HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: LMEANS@cmsa.gmr.com
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: Flour Tortillas
Date: 8 Apr 92 19:50:16 GMT
Organization: GM Research Labs

My favorite burrito includes hash browns (cooked, of course),
whole chili beans (the ones you buy with a spicy sauce),
salsa, chopped tomatoes, cheese, and avocado.  I like the
consistency of hash browns and whole beans better than
refried beans and rice.
From: mpon@gmuvax2.gmu.edu (Persona Chameleon)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: ...photograph alternatives...
Date: 10 Apr 92 17:51:15 GMT
Organization: George Mason University, Fairfax, Va.

The only thing I can think of (and it's expensive and inconvenient) is
to digitize your image and print it with a laser printer, or use a
color laser printer which uses 4 sheets of plastic dyes or 4 kinds of
toner to do the job.  I don't think these use anything animal based,
but I could be wrong.  I also don't know if this would be acceptable for
your press kits.

Good luck!

Malcolm

-- 

Malcolm K. Pon			   "How many Elephants is that?"
Internet: mpon@gmuvax2.gmu.edu	 	- Anneliese F. Hopwood
GEnie:    ETERNITY
From: tfisher@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Tom Fisher)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Roasted Peppers
Date: 13 Apr 92 20:55:28 GMT
Article-I.D.: CERIS.1992Apr13.205528.15830
Organization: Center for Environmental and Regulatory Information Systems, Purdue University

I'm new to this group.  What is a roasted pepper and, in what
section of a large grocery store are you likely to find them?


-- 
====================================================================
Tom Fisher
tfisher@ceris.purdue.edu      |  "...if by chance we find each
Phone (317) 494-6616          |  other, it is beautiful." - F. Perls
From: Michael J. Hudak <mhudak@igc.org>
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Date: 07 Apr 92 21:25 PDT
Subject: Does IBM do animal tests?
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1451200002:000:470
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!mhudak    Apr  7 21:25:00 1992


A friend, who is both a stockholder and an employee of IBM,
tells me that in 1991 there was an IBM stockholder resolution
calling for IBM to refrain from animal testing.  The resolution was
opposed by IBM management and it was defeated.  This year no
such resolution was proposed.

We would like to know what kind of animal testing IBM does, and
why.and where it is done.

Does IBM do the testing, or is it contracted to someone else?

Thanks for your comments.

--Mike
From: sun@maxwell.physics.purdue.edu (Sundar R. Sarukkai)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Vegeterian restaurants in chicago
Date: 14 Apr 92 16:03:55 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Purdue University Physics Department, W. Lafayette, IN

I would like a list of vegeterian restaurants in chicago. If someone can
supply me with one, I would be much obliged. I am planning to check out one
of these restaurants on thursday so a quick response would be tremendously
helpful!
thanks
sundar
Organization: Senior, English, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 18:34:57 -0400 
From: "David F. McWade" <dm3o+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: I support Michael Traub



I too support Michael Traub, although I do believe that he can be a
little obnoxious at times (particularly about macrobiotics, which he
should read up on  : -).  There are PLENTY of people on this list that I
think are MORE obnoxious than Michael Traub, and most of them are not
vegetarians.

I generally think that all of us should be less obnoxious, generally. 
If we can do that (and I'm no angel), then we can have more dialogue and
understanding.  Perhaps a more sensitive person than myself should post
a list of guidelines for the different types of people on this list so
that people don't step on each other's toes.

Dave
From: traub@rtf.bt.co.uk (Michael Traub)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: A suggestion for rec.food.recipies
Date: 11 Apr 92 17:43:43 GMT
Organization: BT Customer Systems, Brighton, UK

In article <92101.163538SECBU@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> SECBU@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU writes:
>But that was just the point.... you CAN be childish and arrogant
>or is that ignorant???

I don't know, you tell me, where was I arrogant or ignorant?

>That is what is turning veg and non-veg's
>away from this newsgroup.  Read todays mail.  One of your own
>is ready to drop because nobody says anything right on this
>line.

I have read todays mail. I had four letters of support and no
letters of complaint. How would you know what was in my mail
anyway unless you sent it?

>  I have never seen anyone try to convert any of you to
>anything.

You can't be reading all the articles then can you?

>Yet you are ever so defensive and down right nasty.

Only when responding in kind.

>I was just talking to a friend of mine about just that, last
>night.  It is just a shame.  I read to get recipes and information
>not be lamblasted at the slightest provocation.

Try rec.food.recipes, I think Charlie might forward some from here
for those of you that just wish to snarf recipes all day long. I
don't suppose you've ever though of buying a recipe book have you?

>Go ahead and flame me, I will not read your mail.

That's ok, I'm posting this.

>I am tired of being told that I am an idiot, uneducated,
>heathen, just because I don't hold with EVERYTHING you say.

I have never called anyone in this newgroup uneducated or
idiotic or a heathen because they don't hold with something
I have said. Why don't you point out an example of this supposed
behaviour (else shut your mouth).

>I don't care what you eat, so lighten up, AYE?

I don't give a toss what you eat either mate.


-- 
Michael Traub
BT Customer Systems, Brighton Systems Centre. traub@rtf.bt.co.uk
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
From: omitchel@jarthur.claremont.edu (Ocie *banjo* Mitchell)
Subject: Re: Tofu bacon recipe?
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 04:34:14 GMT

Sorry about the double posting, our news server was a bit flakey today.


----------------------------------------------+-------------------------------
``What do you think sirs?''  -Joel (mst3k)    | do not write above this line
----------------------------------------------+------------------------------- 
   __             _ _ _                       | Ocie Mitchell
  / ')           ' ) ) )  _/_    /      /) /) | omitchel@jarthur.claremont.edu
 /  / _. o _      / / / o /  _. /_  _  // //  | Q:is that your real name? 
(__/ (__(_(<_    / ' (_(_(__(__/ /_(<_(/_(/_  | A:yes, it is my real name.
----------------------------------------------+-------------------------------
From: young@sasquatch.serum.kodak.com (Rich Young (x37176))
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: the single vegetarian
Date: 6 Apr 92 22:56:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: ssd.1992Apr6.225644.13997
Organization: Clinical Products Division, Eastman Kodak Company

nkraft@bkhouse.cts.com (Norman Kraft) writes:

[...]

>Actually, I think you've missed part of my point. In such studies as those
>quoted above, and others of smaller groups, the data has shown that as
>meat consumption decreases, so do health troubles of the cardiovascular
>and typically western "excess" variety. While no large scale studies have 
>been done on truly vegan populations (if there are any), the conclusion 
>certainly leads to the strong possibility that if meat products were 
>completely removed from the diet, the observed trends would continue. 
>This is not cold, hard support for using the China data to support a vegan 
>diet, but the data certainly hints at a vegan conclusion. It most assuredly
>leads me away from the "meat is good for you" argument.

   I don't really disagree with this in principle, it's more a matter of
   degree.  While you're led away from the "meat is good for you" argument,
   I find no justification that the "any meat is bad for you" argument holds
   water.  My own feeling is that there is some level below which no
   significant or useful improvement in health occurs.  When we have studies
   which clearly show that strict veganism provides a useful improvement
   in health, I will change that view.  Thus far, there have been no such
   studies quoted here.

[...]

>It's not black and white, it's all a matter of tendencies and trends
>observed, but I think the vegan position is a shade or two of grey in 
>the healthier direction.

   Again, we don't really disagree here.  There is clearly great risk in
   the "standard" Western diet, whether or not strict veganism is required
   to minimize these risks is not clear.  I will never dispute the "less is
   better" argument, but "none is best" is, as yet, an unjustifiable
   conclusion from a health standpoint.

-Rich (young@serum.kodak.com)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are MY opinions, don't blame them on my employer.

Don't get angry, get accurate information.
From: "john russell" <john.russell@canrem.com>
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: leather
Date: 11 Apr 92 19:43:33 EST
Reply-To: "john russell" <john.russell@canrem.com>
Distribution: rec
Organization: Canada Remote Systems

I don't have any problem with wearing leather shoes or jackets.  In the
same way that I accept that noxious chemicals were used to produce the
electronics gear I'm telecommunicating with, I accept that the
production of much clothing involves things I wouldn't want to do or
watch myself.

The reasons I draw a distinction between clothes and food are:

- Well, eating meat just grosses me out, eh?

- I haven't heard that animals used for leather are factory-farmed the
same way food animals are.  (As a guy I don't have to worry about fur
:-).

- I can accept the "natural order" reasoning much more easily for
clothing than for food.  I.e., although humans may not have evolved to
eat meat, they went through long periods where there was no choice but
to use animals for clothing and tools.  I know it is possible to
dispense with such things now, but not so easily that I can consider
animal-derived products luxuries.

