"I missed the other half of the equation, the consumption end."
No you didn't.
Golly gosh, but I did.
Despite the use of more energy efficient devices in domestic environments, domestic power demands are increasing. Industrial power demands are also increasing.
And yet, here we are, just about 2018, and the brownouts and blackouts promised years back if we don't build more nuc plants haven't materialized. No new nucs, no new coal. In my area we do have a lot of new wind turbines. Right now they have more than taken up the demand. There is a gas turbine generator peaker not too far from here, but half of it's purpose to to use waste steam for heat.
Never have - never will. But some folks do, and last time I checked, there was no law against being a moran
OLE was introduced in 1990, and replaces DDE. Anyone ever using DDE should now be well retired. The fact that they actually use DDE is proof they really needs to be retired. Voluntarily or not.
If no one is using it, there is no need to retire it. If peopel are using it, you fix it. A concept that is based on not pissing people off. It isn't like this is the first security fla in Office, so perhaps any one or group that works with MS Office is a moron?
I don't quite understand, why can't new peat bogs be formed nowadays?
Peat is considered a very slowly renewable energy source. It is formed in wet acidic and anaerobic conditions, which slow down the decay process. The peat forming waters that I refer to are in a lake, at the shallow areas, just deep enough to canoe through. The plant material is mostly the remains of various water lilies, some of which have substantial plant mass. Every year, new mass is formed. The water has a lot of tannin in it, and is acidic. So the biomass at the bottom decomposes very slowly. This is not the typical peat formation method. But when canoeing or kayaking through those area, you can't help but touch the stuff on the bottom, and you get methane bubbles.
I should take a lighter and try igniting the gases some time.
So to be accurate, peat is renewable, just very slowly. To turn it into coal, you'd have to figure out away to stop those lignum munching fungi. Shanghai Bill has the best explanation in the thread.
The habitual Apple doomsayers are claiming with zero proof that iPhone X sales are below expectation. Even if that iPhone sales are down, nobody but Apple knows how it is spread over their (currently uncharacteristically large) number of iPhone models. Apple currently sells the X, the 8+ the 8, the 7+, the 7, the 6+, the 6 and the SE. So who's to say which model production is below expectations?
Actually the conditions for coal cannot be repeated naturally. Coal formed before microbes evolved the ability to break down the hard cellulose of trees. This is long before terminates as well, which broke down trees in forests. Theoretically some coal can still form in the existing peat bogs, but new peat bogs cannot be formed either.
There appears to be a fungus that also breaks down lignum developing and essentially ending the carboniferous age - or at least the coal forming part of it.
We have what would be a peat bog a bit north of where I live, in a lake. But instead of forming peat, it's a fine source of methane gas.
The latter. It's nuke industry shilling to try to stop its inevitable decline as the market turns to cheaper and cleaner renewables.
It's not the safety of a week maintained, normally operating reactor that is the problem. They just fixate on that because they have no answers to the real issues.
The joke was that no one is likely to spend their vacation staring at a nuclear reactor. I'd enjoy a tour, but not more than an hour. Boredom not radiation.
You are correct that renewables are making a mess of the Nucfan's dreams. Even a few years ago, I believed that more nuc powerplants were inevitable, while at the same time cautioning the zealots to not be so condescending and cocksure.
I was wrong. I missed the other half of the equation, the consumption end. Having bought CFL, then LED lights, and energy saving electrical appliances as needed and when we needed to replace our outdoor spa, we went for a very energy efficient well insulated model, we now use a fair amount less than our neighbors, who are only home a few weekends a month. And a lot less than we did 15 years ago. Energy efficient devices are making a dent in the supply needed, and the Local Wind Turbines are serving as total peaking +, now to the point of being able to rest some of them because they can make surplus.
I also learned that the "payback period" numbers quoted by those who don't like alternative is a scam perpetrated by people who want us to spend our money on inefficient wasteful devices - and of course, their useful drones. Our quality of home life and comfort has increased by going energy efficient.
I am able to basically do the same thing by just asking for a receipt wherever I go. It also gives me the privacy I want and if I was to ever need an alibi I'd just produce the receipt. It is my location data and I control it, not some third party.
You pay cash and get a reciept is not remotely close to an alibi. You could decide to murder someone and tell someone to pick up something at somewhere and get the receipt. Think ahead - the third parties in control are what lend the veracity to your alibi.
