No Animal Food Part 4

VI

THE EXCLUSION OF DAIRY PRODUCE

It is unfortunate that many flesh-abstainers who agree with the general trend of the foregoing arguments do not realise that these same arguments also apply to abstinence from those animal foods known as dairy produce. In considering this further aspect it is necessary for reasons already given, to place hygienic considerations first.

Is it reasonable to suppose that Nature ever intended the milk of the cow or the egg of the fowl for the use of man as food? Can anyone deny that Nature intended the cow's milk for the nourishment of her calf and the hen's egg for the propagation of her species? It is begging the question to say that the cow furnishes more milk than her calf requires, or that it does not injure the hen to steal her eggs. Besides, it is not true.

Regarding the dietetic value of milk and eggs, which is the question of first importance, are we correct in drawing the inference that as Nature did not intend these foods for man, therefore they are not suitable for him? As far as the chemical const.i.tuents of these foods are concerned, it is true they contain compounds essential to the nourishment of the human body, and if this is going to be set up as an argument in favor of their consumption, let it be remembered that flesh food also contains compounds essential to nourishment. But the point is this: not what valuable nutritive compounds does any food-substance contain, but what value, _taking into consideration its total effects_, has the food in question as a wholesome article of diet?

It seems to be quite generally acknowledged by the medical profession that raw milk is a dangerous food on account of the fact that it is liable from various causes, sometimes inevitable, to contain impurities.

Dr. Kellogg writes: Typhoid fever, cholera infantum, tuberculosis and tubercular consumption--three of the most deadly diseases known; it is very probable also, that diphtheria, scarlet fever and several other maladies are communicated through the medium of milk.... It is safe to say that very few people indeed are fully acquainted with the dangers to life and health which lurk in the milk supply.... The teeming millions of China, a country which contains nearly one-third of the entire population of the globe, are practically ignorant of this article of food. The high-cla.s.s Hindoo regards milk as a loathsome and impure article of food, speaking of it with the greatest contempt as "cow-juice," doubtless because of his observations of the deleterious effect of the use of milk in its raw state.

The germs of tuberculosis seem to be the most dangerous in milk, for they thrive and retain their vitality for many weeks, even in b.u.t.ter and cheese. An eminent German authority, Hirschberger, is said to have found 10 per cent of the cows in the vicinity of large cities to be affected by tuberculosis. Many other authorities might be quoted supporting the contention that a large percentage of cows are afflicted by this deadly disease. Other germs, quite as dangerous, find their way into milk in numerous ways. Excreta, clinging to the hairs of the udder, are frequently rubbed off into the pail by the action of the hand whilst milking. Under the most careful sanitary precautions it is impossible to obtain milk free from manure, from the ordinary germs of putrefaction to the most deadly microbes known to science. There is little doubt but that milk is one of the uncleanest and impurest of all foods.

Milk is constipating, and as constipation is one of the commonest complaints, a preventive may be found in abstinence from this food. As regards eggs, there is perhaps not so much to be said, although eggs so quickly undergo a change akin to putrefaction that unless eaten fresh they are unfit for food; moreover, (according to Dr. Haig) they contain a considerable amount of xanthins, and cannot, therefore, be considered a desirable food.

Dairy foods, we emphatically affirm, are not necessary to health. In the section dealing with 'Physical Considerations' sufficient was said to prove the eminent value of an exclusive vegetable diet, and the reader is referred to that and the subsequent essay on Nutrition and Diet for proof that man can and should live without animal food of any kind. Such nutritive properties as are possessed by milk and eggs are abundantly found in the vegetable kingdom. The table of comparative values given, exhibits this quite plainly. That man can live a thoroughly healthy life upon vegetable foods alone there is ample evidence to prove, and there is good cause to believe that milk and eggs not only are quite unnecessary, but are foods unsuited to the human organism, and may be, and often are, the cause of disease. Of course, it is recognized that with scrupulous care this danger can be minimized to a great extent, but still it is always there, and as there is no reason why we should consume such foods, it is not foolish to continue to do so?

But this is not all. It is quite as impossible to consume dairy produce without slaughter as it is to eat flesh without slaughter. There are probably as many bulls born as cows. One bull for breeding purposes suffices for many cows and lives for many years, so what is to be done with the bull calves if our humanitarian scruples debar us from providing a vocation for the butcher? The country would soon be overrun with vast herds of wild animals and the whole populace would have to take to arms for self-preservation. So it comes to the same thing. If we did not breed these animals for their flesh, or milk, or eggs, or labour, we should have no use for them, and so should breed them no longer, and they would quickly become extinct. The wild goat and sheep and the feathered life might survive indefinitely in mountainous districts, but large animals that are not domesticated, or bred for slaughter, soon disappear before the approach of civilisation. The Irish elk is extinct, and the buffalo of North America has been wiped out during quite recent years. If leather became more expensive (much of it is derived from horse hide) manufacturers of leather subst.i.tutes would have a better market than they have at present.