- A pair of leather shoes or a jacket or car upholstery can provide
years of use, vs. a couple of hours that a meal can fill someone's
stomach.  If you can limit your impact on the environment to an animal
or two every couple of years, you're probably doing OK.  (Equivalent to
an ultra-strict vegan who runs over a raccoon by accident.)  It comes
down to, how much difficulty and discomfort are you willing to subject
yourself to for how much benefit to the animal kingdom?

John
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
From: traub@rtf.bt.co.uk (Michael Traub)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: India (was Re: Dairy farming (Was: Ben & Jerry's ice cream))
Date: 17 Apr 92 09:38:51 GMT
Organization: BT Customer Systems, Brighton, UK

In article <92107.140526U15297@uicvm.uic.edu> U15297@uicvm.uic.edu (Shyamala Parameswaran) writes:
>Just a little nitpicking. Parsees are *not* fruitarians and I doubt
>any other group is. There is a difference to consuming a lot of
>fruit in one's regular diet and eating only fruit. Parsees are
>great meat-lovers. Their "dhansak" is usually a rave among
>non-vegetarians for the tenderly cooked meat bits in lentil and
>vegetables and subtle spice flavorings.
>
I have already mentioned that I had gotten confused between Jains and
Parsees. I must now admit that the reason why is rather racist. When
in Bombay our uncle took us around the city and one area I remember well
was the "Parsee area". My uncle (a catholic priest) took great delight
in pointing out the colour of their skin and remarking how light it
was. It was almost as if he were saying that "they are not one of us".
Recently their was a discussion about Jains and I also saw a show on
TV about them. On one of these occasions a remark was made that they
look very pale because of their diet. I'm afraid I mixed the two up
on purely racist (skin colour) grounds. Apologies again.

>Also, while milk per se is not a big consumption item generally,
>yogurt, buttermilk, i.e. sweet and salted lassis are fairly common.
>
What I was trying to get across here (and again I could be wrong),
was that the volume of actual milk drunk was low, and that
milk is often watered down so this and the fact that some people in
India do eat meat would explain (to me at least) why India is not
over-run by cows as someone originally intimated.

On a personal note I have never drunk anything more *foul* than a
salted lassi!



-- 
   "This isn't an argument, you're just contradicting me!"  "No I'm not."
   
Michael Traub
BT Customer Systems, Brighton Systems Centre. traub@rtf.bt.co.uk
From: raghu@norway.fishkill.ibm.com (Raghu Hudli)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Carotene extract from pumpkin
Keywords: pumpkin extract, pumpkin pulp
Date: 6 Apr 92 14:03:14 GMT
Reply-To: raghu@vnet.ibm.com
Followup-To: none
Distribution: usa
Organization: IBM Corp., E. Fishkill, NY

I read in a book "Foods that Heal" by M. Salaman that Soviet researchers
extracted carotene - vitamin A precursor - from pumpkins and treated 
eczema patients with it in two ways -- orally and as an ointment -- and 
found it to be very effective even for atopic eczema.  

I would like to know if carotene extract from pumpkin or pumpkin 
pulp or pumpkin extract is available anywhere in the US.

I would appreciate very much for any information regarding this. 

Thanks in advance. 


Raghu  Hudli
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Raghu V. Hudli                       Tel:   (914) 892-4188
IBM Corporation                      Fax:   (914) 892-4316 
E. Fishkill, NY                      email: raghu@vnet.ibm.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: The opinions/views expressed here are mine and my employer
does not necessarily concur with me.
From: sbhattac@sales.GBA.NYU.EDU (Shankar Bhattacharyya)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: Pepperoni?
Date: 13 Apr 92 20:38:12 GMT
Organization: NYU Stern School of Business

In article <1992Apr13.192904.28084@acsu.buffalo.edu> biehler@acsu.buffalo.edu (Timothy J. Biehler) writes:

>A few things about their advert scared me a bit ... such as proudly
>proclaiming that all their ingredients are on the USDA's GRAS list.
>(Probably nothing wrong with this, but it sort of strikes me
>as saying "The government doesn't *think* this stuff will kill you!
>:-))

The GRAS (Generally Regarded As Safe) designation means that given a long
history of established use, predating any FDA regulations, FDA has no
rules on the use, and no official opinion. That also means that FDA has, in
general, done nothing whatsoever about checking, one way or the other. At
long intervals some substance on the GRAS list gets re-examined, but it
takes a lot of evidence for anyone to get concerned.

