As promised...here's my paper on red-meat and its' physiological detriment; (Desolating Of Nations)

The Desolating of a Nations…

Jacob – A. Eder

English 122: English Composition II.

Professor, Gurley, Renee;

05/21/15

The Desolating of a Nation… (An explanatory overview of the issue presented.)
The controversial topicality of my paper is to further any willing persons understanding of the detrimental consumption of red-meats, and also dictate upon the necessity of the proteins and creatine found within meats – to offer an array of alternatives to red-meats for healthy consumption, and to bring forth evidential substantiation for the claims aforementioned.
‘The ‘average’ American consumes 270 lbs. of beef every year; (keep in mind, that’s just one of many meat by-products – consumed by nearly every United States citizen annually.) For some time now, I’ve suspected that meat (in generality) is not only bad, but detrimental to human health and physiology. (NPR: Allison Aubrey, and Dan Charles – correspondents and specialists.) [Visualizing-a-nation-of-meat-eaters]; [A Nation of meat eaters…] (1) ^p
This case is especially pressing when you take into account arguable, though compelling evidential studies (nonetheless)…of human beings over decades, or what is referred to in Mathematical Statistics as ‘sampling.’ Further, upon careful and scientifically analytical inspection of their protein and creatine intake – then correlating the two to (found soluble concept) and when evidence is sufficient, ascribe a medical terminology or a description for their reduced cognitive functionality and aptitude (in efficacy) as correlatively and consistently relatable to protein and creatine ingestion. Then, while also considering substantiality and feasibility when taking into account the environmental, the atmospheric, the psychophysiological, the psychosocial, the physiological and finally, the assimilatory variables and/or factorizations, we’re then ready to conceive of all aspectual and situational instances and fundamentalist points to which need be contained and isolated for more comprehensive analysis; to note, the (isolation one variable from many is difficult, however, isolating one from few is significantly easier to achieve.)
The Facts…the most disturbing statistic of this is America isn’t even the worst of the (metaphorical) evils; The United States of America is amongst the top of nations for red meat consumption, though – we pale behind nations and principalities such as…Luxembourg and Australia. I want to note (as of the last five years, Australia has all but usurped our grotesque reigning supremacy.
Thus, I’m confident in my own studies, that my conclusion on this hypothesis is more likely than not – correct; as seems prevalent, excess amounts of protein and creatine have detrimental effect on the human brain, affecting severely and negatively, the cortexes (where the senses are based) and thus decreasing overall brain/cognitive functionality – having more detriment and severity with the more protein and creatine consumed. (3) ^P Memory for example, is something that is noticeably affected and negatively so by protein and creatine consumption; vision, hearing, and sensation (having some unknown effect on blood circulation causing numbness in some cases, with permanence all over the body), affecting taste by its salts and preservatives (the protein and creatine), one craves unhealthily foods more often, in frequency and quantity. (Monosodium glutamate is the sodium salt of glutamic acid, one of the most abundant naturally-occurring non-essential amino acids; Loliger J (April 2000).
[Sic]"Function and importance of Glutamate for Savory Foods". Journal of Nutrition: 130 (4s Supply): 915s–920s PMID 10736352.) (1) ^P
The horrifying truth…
Within extensive and long-term consumption, diseases such as Diabetes, varied-Cancers, Dementia, Alzheimer’s and Bone/Degeneration Diseases, similar to atrophies, and dystrophies, and to make such worse, severe forms and mutations within the complex diseases to which alter genetic-make-up are found to often have causation from the consumption of red-meats. In idealization, it’s most likely due to preservatives within that which human beings eat, from which animals are fed for hormonal and quickened growth, fattening, shedding, and overall production; then of course – extended and extensive though, excessive amounts of protein and creatine.
(To note: you must know, that protein and creatine are by evolutionary inheritance , necessary for stabilizing neurons within the brain’s biochemistry – though, it takes very, very little protein and creatine consumption to achieve the necessary requirements.) (proof thereof claims found within Francis Darwin, Richard Dawkins and Aubrey De’ Gray’s collective works – http://www.longecity.org; genetics nonprofit organization; research firm.)
An excerpt: “The present review collects bibliographic data from the last 10 years, on the possible relationship between the intakes of certain foods and cancer risk. This paper belongs to a series of reviews on different aspects of heterocyclic amines, such as (1) the occurrence and formation of (HAA’s) during the cooking of food, mainly meat and fish products.”


The Scientific Consensus: data and evidence for the danger of red-meats;
[Sic] “Consumption of well-done or grilled meat may be associated with increased cancer risk in humans; the data is insufficient to support the conclusion that this risk is due specifically to MeIQ, MeIQx, or to PhIP,’” to which will now herein be referred to the (chemicality) present within these foods. Case-control studies show very conflicting results. Other case-control studies suggest that any chemicality may increase the risk of certain cancers, but they were not associated with other types of cancers. (To make evidential, that my studies are not absolute, nor are they certain – but are simply products of ongoing studies, tests and researches.)
“Published epidemiology studies provide some indication that human cancer risk is related to consumption of broiled or fried foods that may contain IQ and/or other Scientific terminology: ‘Heterocyclic Aromatic Amines; layman’s terms: Hormonally Active Agents,’ (HAA’s.)” (US Department of Health and Human Services 2004)
Therefore, a reduction to the exposure of these compounds has been recommended. In any case, it is important to have reliable data on the content of these HAAs in different types of foods prepared in several ways in order to assess the effects associated with their intake. [Sanz Alaejos and Afonso 2007); (2) ^Panalytical methods applied to HAAs determination in foods (Sanz Alaejos et al. 2007a); and (3) HAAs intake, genetic aspects and human cancer risk (Sanz Alaejos et al. 2007b).]




Possible relationships between Hormonally Active Agents or (HAA’s) and human cancer…

“Epidemiological evidence appears to imply that an excessive consumption of very well-done red meat (HAAs containing meat products), may induce certain types of cancer (Nowell et al. 2002; Navarro et al. 2004).” ‘Red meat’ usually refers to beef, veal, pork, mutton, and lamb. The so-called ‘processed meat’ groups ham, cured or smoked meats, cold cuts, charcuterie, and meat products. The introduction of the Ames test in 1975 provided a rapid method to isolate potential carcinogens from food on the basis of their mutagenic activity.
Meaning, essentially, that nobody is trying to take away any sort of freedom from you – but is simply and actively seeking the most (deductive reasoning used) viable and truthful healthily mode and/or means for human consumption, to which coincide with the benefaction of naturalistic atmospheres for both humankind and animal-kind.
If comparing the mutagenic activity in meat samples to the one related to the known HAAs, most samples present mutagenic activity that cannot be exclusively associated to the aromatic amines currently identified. This suggests that additional compounds other than HAAs are present in these foods and need to be investigated, particularly those grilled over open flames [Balbi et al. 2001; Anderson et al. 2005; Ja¨gerstad and Skog 2005).]
‘”Several epidemiological studies have been performed to test the hypothesis of an association between meat intake and human cancers (Zimmerli et al. 2001). It becomes really difficult to link meat consumption to the HAA’s intake in practically all these essential studies.”

The Naturalistic Catastrophe…
Many other substances and factors which have possible contribution (in the detriment sense) to the etiologies of these cancers cannot be excluded: For instance, the ‘nitrosamines, ‘polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH’s), acrylamide, high fat or salt intake, physical activity and other unmentioned types, strings and forms.’ [Ji et al. 1995; De Stefani et al. 1997, 1998a, 2001; (LeMarchand et al. 1997, 2002; (Probsttensch et al. 1997; Singh and Fraser 1998 ;( Sinha et al. 1998, 1999, 2001, 2005; (Zheng et al. 1998; (Augustsson et al. 1999; Balbi et al. 2001; Oreglia et al. 2001; Nowell et al. 2002; (Murtaugh et)
[Sic] “Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin (2, 3, 7, 8,-TCDD) ‘(TCDD) is not intentionally produced by industry(s).” It can be inadvertently produced in very small amounts as an assorted form of impurity during the incineration of municipal, and of industrial wastes; and even during the manufacturing of certain chemicals.
(ATSDR) (1) ^P ‘The only present use for (TCDD) is in chemical research. (1) ^P (TCDD) may be formed during the chlorine bleaching processes used by pulp mills and paper mills, and as well, can be considered a byproduct from the manufacturer of certain chlorinated organic chemicals, such as “chlorinated phenols.” (ATSDR) (1) ^P “(TCDD) is primarily released to the environment during the combustion of fossil fuels (including motor-operated vehicles), wood, and during incineration processes.” (ATSDR) (2) ^P

Very low levels of (TCDD) are found throughout the environment, including air, food, and soil. (1) Most of the exposure of the general population to (TCDD) is from food, mainly meat, dairy products, and fish. (ATSDR) [Sic] Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). ‘Toxicological Profile for Chlorinated Dibenzo-p-Dioxins; Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA. 1998.)” (10) ^P
(Fore Referential curiosity: these are excerpts to which were studies over decades of this (TCDD) compound, discovered at an industrial accidental happening, which occurred near Seveso, Italy, in 1976 – 1989.) [Bertazzi, 'et al.1989.]
“Overall, existing epidemiologic data(s) provide little support for a positive association between the HAA’s and the risk of breast cancer.” (Longnecker et al. 1997) Any positively associable suggestions from outdated and preceded studies become less tenably plausible in retrospective context and respect, to more recent data from large, well-designed investigations.
Trends in exposure and disease should be positively correlated, taking into account a biologically relevant “lag-time” between them. Human adipose concentrations of these varied chemicality(s) were at their peak (at least in the United States) in the 1970’s. Moreover, since then, adipose concentrations “have declined, consistent with the declining concentrations in the environment and in food sources.” (Kutz et al. 1991) & M. S. ALAEJOS, V. GONZA´ LEZ, & A. M. AFONSO [Department of Analytical Chemistry, Nutrition and Food Science, University of La Laguna, E-38205 La Laguna (Santa Cruz De Tenerife), Spain, March, 15, 2007.]
[DOI: 10.1080/02652030701474235]
(3) More recently a publication appeared from the (Nurse’s Health Study), a ‘cohort” of about 120,000 (one-hundred and twenty thousand) nurses whom were followed since 1976 (Hunter et al. 1997). There were compared blood levels of DDE and PCBs in 240 incident cases of breast cancer and also (a) equal number(s) of paired and matched control women. “Blood was drawn in 1989 or 1990 and cases were diagnosed through May 1992. The results can be summarized briefly.” (Kutz et al. 1991, and Gonza ‘Lez, and A.M. Afonso 2007, w/DoAC)