Then again, it might be more important to some people to scare the public with scary factoids than to provide education. That's my observation at least.
TL;DR: Airline pilots have some higher risk of skin cancer but not other cancers. Also additional lifestyle factors are difficult to filter out from sample set.
This can be read two ways. Are they trying to scare people away from planes, or impress people so they stand in front of reactors?
"What do we want to do for vacation this year honey? I was thinking we could either fly to Cancun or go stand in front of the Wolf Creek reactor."
I really don't understand your reasoning. It seems you would rather indulge in meat than prevent the world from becoming uninhabitable for humans.
Because consuming meat != destroying the world. That's just the vegan narrative. If meat eating was the sin you declare, the Inuits would have caused a total collapse of the arctic ecosystem long ago, as their diets consist alomost totally of meat.
But over population quite possibly will destroy us.
Allow me to make a minor correction. It can destroy the world for us. Nature does not care if humanity survives or not.
Is Indiia your model? India has more Vegetarians than the rest of the world combined.
So let's all be like India, as vegetarians they are going to save the world, amirite?
Sorry dear, but overpopulation is a hella bigger problem than those evil souls that allow corpse meat to pass their lips. Your narrative is showing.
Now do you have a plan for killing the Inut? Damn meat eaters, That would serve them right, probably.
What do they do about their immune systems? Immune systems are pretty deadly killing machines. Macrophages are pretty impressive
If I understand it correctly, they proscribe more killing, pain or upset to other beings than what is necessary for survival. So they accept that the immune system kills, but will only eat foods with antiseptic properties or "live" food like yoghurt if prescribed by a doctor, because either would be killing other living beings.
I don't think my bank or credit card company needs to know where I eat lunch every day.
I find that leaving a trail of where I have been to be useful. People often think of only the negative aspects of someone being able to tell where you were. However, a couple key tracking elements, like " I ate at this restaurant at this time as evidenced by my credit card payment, you can observe me entering the restaurant at this time as evidenced by the parking lot security cam, and further verified by the nearby cell phone tower logs, you can make a personless alibi supported by data. I've been having a tough time re-finding the link, but a New York Banker accused of rape was exhonorated by video cam footage of him leaving work and getting money at an ATM at the time the sexual assault occurred.
Sure, I use plastic to avoid dealing with a cashier (gas stations and parking) and of course for online shopping where you can't use cash.
I can also use the gas stations as proof of where I was, double verification via CC and Security camera.
But before I sound like some paranoid kook, I only bring this up as a possible benefit. The main reasons I live off credit cards is that I get a detailed listing of expenditures every month, which is a great way to budget my money. I have a separate Gas card, so keep close track of vehicle expenses. I have a 2 percent cashback card. Except for a few gas stations which charge less for cash, almost all businesses have the same cost for cash as credit. So I get several hundred dollars back once or twice a year.
The only catch is that you have to have the financial discipline to pay the card off every month. And the CC companies actually like that in some of their users because it gives cash flow.
Get off my lawn...I suppose?
Different strokes for different folks. My method isn't for everyone, as most people don't pay off their cards every month, and some are worried about that tracking element, either because they have a reason to be worried, or most likely just think of the negative possibilities of tracking. Me? I look for the advantages and take them. There's really no right or wrong here.
I've been using it for 10+ years and appreciate the lack of needless feature churning and meaningless version bumping, it's a mature product. Hope the morons jerking their browser around don't fuck it up.
I suspect that they will though. The nannies at Mozilla need to get their fingers on everything.
They'll probably decide what mail you are or aren't allowed to see, just like Firefox does now. Which I've uninstalled from my machine. I don't need a nanny.
I find your comment cold, sarcastic, and frigidly chilling. How does one get a point across to someone as clothesminded as you?
By making a cogent argument. Animals do not exist except by killing. Our immune system kills millions of individual lives every day. I make no distinction, only understand. The most ethical vegan kills only a few less life forms than I do.
Cold? Nature is not warm and fuzzy. There are herbivores, and there are carnivores. Somewhere in the mix, Herbivore became equated with good, and carnivore became equated with evil. And the idea was hatched that if we were all herbivores, we would be good, because herbivore equals good - how rational and logical eh?
In the end, the problem isn't whether I have accepted that humans are omnivores, or that the most ethical vegans try in vain to never kill another animal. Then jump threough hoops to rationalize what life they do kill.