Other than substances on the GRAS list, no additive can be used unless
there exist specific rules for its use.

The list is simply a grandfathering mechanism. Safety is presumed from the
history of use, without any opinion from FDA.

I'm pretty usre that Tim knows this already. I'm just mentioning this so
that the exceptionally paranoid don't get any more paranoid.

- Shankar
From: mma9872@csseq.cs.tamu.edu (Matthew M Agee)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: the whole plant pain question . . .
Date: 8 Apr 92 21:42:36 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Texas A&M University
	....in response to the request that this discussion be taken 
					...matthew m. agee...
					mma9872@csseq.cs.tamu.edu
From: Kamchatka Charlie
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: suggested guidelines for dealing with r.f.v
Keywords: 2,5,10
Date: 15 Apr 92 03:36:38 GMT
Organization: Psychosis Unlimited International

msieweke@hayes.com writes:
>I've been watching most of the recent flame-wars (and "kill"ing the rest),
>and I think it's time we had a posting giving guidelines on how to deal
>with rec.food.veg.  Here's what I came up with - time to break out the
>asbestos underwear.  I hope you have as much fun reading this as I had
>writing it.

     (suggestions removed)
I'll go along.  Heck, I even saved it on disk.

>These are not intended to be flames, but (5) someone will always
misunderstand.
     I just hope the misunderstandings ain't intentional.

(BTW; how did *I* get named on this list?  I only hopped in in time to
inadvertantly start the latest flame war with my suggestion that...ah, skip it.
 You must have been inspired by it.)

kamchatka charlie
kamchar@ibm.cl.msu.edu
From: biehler@acsu.buffalo.edu (Timothy J. Biehler)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Soap
Date: 12 Apr 92 23:27:28 GMT
Organization: UB

This is not meant to be an advert, but I am posting this strictly
for information for those who are interested.

A week or two ago I ran across a brand  of soap at a local market
called "Clearly Natural" which advertised that it was "cruelty free".
I was wondering whether that meant not tested on animals, or whether
it meant also it was not made from animal products and so I wrote
to the company.  The following is thier reply (posted without
permissions)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello!

Thank you very much for your kind letter. We're pleased that you like
our quality glycerine soap and that you would take the time to
let us know.

Not many of our customers are aware that we use only the finest
non-animal ingredients for our products, and that we do not test
on laboratory animals/  Glycerine, our primary ingredient, is a natural
humectant which allows your skin to absord water and our soap contains
more glycerine than any other soap on the market.  Glycerine is the
reason your skin feels fresh and dewey after washing, instead of
dry as with ordinary soaps.  You may also be please to know that
Clearly Natural soaps don't leave behind a filmy residue --- on either
your skin or your bathtub.  What's more, if you keep your soap in
a dry soap dish (one where water won't collect) it will last longer.

Thank you once agai for writing to us. Customers like you are
our greatest asset.

Best wishes,
Peggy Dunne
CCLEARLY NATURAL PRODUCTS
_________________________________________________________________________

The soap is available at the local market for 69 cents per bar.
It is available in a lot of different scents.

The companies adress is

CCLEARLY NATural
1306 Dynamic Street
Petulama, CA 94952
(707)762-5815

PLEASE NOTE THAT I DO NOT WORK FOR THIS COMPANY and am only posting this\
for information for those who, like me, have been looking for a non-animal
soap.  I don't claim their soap to be superior to any other; only to be
the only non-animal one I can find around here.

Tim Biehler
*******************************************************************************
* "I'm too sexy for my cat,		*				      *
*	I'm too sexy for my hat!	*  Tim Biehler			      *
*  I'm too sexy for my car,		*  biehler@acsu.buffalo.edu	      *
*	I'm more sexy than you are!"	*  V116jugp@ubvms.buffalo.edu	      *
*	  	-- Dr. Seuss            * 				      *
*******************************************************************************
From: traub@rtf.bt.co.uk (Michael Traub)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: Dairy Farms and Cows
Date: 17 Apr 92 07:51:23 GMT
Organization: BT Customer Systems, Brighton, UK

In article <EdvW=Uy00VB3M4aKgH@andrew.cmu.edu> dm3o+@andrew.cmu.edu (David F. McWade) writes:
>
>I am a vegan for ecological reasons as well as ethical ones, and also
>health reasons (also economic ones, although I wish I had more evidence
>about that.)
>
Well if you're broke you're broke Dave!->

I will post some details later on the economical advantages. I normally
ignore many of these arguments because most economics is utter BS. I
follow the "small is beautiful" type economics of Schumacher (sp?), that
is economics is only relevant if all factors are taken into consideration
(pollution, energy consumption in production, etc.). Supply and demand
style economics are for the birds if you ask me.





