Any Vegetarians/Vegans here?

[Little Rik]

Cavemen. Animal bones. /finished

If it would be natural for ominids or humans to kill and eat meat then they would have been provided by mother nature with strong canine teeth and a digestive system able to process meat but as we can see we haven't not.
So what it means the evidence that even caveman were eating meat?
As i already explained in previous post it means that during hard times man restore to eating whatever is available and even during easier times he can carry on with this unnatural habit.

To a degree, this is true. Many people in developed countries eat MUCH more meat than they need. And I consider this excess, accompanied by suffering as it is, immoral. But I'm asking people to transcend their nature in favor of a moral idea-- not pretending that eating meat is against human nature.

People like you that behave like Gandhi or the Dalai Lama do more damage that meat eaters.
Meat eaters will learn the hard way when vascular diseases will strike when their arteries will choke because of saturated fats, bad cholesterol and toxins coming mainly from meat eating so they one day will shut up and the meat policy will finally change but you with your refusal to fight and have compassion for those who cause problem for everybody will serve to procrastinate the rot.
Gandhi although said something interesting like....there is enough for everybody's need, but not enough for anybody's greed.....did nothing to get rid of the British invaders.
The same with the Dalai Lama who instead of organizing a revolt against the Chinese occupier keep on talking against violence.
Peace and sanity always come after the struggle whether is physical or mental struggle never after words of peace.

I mean, how often do horses adopt the "fashion" of eating meat? Or cows? Or rabbits? Pretty rarely.

Mother nature did not provide herbivorous with the capacity to digest meat.
That is one of the reason why madcow disease sprung up after these animals were given food containing rest of other animals.
Humans follow similar problems as their body can not deal with meat eating.
The difference between herbivorous and man is that while man has the capacity to make decisions (in this case wrong one) animals can not and they are really stuck with instinct and their instinct tell them what to eat and what not to eat.

Anyway, I'm not sure how your argument that your grandparents were omnivores is meant to support your thesis that people aren't omnivorous.

Most of the poor people feel envy to see that rich people have the money to buy and eat meat.
This did not happen only in the past but happen all the time as we can see in the emerging countries where better economic condition allow people to buy more and more meat.
So is not that my grandparents were omnivore by nature but it was that they follow bad habits which were build up in the past for the same reasons and as i already said because the habit of eating meat continue after periods of hardship.

Evolution. Cooked foods are easier to digest, and offer a better net intake of calories, allowing us to burn a truly incredible 25% of our calories on our giant brains.

Unnatural cooked food like meat may well be easy to digest but what this has got to do with the natural human being food like fruit and nuts which if you cook you will ruin their nutritional value?

No fire, no humans. Simple.

Garbage.
Fruit and nuts need no fire.

---

We don't have huge canine teeth to kill creatures because we didn't use our teeth to kill them! Jesus fucking Christ!

So you mean that humans had to wait to eat meat until they develop the mental capacity to fabricate spears or other instruments?
Well in the meantime which could last thousand of years you reckon they only feed on carcasses?
You are a real joke boy!

No not at all, humans either scavenged from carcasses killed by other predators or they hunted using spears. As a lions main weapon is its teeth, ours was our hands.

Again, how did they hunt before they had enough brains to invent weapons?

Hippo have huge canine teeth but that is because they need to kill enemies especially those who threaten them like the crocs not to eat them.

Exactly, the only reason they have those teeth is to defend themselves. They have nothing to do with eating at all. So your point is invalid. If you were to look at the hippos other teeth, you would see that they are adapted to exclusively eat plant matter

Did i say something different?

Animals which their body is made to process different things including meat. (dogs, bears even chickens and so on).

So this is your definition of an omnivore correct?
So by your definition, we are omnivores. We have canine teeth for gripping meat, incisors for slicing meat and molars for chewing both meat and plant. We can digest both meat and plant.

You are running too fast with your imagination.
1) Having teeth to deal with chewing meat has nothing to do with having a digestive system able to digest it.
2) We have very small canine teeth which you can not compare with the teeth of omnivore creature.

Oh how convenient! one of your made up explanations that means whoever disagrees with you is obviously deluded.
How about you come up with a peer-reviewed, scientific study that supports what you are saying. Then maybe, we will believe you. We don't want stupid spiritual websites, we don't want links to voodoo spiritual woo books. We want an article, posted in a peer-reviewed, scientific, mainstream journal.
I would recommend looking on Google Scholar.

Peer review are important but they don't mean that what they say is truth all the time.
If what they say is true that meat is necessary then the hospitals would be almost empty but as we know they are crammed with people who suffer with vascular diseases and that is due to saturated fats, bad cholesterol and toxins coming mainly from a meat diet.