Interesting Pork Topic I saw

[sereia 0]

If parasites were such a problem in other meats, then WHY do they need marking on pork of "parasite killing temperature"?

If you're going to use that argument then why do they make sure you wash your hands (and anything that's touched it) thoroughly after you touched raw poultry and make sure you cook it to a minimum temperature to be servable? Which by the way, the government recommends a temperature way higher than what actually tastes good just to be sure you kill off everything! Blech for dried up chicken!

What about ground beef? How many restaurants refuse to cook it anything less than well-done because of all that e-coli drama a while back?

Edited April 2, 2008 by sereia

[sandinista! 1,816]

I don't think the theory makes much sense if one accepts the Qur'an as divine. An "all knowing" God would be able to foresee circumstances where raising pigs would not be as labor intensive, not be in deserts, be a good business, etc. and assumes God lacked knowledge of Iberico pigs and other grazing types of pigs (some now nearly extinct). If Harris' theory is the reason, God probably would have thrown in some type of abrogation for ecological economics, similar to how we are told we can eat pork of out of necessity/hunger if it is not done as an act of willful disobedience.

Harris goes on to say that Islam was limited in its ability to being the predominant religion once it reached populations where pork is a mainstay of the diet. I don't see God making a rule about Wilbur that would limit the spread of Islam.

It doesn't add up for me.

Which again brings me to this-- why ar epoeple not all in a bunch over camels? Camels are forbidden although islam decided it was OK after all to eat camels and rabbits, two specifcally forbidden things. So? What's the deal with harping on pigs?

the marvin harris theory on why they were forbidden in the first place is that cattle, sheep, etc. all eat grass, but pigs aren't too keen on grazing. pigs provide more competition for pretty precious food sources like grain. they serve no other purpose than a meat source, while cattle, sheep, camels are all multi-functional-milk, transport and labor, clothing, etc. pigs make no sense in a desert environment. too labor intensive, and not a worthwhile enough payoff.

it's not a perfect theory, but it makes more sense than "eww pigs are wormy and germy".

even outside of hot places, dry places, pigs are an ecological disaster. "The presence of crops in the near area (for example palm dates or oat hay cultivations) provide a food supplement and may greatly increase feral pig density; the close location of cereal crops in one study increased the density of feral pigs almost four-fold. Similarly the presence of adjacent palm cultivations in Malaysia was found to increase pigs density by 10 to 100 times." that's food meant for people, of much greater need and benefit for people.

"Rooting by pigs disturbs the seed bank, reduces surface vegetation and alters the soil by increasing soil temperature, increasing or decreasing the nitrogen content, increasing oxidation and increasing the leaching of Ca, P, Zn, Cu and Mg. In addition, rooting creates large unattractive open spaces, reduces perennial cover and increases the growth of alien annual grasses. In its native range in Sweden the pig generally roots extensively in deciduous forests and damp soil, preferring these locations to grassland areas with dry soils...their rooting habit accelerates soil erosion and increases siltation in rivers...Pig rooting also damages cultivated crop species. In one study conducted in 40 counties of California an economic loss of approximately US$ 1 730 000 was recorded due to pigs." invasive species database there's no human labor involved with feral pigs, but they certainly have an ecological cost, one that can't be justified by serving other purposes besides the singular luxury of a meat source. you can't milk a pig, you can't hook one up to a plow and put it to work. regardless of where it's at, pigs are always going to like the same kind of food people like, food people grow for their own consumption. (even a pig that will graze, because its diet is never 100% grazing.) in hard economic times, there's far less human food-waste left over from dinner to supplement pigs' diets with. ruminates not so much-their hay and grass never appeared on a person's plate first. there is no benefit of dairy nutrition for years prior to killing a pig and in places where the majority of the population are lactose intolerant, big, labor-intensive animals like cattle were put to work for years before they were ate. Until about 1960, most beef in Japan was produced from cattle kept primarily for draught purposes. Grazing areas are only available on mountain sides and in other remote areas where rice and other crops cannot be grown.

