From: altar@beaufort.sfu.ca (Ted Wayn Altar)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: an idea
Date: 28 Aug 92 19:55:29 GMT
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada

young@serum.kodak.com writes:
[...]
>  I'll take this opportunity to say that I have no enmity 
>  toward vegetarians of any stipe,
 
Then why the hate mail and the insulting name-calling?
 
Sending me curt e-mail messages simply asserting  that I am "a
pedant", "immature", "dogmatic", etc. is "hate-mail".  Note that
I have never in turn resorted to such name-calling, yet you have
freely expressed an enmity towards my person by such name-
calling.
 
To take another example, consider your own slanderous remarks of
John Robbins and McDougall that I've reprinted below.
 
 
 
>and in fact agree that "less is better" is sound advice when
>   it comes to dietary fat, especially saturated fat,
 
This is now conventional wisdom and established fact.  So what?
 
Of course "less is better" but I and others have cited and even
detailed good empirical evidence to point out that this is a
continuous relationship such that one can validly conclude
further that "none is best".  You have yet to provide any
evidence to the contrary.  Certainly, you have not been able to
point to some other life style change that reduces risk for CHD
and cancer to the same extent that vegetarians enjoy.  All you
have done is quibble about research you neither have read, nor
shown any willingness to read, nor have any formal training to
properly evaluate.
 
 
>   but I do dislike
>   promulgation of faulty information under the guise of fact
 
No "guise" of fact exits when I and others have at least provided
references and citations for our claims and verifiable facts.
 
 
>  and will offer  corrections on those rare occasions when it
>  seems to be the proper thing to do to 
>  prevent misconceptions or misinterpretations.
 
All very reassuring, but I don't think you are being candid with
us about what you really think about vegetarianism.  Permit to
post a reminder of your own words:
 
In article <1992Jan15.171405.16699@ssd.kodak.com>
young@co2.serum.kodak.com (Rich Young (x37176)) writes:
 
     "I don't argue that the Beef and Dairy Councils don't have
     an agenda to promote, but not all non-vegetarians, etc.
     belong to these organizations, either.  Not all vegetarians,
     etc. make the above claims, but to imply that John Robbins
     or Dr. John McDougall wrote their books out of a sense of
     altruism is ingenuous.  They, too, have an agenda to
     promote: namely the sale of their books.  And what easier
     way than to use incendiary  condemnation of those who don't
     agree and back it up with data manipulated to support their
     points, presented in a misleading fashion?  Can you spell
     GREED?"
     
 
You profess to be guided by an open-minded search for the "truth"
and yet here you are vilifying their person, making slanderous
claims when you simply don't have any evidence whatsoever that
Robbins and McDougall are "manipulating data" or are mere
opportunists only interested in the profits from their books.
Robbins motivated by GREED?  Who are you kidding when the guy out
of conscience turned his back on a fortune.
 
Also, how would you know about their "data manipulation" when you
have not looked up one single primary reference they cite.  At
least I have looked up quite a few of Robbins citations and I
know enough about research methodology/statistics (having taught
it myself) to assure you that Robbins cites his facts correctly.
 
This kind of attack of yours on Robbins and McDougall is not
"truth", it is simply calumny motivated by prejudice.
 
                                          ted
 
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg