Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1912-02-21
Hs-7---si--7-i--i-4-l
VEGETARIANISM.
Experiments to Prove its Superiority
Not Conclusive.

Not Conclusive.
Rather too much stress has been put on
the triumph Of vegetarianism in the test
instituted by DIR. Sargent, physical
director at Harvard university, says the
Springfield Republican.
At his suggestion, two brothers, we'll
matched in age, physical qualifications
and presumably in Inheritance, set out to
walk across the continent, one eating
meat, the other only vegeta bles. During
the journey the meat-eater gained three
pounds in weight, the vegetarian eight
pounds. The conclusion drawn is that
vegetables are the healthier diet, not
only for one leadinga sedentary life, but
for one doing hard work.
''But the conditions of the experiment
are open to question. On such a jaunt
one eats what the country eats, and while
the traveller by train, stopping only at
hotels, is likely to fare better on chops,
beefsteaks and roasts than on tasteless
pulp that passes for vegetables, the Pc
destrian, stopping where night overtakes
| him, is likely to do better with bread and
milk and cheese presumably counted as
vegetables), potatoes, turnips, squash and
| cabbage, than with butchers meat"
The country is prevaiiingly vegetarian;
the city, as it shows itself to the traveller,
is as prevailingly carnivorous. The Ameri-
fcan restaurant or hotel puts the emphasis
on meat. Therefore, to make the expert
ment quite scientific, the pedestrians
should have been accompanied by COM
missary department prepared to supply
both competitors equally we'll.
On the other hand, it is doubtful logic
to appeal from this test, as the New York
World does, to the verdict of history.
Since the beginning OF recorded history
down to our own time, the flesh consum-
ing peoples have been stronger mentally,
morally aud physically than those who
have lived exclusively on grain. Nor has
the superiority OF the beef and beer men
over the rice and tea men been confined to
physical prowess. In all the humanities
and religions and arts and sciences they
are leading and teaching the rice-eaters.
With the exception Of a little corner of
the far East, they are lords of the world.
This is the result OF a test carried on by
millions of men through thousands OF
years. 1t may not have been scientific,
but it was effective.
Yet is it test? Or, in assuming that
meat diet produces a superior race, are
we confounding cause and effect? 1t is
undeniable that races which can afford
meat turn to it as luxury, just as they
turn to white wheat bread or to alcohol or
to sugar. 1t is quite as reasonable, then,
to look upon meat consumption as the re-
ward OF success as to call it the cause of
success.
The case of Japan has been noted: 1t is
not beside the point to recall that the
Romans, when they were most formidable,
were a farmer soldiery and prevailingly
vegetarian, with a sparing addition of
pork, much after the old-time New Eng
land country fashion. In Spain, Caesars
men suffered greatly from having to live
on flesh. In Homeric Greece we read, of
course, of heroic fiesh-eating, but this was
fancy picture; in the historic times OF
Hellenic greatness the Greeks were a
frugal people and their diet was prepon-
derantly Of vegetables.
On the other hand, the races which are
exclusively vegetarian are, usually, so
from dire poverty; il they fail of notab ie
achievement it is not to be ascribei TO
vegetarianism. The Chinese are noG vege-
tarians; they eat anything that can be
eaten, and do not stop there. II they
live mainly on rice it is because they have
mainly rice to eat, and too little of that.
There are many mouths to feed, and every
fertile bit as big as ones hat is used to
raise food. China has a great past, and
may have a great future if it finds the
needed outlet for its millions, but moth
ing is proved as to the relative merits Of
diets.
I'm fact, so confused is the issue by the
tendency of people to take richer and
more palatable food whenever they can
afford it, that we really know very little
about the effect of diet upon history.
The things that seem fairly certain are
that poverty leads to defective nutrition
and enfeebiement, and riches to a surfeit
OF meat and drink and consequent de-
generation. Nations, like individuals,
may well ask to be given neither poverty
nor riches, and the rather lean mixed diet
that goes with the ''golden mediocrity of
the poets'.