“For DDE, mean values (ng/ml) in cases were 6.01 and in controls 6.97. For PCBs, the mean values were 5.08 and 5.16 in cases and controls, respectively.” The multivariate (layman’s, multivariable component) adjustment is of relative risk for breast cancer comparing the fifth (highest) with the first (lowest) quintile (chemical quantity) of DDE was 0.72, 95% CI 0.37-1.40.’
“The analogous risk estimate for PCBs was 0.66, 0.32-1.37.” This is disturbing, to say the least, consider [pi] and three generational modes of variables; for instance, with [pi] or 3.14 (my viewers may be more familiarized with), consider the following equation/expression that solves and proves that startling statistic. (Bear with me, it’s mostly rudiment math.)
Π ±a³ⁿ a^3m=a^3n+3m∀a+1, b+1, c+1 (a=b)∧ (a=c)⇒b=c|0.66| (Layman Terms) summed from: Π=3.14 (2); .33(2)=.99/ Π; thus, 0.66%. [Elsewise, the numbers represent a (0.66%) chance to be devolved into multiple cancers, and (it is long-term, meaning, one will not awake after a good night’s meal and slumber to cancer – but rather, may not wake at all, or will noticeably develop cancerous regions and tumorous deformities), though in this case, the numbers specifically relate to breast cancer, testicular cancer, and intestinal-organ failures and internal cancers. (ATSDR, 1998, Atlanta, Georgia – EPA dioxin) For the sake of clarification, the findings (regardless, how’t, palely and fearful they are) only bear evidence (nearing proof) to cancer-growths, spreading, malignity and lethality; however, the findings do not represent actual death-rates, nor do they take from remission’s potentiality, necessitated treatment, or miraculous happenings!
The Determinant Premise: (Entropy is what I like to call [as it is assimilar in concept] naturalistic decay), meaning, a naturalistic aging processing, or a decaying invariance, when likened humanistic context. For every year one lives, ones’ cancer rate (chance of malign, lethal and growth) efficacy of any cancers, though (most attuned in appropriation to your highest risks, being figured by genetic inheritance, toxic exposure, and atmospheric conditionings), a harrowing, 1.233, is the annual growth for any and all mammals (considering evolutionary principle.)[“Exposure to heterocyclic aromatic amines from the consumption of cooked red meat and its effect on human cancer risk: A review.’ [Sic]‘Publication Details For "Food Additives & Contaminants. Part A: Chemistry, Analysis, Control, Exposure & Risk Assessment."] [DOI: 10.1080/02652030701474235] al. 2004; Navarro et al. 2004; Anderson et al. 2005; Gunter et al. 2005; Ja¨gerstad and Skog 2005).] … [DOI: 10.1080/02652030701474235] – Content Identification. “Meat is all about money, not about morality.”]
Those findings are convincingly consistent with no association between plasma organ-chlorine levels and risk of breast cancer, with the best estimate of risk for both compounds being less than one. (Correlation does not imply causation.)
(Keep in mind, that the statistical figure is .66 and not 66. granting invariable difference) – meaning, though red-meat consumption does not have consistent and constant figuring for breast cancer formation, the abhorring cyclic demeanor that is entropy and mortality (two very lethal forces) which affect all living and existential organisms at one point or another (many call this aging), will in effect, become exponential from the thousandths, to the thousands – in regarded respect to percentage foundation, and chance of disease procreation/manifestation.
Meaning, in layman’s, that the findings represent negative correlation between cancers and red-meats, however, medical evidence represent positive correlations between cancers and red-meats; this could mean many things, but the most likely possibilities are mutations, and/or rot, decay or rarity (as in undercooked red-meats.) To add, naturalistic fossil-fuels are effectively (and harrowingly enough) worse for the human species, all animal life-forms and our earth in naturalistic-conceptualization than the eating of our fellow mammals is. (ATSDR, GA, 98)
“The disparity between cases and deaths indicates the effectiveness of treatment and the excellent prognosis for those diagnosed with the disease.” (Meaning, correlation does not imply causation.) Testicular cancer is uncommon in white men and rare in black men.”
Secular (scientifically indifferent or invariant) trends in incidence rates differ for white persons and black persons. “Between 1973 and 1994, white men exhibited an average annual increase of 2.4%, whereas black men experienced an annual decrease of 0.2%. Both groups showed a decline in mortality rates that averaged 5.6% annually.” (Ries et al.1997).
“The peak incidence rates ‘(for inclination and/or declination) are in the 25- to 39-yr age groups: for whites ages 30-34, 16.7 per 100,000; for blacks ages 25-29, 1.9 per 100,000 and for blacks ages 34-39, 1.9 per 100,000.” (To which is contradictory to common-day studies and statistics bearing evidence to the most obese places in the continental United States are of the highest African populous; to clarify: this simply means more red-meats are consumed, with the majority of the African American populous, much like the north is where the majority of the Native Americans populous is, thus the obesity rate is higher.)
“Prostate cancer is the most commonly occurring cancer among men in the United States, with 334,500 new cases and 41,600 deaths estimated for 1997 (Parker et al. 1997). Incidence rates, averaged over 1990-1994, were 155.8 per 100,000 for Caucasian males and 229.3 per 100,000 for African males (Ries et al. 1997).”
Age-specific rates start to increase in the late forties (40’s) and continue to increase exponentially through the oldest age groupings. “Since the mid-1980s age-specific and age-adjusted incidence rates have increased abruptly, and this shift is superimposed on an existing secular trend of gradually rising rates (Ries et al. 1994). ‘An abrupt increase in mortality rates has not occurred, although the steady upward trend continues for Caucasian and African males.”
A quick note: culture and religiosity factor in too, though – not often in medical sampling/statistics;
For example, my father’s best friend had been married to a Native American (Ho-Chunk) woman for twenty-nine (29) years, and when she died of cancer, her funeral was done the way her spiritualistic ancestral heritage wanted it done: ‘as a procession, funerary dirges.’ Further, I remember, as it was not scarring to my psyche, but it was offensive to me, and to the wonderful (and sadly, barren) woman I knew, whom was being burned in her coffin – within the epicenter (center thereof) the Native building, was dissolving, and thusly dissipating into the rising smoke sifting its way through the vents directly above her coffin.
(In footnoting, I’m subjectively appalled, and that’s insignificantly immaterial, as I am one person, among a vastness and beautifully encompassing culture.)
While this was happening, all of her family, and the extended family members were present, as were my father, his friend, and I. We were encircled throughout the entirety of the room around the recently deceased, neatly compacted and sitting – handling and handing food to one another (no plates, no personal drinks) but finger-picking foods, shared and various drinks, etc. I’m sharing this story for a depiction of my exemplification; further, I was asked by the Chieftain or Elder of the family to eat the first piece of chicken being passed around – honored and anxious, I accepted.

