What's with the emphasis on meats/fat in Traditional Foods?

[marimara]

I have to know...I've done the MDC Traditional Foods diet before and was shocked at the emphasis on meats/fats over veggies and fruit.
I thought that veggies and fruits (fresh, organic, and local) were the epitome of nutrient dense foods (esp greens). I've read here in the stickies that veggies and fruit are included but they are at the very least, under-emphasized.

I was also thinking about the whole-planet implicatons if such a Traditional Diet, heavy in animal products, is considered to be the pinnacle of human health. I mean, we can't possibly feed everyone on the planet such high amounts of animal products, can we? What about the environmental implications? I mean, wouldn't it be better for the planet, for everyone in general, if we focused on getting better quality produce for people first w/ meats and animal products second? Everyone has heard the quotes of it taking so much more "energy" to get food from animals vs. growing plants, etc. I just keep thinking, what kind of future would we have if we all ate such high amounts of animal products, how is that sustainable?

Personally, I'm all for local, organic, grass fed, free range (etc.) meats and animal products, I just don't feel that it's responsible or even healthy to make that the cornerstone of our diets. I think the focus should be on plant foods first and foremost with some animal products on the side.

It just seems to me that most of the threads here in TF have to do with milk, meat, butter, and eggs. So why the big emphasis on animal products? And I'm certainly not trying to start a war, I'm just an ordinary mom trying to feed my family healthy foods and hope to contribute to the general health of the world and planet. I'm curious to hear some MDC mama thoughts on this topic

[possum]

The largest base of knowledge on TF eating is from Weston Price, a dentist who traveled the world in the 1930s looking for healthy populations and recording their diets and taking some fascinating pictures of their teeth and faces. His book, Nutrition and Physical Degeneration is a fascinating read. Even if you are not ready to read the whole book, the pictures are truely worth 1000 words (each!).
He analyzed the diets of different healthy populations and compared them to the diets of their genetic counterparts eating modern, processed diets and found that the traditional diets were very high in fat soluble vitamins A, D, E, and K.
The healthiest populations he found, if I recall correctly, actually ate lots of sea foods.
Vitamins A, D, and K2 are only available from animal sources. Beta-carotene is listed as vitamin A, but it is only a pre-cursor. At best, it is converted to true vitamin A (retinol) at around 25%. We make vitamin D from sun exposure, but this is highly dependent on latitude and duration of exposure.

Animal foods have gotten a bad rap in the last few decades, but pastured meats are actually very efficient sources of food/energy for us. Cow, sheep, goats, and chickens can all thrive on land that is not necessarily great for growing crops. When you start trying to eat locally, it becomes very obvious, very quickly, what things are truely sustainable. I can easily find milk, eggs, and meats locally and have been able to in 3 different states in 3 rather different areas of the country. We no longer eat wheat, but I'd be darned if I could find any local wheat to eat. It is a myth that large monoculture farms are more efficient and more sustainable than small, polyculture farms that necessarily include animals.

In addition to Price's book on nutrition, I would recommend anything by Joel Salatin to learn more about farming and why animals are actually not as bad for the environment as wheat or soy or corn or other monoculture foods.

Melinda

[marimara]

Thanks for your thoughts. I agree with you about large scale monoculture and how that's been shown to be detrimental. Rotating crops, crop covers, nitrogen fixers, all that. I have read lots of Weston Price stuff, even adopting the TF diet for about 6 months or so. I've also read lots of criticism against him. There are studies to show just about anything regarding human nutrition. I mean the Eskimons eat mostly meat, Some groups of Asians eat mostly produce w/small amounts of animal products, etc. I think it's fair to say that humans have survived and even thrived on a variety of traditional diets. Humans are very flexible and adaptable and that's been the key to our survival. And I'm aware of certain nutrients and vitamins that can only be found in animal products, and that's why I do believe in eating some animal products. But I just don't get the "mostly animal products" and the under-emphasis on plant foods.

