HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: butter vs. margarine
Date: 14 Aug 92 11:54:51 GMT
Reply-To: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Organization: COMANDOS Project, Glesga Yoonie

duncan@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Duncan McEwan) wrote:
> When I was living in the UK a couple of years ago I tasted some really
> horrible margarine.  It's been a while now, but I'm sure that when I looked
> at the ingredient's list, I noticed that "animal fats" where listed...
> Does anyone know if this could be true, or is my memory faulty?

There is a truly disgusting description of margarine manufacture in William
Poundstone's book "The Secret House" (I don't have it handy so can't quote
the passage in question).  Yes, it often does contain animal fat; this
means tallow.  Others don't do this but use milk powder as an additive.
But Poundstone's description does not apply to pure sunflower margarines,
which are what I mostly use.  Fortunately UK labelling laws are good enough
that you can work out what you're getting.

Since margarine manufacture mainly consists of saturating previously
unsaturated fats, marge is never going to be as good a food as the raw
materials that go into it; in particular melting it makes no sense - if
you need an oil for frying, use something that's oily at room temperature.


> Here in New Zealand I have never seen any margarine with with animal fats
> listed as an ingredient -- some have skim milk products -- I'm not sure if
> that is what the UK margarine was talking about...

Bizarre NZ marge story: when the stuff was first introduced there (in the
early 70s) the dairy industry lobbied for a law that would require it to
be dyed blue.  They settled for a pricing floor that made it more expensive
than butter.

-- 
--  Jack Campin    room G092, Computing Science Department, Glasgow University,
17 Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8RZ, Scotland   TEL: 041 339 8855 x6854 (work)
INTERNET: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk or via nsfnet-relay.ac.uk    FAX: 041 330 4913
BANG!net: via mcsun and uknet     BITNET: via UKACRL    UUCP: jack@glasgow.uucp
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
From: traub@btcs.bt.co.uk (Michael Traub)
Subject: Re: E1404 etc. (Re: LIST OF INGREDIENTS DERIVED FROM ANIMALS)
Organization: BT Customer Systems, Brighton, UK
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 08:13:16 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.092857.5711@cs.joensuu.fi> hpiirai@cs.joensuu.fi (Heikki Piirainen) writes:
>Does anybody know anything about those E numbers they use over
>here to identify some ingredients? E1404 (or something like
>that) is gelatin; are there others to be aware of?

Hmm, My "E for Additives" book doesn't even have an E number for gelatin,
mind you its three years old now. I hope we are talking about the same E
numbers!

From the Vegan Society's 'Animal Free Shopper':

Animal Derived Ingredients
--------------------------

120 - cochineal
542 - edible bone phosphate
631 - sodium 5'-inosinate
901 - beeswax
904 - shellac
920 - L-cysteine hydrochloride

Un-numbered:
calcium mesoinositol hexaphosphate, lactose, sperm oil, spermaceti

Possibly animal derived
-----------------------

This list is rather long, forgive me but all you get is the numbers.

101,101a,153,203,213,227,270,282,302,322,325,326,327,333,341a,341b,341c,
404,422,430,431,432,433,434,435,436,470,471,472a,472b,472c,472d,472e,473,
474,475,476,477,478,481,482,483,491,492,493,494,495,570,572,627,635

Un-numbered:
calcium hepatonate, calcium phytate, diacetin - glyceryl, glyceryl diacetate,
glyceryl triacetate, glycine, leucine, monoacetate, monoacetin, oxystearin,
triacetin and any unspecified flavourings.

The Vegan Society recommend:

"The  addition  of  substances  to  modify  food  is  by  no  means  a  new
phenomenon.  Salt,  for  example,  has been used as a preservative since c.
3000  BC.  However,  the sheer number of additives available for use today,
the  routine  and  insidious  use  of  animal-derived substances, the known
health   problems   associated   with  some  additives  (including  eczema,
hyperactivity,  nausea,  allergies,  asthma  and  migraine), the hazards of
others  that  may  yet  come  to  light,  and  the  totally unnecessary and
morally  abhorrent  requirement  to  test  NEW  ADDITIVES  ON  ANIMALS, all
provide  the  animal-free  shopper  with a great incentive to shun most, if
not all, additive containing products."