-- 
   "This isn't an argument, you're just contradicting me!"  "No I'm not."
   
Michael Traub
BT Customer Systems, Brighton Systems Centre. traub@rtf.bt.co.uk
From: biehler@acsu.buffalo.edu (Timothy J. Biehler)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: Vegetarianism and warexit
Date: 9 Apr 92 18:50:42 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <1992Apr9.084047.16640@rtf.bt.co.uk> traub@rtf.bt.co.uk (Michael Traub) writes:

>If this newsgroup does not agree with your "open mind" then find another
>newsgroup.
>
>
>
>-- 
>Michael Traub
>BT Customer Systems, Brighton Systems Centre. traub@rtf.bt.co.uk

	Well, nobody will accuse you of plagiarizing
	Voltaire, that's for sure.

Tim

*******************************************************************************
* "I'm too sexy for my cat,		*				      *
*	I'm too sexy for my hat!	*  Tim Biehler			      *
*  I'm too sexy for my car,		*  biehler@acsu.buffalo.edu	      *
*	I'm more sexy than you are!"	*  V116jugp@ubvms.buffalo.edu	      *
*	  	-- Dr. Seuss            * 				      *
*******************************************************************************
From: fyl@ssc.wa.com (Phil Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: Lavilin
Date: 16 Apr 92 20:40:22 GMT
Organization: SSC, Inc., Seattle, WA

In article <1992Apr13.152020.18277@acsu.buffalo.edu> biehler@acsu.buffalo.edu (Timothy J. Biehler) writes:
>In this month's issue of Vegetarian Times there was an advert for
>Lavilin, a deodorant of sorts which supposedly you apply once to
>your 'pits and don't need to again for about a weeks or two.
...

>work.  So I'll try it, but I was wondering if anyone has used this
>product, and if so, 
>
>(a) is it vegetarian in source?

Yes.  It is, as I remember, potato starch with herbs (arnica or calengula,
I think).  

>(b) how effective is it?

I don't normally use it (I use my 50-50 baking soda-corn starch mixture)
but have used it when I go backpacking.  (You wash and apply it at night
before going to bed.)  I have never tried a 2-week test but 3 days of
backpacking seems like a pretty good test and it worked ok.
-- 
Phil Hughes, SSC, Inc. P.O. Box 55549, Seattle, WA 98155  (206)FOR-UNIX
     uunet!nwnexus!ssc!fyl or fyl@ssc.wa.com            (206)527-3385
From: michael@psych.toronto.edu (Michael Gemar)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: Dairy farming (Was: Ben & Jerry's ice cream)
Date: 16 Apr 92 21:07:32 GMT
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto

In article <5020390@hpindda.cup.hp.com> gph@hpindda.cup.hp.com (Paul Houtz) writes:

>Cream is extremely high in saturated fat and cholesterol.  The eggs used
>are unborn chickens, fertile or not, and I won't eat them.  
                                 ^^^

Not to pick nits, but unfertile eggs are no more unborn chickens that
unfertilized ova are unborn humans.  If it ain't fertilized, it ain't
gonna be a chicken.

Of course, the horrible conditions of battery hens still makes avoiding
eggs a reasonable course of action...

- michael
Organization: Senior, English, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Date: Tue,  7 Apr 1992 14:02:14 -0400 
From: "David F. McWade" <dm3o+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: USA Today April 7th


In today's USA today (April 7th) there's a simplisticly written article
about pig factories in North Carolina.  The article is mainly centered
around a debate between environmental activists and the industry as to
how much environmental damage and stench the factories cause.

More to the point, the article gives the impression that the pigs are
handled with great care (due to the simplistic argument "the quality of
the 'merchandise' is better that way") and have a great time.  I can't
help feel that the "newspaper" got their information straight from the
industry on this one.  Apparently they don't know about factory farms.

I encourage anyone to post the article for further review.  Perhaps we
should embark on a letter writing campaign to USA Today (which is the
largest newspaper in the country) and let them know that they are
inaccurately reporting on factory farms, and even tell them what goes on
in factory farms.

After all, the people have a right to know.

David McWade
dm3o@andrew.cmu.edu