This blog post I read on Peaceful Sedition (one of the many blogs I read) really made sense to me and I feel this is mostly in line with what I think. I especially agree with the cost factor of humane, pastured, organic (ie optimal) animal products. This is one of the main reasons I cannot get my head wrapped around it. I can find a wide variety of optimal produce but cannot find any (except pastured eggs, very humane, know the farmer, he loves his hens, and organic (not raw or local) milk and butter).

that's all I have time for now, gotta run (to do my modern foraging for foods )

[StrongBeliever]

For me, the emphasis on meat and animals products is a pretty simple one. Melinda made great points, on which I simplify further... Animals CONCENTRATE the nutrients found in plant matter and therefore you end up with nutrient DENSE food. And I'm not just talking vitamin and minerals, I'm talking FAT and PROTEIN. I'm sure you've come across the literature that not all folks do well with a lot of carbohydrates. I'm one of those. If I were to try and get all of the nutrients I needed from fruit and veg that I can get in a much smaller amount of animal products, I would be pretty dang unhealthy. In my case, animal products are more cost effective. Been there, done that, burnt the vegetarian t-shirt. Like it was said before, a cow or goat can turn scrub land into an awful lot of very healthy food... With NO energy input. You just put it out there and it eats whatever is there. Think of all the typical third world pictures in your head where babies are starving to death on tiny amounts of rice and corn, and think instead if they had tiny amounts of butter or eggs. And there you have it.

The cost factor behind healthy animal products is only the way it is because there aren't enough people aware of the benefits, so there isn't enough support for the small farmers. I myself am a small farmer, and its not always easy to find buyers in my area. Community outreach, education, and going the extra mile to support your small farmers would go a long way to making healthy meat and dairy, as well as veggies, more accessible.

The impact on the Earth... Heck no, the world could not be supported by animal products done the "conventional" way. That's what all of the speculation and horror stories are based off of. I'm on the verge of a rant about how factory agriculture screwed it up for everyone by cornering the market, but I am trying to contain myself. The nature world in an intricate web that includes both animals and plants, one not being able to live without the other. A good healthy farm mirrors the natural world, having the animals and plants cooperate to make a healthier whole. And this results in a LOT of productivity. Yes, smaller healthier farms could support the world's need for healthy animal products and make the world a better place for it. But it will never happen if people continue to be so disconnected from the sources of their food.

ETA: You are right that there are a lot of different ratios of plant foods to animal foods present in traditional diets all over the world. But the key to getting the most out of your plants foods is to have the healthy animal foods, namely fats, to help your body put all the pieces together. If the animal foods weren't there, everything else wouldn't amount to much, as far as health goes. That seems like a good enough reason to put such a large emphasis on meat and dairy, even if they only make up a small portion of the diet. Secondly, while I'm sure there is a diverse group of people here at MDC, maybe we just talk the way we do because a large portion of us ARE those types that come from a back ground traditionally heavy on the animal products? Just a thought, anyway.

[witchygrrl]

i've been thinking a lot of the same things as you, OP. I am trying to incorporate more animal fat in my diet, but keeping the same or more amount of veggies. I think that there are people who feel at their best eating vegan, like my friend with severe dairy issues, while others feel best with at least some animal product. My ultimate goal is to nourish my body the best way I can figure out. And I feel best eating very omnivorously.

But I think that with the traditional diets that Price detailed, the sheer volume of food is much less than what most people eat on the SAD, trying to keep some level of nutrition in their bodies. So it would be easier to feed the masses the NT way because we won't need to eat so much.