I would go along with most of that but remember that some of these E
numbers are very harmless. For example E101 is vitamin B2, E140 is
chlorophyll, E160a is carotene, E162 is beetroot red, E170 is calcium
carbonate, E260 is acetic acid, E290 is carbon dioxide, E300 is
vitamin C, E322 is lecithin (though possibly animal derived), E330 is
citric acid, E406 is agar-agar, E407 is carrageenan, E410 is locust bean
gum or ceratonia gum or carob bean gum, E412 is guar gum...

If any UK reader has read this far I have an old (1985) E for additives
I wish to dispose of. Any takers? I'll even pay the postage!


-- 
Michael Traub
From: mary@uicsl.csl.uiuc.edu (Mary E. Allison)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: Are there any reasonably priced cruelty free products???
Date: 20 Aug 1992 20:12:13 GMT
Organization: Center for Reliable and High-Performance Computing, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: uicsl.csl.uiuc.edu

sanderso@math.rutgers.edu (Yasmine B. Sanderson) writes:

>In article <1992Aug12.191742.14006@cci632.cci.com>, agc@cci632.cci.com (Anupama Chathampally - co-op) writes:
>> 
>> 	I just went to the body shop yesterday and spent $16+ on a deoderant,
>> and a tiny bottle each of shampoo and conditioner.  I love getting cruelty free
>> products but I can't afford them.  I just looked through the FAQ list and saw
>> a bunch of other places.  Before I write to these places does anyone have any
>> recommendations on places that are more reasonably priced and have good stuff?
>> Thanks.


>A CHEAP effective deoderant is baking soda. I use it and have never
>had any complaints. Other suggestions for creulty free beauty products
>that you can make at home are in Debra Lynn Dodd's The Nontoxic Home (
>a book).

PETA puts out a list of companies that do not test on animals and a
list of products that contain NO animal products.  There are MANY
inexpensive cruelty free products.

*I* wish that everyone that did NOT test would list it on the
container, then I wouldn't need to carry around my PETA list :^) 

--
I owe the government $3400 in taxes.  So I sent them two hammers
and a toilet seat.
  -- Michael McShane

    Mary Allison (mary@uicsl.csl.uiuc.edu) Urbana, Illinois
Catx2 Owned, Square Dancer, Leaper, Ballroom Dancer in training
From: young@serum.kodak.com
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: Hamburger disease kills girl
Date: 14 Aug 92 16:12:35 GMT
Article-I.D.: pixel.1992Aug14.161235.6300
Reply-To: young@serum.kodak.com
Organization: Clinical Products Division, Eastman Kodak Company
Originator: young@sasquatch

In article <14253@mindlink.bc.ca> Christine_Code@mindlink.bc.ca (Christine Code) writes:
>Want one more reason not to eat meat?   Here's an article that appeared on the
>front page of the Vancouver Sun newspaper on Wednesday, August 12, 1992.

[...]

>HUS is caused by a type of E. coli bacterium found in raw meat.

   Sometimes...maybe.  From the redoubtable Merck Manual [emphasis has been
   added]:

	   "HUS occurs primarily in infants and small children and pregnant
	or postpartum women.  ITS PATHOGENESIS IS DEBATED.  In SOME patients,
	gram-negative infection (e.g., an episode of diarrheal illness due
	to a gram-negative organism [i.e., E. coli 0157:H7]) appears to be
	an initiating agent..."

   Just another $.02 added to the mix.

[...]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>|<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Rich Young                             | Phone: (716) 253-7176
Eastman Kodak Company                  | FAX: (716) 253-7254
Clinical Products Division             | Internet: young@serum.kodak.com
100 Carlson Road                       |
Rochester, New York, USA   14653-9122  | These are MY opinions, not Kodak's!!!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>|<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Don't get angry, get accurate information.
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
From: 6175190@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Subject: Re: Organic vs. cruelty free
Organization: Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 17:51:04 GMT