Its that the evil people like me are not trying to encourage vegans to adopt our ways. I seriously do not care if you decide to eat only things that start with the letter A, or become a breatharian. That is your right to eat as you please. Almost all of these discussions come about when the vegan community tries to claim their innate superiority. How terrible wasteful and intent on destroying the planet the evil meat eaters are.
Sarcastic? That's when I'm being kind and holding back. Chilling? Some times the truth is very chilling.
All life is precious you insensitive clod, and you do not live unless you kill something. Plant? You killed, animal? You killed it.
Jains only eat parts of plants that can be harvested without killing the plant.
What do they do about their immune systems? Immune systems are pretty deadly killing machines. Macrophages are pretty impressive https://www.youtube.com/watch?... .
Humans die unless they kill. This is just how it is.
Every time I see statements like the OP's I ask "what about the people who use {photoshop/premierepro/equivalents} as their income-producing software?
People have a tendency to think that what they are using a device for is the only thing devices are used for. They even think that whatever they are using just somehow popped into existence, perhaps like Zero Point Energy Fermions.
You're forgetting a few other categories: gaming and creators.
I love how the Desktops are dead crowd seems to think that new and awesom apps for them to consume on their wave of the future smartphones just show up like manna from the heavens.
Sorry consumers, someone actually has to make the things you think just happen.
I agree. When I cannot tell the difference between a top quality sirloin steak and a plant based substitute, then MAYBE we should think about replacing beef.
When we get ot the artificial meat, when it gets to the point you describe, I will probably stop eating traditional meat. My metric is bacon. Right now the process is 100 percent lean meat. But some day I think it will happen.
Until then, the veganuts can dream all they want, but it is NOT going to happen!
As I had touched on before, the issue of going vegan is largely a psychological one. And therein lies the problem. We are just coming off of a "Fat is bad, and load up on those carbs!" version of the food pyramid that was simply bad for people. My parent's generation is creeping up on the likely limits of human life. Right now, Life expectancy in the US is dropping though.
The fact is that there has not yet been a plant based meat substitute that is comparable in taste, texture, and nutritional value to what it is supposed to be replacing.
I have a confession to make. There are veggie burgers out there that I love. I discovered them one day when I accidentally grabbed on at a sporting event. So I eat them now. However, I put a couple thick-cut slabs of my home made bacon on top. Good eating!. But they are good, I just don't mistake them for real beef. And of course I still eat regular hamburgers.
News flash.
Animals don't make proteins. All protein comes from plants.
Animals are just a very inefficient mechanism of converting plant protein to unhealthy animal protein.
Better to eat lower on the food chain. Fewer toxins, no saturated fat, Better for the planet.
Yet somehow, some way, in a miracle of nature, humans have survived to this point while apparently eating the exact wrong things. Only now do we know enopuight that the metabolism that nature has provided us with is wrong, evil, and utterly unhealthy and perhaps nature wants humans to destroy the planet?
The only reason that humans living and eating the very substances that they evolved to eat is is any sustainability problem, isbecause ther are too gawddamned many of us. In no time during the evolution of humans did the world end, eh? If we manage to destroy the planet, about the least likely mechanism is eating meat.
And eating too much meat can be a problem, just as eating too much carbs, and excessive phytoestrogens. It is not an indictment od either. In fact, the superseded food guidelines in the US were heavily influenced by vegans and the good old American values of industry influence.
In addition, there are interesting problems for men in the phytoestrogen loaded "correct" diet of today. http://www.lifeextension.com/M...
If you wish to eat like a prey animal and load up your body with estrogens, by all means do. I'll balance out my diet with meat, complex carbs but watch the phytoestrogen containers - if they brag about anti-oxidant properties, its probably got them in spades - and limit my simple carbs.
Slashdot Mirror
If you want to go to another store, do so. I make the choice every week which store I want to give my money to.
I would, but they are in empty strip malls now, or have been razed.
"I missed the other half of the equation, the consumption end."
No you didn't.
Golly gosh, but I did.
Despite the use of more energy efficient devices in domestic environments, domestic power demands are increasing. Industrial power demands are also increasing.
And yet, here we are, just about 2018, and the brownouts and blackouts promised years back if we don't build more nuc plants haven't materialized. No new nucs, no new coal. In my area we do have a lot of new wind turbines. Right now they have more than taken up the demand. There is a gas turbine generator peaker not too far from here, but half of it's purpose to to use waste steam for heat.
If you work with DDE these days, you're a moron.
Never have - never will. But some folks do, and last time I checked, there was no law against being a moran
OLE was introduced in 1990, and replaces DDE. Anyone ever using DDE should now be well retired. The fact that they actually use DDE is proof they really needs to be retired. Voluntarily or not.
If no one is using it, there is no need to retire it. If peopel are using it, you fix it. A concept that is based on not pissing people off. It isn't like this is the first security fla in Office, so perhaps any one or group that works with MS Office is a moron?
I don't quite understand, why can't new peat bogs be formed nowadays?
Peat is considered a very slowly renewable energy source. It is formed in wet acidic and anaerobic conditions, which slow down the decay process. The peat forming waters that I refer to are in a lake, at the shallow areas, just deep enough to canoe through. The plant material is mostly the remains of various water lilies, some of which have substantial plant mass. Every year, new mass is formed. The water has a lot of tannin in it, and is acidic. So the biomass at the bottom decomposes very slowly. This is not the typical peat formation method. But when canoeing or kayaking through those area, you can't help but touch the stuff on the bottom, and you get methane bubbles.
I should take a lighter and try igniting the gases some time.
So to be accurate, peat is renewable, just very slowly. To turn it into coal, you'd have to figure out away to stop those lignum munching fungi. Shanghai Bill has the best explanation in the thread.
He'll make a Humvee equivalent, with mounted machine gun to shoot down Elon haters.
Those things are rather gross.
The habitual Apple doomsayers are claiming with zero proof that iPhone X sales are below expectation. Even if that iPhone sales are down, nobody but Apple knows how it is spread over their (currently uncharacteristically large) number of iPhone models. Apple currently sells the X, the 8+ the 8, the 7+, the 7, the 6+, the 6 and the SE. So who's to say which model production is below expectations?
http://bgr.com/2017/12/26/ipho...
I think the problem if it exists, is that it just came out too soon.
Actually the conditions for coal cannot be repeated naturally. Coal formed before microbes evolved the ability to break down the hard cellulose of trees. This is long before terminates as well, which broke down trees in forests. Theoretically some coal can still form in the existing peat bogs, but new peat bogs cannot be formed either.
There appears to be a fungus that also breaks down lignum developing and essentially ending the carboniferous age - or at least the coal forming part of it.
We have what would be a peat bog a bit north of where I live, in a lake. But instead of forming peat, it's a fine source of methane gas.
Elon my man, I want a gaddamed Jeep equivalent.
The latter. It's nuke industry shilling to try to stop its inevitable decline as the market turns to cheaper and cleaner renewables.
It's not the safety of a week maintained, normally operating reactor that is the problem. They just fixate on that because they have no answers to the real issues.
The joke was that no one is likely to spend their vacation staring at a nuclear reactor. I'd enjoy a tour, but not more than an hour. Boredom not radiation.
You are correct that renewables are making a mess of the Nucfan's dreams. Even a few years ago, I believed that more nuc powerplants were inevitable, while at the same time cautioning the zealots to not be so condescending and cocksure.
I was wrong. I missed the other half of the equation, the consumption end. Having bought CFL, then LED lights, and energy saving electrical appliances as needed and when we needed to replace our outdoor spa, we went for a very energy efficient well insulated model, we now use a fair amount less than our neighbors, who are only home a few weekends a month. And a lot less than we did 15 years ago. Energy efficient devices are making a dent in the supply needed, and the Local Wind Turbines are serving as total peaking +, now to the point of being able to rest some of them because they can make surplus.
I also learned that the "payback period" numbers quoted by those who don't like alternative is a scam perpetrated by people who want us to spend our money on inefficient wasteful devices - and of course, their useful drones. Our quality of home life and comfort has increased by going energy efficient.
I find that leaving a trail of where my card (or copy of it) has been to be useful.
FTFY. You didn't think that it's an alibi, did you?
A credit card bill and a security camera and cell phone tower records are a better alibi than most people's testimony.
If I ever need an alibi, My lawyers will be subpeoning the camera footage of every place I've been to.
Aint just the card honey, it's every form of tracking, the card is just part of the process.
I am able to basically do the same thing by just asking for a receipt wherever I go. It also gives me the privacy I want and if I was to ever need an alibi I'd just produce the receipt. It is my location data and I control it, not some third party.
You pay cash and get a reciept is not remotely close to an alibi. You could decide to murder someone and tell someone to pick up something at somewhere and get the receipt. Think ahead - the third parties in control are what lend the veracity to your alibi.
Then again, it might be more important to some people to scare the public with scary factoids than to provide education. That's my observation at least.
TL;DR: Airline pilots have some higher risk of skin cancer but not other cancers. Also additional lifestyle factors are difficult to filter out from sample set.
This can be read two ways. Are they trying to scare people away from planes, or impress people so they stand in front of reactors?
"What do we want to do for vacation this year honey? I was thinking we could either fly to Cancun or go stand in front of the Wolf Creek reactor."
I really don't understand your reasoning. It seems you would rather indulge in meat than prevent the world from becoming uninhabitable for humans.
Because consuming meat != destroying the world. That's just the vegan narrative. If meat eating was the sin you declare, the Inuits would have caused a total collapse of the arctic ecosystem long ago, as their diets consist alomost totally of meat.
But over population quite possibly will destroy us.
Allow me to make a minor correction. It can destroy the world for us. Nature does not care if humanity survives or not.
Is Indiia your model? India has more Vegetarians than the rest of the world combined.
So let's all be like India, as vegetarians they are going to save the world, amirite?
Sorry dear, but overpopulation is a hella bigger problem than those evil souls that allow corpse meat to pass their lips. Your narrative is showing. Now do you have a plan for killing the Inut? Damn meat eaters, That would serve them right, probably.
What do they do about their immune systems? Immune systems are pretty deadly killing machines. Macrophages are pretty impressive
If I understand it correctly, they proscribe more killing, pain or upset to other beings than what is necessary for survival. So they accept that the immune system kills, but will only eat foods with antiseptic properties or "live" food like yoghurt if prescribed by a doctor, because either would be killing other living beings.
Either way, a very inconsistent outlook.
I don't think my bank or credit card company needs to know where I eat lunch every day.
I find that leaving a trail of where I have been to be useful. People often think of only the negative aspects of someone being able to tell where you were. However, a couple key tracking elements, like " I ate at this restaurant at this time as evidenced by my credit card payment, you can observe me entering the restaurant at this time as evidenced by the parking lot security cam, and further verified by the nearby cell phone tower logs, you can make a personless alibi supported by data. I've been having a tough time re-finding the link, but a New York Banker accused of rape was exhonorated by video cam footage of him leaving work and getting money at an ATM at the time the sexual assault occurred. Sure, I use plastic to avoid dealing with a cashier (gas stations and parking) and of course for online shopping where you can't use cash.
I can also use the gas stations as proof of where I was, double verification via CC and Security camera.
But before I sound like some paranoid kook, I only bring this up as a possible benefit. The main reasons I live off credit cards is that I get a detailed listing of expenditures every month, which is a great way to budget my money. I have a separate Gas card, so keep close track of vehicle expenses. I have a 2 percent cashback card. Except for a few gas stations which charge less for cash, almost all businesses have the same cost for cash as credit. So I get several hundred dollars back once or twice a year.
The only catch is that you have to have the financial discipline to pay the card off every month. And the CC companies actually like that in some of their users because it gives cash flow.
Get off my lawn...I suppose?
Different strokes for different folks. My method isn't for everyone, as most people don't pay off their cards every month, and some are worried about that tracking element, either because they have a reason to be worried, or most likely just think of the negative possibilities of tracking. Me? I look for the advantages and take them. There's really no right or wrong here.
I've been using it for 10+ years and appreciate the lack of needless feature churning and meaningless version bumping, it's a mature product. Hope the morons jerking their browser around don't fuck it up.
I suspect that they will though. The nannies at Mozilla need to get their fingers on everything.
This scares me.
They'll probably decide what mail you are or aren't allowed to see, just like Firefox does now. Which I've uninstalled from my machine. I don't need a nanny.
I find your comment cold, sarcastic, and frigidly chilling. How does one get a point across to someone as clothesminded as you?
By making a cogent argument. Animals do not exist except by killing. Our immune system kills millions of individual lives every day. I make no distinction, only understand. The most ethical vegan kills only a few less life forms than I do.
Cold? Nature is not warm and fuzzy. There are herbivores, and there are carnivores. Somewhere in the mix, Herbivore became equated with good, and carnivore became equated with evil. And the idea was hatched that if we were all herbivores, we would be good, because herbivore equals good - how rational and logical eh?
In the end, the problem isn't whether I have accepted that humans are omnivores, or that the most ethical vegans try in vain to never kill another animal. Then jump threough hoops to rationalize what life they do kill.
Its that the evil people like me are not trying to encourage vegans to adopt our ways. I seriously do not care if you decide to eat only things that start with the letter A, or become a breatharian. That is your right to eat as you please. Almost all of these discussions come about when the vegan community tries to claim their innate superiority. How terrible wasteful and intent on destroying the planet the evil meat eaters are.
Sarcastic? That's when I'm being kind and holding back. Chilling? Some times the truth is very chilling.
All life is precious you insensitive clod, and you do not live unless you kill something. Plant? You killed, animal? You killed it.
Jains only eat parts of plants that can be harvested without killing the plant.
What do they do about their immune systems? Immune systems are pretty deadly killing machines. Macrophages are pretty impressive https://www.youtube.com/watch?... .
Humans die unless they kill. This is just how it is.
Actually, meat production does more harm (greenhouse gases, deforestation) than transportation so it's a good candidate for planet destruction.
And if we all committed mass suicide, your world vision would be complete.
You hate humanity with a fervor that would make a Calvinist blush.
Yeah, the "remnant" of the desktop PC market.
Every time I see statements like the OP's I ask "what about the people who use {photoshop/premierepro/equivalents} as their income-producing software?
People have a tendency to think that what they are using a device for is the only thing devices are used for. They even think that whatever they are using just somehow popped into existence, perhaps like Zero Point Energy Fermions.
You're forgetting a few other categories: gaming and creators.
I love how the Desktops are dead crowd seems to think that new and awesom apps for them to consume on their wave of the future smartphones just show up like manna from the heavens.
Sorry consumers, someone actually has to make the things you think just happen.
I think you're confusing signs of Linux adoption with signs of the apocalypse.
Damn - that was brutal. Especially since it's true.
I agree. When I cannot tell the difference between a top quality sirloin steak and a plant based substitute, then MAYBE we should think about replacing beef.
When we get ot the artificial meat, when it gets to the point you describe, I will probably stop eating traditional meat. My metric is bacon. Right now the process is 100 percent lean meat. But some day I think it will happen.
Until then, the veganuts can dream all they want, but it is NOT going to happen!
As I had touched on before, the issue of going vegan is largely a psychological one. And therein lies the problem. We are just coming off of a "Fat is bad, and load up on those carbs!" version of the food pyramid that was simply bad for people. My parent's generation is creeping up on the likely limits of human life. Right now, Life expectancy in the US is dropping though.
The fact is that there has not yet been a plant based meat substitute that is comparable in taste, texture, and nutritional value to what it is supposed to be replacing.
I have a confession to make. There are veggie burgers out there that I love. I discovered them one day when I accidentally grabbed on at a sporting event. So I eat them now. However, I put a couple thick-cut slabs of my home made bacon on top. Good eating!. But they are good, I just don't mistake them for real beef. And of course I still eat regular hamburgers.
News flash. Animals don't make proteins. All protein comes from plants. Animals are just a very inefficient mechanism of converting plant protein to unhealthy animal protein. Better to eat lower on the food chain. Fewer toxins, no saturated fat, Better for the planet.
Yet somehow, some way, in a miracle of nature, humans have survived to this point while apparently eating the exact wrong things. Only now do we know enopuight that the metabolism that nature has provided us with is wrong, evil, and utterly unhealthy and perhaps nature wants humans to destroy the planet? The only reason that humans living and eating the very substances that they evolved to eat is is any sustainability problem, isbecause ther are too gawddamned many of us. In no time during the evolution of humans did the world end, eh? If we manage to destroy the planet, about the least likely mechanism is eating meat.
And eating too much meat can be a problem, just as eating too much carbs, and excessive phytoestrogens. It is not an indictment od either. In fact, the superseded food guidelines in the US were heavily influenced by vegans and the good old American values of industry influence.
In addition, there are interesting problems for men in the phytoestrogen loaded "correct" diet of today. http://www.lifeextension.com/M...
If you wish to eat like a prey animal and load up your body with estrogens, by all means do. I'll balance out my diet with meat, complex carbs but watch the phytoestrogen containers - if they brag about anti-oxidant properties, its probably got them in spades - and limit my simple carbs.