it's not a perfect theory, but there is still consideration in it for an all-knowing God to direct humanity to avoid cultivation and disallow feral populations of pigs to proliferate so abundantly for hunting in the interest of ecology maintenance and the huge benefits to humanity that such maintenance provides.

as well, the last part about islam being somehow limited to places where pigs weren't a diet mainstay is not mentioned anywhere in my book, the cows, pigs, wars, witches one. where did you read it? at any rate, that part falls completely flat in light of the fact that the world's 4th most populous nation, with over 220 million people that are 86% muslim, is indonesia, where pigs had been a dietary staple for a long, long time.

[sarahaziz 0]

Pork, gelatin, ribs, ham, all 7aram.

[aisha kandisha 0]

I don't think the theory makes much sense if one accepts the Qur'an as divine. An "all knowing" God would be able to foresee circumstances where raising pigs would not be as labor intensive, not be in deserts, be a good business, etc. and assumes God lacked knowledge of Iberico pigs and other grazing types of pigs (some now nearly extinct). If Harris' theory is the reason, God probably would have thrown in some type of abrogation for ecological economics, similar to how we are told we can eat pork of out of necessity/hunger if it is not done as an act of willful disobedience.

Harris goes on to say that Islam was limited in its ability to being the predominant religion once it reached populations where pork is a mainstay of the diet. I don't see God making a rule about Wilbur that would limit the spread of Islam.

It doesn't add up for me.

Which again brings me to this-- why ar epoeple not all in a bunch over camels? Camels are forbidden although islam decided it was OK after all to eat camels and rabbits, two specifcally forbidden things. So? What's the deal with harping on pigs?

the marvin harris theory on why they were forbidden in the first place is that cattle, sheep, etc. all eat grass, but pigs aren't too keen on grazing. pigs provide more competition for pretty precious food sources like grain. they serve no other purpose than a meat source, while cattle, sheep, camels are all multi-functional-milk, transport and labor, clothing, etc. pigs make no sense in a desert environment. too labor intensive, and not a worthwhile enough payoff.

it's not a perfect theory, but it makes more sense than "eww pigs are wormy and germy".

even outside of hot places, dry places, pigs are an ecological disaster. "The presence of crops in the near area (for example palm dates or oat hay cultivations) provide a food supplement and may greatly increase feral pig density; the close location of cereal crops in one study increased the density of feral pigs almost four-fold. Similarly the presence of adjacent palm cultivations in Malaysia was found to increase pigs density by 10 to 100 times." that's food meant for people, of much greater need and benefit for people.

"Rooting by pigs disturbs the seed bank, reduces surface vegetation and alters the soil by increasing soil temperature, increasing or decreasing the nitrogen content, increasing oxidation and increasing the leaching of Ca, P, Zn, Cu and Mg. In addition, rooting creates large unattractive open spaces, reduces perennial cover and increases the growth of alien annual grasses. In its native range in Sweden the pig generally roots extensively in deciduous forests and damp soil, preferring these locations to grassland areas with dry soils...their rooting habit accelerates soil erosion and increases siltation in rivers...Pig rooting also damages cultivated crop species. In one study conducted in 40 counties of California an economic loss of approximately US$ 1 730 000 was recorded due to pigs." invasive species database there's no human labor involved with feral pigs, but they certainly have an ecological cost, one that can't be justified by serving other purposes besides the singular luxury of a meat source. you can't milk a pig, you can't hook one up to a plow and put it to work. regardless of where it's at, pigs are always going to like the same kind of food people like, food people grow for their own consumption. (even a pig that will graze, because its diet is never 100% grazing.) in hard economic times, there's far less human food-waste left over from dinner to supplement pigs' diets with. ruminates not so much-their hay and grass never appeared on a person's plate first. there is no benefit of dairy nutrition for years prior to killing a pig and in places where the majority of the population are lactose intolerant, big, labor-intensive animals like cattle were put to work for years before they were ate. Until about 1960, most beef in Japan was produced from cattle kept primarily for draught purposes. Grazing areas are only available on mountain sides and in other remote areas where rice and other crops cannot be grown.

it's not a perfect theory, but there is still consideration in it for an all-knowing God to direct humanity to avoid cultivation and disallow feral populations of pigs to proliferate so abundantly for hunting in the interest of ecology maintenance and the huge benefits to humanity that such maintenance provides.

as well, the last part about islam being somehow limited to places where pigs weren't a diet mainstay is not mentioned anywhere in my book, the cows, pigs, wars, witches one. where did you read it? at any rate, that part falls completely flat in light of the fact that the world's 4th most populous nation, with over 220 million people that are 86% muslim, is indonesia, where pigs had been a dietary staple for a long, long time.

I still think it doesn't take into account all types of pig rearing or all types of pigs, and Harris himself talks about regions that are ecologically suited for raising pigs when he discusses the geographical limits of Islam.

The book I have is a food and culture book with an abominable pig chapter by Harris. It says "Wherever Islam has penetrated to regions where pig raising was a mainstay of the traditional farming systems, it has failed to win over substantial portions of the population. Regions such as Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Africa south of the Sahara, parts of which are ecologically well suited for pig raising, constitute the outer limits of the active spread of Islam. All along this frontier, the resistance of pig-eating Christians has prevented Islam from becoming the dominant religion". ..........."Islam, in other words, to this very day has a geographical limit ..... (coinciding with geographical zones)" He goes on for a bit and then says he isn't say " that a proselytizing religion like Islam" cannot get pig eating people to adhere just out of obedience to divine commandments, but rather the food preferences/aversions are "on balance favorable to the nutritional and ecological welfare of their followers".

So the theory, IMO, seems to rest on the fact that Islam has a limited audience, that places where pigs arguably prosper, Islam cannot, and that God couldn't somehow work around these limitations or chose not to. This comes across very atheistic to me. Not that belief in God has to be a basis for the discussion, but if followers are looking for the answer, it seems you cannot start with the premise that God was limited in his ability/desire to reach people with Islam, choosing instead to limit the message to a certain geographical audience all for the sake of the pig.

[sandinista! 1,816]

Which again brings me to this-- why ar epoeple not all in a bunch over camels? Camels are forbidden although islam decided it was OK after all to eat camels and rabbits, two specifcally forbidden things. So? What's the deal with harping on pigs?

the marvin harris theory on why they were forbidden in the first place is that cattle, sheep, etc. all eat grass, but pigs aren't too keen on grazing. pigs provide more competition for pretty precious food sources like grain. they serve no other purpose than a meat source, while cattle, sheep, camels are all multi-functional-milk, transport and labor, clothing, etc. pigs make no sense in a desert environment. too labor intensive, and not a worthwhile enough payoff.

it's not a perfect theory, but it makes more sense than "eww pigs are wormy and germy".

Yeah, but pigs are they are native to Israel/north Jordan, etc. There are still wild pigs there today-- they get into the farms up there It's not a desert environment there, but rather far from it-- it's 16+ inches of rain/year (Jerusalem being very wet at 25+.). Also camels and rabbits don't fit that model (both are listed as cud-chewers but still forbidden). But yeah, I totally agree-- wormy and germy doesn't make sense at all since, to me, that describes any kind of meat... as Jen pointed out fish have worms.. and all animals are carriers of parasites (unless you drug them totally up-- which can be done today, but isn't practical over herds and obviously wouldn't retroactively apply to any reasoning of the past).

Haha! I typed pigs are monovores. That reminds me of earlier today when I read on wikipedia about groundhogs: ". Groundhogs are generally agonistic and territorial" which I read as "groundhogs are generally agnostic." I have a fever right now and am drugged up myself and thought, hmm, you couldn't even poll that-- how unscientific. Sometimes I amaze and disappoint myself.

I like the new picture on your signature. The hat! The hat is precious.

temperature could still be an issue, even with that amount of rainfall. even in parts of europe, temperatures can be high enough to require intervention and use of valuable resources to keep them cool enough, in addition to all the other environmental damage they cause. bunnies are too cute, so it's just wrong to eat them. camels are a big conundrum though. actually, trying to ascertain why these things are as they are is probably as futile as trying to poll groundhogs about their religious beliefs (or lack thereof).

thank you though, i like ollie's hat too. he says it looks like oliver twist's hat in the movie.

[PetraPerson101 0]

If parasites were such a problem in other meats, then WHY do they need marking on pork of "parasite killing temperature"?

If you're going to use that argument then why do they make sure you wash your hands (and anything that's touched it) thoroughly after you touched raw poultry and make sure you cook it to a minimum temperature to be servable? Which by the way, the government recommends a temperature way higher than what actually tastes good just to be sure you kill off everything! Blech for dried up chicken!

What about ground beef? How many restaurants refuse to cook it anything less than well-done because of all that e-coli drama a while back?

Listeria, Salmonella, etc - are bacteria.

Roundworms, Trichinella, Tapeworms - are animals / parasites.

There's a big difference from a cell - vs a full-out multicelled organism. You can slap a tapeworm in a tray and dissect it - can't really do that with a salmonella bacteria.

I wear gloves when doing prep, and wash my hands here.

And who in their right mind cooks rotted / dried-out meat? o.O Me - I've gotten into the mode of "take-no-chances" with food. If it smells weird -> trash. Freezerburned -> trash. Looks funny -> trash. ( That's assuming it even made it past my expired date circling black marker and into my shopping cart. )

Read "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair - sausage originates from rotted pork that's normally too vile & unpalatable to eat - so it's spiced up until it doesn't taste like rot anymore. ( ... that's putting aside the old food handling techniques of stirring in the rat poo better so people wouldn't notice - and adding extra protein with a decapitated worker's limbs. )

And you can thank a Republican - Theodore Roosevelt - for putting some checks on food handling.

But really - everyone likes their own stuff. You're going to get a tough sell trying to convince people who grew up in the Middle East that pork is palatable.

Just like you'd have a good time convincing me to eat kohlrabi or brussels sprouts.

--- edit ---

Undercooked burgers - is asking for trouble. Especially if it's from a mass-producer - like those frozen places.

IMO - anything under medium is asking for it... :\ But a burger, man, undercooked burgers pink-on-the-inside are gross.

A medium steak, however, is great. ( As for those - handling, I'm not concerned with with steaks. I haven't found a restaurant in my area that can match my home-grilled steaks. Seriously. Each time I order a cut, I'm thoroughly disappointed with overcooked & flavorless steaks. )

Edited April 2, 2008 by KyanWan

[sereia 0]

But really - everyone likes their own stuff. You're going to get a tough sell trying to convince people who grew up in the Middle East that pork is palatable.

Just like you'd have a good time convincing me to eat kohlrabi or brussels sprouts.

I could care less who eats pork and who doesn't. I hardly eat it anymore either (moved away from dad!) but I find some of the arguments against it ridiculous.

LOL on the kohlrabi!

[PetraPerson101 0]

It all boils down to the prep & handling of the product. You could infect anything if it's not handled properly.

Beef - if you feed it meat - will get bovine spongiform. (aka: mad cow)

Pork - Trichinella

Fish - those nasty worms ...

Chicken - Salmonella

etc etc.

The preparer, slaughterhouse, and farmer have the control of the food quality with anything. Even vegetables - if you've got someone who decides to ... answer nature's call while picking vegetables in the field - you've got a salad bar e.coli disaster in some faraway city.

It's all complex.

[sereia 0]

Yah like that E.Coli scare recently? The spinach was growing right next to where cows were wandering around and pooping! Nasty!!!

Edited April 2, 2008 by sereia

[Nasturtium 500]

temperature could still be an issue, even with that amount of rainfall. even in parts of europe, temperatures can be high enough to require intervention and use of valuable resources to keep them cool enough, in addition to all the other environmental damage they cause. bunnies are too cute, so it's just wrong to eat them. camels are a big conundrum though. actually, trying to ascertain why these things are as they are is probably as futile as trying to poll groundhogs about their religious beliefs (or lack thereof).

thank you though, i like ollie's hat too. he says it looks like oliver twist's hat in the movie.

Pigs do require intervention if you want them to be meaty and large like the domestic ones we see... although the same is true for other domestic animals-- but not as much (in my experience). There could be something to that. Bunnies are too cute and IMO not worth the effort-- I mean look at how much you get from them.

I totally agree about the futility in trying to figure out the reasons sometimes, and I think for me I get frustrated at people rushing to some kind of non-sensical answer for these things-- just to have an answer. My biggest pet peeve are people who make things up and exagerate in order to prove their point, such the "fossilized finger" supposedly found to disprove evolution. This falls under the same fantastical and LYING behavior to me as the latter example. I really respect those who say "I don't know" much more than that other reaction: Worms! Death! Terrible plagues and fire!! Cave paintings of dinosaurs!

I do have two groundhogs who live in my backyard. I shall think about this every time I see them.

He is right-- it does look like the movie.

[sarahaziz 0]

I think everyones digging a little way too deep in this subject. I don't think they even ate chicken or beef back in bible days. There weren't advanced machinery and factories , oilspills so I'm guessing the fish didn't have those worms long ago. Bread, olives, olive oil, water, spices (thyme rosemary, etc.) 1 day of fish, nuts, fruits, seeds, were probably the only eaten things back then. In our modern days people eat anything and everything processed foods- sugar not natural cane, fish in a can, boxed foods, canned vegetables. That's why people get overweight and unhealthy with diseases. I try to stay on a vegetarian diet and chicken only couple times a week. Meat takes 3 days to process so does bread. Pork is just nasty I don't know how anyone can eat that! too much fat !

[Nasturtium 500]

I think everyones digging a little way too deep in this subject. I don't think they even ate chicken or beef back in bible days. There weren't advanced machinery and factories , oilspills so I'm guessing the fish didn't have those worms long ago. Bread, olives, olive oil, water, spices (thyme rosemary, etc.) 1 day of fish, nuts, fruits, seeds, were probably the only eaten things back then. In our modern days people eat anything and everything processed foods- sugar not natural cane, fish in a can, boxed foods, canned vegetables. That's why people get overweight and unhealthy with diseases. I try to stay on a vegetarian diet and chicken only couple times a week. Meat takes 3 days to process so does bread. Pork is just nasty I don't know how anyone can eat that! too much fat !

Psst! chicken, beef, etc are all mentioned as clean animals to eat in the Torah. Cows, sheep, goats, doves, etc are all listed as animal sacrifices. Even Abel kept animals. You may want to brush up a bit Also those worms are natural parasites not caused by "farms" and oilspills don't cause parasites.

[sarahaziz 0]

I need to go read the bible again which book is telling if they did actually eat meat back in the days?!?! It's so fascinating

[sarahaziz 0]

I'm scared to eat meat these days cuz of the hormones and all that what they inject in them. The fruits and vegetables if theyre not organic have pesticide. My mom washes the fruit and vegetables with soap and water

[Nasturtium 500]

I need to go read the bible again which book is telling if they did actually eat meat back in the days?!?! It's so fascinating

All of them that describe any daily life? Did you want specific quotations? Genesis 18:5-8, Luke 15:23-27, Luke 15:30, 1 Samuel 28:24, etc--a short list of some examples of calf eating... you can do a word search at here:

http://scripturetext.com/

But at any rate, you should even remember the story of PASSOVER in Exodus? Where Moses led out the children of Israel from Egypt? And how before he led them out Pharoah had plagues which included the death of the firstborn from which those who had set aside and sacrificed the lamb and put the blood on the doorposts were "passed over" by the angel? And how they ate the lamb -- a major part of the event and celebration being the lamb?? That involves eating meat.

It's everywhere