spratt@src.honeywell.com (Steve Pratt)says:
>
>All this discussion of animal by-products and what is or is not cruelty
>free has led me to a very disturbing train of thought.
>
>For the normal reasons (health, socio-economic, and environmental
>conciousness) I have recently started to focus on so-called "organically"
>grown products.  I have also, due in no small part to the eloquent advocacy
>of the many vegans in this group, started to move from being an ovo-lacto
>vegetarian to reduce my use of any animal derived products, food and
>non-food alike.
>
>Now comes my dilemma.  I started thinking about what "organic" farming
>means.  If you look in a dictionary, you will see something like "grown
>with only animal and vegetable fertilizers, as manure, bone meal, compost,
>etc."  I have no problem with compost (although this may be an issue for
>fruititarians :-) but bone meal?  This sounds very reminiscent of the
>discussion that we just had about the use of bone char in the refining of
>sugar.  And manure?  Surely, the animals are not kept around *just* to
>produce fertilizer (is so, it sounds incredibly inefficient, so it raises
>economic and environmental issues, at a minimum), so we can hardly call
>manure an innocent by-product.
>
>All this makes me really depressed.  Can someone point out the error in
>this thinking, or are we doomed ultimately to drawing arbitrary lines in
>this "cruelty free" business?
>
Just a thought, but... I bet if you peeked into the rec.equestrian group,
you'd find lots of folks willing to part with horse manure, which can be
great fertilizer. AND you can bet none of these animals has been abused
or raised with money as the prime motivation (very little money in horses
these days, for riding anyway). There are folk from all over the world
there too! Maybe we could help each other out! ;-)
Diane
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
From: tara@socrates.umd.edu (Tara McDermott)
Subject: Re: RECIPE REQUESTS: Vegan Muffins and seitan 
Organization: University of Maryland University College
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 18:22:36 GMT

marylou@bwdlh490.BNR.CA (MaryLou Rowe) writes:

>Hi. I'm looking for recipes for vegan muffins. Also, I would love some
>good seitan recipes (as in using it as opposed to making seitan itself).
>Please post if you 'ave any!!

I just posted three recipes I have recently tried making, with great
success.  My recipe book has a few others - Best Bran Muffins,
Peanutty Corn Muffins, and Date-Nut Muffins.  I haven't tried any of
them yet, but if there's any interest, I could post them.

Tara
-- 
Tara McDermott            "We suggest people take their Food Pyramids,
                            cut off the top and make a Healthy Eating
tara@socrates.umd.edu         Trapezoid."  -Neal Barnard, M.D.
From: dondd@hpmwtd.sr.hp.com (Don Dillon)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: Eggplants, mushrooms, Chinese style
Date: 12 Aug 92 22:44:36 GMT
Organization: HP Santa Rosa Site (NMD MTA MWTD)

>stcmille@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (Stephen C. Miller) /  7:06 am  Aug 12, 1992 /
>Hum-te-dum.
>
>Sitting around at work, bored.  Wondering, what will I make for dinner
>tonight?  Then I remmeber:  I bought an eggplant yesterday and have some
>dried shitakes and some hot peppers and green peppers.  Wonder what
>they'll looks like Chinese style.
>
>Hmm..
>
>Anybody have some ideas about saucing this one, and perhaps suggestions
>for a few more ingredients?
>

Yeah steve, why don't you skewer these on red hot pokers slathered with
a good soy/sherry/cornstarch sauce.  Be sure to tongue the skewers many
times to achieve the correct endorphine pleasure.  Me.... I just stick a few
scotch bonnets between my cheek and gumms.


BTW, for those of you who think I came off the wall here... check out
Steve's post in rec.food.historic, under "custard apple was Re: why
chile-hot food?"....... made me laugh.  NOT!!! ;)

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Don { couldn't resist } Dillon

INTERNET : dondd@sr.hp.com
TELNET   : 577-3690
PHONE    : 707-577-3690
From: rfelix@netcom.com (Robbie Felix)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: I love red meat! I love sugar!
Date: 15 Aug 92 14:14:41 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Aug14.145755.4385@bb1t.monsanto.com> rghoff@bb1t.monsanto.com writes:

>
>Gee, my great grandma smoked (and inhaled) a pipe from the time she was
>a kid and ate fried everything from the day she was born and died a very
>premature death at 98.
>
>Yep Michael, you seem to ALWAYS be right. And you're awlfully good at telling
>us too.... :-)
>
>Rick Hoffman.

Gee Rick,

My mom ate fried everything everyday of her life,too, She is currently
in the stroke recovery at Kaiser. She is paralyzed from head to toe on
her left side. Perhaps she will recover, maybe not. She is 54.

She could live to be 98, too. It's hard to imagine what the quality of
her life could be like.