VI

CONCLUSION

'However much thou art read in theory, if thou hast no practice thou art ignorant,' says the Persian poet Sa'di. 'Conviction, were it never so excellent, is worthless until it converts itself into Conduct. Nay, properly, Conviction is not possible till then,' says Herr Teufelsdrockh. It is never too late to be virtuous. It is right that we should look before we leap, but it is gross misconduct to neglect duty to conform to the consuetudes of the hour. We must endeavour in practical life to carry out to the best of our ability our philosophical and ethical convictions, for any lapse in such endeavour is what const.i.tutes immorality. We must live consistently with theory so long as our chief purpose in life is advanced by so doing, but we must be inconsistent when by antinomianism we better forward this purpose. To ill.u.s.trate: All morally-minded people desire to serve as a force working for the happiness of the race. We are convinced that the slaughter of animals for food is needless, and that it entails much physical and mental suffering among men and animals and is therefore immoral.

Knowing this we should exert our best efforts to counteract the wrong, firstly, by regulating our own conduct so as not to take either an active or pa.s.sive part in this needless ma.s.sacre of sub-human life, and secondly, by making those facts widely known which show the necessity for food reform.

Now to go to the ultimate extreme as regards our own conduct we should make no use of such things as leather, bone, catgut, etc. We should not even so much as attend a concert where the players use catgut strings, for however far distantly related cause and effect may be, the fact remains that the more the demand, no matter how small, the more the supply. We should not even be guilty of accosting a friend from over the way lest in consequence he take more steps than otherwise he would do, thus wearing out more shoe-leather. He who would practise such absurd sansculottism as this would have to resort to the severest seclusion, and plainly enough we cannot approve of such fanaticism. By turning antinomian when necessary and staying amongst our fellows, making known our views according to our ability and opportunity, we shall be doing more towards establis.h.i.+ng the proper relation between man and sub-man than by turning cen.o.bite and refusing all intercourse and a.s.sociation with our fellows. Let us do small wrong that we may accomplish great good. Let us practise our creed so far as to abstain from the eating of animal food, and from the use of furs, feathers, seal and fox skins, and similar ornaments, to obtain which necessitates the violation of our fundamental principles. With regard to leather, this material is, under present conditions, a 'by-product.' The hides of animals slaughtered for their flesh are made into leather, and it is not censurable in a vegetarian to use this article in the absence of a suitable subst.i.tute when he knows that by so doing he is not asking an animal's life, nor a fellow-being to degrade his character by taking it. There is a subst.i.tute for leather now on the market, and it is hoped that it may soon be in demand, for even a leather-tanner's work is not exactly an ideal occupation.

Looking at the question of conviction and consistency in this way, there are conceivable circ.u.mstances when the staunchest vegetarian may even turn kreophagist. As to how far it is permissible to depart from the strictest adherence to the principles of vegetarianism that have been laid down, the individual must trust his own conscience to determine; but we can confidently affirm that the eating of animal flesh is unnecessary and immoral and r.e.t.a.r.ds development in the direction which the finest minds of the race hold to be good; and that the only time when it would not be wrong to feed upon such food would be when, owing to misfortunes such as s.h.i.+pwreck, war, famine, etc., starvation can only be kept at bay by the sacrifice of animal life. In such a case, man, considering his own life the more valuable, must resort to the unnatural practice of flesh-eating.

The reformer may have, indeed must have, to pay a price, and sometimes a big one, for the privilege, the greatest of all privileges, of educating his fellows to a realisation of their errors, to a realisation of a better and n.o.bler view of life than they have hitherto known. Seldom do men who carve out a way for themselves, casting aside the conventional prejudices of their day, and daring to proclaim, and live up to, the truth they see, meet with the esteem and respect due to them; but this should not, and, if they are sincere and courageous, does not, deter them from announcing their message and caring for the personal discomfort it causes. It is such as these that the world has to thank for its progress.

It often happens that the reformer reaps not the benefit of the reform he introduces. Men are slow to perceive and strangely slow to act, yet he who has genuine affection for his fellows, and whose desire for the betterment of humanity is no mere sentimental pseudo-religiosity, bears bravely the disappointment he is sure to experience, and with undaunted heart urges the cause that, as he sees it, stands for the enlightenment and happiness of man. The vegetarian in the West (Europe, America, etc.) is often ridiculed and spoken of by appellations neither complimentary nor kind, but this should deter no honorable man or woman from entering the ranks of the vegetarian movement as soon as he or she perceives the moral obligation to do so. It may be hard, perhaps impossible, to convert others to the same views, but the vegetarian is not hindered from living his own life according to the dictates of his conscience.

'He who conquers others is strong, but the man who conquers himself is mighty,' wrote Laotze in the _Tao Teh Ch'ing_, or 'The Simple Way.'

When we call to mind some heroic character--a Socrates, a Regulus, a Savonarola--the petty sacrifices our duties entail seem trivial indeed.

We do well to remember that it is only by obedience to the highest dictates of our own hearts and minds that we may obtain true happiness.

It is only by living in harmony with all living creatures that n.o.bility and purity of life are attainable. As we obey the immediate vision, so do we become able to see yet richer visions: but the _strength of the vision is ours only as we obey its high demands_.

NUTRITION AND DIET

I

THE SCIENCE OF NUTRITION

The importance of some general knowledge of the principles of nutrition and the nutritive values of foods is not generally realised. Ignorance on such a matter is not usually looked upon as a disgrace, but, on the contrary, it would be commonly thought far more reprehensible to lack the ability to conjugate the verb 'to be' than to lack a knowledge of the chemical properties of the food we eat, and the suitability of it to our organism. Yet the latter bears direct and intimate relation to man's physical, mental, and moral well-being, while the former is but a 'sapless, heartless thistle for pedantic chaffinches,' as Jean Paul would say.

The human body is the most complicated machine conceivable, and as it is absurd to suppose that any tyro can take charge of so comparatively simple a piece of mechanism as a locomotive, how much more absurd is it to suppose the human body can be kept in fit condition, and worked satisfactorily, without at least some, if only slight, knowledge of the nature of its const.i.tution, and an understanding of the means to satisfy its requirements? Only by study and observation comes the knowledge of how best to supply the required material which, by its oxidation in the body, repairs waste, gives warmth and produces energy.

Considering, then, that the majority of people are entirely ignorant both of the chemical const.i.tution of the body, and the physiological relations.h.i.+p between the body and food, it is not surprising to observe that in respect to this question of caring for the body, making it grow and work and think, many come to grief, having breakdowns which are called by various big-sounding names. Indeed, to the student of dietetics, the surprise is that the body is so well able to withstand the abuse it receives.

It has already been explained in the previous essay how essential it is if we live in an artificial environment and depart from primitive habits, thereby losing natural instincts such as guide the wild animals, that we should study diet. No more need be said on this point. It may not be necessary that we should have some general knowledge of fundamental principles, and learn how to apply them with reasonable precision.

The chemical const.i.tution of the human body is made up of a large variety of elements and compounds. From fifteen to twenty elements are found in it, chief among which are oxygen, hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen, calcium, phosphorus, sodium, and sulphur. The most important compounds are protein, hydrocarbons, carbohydrates, organic mineral matter, and water. The food which nourishes the body is composed of the same elements and compounds.

Food serves two purposes,--it builds and repairs the body tissues, and it generates vital heat and energy, burning food as fuel. Protein and mineral matter serve the first purpose, and hydrocarbons (fats) and carbohydrates (sugars and starches) the second, although, if too much protein be a.s.similated it will be burnt as fuel, (but it is bad fuel as will be mentioned later), and if too much fat is consumed it will be stored away in the body as reserve supply. Most food contains some protein, fat, carbohydrates, mineral matter, and water, but the proportion varies very considerably in different foods.

Water is the most abundant compound in the body, forming on an average, over sixty per cent. of the body by weight. It cannot be burnt, but is a component part of all the tissues and is therefore an exceedingly, important food. Mineral matter forms approximately five or six per cent.

of the body by weight. Phosphate of lime (calcium phosphate), builds bone; and many compounds of pota.s.sium, sodium, magnesium and iron are present in the body and are necessary nutrients. Under the term protein are included the princ.i.p.al nitrogenous compounds which make bone, muscle and other material. It forms about 15 per cent. of the body by weight, and, as mentioned above, is burnt as fuel for generating heat and energy. Carbohydrates form but a small proportion of the body-tissue, less than one per cent. Starches, sugars, and the fibre of plants, or cellulose, are included under this term. They serve the same purpose as fat.

All diet.i.tians are agreed that protein is the essential combined in food. Deprivation of it quickly produces a starved physical condition.

The actual quant.i.ty required cannot be determined with perfect accuracy, although estimates can be made approximately correct. The importance of the other nutrient compounds is but secondary. But the system must have all the nutrient compounds in correct proportions if it is to be maintained in perfect health. These proportions differ slightly according to the individual's physical const.i.tution, temperament and occupation.

Food replenishes waste caused by the continual wear and tear incidental to daily life: the wear and tear of the muscles in all physical exertion, of the brain in thinking, of the internal organs in the digestion of food, in all the intricate processes of metabolism, in the excretion of waste matter, and the secretion of vital fluids, etc. The ideal diet is one which replenishes waste with the smallest amount of suitable material, so that the system is kept in its normal condition of health at a minimum of expense of energy. The value, therefore, of some general knowledge of the chemical const.i.tuents of food is obvious. The diet must be properly balanced, that is, the food eaten must provide the nutrients the body requires, and not contain an excess of one element or a deficiency of another. It is impossible to subst.i.tute protein for fat, or _vice versa_, and get the same physiological result, although the human organism is wonderfully tolerant of abuse, and remarkably ingenious in its ability to adapt itself to abnormal conditions.

It has been argued that it is essentially necessary for a well-balanced dietary that the variety of food be large, or if the variety is to be for any reason restricted, it must be chosen with great discretion.

Dietetic authorities are not agreed as to whether the variety should be large or small, but there is a concensus of opinion that, be it large or small, it should be selected with a view to supplying the proper nutrients in proper proportions. The arguments, so far as the writer understands them, for and against a large variety of foods, are as follows:--

If the variety be large there is a temptation to over-feed. Appet.i.te does not need to be goaded by tasty dishes; it does not need to be goaded at all. We should eat when hungry and until replenished; but to eat when not hungry in order to gratify a merely sensual appet.i.te, to have dishes so spiced and concocted as to stimulate a jaded appet.i.te by novelty of taste, is harmful to an extent but seldom realised. Hence the advisability, at least in the case of persons who have not attained self-mastery over sensual desire, of having little variety, for then, when the system is replenished, over-feeding is less likely to occur.

In this connection it should be remembered that in some parts of the world the poor, although possessing great strength and excellent health, live upon, and apparently relish, a dietary limited mostly to black bread and garlics, while among ourselves an ordinary person eats as many as fifty different foods in one day.[3]

On the other hand, a too monotonous dietary, especially where people are accustomed to a large variety of mixed foods, fails to give the gustatory pleasure necessary for a healthy secretion of the digestive juices, and so may quite possibly result in indigestion. It is a matter of common observation that we are better able to digest food which we enjoy than that which we dislike, and as we live not upon what we eat, but upon what we digest, the importance of enjoying the food eaten is obvious.

Also as few people know anything about the nutritive value of foods, they stand a better chance, if they eat a large variety, of procuring the required quant.i.ty of different nutrients than when restricted to a very limited dietary, because, if the dietary be very limited they might by accident choose as their mainstay some food that was badly balanced in the different nutrients, perhaps wholly lacking in protein.

It is lamentable that there is such ignorance on such an all-important subject. However, we have to consider things as they are and not as they ought to be.

Perhaps the best way is to have different food at different meals, without indulging in many varieties at one meal. Thus taste can be satisfied, while the temptation to eat merely for the sake of eating is less likely to arise.

It might be mentioned, in pa.s.sing, that in the opinion of the best modern authorities the average person eats far more than he needs, and that this excess inevitably results in pathological conditions. Voit's estimate of what food the average person requires daily was based upon observation of what people _do_ eat, not upon what they _should_ eat.

Obviously such an estimate is valueless. As well argue that an ounce of tobacco daily is what an ordinary person should smoke because it is the amount which the average smoker consumes.

A vegetarian needs only to consider the amount of protein necessary, and obtained from the food eaten. The other nutrients will be supplied in proportions correct enough to satisfy the body requirements under normal conditions of health. The only thing to take note of is that more fat and carbohydrates are needed in cold weather than hot, the body requiring more fuel for warmth. But even this is not essential: the essential thing is to have the required amount of protein. In pa.s.sing, it is interesting to observe the following: the fact that in a mixed fruitarian diet the proportion of the nutrient compounds is such as to satisfy natural requirements is another proof of the suitability of the vegetable regimen to the human organism. It is a provision of Nature that those foods man's digestive organs are constructed to a.s.similate with facility, and man's organs of taste, smell, and perception best prefer, are those foods containing chemical compounds in proportions best suited to nourish his body.

One of the many reasons why flesh-eating is deleterious is that flesh is an ill-balanced food, containing, as it does, considerable protein and fat, but no carbohydrates or neutralising salts whatever. As the body requires three to four times more carbohydrates than protein, and protein cannot be properly a.s.similated without organic minerals, it is seen that with the customary 'bread, meat and boiled potatoes' diet, this proportion is not obtained. Prof. Chittenden holds the opinion that the majority of people partake greatly in excess of food rich in protein.