At 11:52 AM 2003-10-28 +1300, I wrote to LIM, title: "ethical choices {was: re Atkins diet (via LessIsMore)}", at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LessIsMore/message/12301 (after signing-in) :- · In my "Atkins Diet" post I gave my reasons for ordinary healthy people to eat only a small amount of meat each week. Given that our heads are bumping up against the lid of the amount of goods that can be produced on the bio- productive part of the earth's land and sea, that's an ethical choice, IMO. · Here's my post to LessIsMore from a third of a year ago about such choices From: David MacClement ; Mon Jul 28, 2003 9:10 am Subject: long-distance phone costs - Working Assets; dichotomy (at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LessIsMore/message/11037 after signing-in) :- At 07:49 PM 2003-07-25 -0000, John, in Richmond VA, wrote: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Which do you folks think is better -- simply paying for local phone service and using 10-10 numbers and calling cards to make phone calls at 3-5 cents per minute, or using a socially conscious company like Working Assets for 10+ cents a minute. I find myself wondering if it isn't more destructive to global corporate capitalism to make them lose money by serving us than by paying a premium to a smaller company to make a statement. For the sake of full disclosure, I've recently had a bad experience with Working Assets regarding wireless service, which they and I are still trying to work out six months later. John - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [David, in July: ] · I don't have an opinion, which usually (i) means I don't have enough information, or it (ii) means equally-concerned people would divide equally between the options. · I found myself thinking back to other less-than-obvious ethical choices. (1) I could have chosen organic breakfast-biscuits made in Australia or locally-made-by-less-advantaged Weetbix, GM-free but not organic; Weetbix. (2) I could have continued to support local delivery of non-homogenised non- organic milk or chosen homogenised organic-farm milk, both from a company we have tried to boycott since the 1980s when it went from re-used glass bottles to plasticised cartons and recyclable plastic bottles. For most of a year I chose the homogenised organic-farm milk in plastic bottles since the welfare of the cattle was more important to me than the other two factors. Fortunately, an organic baker arrived (Stephanie Mark) who used enough milk that the competitor milk-supply company was willing to deliver (once a week) to her shop in our village, so our family now uses non-homogenised full- cream organic milk, delivered to her (whom I pay). · These examples don't really help, but I'm saying (I suppose) that here's another place where dichotomous thinking (one choice is good, the other choice bad) misleads people trying to "do right". · Doing whatever feels best at the time, and re-evaluating it when you've got more information, or the situation has changed, is all anyone can do. (Avoiding: black-white, yes-no, right-wrong, open-shut dichotomy.) David. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [my "Atkins Diet" post http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LessIsMore/message/12299 had: ] · I've never heard about the details of this diet before, and know nothing beyond what's been written in earlier posts. · "studies have shown that people perform better on Atkins" doesn't convince me - I would have to find _which_ people; see: "For certain folks, carbos (particularly refined carbos but also things like whole wheat and other grains) are converted to sugars so quickly that they overwhelm the body's capacity to absorb and use them .." · My wife (about my height, 5-ft 11-in) has had a weight "problem" in the past, but she has found she can _maintain_ her (somewhat-overweight) state by eating totally lacto-vegetarian (bread-cheese-based). Provided she has good fruit, mainly apples and dates, to round-out a diet very much like mine · I would _guess_ that she was one of those who have a metabolism which converts starches to sugars very efficiently, the sort Bruce Elkin mentioned. But she's been vegetarian (on a rather monotonous diet) without problem for years now. (We're both people who "read at table" or listen to the radio, while eating) · I'm with Gary in saying: "the Atkins Diet ... has the potential of doing significant damage to the body, especially the kidneys (due to overprod- uction of wastes from protein breakdown). This is another of those shortcuts that Americans just LOVE". · And further, I'm with Kelley: "meat consumption is an ecological disaster. I know we're not all strict vegetarians or vegans (I'm not, for the record) but I think we all recognize the ecological benefits of eating less meat." · Basically, _I_am_against_waste_. · And if ecologically-expensive meat is just going in and most of it being broken down in the kidneys and going out again, I wouldn't do it, and I see people who do it for no medically-prescribed reason as operating without thought, like a robot or a sheep. Being consumption-machines. David.