Some people don't pay a high price for their excesses, some do.

I hope you are among the lucky ones.

rf
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
From: abulsari@abo.fi (Abhay Bulsari VT)
Subject: Re: the term "vegetarian"
Organization: Abo Akademi University
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 08:14:28 GMT

In article <BtDDFD.2sE@acsu.buffalo.edu> marcotte@acsu.buffalo.edu (Brian Marcotte) writes:
>Yes, I am a vegetarian. I don't eat or use products that come from
>dead animals (I am an Ovo-Lacto vegetarian).

That makes ovo-lacto an adjective  to vegetarian,  more  or less  like
other  adjectives - pesce,  etc. which  means (or  at  least  gives  a
feeling to someone who hasn't heard of it  before)  that many  of them
are various kinds of vegetarians.

>I'd like to suggest that the terms "semi-vegetarian" and
>"pesce-vegetarian" can help PREVENT this confusion.
>
>The prefix "semi" means "to some extent...", or "having some of the
>characteristics of...". The prefix "semi" can be put in front of many
>words (semi-independent, semicivilized, etc). I got this information,
>directly from a US English dictionary.

That makes it a US semi-English dictionary.

>This is exactly the same as putting "ovo" or "lacto" in front of the
>term "vegetarian". Since these are accepted terms, if someone calls
>themself a "vegetarian", you don't know if they drink milk, or eat
 ^^^^^^^^
>eggs.
>
>The term "vegetarian" is now vague. It at least means someone who eats
>no meat. To some, it may mean someone who eats no animal products at
>all but uses other animal products. To others it may mean someone who
>uses no products derived from animals (virtually impossible in the
>"civilized" world).
>
>Putting modifiers in front of "vegetarian", like "ovo", "lacto",
>"semi", "pesce", "pseudo", etc. just serve to try to make it clear
                                      ^^^^^
>what you are trying to say.
>
>If you want to eliminate the terms "semi-vegetarian" and
>"pesce-vegetarian" from the english language, you may as well
>eliminate "Ovo and/or Lacto vegetarian".
>
>In the FAQ where "semi-vegetarian" is defined, it says "See also:
>pseudo-vegetarian".
>
>That section of the FAQ trys to reflect the overall opinions of
                         ^^^^
>vegetarians (all types).

^^^^^ : I feel dictionaries can be of limited help to you.

>
>	Withholding information is NEVER the answer.
>
>--
>- Brian Marcotte
>marcotte@cs.buffalo.edu

With regards,


-- 
A. Bulsari                                       Tel.  358 (21) 654 721
V{rmeteknik, ]bo Akademi                         Fax   358 (21) 654 792
Va"rmeteknik, A'bo Akademi   (for the non-Scandinavian screen impaired)
SF 20500 Turku, Finland                          Tlx  57 62301 AABIB SF
From: young@serum.kodak.com
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: Tofu, fat and protein
Date: 21 Aug 92 15:52:45 GMT
Article-I.D.: pixel.1992Aug21.155245.3922
Reply-To: young@serum.kodak.com
Distribution: usa
Organization: Clinical Products Division, Eastman Kodak Company
Originator: young@sasquatch

In article <altar.714378758@sfu.ca> altar@beaufort.sfu.ca (Ted Wayn Altar) writes:
>ERRATA:
> 
>Oops, I made a mistake in my earlier posting.  Thanks to Shankar
>Bhattacharyya for his alert observation of the error, it turns
>out that what I listed as being composition for "beef" was only
>for "beef FAT".  Permit me to post a corrected table and also add
>an entry for raw beef sirloin (boneless, 72% lean).  I would have
>preferred an entry for hamburger since tofu is often used for
>vegi-burgers, but my British reference doesn't provide a listing
>for hamburger (!).

   From the USDA:

	Ground beef, broiled, lean, 100 grams:

		water			56.0 grams
		protein			24.7 grams
		fat			18.8 grams

		  saturated		7.29 grams
		  mono-unsat.		8.12 grams
		  poly-unsat.		0.71 grams
		  cholesterol		.084 grams

		energy			271 kcal

	Ground beef, broiled, regular, 100 grams:

		water			54.0 grams
		protein			23.5 grams
		fat			21.2 grams

		  saturated		8.12 grams
		  mono-unsat.		9.06 grams
		  poly-unsat.		0.82 grams
		  cholesterol		.089 grams

		energy			288 kcal

   Although the other nutrients listed in the original posting are also
   included in the USDA data, these should suffice for the subject of "Tofu,
   fat, and protein."  Anyone interested in these other data may e-mail me.


-Rich Young (These are not Kodak's opinions.)
From: wjb@druwa.ATT.COM (BlazekB)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: Vita-Mix ?
Date: 18 Aug 92 21:27:31 GMT

From article <16139@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>, by ez002228@shaggy.ucdavis.edu:
> 
> I would like to hear opinions on the Vita-Mix Juicer.  Is it any
> good?
> 

The Vita-Mixer was discussed quite a bit a while back. Heres some of it:

Someones original question:
>> I have been condidering checking out a "Vitamix" machine. 

Someone elses opinion:

> I have a Vitamix I've had for 6 months. It makes great juice and wonderful
> sorbets. . . .
> It is absolutely everything they say in the way of being easy to clean. 
> We love it and use it all the time.
> 

My opinion:

I second this.  I've had one for ~9 mo also and use it a lot and love it.
I think the advertisement information is quite accurate.  
It is quiet easy to clean and makes great juice.  My only criticism of it is
that it would be nice to have a greater range of speeds.  Even the slow
speed is quiet fast.  But I get around this by toggling the on/off switch.
It comes with a hour long video demonstrating how to use it for  
everything under the sun.  Its quite humorous too in spots.

The vitamix is basically a super-duper blender.  Its got a square sided
stainless steel 2 quart container with a 2 piece plastic lid that allowes
adding stuff while it's running.  The container also has a spigot near the
bottom for dispensing.  It sits on a stainless steel base that has 2 controls:
1) a 3 way switch for forward, off and reverse.  The reverse is spring
loaded so it only stays on while holding it in the reverse direction.
Forward will stay on until turned off.  You can flip back and forth 
between forward and reverse as fast as you want.  
2) a 3 speed switch, slow, medium, fast.  Even slow is quite fast.

The motor is a heavy duty router motor with magnetic drive instead of
gears so you can switch it back and forth between forward and reverse
as much as you want.  They actually recommend this for making 
certain things like bread.

The blades are not sharp like regular blenders.  They use what they call
hammermill blades which have square edges which are better for 
pulverizing, grinding, crushing, etc.
They bottom of the container does not come off at all.  Its permanently
part of the container and the blades are permantenly screwed into the
bottom with nuts and bolts.  It would require tools to remove it.
And you should never need to remove it.  Ever!

The number is easy: 1-800-VITAMIX; 1-800-848-2649.
You can call them and request an information package and prices.
They also advertise a lot in Vegetarian Times if you read that.
Thats where I saw it.  Just so you know it is quiet expensive for
a "blender": ~$400-500.  Mine was $379 in Dec 91 for the top of the
line model with a 7 year warranty.  The company has been in existance
since the 1920's so they should be around for a while.
But their prices were supposed to go up.  I supposedly got some
anniversary prices or something.  I don't remember exactly.

JMHO.
Bill Blazek
wjb@druwa.att.com
From: Greg_Dawson@mindlink.bc.ca (Greg Dawson)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: Yves Burger Burgers
Date: 14 Aug 92 01:28:38 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

Here's the info on Yves Burger Burgers:

Address: Yves Veggie Cuisine Inc.
Vancouver, BC, Canada  V6A 2A8

Phone: 1-800-667-YVES (I don't know if this works outside of Canada, so...)

Phone: (604) 251-1345


I hope this helps. BTW, Yves are working on another product, "along the same
lines" as what they make now. But they wouldn't tell me what it was! I'm hoping
it's some kind of veggie sausage... mmmmm....


Shari Dawson

Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
From: seove@mars.lerc.nasa.gov (ERIC OVERTON)
Subject: Re: Nissan Maxima SE.  good choice?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Distribution: usa
Date: 17 Aug 1992 14:09 EDT  

Sorry.  Wrong group.

I apologize.

Eric
In article <17AUG199213323094@mars.lerc.nasa.gov>, seove@mars.lerc.nasa.gov (ERIC OVERTON) writes...
> 
>I'm thinking about purchasing a '89 Maxima SE.  Is this 
>a good car?
> 
>Thanks 
> 
>Eric