The room watched me intently as I ate the chicken leg – upon (what I consider) finishing the chicken leg, stares of awe and oddity pursued me. The man sitting next to me told me, it would be disrespectful not to eat the bone’s contents (bone marrow) and the bone itself. Knowing that he was sincere, I did as much – and the (ceremonial flames and mourning songs) went onwards. She was buried (her ashen remnants were), and thus I conclude this short story with this: not only was the passing of the foods dangerous and unhealthily testing of naturalistic toxicity, parasites, infection and disease (germs) but it was homing, it was more unity-bearing than anything else I’ve ever experienced.
In second though, you can understandably see how easily ascertainable, passable and vulnerable disease is – the rampancy and severance of it, even amongst the eldest and the sick – it was immaterial, as though such was not given thought. Sure, the food was cooked well, the ceremony was great – as it was honorable and humbling, but the fact is, very few people washed their hands (and especially neglected to clean their mouths) prior to this funerary feast, and shared foods, drinks, etc., how horribly harrowing is such a tale – to know how susceptible to death we all are – it amazes me; I’ve an obsession with biology, and physiology – and how the interrelating atomic/subatomic particles affect us in our daily endeavors and overall lives. It’s almost as if, our inner-death clock was designed to be ridden with infesting contagions and diseases: likened to cancer – the incurable killer.


Continuation of elaboration…
“Endometrial tissue is extremely responsive to the actions of estrogenic and antiestrogenic compounds. Therefore, it should be a sentinel target tissue for (HAA’s) actions. (ATSDR, GA, 98) The actions should be most readily observable in postmenopausal women in whom endogenous steroid hormone concentrations are low.’ (ATSDR, 1998, Atlanta, Georgia – EPA dioxin) I’d hate to say it, but… I did tell you so; the mathematical evidences rendered a few short pages ago give resounding validity to my claims on exponential cancer-growth increases among older women and men. (ATSDR, GA, 98)
“Decreased frequency of endometrial cancer was suggested in one study of environmental exposure to high (TCDD) concentrations, no association was found between a variety of organochlorine compounds and risk of endometrial cancer in the one published case-control study.” (ATSDR, 1998, Atlanta, Georgia – EPA dioxin)
Elsewise, the numbers represent a (0.66%) chance to be devolved into multiple cancers, and (it is long-term, meaning, one will not awake after a good night’s meal and slumber to cancer – but rather, may not wake at all, or will noticeably develop cancerous regions and tumorous deformities), though in this case, the numbers specifically relate to breast cancer, testicular cancer, and intestinal-organ failures and internal cancers. (ATSDR, 1998, Atlanta, Georgia – EPA dioxin) For the sake of clarification, the findings (regardless, how’t, palely and fearful they are) only bear evidence (nearing proof) to cancer-growths, spreading, malignity and lethality; however, the findings do not represent actual death-rates, nor do they take from remission’s potentiality, necessitated treatment, or miraculous happenings!
The Determinant Premise: (Entropy is what I like to call [as it is assimilar in concept] naturalistic decay), meaning, a naturalistic aging processing, or a decaying invariance, when likened humanistic context. For every year one lives, ones’ cancer rate (chance of malign, lethal and growth) efficacy of any cancers, though (most attuned in appropriation to your highest risks, being figured by genetic inheritance, toxic exposure, and atmospheric conditionings), a harrowing, 1.233, is the annual growth for any and all mammals (considering evolutionary principle.)[“Exposure to heterocyclic aromatic amines from the consumption of cooked red meat and its effect on human cancer risk: A review.’ [Sic]‘Publication Details For "Food Additives & Contaminants. Part A: Chemistry, Analysis, Control, Exposure & Risk Assessment."] [DOI: 10.1080/02652030701474235] al. 2004; Navarro et al. 2004; Anderson et al. 2005; Gunter et al. 2005; Ja¨gerstad and Skog 2005).] … [DOI: 10.1080/02652030701474235] – Content Identification. “Meat is all about money, not about morality.”
Continuation of elaboration:
To base the point of this digression, the specialist on the radio program peeked my interest, as he is the first person I’ve heard from that thinks similarly in context to this subject matter as correlatively accordantly to how I think; further, he also links evolution then, to our ironic, devolution now; also showing that not only our species is being threatened by excessive meat consumption, but also all other land-mammal species, as well many marine-based life forms.
…as nitrogen, oxides, chemicals, hormonal/genetic mutations made by means of laboratory-created medicines, antibiotics, injections and subsequent implementation of acidic chemicals into foods consumed by animals – causing intestinal deterioration, internal bleeding, corrosion of vital organs, and tense-forming (making tense the muscles to which we consume from other animalistic species and life forms, greatly reducing the nutritional value of the muscle tissue (or meat) and as a byproduct or secondarily consequence, abuse and fear instillation of and to animals.)
And thusly…having detrimental effect on the global-scaling of our collective environment(s) but adding to carbon pollution, and overall global warming, in addition to the long-term (and now, irrevocable) repercussions of our inane savagery; humankind, our animalistic brethren, and our otherwise world of naturalistic and unambiguously indigenous counterparts will suffer indefinably and undeniably unendingly,; thus begs the next question…