[rhiandmoi]

I think that some people can do well eating mostly animal products. But definitely not all of them. There are many kinds of traditional diets. I think each person needs to find what works best for them. I think one common thread will be to reduce sugar and eliminate fake foods, but a lot of people will need to eat produce or grain as much as they eat meat. Also I don't fully believe the dental connection. DH has almost perfect teeth and an awesome palate. His mom has terrible teeth and his grandma has had dentures for almost 30 years. He was born here and grew up eating SAD. They're from south america and ate a traditional diet. Same thing with me and my brother. I think it is possible that a high protein diet during pregnancy helps (my mom scarfed down the protein) because my brother and I have much healthier mouths than our parents despite being raised on SAD. Although the SAD when we were growing up had a lot fewer fake foods.

[StrongBeliever]

One more point, after reading the blog link you included, and this having to do with cost and feasibility...

If plant based foods are the key to overcoming the high cost of healthy meats and dairy, and we are worried that low income people would be better off going for the plant based foods... Did anyone stop to think about the exorbitant cost of organic plant based foods? Even beans and rice. Heaven forbid we start talking variety, like greens and fruit. If the misconception that grains and vegetables/fruits are the ultimate food to eat for health and affordability, how many people are going to be horking down conventionally grown, chemical, pesticide and herbicide laden produce, irradiated and gassed, then shipped from thousands of miles away? That thought is equally frightening. And when it comes down to bottom dollar, and organic spinach is $6 a pound, and organic ground beef is $6 a pound, which am I going to choose for my family based on what will fill us up and benefit our health more, I'll go for the meat. Of course there has to be balance... If I have $12, I'll get both. But if we are talking about how to help the low-income find a healthier way of eating, education on what actually IS healthy is going to be the most important thing. Eating within a certain standard of extremes, on either end of the spectrum, is never going to be cost effective if you are going for the highest quality(high $$$) foods. But a sensible combination of high quality food, constructed to get the most out of every bit of food you put in your mouth(which WAPF preaches big time), is definitely going to be cost effective because it leads to optimal health.

[rhiandmoi]

Although I do think on a long term scale everyone should eat a healthy and wholesome diet, I think focusing on the people who have a hard time affording even the SAD is the wrong approach. If middle income America got wholesale behind the wholesome food movement there would be more competition in wholesome food supply, and this would bring the cost down for everyone, opening wholesome food up to a broader audience. And once you establish a diet of wholesome real food, fake food starts to really taste, well fake. And the demand for that will plummet. I think fake food is sort of like cigarettes in that a person can derive some degree of enjoyment from consuming fake foods, especially at first. But there gets to a point where the enjoyment is lost, and then there is just dependence. Once a person can get clean again, the fake food reveals it's true chemical flavor.

As an interesting side note, as it is is Girl Scout Cookie season, I have several boxes of cookies in the house. (DH still enjoys his fake foods.) I bought two boxes for me - Samoas. They taste terrible. I used to love these! Same thing is happening to my beloved See's marzipans. They don't taste as fake, but they don't taste as good as I remember.

[marimara]

I agree that different bodies require things, and one person's lamb chop is another's chickpea spread.
After a quick search around the web, it seems this is a very hotly debated topic! There is so much information out there, most of them contradict one another. Namely, Dr. Campbell The China Study, Dr. Fuhrman vs Weston Price and the more TFers.
I've been reading studies about the sustainability of a meat-based diet vs plant based diet.

I mean, personally I followed the TF diet for about 7 months. I felt good at the beginning then after a while my hives flared like crazy (I have dermographism), and I just felt like crap. I felt so full of all the animals I'd been eating and just toxic. I personally wondered to myself "Could I physically kill an animal and eat it's parts?". The answer was no, not even a chicken. I have killed fish and eaten them before, and I could take eggs from the hens, but mammals or birds? The answer was no.

I am in an exploratory phase again , searching for that delicate balance of foods the fuels me and my family best. I really like solid science to back me up and honestly I haven't found that yet for a largely meat-based diet. I don't feel that a vegan diet is on par with optimum health either though, mainly because of the B-12 thing. I do think that mostly plants w/some meat/animal products occasionally works though (Michael Pollan style.

[ceiba]

Another reason that pastured, organic, local, etc meat and produce cost more than industrially-produced meat is that the CAFOs and agribusiness plantations receive vast government subsidies. It is actually much more costly in terms of energy, food, fertilizer, equipment, etc to produce meat in a CAFO and grains and vegetables in a monoculture than either on a polyculture farm, but the resulting products are cheaper because our government subsidizes them. Take away the subsidies and the cost of industrially-produced food would be even higher than foods from low-input biodynamic farms. We as a nation have invested in making food artificially cheap, and now we think that's all that food SHOULD cost. I am willing to pay more out of our limited household budget for sustainable, local, organic foods not only because it is better for my family's health, but because I prefer to give my money to individuals whom I know to help support their families and their farms, instead of to multinational corporations so they can fund the export of our f***ed-up system to the rest of the world.

[marimara]

Originally Posted by ceiba

Another reason that pastured, organic, local, etc meat and produce cost more than industrially-produced meat is that the CAFOs and agribusiness plantations receive vast government subsidies. It is actually much more costly in terms of energy, food, fertilizer, equipment, etc to produce meat in a CAFO and grains and vegetables in a monoculture than either on a polyculture farm, but the resulting products are cheaper because our government subsidizes them. Take away the subsidies and the cost of industrially-produced food would be even higher than foods from low-input biodynamic farms. We as a nation have invested in making food artificially cheap, and now we think that's all that food SHOULD cost. I am willing to pay more out of our limited household budget for sustainable, local, organic foods not only because it is better for my family's health, but because I prefer to give my money to individuals whom I know to help support their families and their farms, instead of to multinational corporations so they can fund the export of our f***ed-up system to the rest of the world.

I def. agree with you. I know why organic foods cost more. In fact, everything we consume has been cheapened by the modern machine. Most people don't know the true cost of things.

[Magelet]

I think that there are a lot of different ways of eating TF, and most definitely a lot of us don't eat as high percentages of meat as many represent here.

Personally, we eat a lot of veggies, plenty of properly prepared grain, bone broth several times a week, eggs 2-3 times a week (less out of season, more in season), a little cream and milk each week, lots of butter, and meat or chicken perhaps 2-3 times a week. (this would constitute 1 small chicken, 1-2 pounds of ground beef, or 1-2 pounds of stew beef (or lamb ground or stew, etc), stretched over several days.)

I do acnowledge that even this is far more meat than is sustainable for everyone to eat. My DP and I have talked a lot about this, that there is no way that the majority of the world could eat the amount of meat that many TFers do.

My thoughts on that are twofold:
It would be possible for much of the world to eat enough high quality dairy (most likely primarily goat, with cow where suited, and other mammals where suited.) and eggs, with very occasional meat and bones. For instance, when the chicken is too old to lay, it goes in the stock pot. Not, a chicken every friday for dinner. Even in many cities, this would be possible. Goats do well on a small amount of land, and with lots of kitchen veggie scraps, as do chickens. Some cities are designed that yards for this would be possible way, other cities could have lots of community gardens, and places to keep a couple chickens, and a goat. Do I think this will happen/happen easily that everyone will have access to this? realistically, no. but it is definitely a worthy goal, to try to make it accessible.
Also, I think the reason that so many TFers need such a high portion of meat in their diet is that their digestive systems have been ruined by SAD crap. they can't properly digest grains and vegetables to get lots of nutrients from them, and so they require a large portion of their diet to be more nutrient dense and easily digestible meat. There may be some people who naturally do better on that type of diet anyways, however I suspect those numbers are drastically larger due to multi-generational damage from bad food.

However I do think that is is vital to consume a good amount of pastured/grassfed meat and dairy and eggs and seafood. I think that if you consume enough dairy and eggs, it is possible to be a healthy vegetarian, if your dairy is full fat and you eat plenty of dairy and eggs, however I don't think it is ideal.

[marimara]

Thanks Magelet, a very thoughtful post and thought provoking indeed.

[possum]

Originally Posted by marimara

There are studies to show just about anything regarding human nutrition. I mean the Eskimons eat mostly meat, Some groups of Asians eat mostly produce w/small amounts of animal products, etc. I think it's fair to say that humans have survived and even thrived on a variety of traditional diets. Humans are very flexible and adaptable and that's been the key to our survival.

The key thing about Price's studies is that he did not find healthy people eating diets without animal foods. He looked but didn't find them. I think that individuals may do better with more or less of any particular food or nutrient, but Price was not able to find healthy populations who were able to maintain themselves without meat, dairy, blood, fish, eggs, etc.
Of course you can find studies that say just about anything, but I'm not sure that IMO you can find a study that examines healthy populations of people with known dietary histories that says otherwise. Are you aware of studies that examine healthy long-term, multigenerational consumption of mainly vegetables/grains?

Originally Posted by marimara

I can find a wide variety of optimal produce but cannot find any (except pastured eggs, very humane, know the farmer, he loves his hens, and organic (not raw or local) milk and butter).

In what way is your produce "optimal"? Is is organic - certified by the USDA or some other *trustworthy* group? Is it nutrient dense? Is it local?
In my experience, it is far easier to find local eggs, meat, and dairy products - all nutrient dense - raised without chemicals, on family farms in polyculture than it is to find most fruits and veggies or grains.
We do eat a fair amount of veggies which are fairly easy to find from local farms, and we do supplement our diets with limited *exotic* fruits such as oranges (a rare treat) and avocados (have these quite a bit - worth the price and the transportation to me).

Melinda

[rhiandmoi]

There are very few completely vegetarian groups in the world, other than modern ethical vegetarians. The tribes WAP observed did consume animal products and the healthiest tribes he found ate a combination of meat and grain without going too far to either extreme.

http://www.westonaprice.org/Out-of-A...an-Tribes.html

[marimara]

Originally Posted by possum

The key thing about Price's studies is that he did not find healthy people eating diets without animal foods. He looked but didn't find them. I think that individuals may do better with more or less of any particular food or nutrient, but Price was not able to find healthy populations who were able to maintain themselves without meat, dairy, blood, fish, eggs, etc.
Of course you can find studies that say just about anything, but I'm not sure that IMO you can find a study that examines healthy populations of people with known dietary histories that says otherwise. Are you aware of studies that examine healthy long-term, multigenerational consumption of mainly vegetables/grains?

I'm not talking about strictly vegetarian groups but groups whose main focus was plants as opposed to animal products. There are many groups who are Plant-based, NOT completely vegetarian, namely Med and Asian.
What about Okinawans? I'm sure we've all heard of that.
Here is something I found just real quick.
I mean, there a lots of studies that show that humans can thrive and survive on a variety of diets. Price is not the end all and be all in my book. I'm not about to get into an internet research contest either. So,




In what way is your produce "optimal"? Is is organic - certified by the USDA or some other *trustworthy* group? Is it nutrient dense? Is it local?
In my experience, it is far easier to find local eggs, meat, and dairy products - all nutrient dense - raised without chemicals, on family farms in polyculture than it is to find most fruits and veggies or grains.
We do eat a fair amount of veggies which are fairly easy to find from local farms, and we do supplement our diets with limited *exotic* fruits such as oranges (a rare treat) and avocados (have these quite a bit - worth the price and the transportation to me).

Melinda

I was using optimal in reference to organic and as local as possible. And IME it's been easier to find local and/or organic produce than it has been to find the same "optimal" animal products.

[Smokering]

On a more practical note, you might see an emphasis on meat and dairy in TF forums simply because they're more problematic/niche/illegal/tricky to source and use. A lot of TFers were already somewhat into food and nutrition before going TF, so they know how to prepare and find good veggies and fruits - whereas learning where to get raw milk and how to use it might be more of an alien concept. So you'd see 10 threads about raw milk or eating liver or making bone broth, and only one or two about veggies. It's a learning curve thing. Plus, given that everybody already knows veggies are healthy, it's a less hot topic than "saturated fat is OK". You know?

[marimara]

Originally Posted by Smokering

On a more practical note, you might see an emphasis on meat and dairy in TF forums simply because they're more problematic/niche/illegal/tricky to source and use. A lot of TFers were already somewhat into food and nutrition before going TF, so they know how to prepare and find good veggies and fruits - whereas learning where to get raw milk and how to use it might be more of an alien concept. So you'd see 10 threads about raw milk or eating liver or making bone broth, and only one or two about veggies. It's a learning curve thing. Plus, given that everybody already knows veggies are healthy, it's a less hot topic than "saturated fat is OK". You know?

Yeah, I think you're right. It's just a little disconcerting, all the conflicting information out there. It's like night and day, going from the Vegetarian Forum to TF

[stephienoodle]

Originally Posted by Magelet

Also, I think the reason that so many TFers need such a high portion of meat in their diet is that their digestive systems have been ruined by SAD crap. they can't properly digest grains and vegetables to get lots of nutrients from them, and so they require a large portion of their diet to be more nutrient dense and easily digestible meat. There may be some people who naturally do better on that type of diet anyways, however I suspect those numbers are drastically larger due to multi-generational damage from bad food.

I'm in that boat. I eat a lot of meat - it is the focus of most of my meals. But I can't eat: dairy, eggs, grains (though I do cheat and have whole grains sometimes, with repercussions the following day), 4 types of nuts, about 10 types of fruits, 3 types of beans, about 8 types of veggies, and then throw in a few spices, too. Interestingly enough, I also cannot tolerate CAFO meat - I must eat pastured/free range/wild caught meats and fish. I need the dense nutrition and calories provided by meat because there are few non-meat sources that my body can digest. I ended up moving towards a traditional foods diet because I was desperate to find a way to heal myself and stop feeling terrible all of the time... and I get the impression that a lot of other people who end up eating a traditional foods diet come to it for similar reasons.

Do I wish I didn't have to eat so much meat? Absolutely. Do I have to if I want to feel decent and be able to function? Unfortunately, yes.

Originally Posted by Smokering

On a more practical note, you might see an emphasis on meat and dairy in TF forums simply because they're more problematic/niche/illegal/tricky to source and use. A lot of TFers were already somewhat into food and nutrition before going TF, so they know how to prepare and find good veggies and fruits - whereas learning where to get raw milk and how to use it might be more of an alien concept. So you'd see 10 threads about raw milk or eating liver or making bone broth, and only one or two about veggies. It's a learning curve thing. Plus, given that everybody already knows veggies are healthy, it's a less hot topic than "saturated fat is OK". You know?

This, too... it probably seems so much more meat heavy when in the TF forum than most of us actually are on a daily basis. I can discuss making oatmeal for my husband for breakfast anywhere and nobody will bat an eye. Yeah, I soak it... which is different from your typical health-concious person, but not in any kind of radical way. I posted on Facebook not that long ago that I was enjoying liver for breakfast and I got a handful of grossed-out type comments. Eating liver *is* a radical change for even most healthy eaters in America. The differences in meat and dairy are greater than the differences in grain, fruit and veggie when you're comparing traditional foods to other folks who pay attention to nutrition and the food that they eat.

[PreggieUBA2C]

Originally Posted by rhiandmoi

If middle income America got wholesale behind the wholesome food movement there would be more competition in wholesome food supply, and this would bring the cost down for everyone, opening wholesome food up to a broader audience.

I think this is a different issue altogether than the true viability of the planet with a human population that requires meat for health. What you've brought up is economic and since economics is based on fiction, and thereby can and does change according to the whims of the 'all-seeing eye', positing the realistic availibility of foods to the worlds human population on such economic manoevering is specious at best.

