Re: Re: Animal By-Products in Feed

["Robyn Levash" <questarabians@inreach.com>]

----- Original Message -----
From: Susan Garlinghouse <suendavid@worldnet.att.net>
To: Robyn Levash <questarabians@inreach.com>; Maurisa Payne
<maurisap@erols.com>
Cc: <ridecamp@endurance.net>
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 12:37 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Animal By-Products in Feed


> Although I've had a fair amount of human physiology and nutrition classes
> along with the animal nutrition classes, I wouldn't presume to tell people
> what foods are right or wrong for them in their diet.

Marissa and I were only offering information for those interested in
learning. Traditional medicine is not always correct as you might believe or
have learned. No offense, there is another side to health that you just have
not learned. I spent several years going to pre-vet school along with
several personal experiences, only to find along the way that Traditional
medicine is not always what it is cracked up to be. Going back to history,
everyone at one time believed that the world was flat. Very few ventured or
cared to know that the world was actually round. Most doctors learn from
their teachers (in a sense) that the "world is flat". They never venture or
care, or simply do not know to dig any deeper into things.

> However, I think that there's alot of mileage that gets bludgeoned out of
> taking what are some pretty innocuous livestock feed manufacturing
practices
> and turning them into vile, evil and corrupt conspiracies meant to poison
> the entire human and animal population.  Believe me, there would be alot
> more seriously sick people and humans around if preservatives were *not*
> included in commercial feed.

Who's to say there aren't seriously sick people and animals out there? Wake
up! Look all around you at all the people out there with cancers, obesity,
arthritis, Altheimer's disease, high blood pressure, heart disease, Chronic
Fatigue, headaches, hormone relate problems, osteoporosis, high cholestrol,
intestional disorders, Diabetes, kidney disease, liver failure, stroke,
etc.ect. ect.  These diseases are as common as the flu it seems. There is
something seriously wrong with affects of the rich American diet. Not only
that, our pets are getting these very same diseases as readily as ourselves.
Just because there are no noticeable effects from that preservative, that
instant or a few years down the road, does not mean that it is not harming
us in one way or another. Many things are diagnosed as something else. What
about  hundreds of  years ago? There were not even a fraction of the
diseases that our pets and ourselves suffer today. So tell  me then, what is
really wrong with the picture of today? These diseases don't just happen
they are the CAUSE of  "something".

You wanna grow your own organic veggies, and
> never buy a container of pre-prepared food?  Fine, more power to anyone
who
> does that.  Most people are more concerned about convenience in their
lives
> and want someone else to do the majority of their food prep, and that goes
> for horse feeds as well.  If you make that choice, then yes, preservatives
> have to be somewhere in the equation---if it wasn't, there'd be no way to
> adequately control spoilage and ther'd be ALOT of horses colicking from
> moldy feed.  Take your pick.

The point that Marissa and I were making is that there are ALTERNATIVES out
there for people that care to know.  For instance, instead of prepared feeds
there are good old fashioned oats, pasture, or hay. It is that simple, if
people want an alternative without preservatives.

>
> > The consumption of BHA, BHT, or ethoxyquin affects cellular mechanisms,
> > causing gene instability and a higher mutation rate. As a result, these
> > substances have been linked to a higher incidence of cancer in both
humans
>
> Any references to independent studies to support this contention?  Any
data
> produced in species other than lab mice (where they've also been able to
> produce neoplasias as a result of diets high in purified, distilled
> water...)
>

Of course no studies exist! Why would feed companies want to fund studies
that might show that their products have any ill effects, even if those
effects are not immediately life threatening? Plus studies are expensive to
conduct. Most holistic practitioners -who'd like to have studies funded
simply do not have the resources available to do the research.

I do not need to have studies done to know that I feel TONS better eating a
starch centered plant based diet vs. the rich American diet I used to eat. I
do not need studies to know that what I am eating now has clearly helped my
serious past medical problems. I am my own study. I listen to my body. I
listen to my animals. The drastic improvements in our health have spoken for
themselves. For instance with my cat, I almost lost her due to high kidney
BUN levels. I put her on a raw meat/vegtable/starch diet (yes, with the help
of my vet) and her blood tests have turned and stayed at normal levels. I do
not need studies to tell me that this clearly "saved" her life. Science is
great, but can only go so far. It is results in the end that speak for
themselves. Results are either temporary or permanant. It is our choice of
what it is to be.

Robyn Levash
>
>