The Ethical Dilemma

As is evident from these researches and scholarly documentations, the consumption of red meat in generality – is detrimental to human health, as for physiological and psychophysiological means; additively, it is questionably unethical and distasteful to consume red meats under any circumstances, let alone overcompensation or over-consumption.
Because of my own volition, the science in exclusiveness of (verifiable and falsifiable) data to back my idealization(s) up, and the considerations of numerous and vast many academia scholars, professionals, scientists and clergymen – that I feel confident in concluding that the overall consumption of red meat is insatiable and incurable amongst human beings, though – the reduction of such consumption is viably feasible – and educationally possible through scientific conquest, academic attestation, education and outreach amidst conservative alternatives to healthy eating choices.
The ideological concept (or framework) behind my work for this class is such content of: the detriment of meat consumption. Memory for example, is something that is noticeably affected and negatively so: by red-meat consumption. (Keep in mind, concurrently, that we need the essential proteins and creatine(s) to maintain healthy brain functionality – optimum, maximized, faster-processing and understandable brains need the protein and creatine. Moreover, red-meat affects (detrimentally) one's physiological systems, such as exemplified here: vision, hearing, physical sensation, blood circulation, heart-regulation, and cognitive functionality (such as memory, working-memory, recollection, mathematical figuring, and drowsiness, and even makes one more apt for depression and negation: thenceforward despondency.)
The molecular levels of the meat's systemic properties such as the natural fats, salts and sugars are essential and necessary for mammal's health - though, the processed meats that consumers purchase at local grocery stores, or eat at restaurants is horrible for one’s health because of the processed materializations present within the meats (meant for preservation, maximized flavor, and minimal (filling, in effect).)., further, for all of the positives found within meat (be it, the natural chemistry, atomic molecular makeup, and microcosmic organisms (parasites) that substantiate brain health, and regulate human ingestion, digestion and oxygenation there are invariables among the detriments too -- such being in exemplification, unnatural fats, salts and sugars -- laboratory created oxides, pesticides (to kill the healthy bacteria's), preservatives (dissolving any potential nutrients) added and man-made fats, artificial salts and sugars for increased taste (granted, this is only done because of the obfuscation of the friendly bacteria’s, the natural fats, salts and sugars, and such vitamin components), thus carnivores are by naturalistic default, desensitized (in remnant to taste and sensation) such being the reasoning behind the salt and sugar (artificial) being implemented into our foods (irregardless of its label, processed meat is bad for oneself.)
And the other such reasoning (with well-founded and sound evidence to back) is the claim of salt/sugar implementation on the corporate level of processed meats to keep one's blood-sugar low (thus making one extraordinarily hungry), forwarding more the motioning - notion of buying more - consuming more, and thusly…(cyclic redundancy = wealthy powers that be.)
As is apparent, restaurants like McDonald’s are monopolies (not because of good-will and ethos), but because of greed (corporate level at that), insatiable desire for more power over such attested opportunities (in this such case, the carrier, host, or precious stock is food and the businesses therein-thereof) and as the monolithic like testament is forevermore unbecoming, noticeable and cruelly apparent, our stomach's grow hungrier, and our wallets thinner -- but because the 'powers that be' use hunger, thirst and basic and rudimentary physiology, to take advantageous or opportunistic concepts as like these in precedence, and use them for gain, to work against us - and to take advantage of our most basic and necessary of needs.;

