbie's Avatar
    Debbie is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    585
    I have not asked any cows for their input, however ... since cutting out grains, the pain in my joints is gone. I have had all kinds of inflammation issues (from allergies and resulting sinusitis to Hashimoto's Thyroiditis --> thyroid cancer to joint/bone pain to rosacea to more ...) ever since I can remember. Since changing my diet, I am watching symptoms disappear. That tells me that I don't want to eat grain ... or anything that eats grain. For all we know, the grain-fed cattle are reminiscing about the good ol' days of their forefathers that roamed on the range ... noshing grass ...

  7. #7
    New Renaissance's Avatar
    New Renaissance is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    The Land of Dixie
    Posts
    365
    I like some of the things Stossel has brought to the television. I disagree with him on occasion, but he does actually try to dig for some truth in matters of conventional wisdom. However, he only played on side of this story and called it bunk. The logic he is using is wrong. AND of course his researcher is a spokesperson for the DAIRY industry. He mentions Pollan's article, but that as far as he goes. I just see this as irresponsible.

  8. #8
    FairyRae's Avatar
    FairyRae is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,996
    I buy grassfed beef whenever I can, and believe in buying local as much as possible.

    BUT, as far as the omega 3:6 ratio goes, it doesn't _really_ matter all that much from what I've read, as there are very little PUFAs in beef, and mostly saturated fat. Therefore, its more important to buy pastured chicken and pork (which contain more PUFAs, so the O3:O6 ratio is much more important there.)

    The hormones are freaky though, whatever the case! (And toxins are stored in the fat--I'm sure a CAFO cow will have more toxins in its fat than a grass-fed cow who does not recieve hormones, antibiotics, etc...)

    ETA: Wanted to mention, I agree w/ the pp who mentioned there are most likely benefits from eating an animal that eats its natural diet (ie cows eating grass) that we are not measuring or aware of yet. I will certainly continue to choose grass fed as much as possible as I do think it matters!
    Last edited by FairyRae; 11-17-2010 at 07:16 PM.

  9. #9
    jammies's Avatar
    jammies is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,522
    The health benefits are a side perk for me. The way confinement animals are treated is disgusting to me. I do not give my money that system.

  10. #10
    AndreaReina's Avatar
    AndreaReina is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    851
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Mark linked to this article in one of his posts I think, or linked to an article that linked to this one. Didn't exist anymore on the server, so pulled it from the Internet Archive and saved it for posterity. Basically, pastured meat uses land that is usually unsuited for agriculture, pastured animals actually improve the vegetative health of their pasture as well as reduce soil erosion. What's more, I understand from the article that all agriculture, including organic, contribute to soil erosion. This doesn't even begin to cover the harm animals come to when eating foods they are not meant to.

    I think it's important to read arguments that go against what we believe because one of the worst things we can do is become blinded by our own beliefs, but the article really fails every test I have for being taken seriously.
    Attached Files Attached Files

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •