Re: controversy over raw food...

I too believe like you did.
But I do not believe that some people need to eat meat.
Some people benefit from eating meats but there are alternative vegetarian diets that can support them.
Looking at meat for such people a "narrow-minded" approach or a lazy approach.
Also this myth has been promoted by the anti-vegetarians and by "health gurus" who make money by telling people what they like to hear.

Everybody likes a diet book that says that "You can lose weight by eating anything you want"
They are the ones that become bestseller.

So on similar lines this myth has also been promoted by such people.

After considerable amount of research I have found a lot of misinformation and outright lies about meat.
I am not a strict vegetarian, Sometimes when I land up at my friends house during festivals I have to eat a piece of chicken or else he will feel bad(cause he tells me comon this is healthy homegrown wild chicken, so you should not be bothered) So do not think I am some fanatic vegetarian.

I just wanted to know the truth and in my free time I have pursued this. It is hard for me to deny the truth that humans can easily live without meat.
there are enough sources of B12 in vegetarian diets.

The entire controversy of B12 and some nutrients only being available in meat products started in the west.
The west is pretty much ignorant about food.

If you look towards India and china(ancient chinese diet not the current chemically ridden food they are eating)and africa you will see that there is so much of diversity and options available in the vegetarian diet.
There are enough foods(not soybean) that have 60% of protien which is much higher quality that meat or whey protien.

But if you are eating meat the raw is the best way to take that :-) Tweet