It is here, that I conclude this brief dissertation, with evidences and means of understandability to (as I profess) appeal to my audience(s) and not for my common interest, but for the common-interest, for the betterment and furtherance/continuance of our species as a healthy, intelligent and ethical societies/humanities.
In absolute ending, I feel the evidence speaks for itself (correlation does not imply causation, meaning, I’m not trying to be circular in logicality here, but rather – inductive and abductively inferential.) -- as it is borderline proof (as is verifiable evidence), and is also evidence from the subjective perspective (appeal to emotionality/subjectivity) and experience from any and all red-meat consumers...do you feel drained, despondent, and 'foggy?' There's a reason for that.
I won't leave you without supplicating practicality as subsidiary/replacement modes of protein/creatine intake, such being...fish (and in seldom consumption), unprocessed red-meats (like jerky/sticks of beef, pork, lamb or whatever else is processed by a local butcher), meat that is incredibly well-cooked, and of course...if consumed in variation, peanut butter, peanuts, phosphorous, wormwood, coconut, lime, lettuces, heavy carbohydrates (like Italian breads), and tofu. There are thousands of alternatives for protein/creating intake, to which is necessary and vital for preferred brain functionality and memory capacity, and thousands more recommendations by professionals and dietitians for life, food and health without unhealthily and carcinogen-infested red meats and byproducts.




· (NPR: WPR – Allison Aubrey, and Dan Charles – correspondents.) [Visualizing-a-nation-of-meat-eaters]
· [A Nation of meat eaters…] http://proxy-library.ashford.edu/login?url=http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=6&sid=d7ce6434-912b-47f4-aeed-595c843d3ba0%40sessionmgr4002&hid=4211&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU%3d#db=n5h&AN=6XN201206271003
· National Research Council (US) Committee on Hormonally Active Agents in the Environment. Hormonally Active Agents in the Environment. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 1999. 9, HAAs and Carcinogenesis in Humans. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK230232/
· M. S. ALAEJOS, V. GONZA´ LEZ, & A. M. AFONSO [Department of Analytical Chemistry, Nutrition and Food Science, University of La Laguna, E-38205 La Laguna (Santa Cruz De Tenerife), Spain, March, 15, 2007.] [DOI: 10.1080/02652030701474235]
· (Citation/Image courtesy of Allison Aubrey, and Dan Charles; Sources: [Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) 2010, Livestock and Fish Primary Equivalent, 02 June 2010, FAOSTAT on-line statistical service, FAO, Rome.])
· Toulmin, Stephen, 1958/2003. The Uses of Argument, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, updated edition 2003.
· Battersby, Mark, 2009. Is That a Fact? A Field Guide for Evaluating Statistical and Scientific Information, Peterborough: Broadview Press.
· (ATSDR, 1998, Atlanta, Georgia – EPA dioxin)
· http://www.epa.gov/ttnatw01/hlthef/dioxin.html#ref1
· [Sic]‘Publication Details For "Food Additives & Contaminants. Part A: Chemistry, Analysis, Control, Exposure & Risk Assessment."] [DOI: 10.1080/02652030701474235] al. 2004; Navarro et al. 2004; Anderson et al. 2005; Gunter et al. 2005; Ja¨gerstad and Skog 2005).] … [DOI: 10.1080/02652030701474235] – Content Identification. “Meat is all about money, not about morality.”
· [Sanz Alaejos and Afonso 2007); (2) ^Panalytical methods applied to HAAs determination in foods (Sanz Alaejos et al. 2007a); and (3) HAAs intake, genetic aspects and human cancer risk (Sanz Alaejos et al. 2007b).]
1999 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
· [Bookshelf ID: NBK230232] National Research Council (US) Committee on Hormonally Active Agents in the Environment. Hormonally Active Agents in the Environment. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 1999. 9, HAAs and Carcinogenesis in Humans. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK230232/
· http://www.longecity.org

Source: Earth Policy Institute
Credit: Angela Wong / NPR
Source: USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service
Credit: Kevin Uhrmacher / NPR
Source: Earth Policy Institute
Credit: Angela Wong / NPR
Source: J.L. Capper, Journal of Animal Science, December, 2011.
Credit: Producers: Eliza Barclay, Jessica Stoller-Conrad; Designer: Kevin Uhrmacher/NPR

Sincerely, Verily, Unapologetically,

Jacob A. Eder;

All Rights Reserved; 2011-2015; copyright protected:
(T3T Innovations); Jacob A. Eder; Darkly Origins/Eerie Flickering;