Live data from Hacker News

When People Ate People, a Strange Disease Emerged

npr.org

131–140 of 215 posts

Re: When People Ate People, a Strange Disease Emerged

#131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The AMR process entails blasting off that meat stuck to the spine and skull with some kind of high pressure for use in ground meat. This is true. A while back, I read stories of how (Mostly low-wage Mexican) Workers at Meat Plants were getting a strange neurological disease that confounded their doctors. The cause was then traced to them inhaling the aerosol of the Animals' brains being blown out, mostly Pigs. Rela…

Here I am teetering on the edge of vegetarianism, and people are talking about blowing meat chunks off spines to extract that last bit of cash, and workers inhaling aerosolized pig brains. Might be the push I needed!

I've been vegetarian for a bit over a decade (no fish, but dairy and eggs okay) - If you live in the right area, and have the right tastes, it's downright easy. In other areas, it's quite difficult.

My personal tips & notes:

* If you otherwise enjoy meat, there are a lot of meat-substitutes out there and more being developed. These tend to do a great job of mimicking processed meats and a terrible job of mimicking "real" meat. They also vary greatly. Quorn, Morningstar, and Boca (for example) all have very different tastes and textures, so if you don't like one try a different one. (I personally prefer Quorn for chicken-substitutes and Morningstar for beef-substitutes). OTOH, some vegetarians never had a big attachment to meat, and this is not an issue. (I am very jealous of these people).

* Eating out is by far the hardest. In areas with many vegetarians (say, Seattle), you tend to have multiple options, things tend to be clearly labeled, and waitstaff is used to getting questions. In other areas (say, Georgia), you have fewer options, no labels, and people act like you've accused them of something evil if you have questions. Either way, though, the majority of the menu becomes inaccessible to you.

* If you are trying to be mostly strict, be cautious when dealing with regional/cultural boundaries. While Indian food tends to follow the same vegetarian definition as I do (Jainian food is even more strict than I am), others don't (Chinese and Japanese tend to not consider fish or other seafood as animals, thus you'll find oyster sauce on the "vegetarian" menu, or dishes that have oyster sauce or some sort of animal-based broth that isn't called out as such (oyster sauce, fish sauce, pork, beef, or chicken broth, and/or shrimp paste in some curries). In the American South, pork isn't just a meat, it's also a seasoning. Most purely vegetable dishes (such as "green beans" or "corn") aren't vegetarian there :(

* How strict you want to be impacts how easy life is. Avoiding tangible animal-based meat = easy. Avoiding broths and lard = not as easy. Avoiding animal byproducts, such as most gelatin, use of bones in filtering, animal-based rennet in cheese , insect-based dyes and glaze = quite a bit more effort. Find a level you are comfortable with, because for most reasons, it is still far better to be a not-entirely strict vegetarian than a failed attempt at a strict vegetarian. I myself avoid gelatin and known insect products (no more Junior Mints :( ), and when cooking at home I get animal-friendly cheese and sugar, but when I'm out I don't worry about where they got their cheese, but will ask about broths and seafood-sauces.

* If you are a picky eater such as myself, be warned that many places decide to make vegetarian dishes more "exciting" by putting in every form of vegetable/grain they can think of. Like a supreme pizza, some people are glad for the variety, but most have something in there they don't like. (I myself can't stand green bell peppers, which is in, like, 90% of commonly available vegetarian fare :( )

* I first went vegetarian cold-turkey (ha!) in college...but after 6 months I stopped because I was seeing stars constantly. (It's actually pretty easy to get all your nutrients as a vegetarian, unless you're living on a diet of rice and mac&cheese like I was) I had, however, lost the taste for red meat (suddenly felt oily and flavorless), and noticed that certain salads I had disliked I now enjoyed. A few years later I tried again, but this time I did it slow. I dropped a category of meat each year, giving myself time to adjust my diet and make sure I had a variety of options. I believe I dropped beef (from the first stint), then pork, then poultry, then all forms of seafood. The next year I dropped leather products as an ethical choice, and I've been this way for over a decade without too much effort. Some extra food costs, a limited range of foods, and limited eating out options, but not so much that it's hard. Dieting, for example, is much harder.

* You will learn to hate the preachy, judgmental vegetarian-types that make life hard for us. Most vegetarians (in my experience) do what they do for reasons they consider good, and think it'd be great if others did the same, but feel no need to look down on others that don't, nor to inform them of their "evil ways". I mean, most of us ate meat for a long time and didn't switch the first time the thought occurred to us, so why judge others for being the same? Still though, people get very defensive and often assume you're one of the preachy types until you prove otherwise.

* ...You will also learn to hate how defensive people are in general. This is not restricted to vegetarianism. If you say you're on a diet, people will talk about how awesome their chocolate cake is. Mention you have diabetes, and they'll list the sugary foods they adore. Say you're vegetarian, and they'll talk about how animals just taste so good, or how happy they are to shoot Bambi. I've collected a few vegetarian jokes to help break the ice and show I'm not a jerk about it. (My favorite: 'Vegetarian' is actually based on an old (insert culture here - I tend to say 'Native American') word, meaning "lousy hunter")

* Oddly enough, holidays tend to be the EASIEST times. Everyone talks about the turkey, but a traditional big feast (at least in America) actually involves lots of non-meat dishes. I found this a good way to relax my family and friends - I provide a big meal that doesn't contain "weird stuff". Some of the more skeptical people still bring meat dishes, but even then they end up seeing that as a part of the whole, as opposed to be a contrast between "weird food" and "normal food".

If you decide to take the leap, I hope this helps!

Re: When People Ate People, a Strange Disease Emerged

#132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"A [real or imagined] respect for animals that led to a reduction in waste product." is not the same as "Maximizing profit by turning undesirable or inaccessible meat into nuggets in a potentially dangerous process." I don't think you're wrong to mention them in the same sentence, but it's definitely disingenuous/uncharitable to compare peoples' sentiments on the two apples-to-apples.

A big part of the point I'm trying to make is that the differing sentiments aren't all that coherent. I don't see how it is disingenuous to express my opinion on the matter. I guess it might not be especially charitable.

I'm interested here because to me they don't seem at all incoherent. Can you unpack that a bit for me?

Re: When People Ate People, a Strange Disease Emerged

#133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's... not how logic works.

I think that might be how logic works. The fallacy seems to be with its parent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraposition

"Alive implies needs-resources" is not the same as "needs-resources implies alive"

Re: When People Ate People, a Strange Disease Emerged

#134
post #57

I first heard about prions and Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease after getting a letter saying I may have been exposed. I had surgery after someone with CJD, but before that person died, was autopsied, and diagnosed. That was over a decade ago. So far no signs of it. I did make peace with the fact that I have a much higher probability of dying from it than the average American. The only substantivu changes in my life are: (a…

Shouldn't autoclaves destroy all proteins, prion or otherwise? What exactly is the exposure vector? edit: Unsourced statement from wikipedia[1]: "However, prions, such as those associated with Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease, may not be destroyed by autoclaving at the typical 134 °C for three minutes or 121 °C for 15 minutes.[citation needed]" [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoclave

> Normal sterilization procedures such as boiling or irradiating materials fail to render prions non-infective.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmissible_spongiform_encep... (The quoted sentence is from the paragraph immediately above the TOC block.)

Remember it was the hospital that sent me, and anybody else who had surgery during the same period, a letter saying I may have exposed. While they followed required sterilization procedures, those standards were apparently not enough to statistically ensure prions were destroyed. I'm not sure if they knew what was required in this regard, because one of the things mentioned in the letter was that all related surgical equipment had subsequently been destroyed.

Re: When People Ate People, a Strange Disease Emerged

#135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The AMR process entails blasting off that meat stuck to the spine and skull with some kind of high pressure for use in ground meat. This is true. A while back, I read stories of how (Mostly low-wage Mexican) Workers at Meat Plants were getting a strange neurological disease that confounded their doctors. The cause was then traced to them inhaling the aerosol of the Animals' brains being blown out, mostly Pigs. Rela…

Here I am teetering on the edge of vegetarianism, and people are talking about blowing meat chunks off spines to extract that last bit of cash, and workers inhaling aerosolized pig brains. Might be the push I needed!

Once you've killed the animal, don't you owe it to eat as much as possible of it? Isn't it a bigger sin to throw away edible meat for aesthetic reasons?

Re: When People Ate People, a Strange Disease Emerged

#136

I did a bunch of research (googling) back in the late 90's or 2000s when the mad cow disease outbreak first happened mainly in England. I thought it was pretty terrifying and I wanted to know what the hell was going on. I read about Kuru all the way back then and the take away was that people shouldn't eat the brain and nervous tissue of other people or Kuru could result. But also it seemed that mad cow disease was o…

"Beef brains and veal (juvenile beef) or calf's brains are used in the cuisines of France; Italy; Spain; El Salvador; Mexico, etc. where they are called sesos in Spanish and are eaten in tacos and quesadillas; Pakistan, where they are known in Urdu as Maghaz; Portugal; Indonesia; and in the United States, especially in St. Louis, Missouri, and the Ohio River valley."

People do eat cow brains...I have at regular ol' restaurants in the USA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beef_brain

Re: When People Ate People, a Strange Disease Emerged

#137
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cannot copy "all" of the information stored in the human body. Briefly, this happens because the physical limitations of information storage require cooling (Landauer's principle) which requires kT×log(2) energy per bit, or about 2.5 zJ at room temperature. The brain's memory capacity is about 2.5 * 10^15 bytes ( https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-the-memor... ), but the amount of information whic…

Copying a disk does in no way require simulating each atom of the disk, though? • We can already clone mammalian bodies. • I'll assume that "growing" an adult human body, with a "blank" or "default" brain, isn't too inconceivable. • Your real, natural brain can access the information within itself. • At the moment of "copying", we figure some way to biologically link the two brains together, and write some biological…

While the information stored in the disk is stored in the "analog" world (magnetic potential of parts of the platters), there's an infinite amount of states that lead to the same digital disk contents. You can't take the digital representation and reconstruct the analog state that leads to it, since by doing the analog-to-digital conversion there was information loss.

And growing a body with a "blank" brain, what does that mean? Your conscience is absolutely intertwined with your body. If you take my mind and put it in Usain Bolt's body, that Frankenthing won't run 100m in <10s.

Re: When People Ate People, a Strange Disease Emerged

#138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that might be how logic works. The fallacy seems to be with its parent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraposition

"Alive implies needs-resources" is not the same as "needs-resources implies alive"

Of course not. And if he'd said "alive implies needs resources", the argument would not be valid.

ianterrelwt posted the article explaining this.

Re: When People Ate People, a Strange Disease Emerged

#139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here I am teetering on the edge of vegetarianism, and people are talking about blowing meat chunks off spines to extract that last bit of cash, and workers inhaling aerosolized pig brains. Might be the push I needed!

I've been vegetarian for a bit over a decade (no fish, but dairy and eggs okay) - If you live in the right area, and have the right tastes, it's downright easy. In other areas, it's quite difficult. My personal tips & notes: * If you otherwise enjoy meat, there are a lot of meat-substitutes out there and more being developed. These tend to do a great job of mimicking processed meats and a terrible job of mimicking "r…

As a, for lack of a better term, total vegetarian, do you have any moral thoughts on different types of animals? Was the herbavore vs omnivore vs carnivore thing a consideration? Did you debate mammal protein vs fish?

Curious how people arrive at "their" vegetarianism.

Re: When People Ate People, a Strange Disease Emerged

#140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A big part of the point I'm trying to make is that the differing sentiments aren't all that coherent. I don't see how it is disingenuous to express my opinion on the matter. I guess it might not be especially charitable.

I'm interested here because to me they don't seem at all incoherent. Can you unpack that a bit for me?

It comes down to "Maximizing profit by turning undesirable or inaccessible meat into nuggets in a potentially dangerous process."

I don't agree that is a particularly good description of the process. They are making the meat accessible, it isn't undesirable to begin with.

There could be some occupational hazard, I don't know. It seems clear enough that it isn't much of a food hazard (we've been eating it for decades).

Post reply on HN