And this notwithstanding the obvious issues with the utter mismanagement of the world's fertile regions and livestock, wild game, wild fish, etc...

What we need to know is not whether or not competition (economic fiction) will drive prices artificially down from the true cost of their worth (as in the subsidies already mentioned), but whether or not we as intelligent beings can circumvent the fictitious economy in order to adequately provide for ourselves and one another.

It is always an odd position to take that asks, "Can I continue to live as I do and also experience this necessary change?" Well, the answer is no. If you do the same as always, you can only have the same as always. So, if you are committed to true cost food sustainibility, you probably cannot reasonably live in a NYC condo, work a high-paying, low value output job, rush through your life depositing your money and children in whathever container is most 'efficient' and then expect to come home to a little house on the prairie, pastured, properly aged meat-based meal on the table.

That's a harsh reality, but there it is. Meat as a main source of nourishment is not sustainable if we keep doing things the way we are doing them. That much is self evident I think. But the system is useless and broken and was never designed to actually nourish anyone, so it doesn't and never will. This system will keep the starving starving and the 'overnourished' unhealthy.

Then it's not just the system, but both the individuals who become aware of it and then choose to live with it anyway and those that remain ignorant that contribute in their own lives and the lives of others to the perpetuation of it.

Committing to the reality of sustainable food, shelter, community, and life on this planet is a whole-life affair and not just a whole-food shopping trip with a list that seems on the outside to be politically correct or conforms to some 'Now, you CAN have it both ways!" mentality.

Originally Posted by Smokering

On a more practical note, you might see an emphasis on meat and dairy in TF forums simply because they're more problematic/niche/illegal/tricky to source and use. A lot of TFers were already somewhat into food and nutrition before going TF, so they know how to prepare and find good veggies and fruits - whereas learning where to get raw milk and how to use it might be more of an alien concept. So you'd see 10 threads about raw milk or eating liver or making bone broth, and only one or two about veggies. It's a learning curve thing. Plus, given that everybody already knows veggies are healthy, it's a less hot topic than "saturated fat is OK". You know?

This certainly accounts for the lob-sidedness as well.

I don't think there are any tf'ers who don't think vegetables and fruits are necessary. Otoh, I think a pp already addressed this, but a goat is so much more efficient at extracting nutrients from lichen and wild rose than I am, and that's what we have here, so it is a way more efficient and sustainable way of gaining nutrients than plowing up the soil and trying to make things grow here against the realities of this climate.

I think personal connection with one's food, as in milking a goat and making compost to shower on soil, slaughtering one's chickens and fixing their roosts when they need it, is essential to committing to a traditional food diet, even though that seems impossible for many.

I think that the degree to which this matters to you will determine the priority you set on it, and I'm not judging anyone's choices here at all; I think it is obvious that we act according to our priorities, even if we don't consider them ideal or even right in the present.

Sometimes a life change takes a lot of work and planning, sweat and time, which is something that western society has little to no concept of, ime. Waiting while planning is not something many of us do extraordinarily well relative to even a few generations ago when there was not such a global accessibility of things. My great grandmother didn't order artesian water from Fiji and receive it the next day in Hungary. I think we forget sometimes how different things really are and how far off-kilter our expectations and actions have become, so that we feel a sense of entitlement that fuels the systems that in this case perpetuate starvation of both those with no food and those with lots of 'food-like-products'.

True traditional food doesn't come in a styrofoam package or flashy box in an aisle, even though that's the best many of us can or are willing to do at the point many of us come here asking about where to find food supplies, including meat.

I don't mean to offend, but I took liberties in this thread because it seems like the level and tone of discussion here presently could handle it. If that's not the case and I've misread, please do forgive my passionate exhortation. This is something I put a lot of time and effort into understanding on a global scale as well as the microcosmic scale of my family life, so I was eager to join in.