Talk:Red meat
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Removed quackery
The following statement is 100% make believe, and the reference points to a site promoting quackery, so I have taken it off the page:
- By the age of fifty, the average American has five pounds of undigested red meat in their bowels. [1]
Nova SS 03:05, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- And if you look at the site, it doesn't even make that claim: it's only a quotation from a movie. I removed the statement again after someone re-added it. Wmahan. 17:50, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- Wow, a holistic quack site with a flaky quote. What a surprise. Nova SS 18:26, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Emus?
The Emu article lists that bird as a red meat, with sources (here and here). Are there other exceptions? Does anyone know enough to describe the distinction in more detail? Blurble 19:42, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] This page needs to be balanced out a lot
I'm surprised the obvious bias in this page has been tolerated. One editor has even gone so far as to add an absurd section on dietary habits in relation red meat, almost as if implying that there might be some chemical in the meat which stops people from eating vegies. The section on globins paints a false picture of total scientific agreement as to the deadly and dangerous potential of red meats, especially, we are told, because of a scary sounding process that red meat triggers off in the gut. This air of scientific certainty did not seem to be present in the BBC article that the entire section seems to be based off, I can only assume that it is deliberate.
Anyhoo, I'll try cleaning it up a bit.
[edit] Red or white?
I'ved moved the following statement here as it's not only poorly sourced but likely false:
- The meat of young mammals such as veal and milk-fed lamb, and that of pork is usually considered "white"; while the meat of duck and goose is considered "red",[1] though the demarcation line has been shifting.
The demarcation line shifted long ago! --Amit 02:58, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
See discussion in Talk:White meat. It's amusing that you consider OED 2 a poor source, and seem to think that 18 years ago is a long time. Are you basing your judgement on personal experience (i.e. original research)? What about a world perspective? Have you investigated European (not to mention Asian, etc.) positions? As a compromise, I will add the word "traditionally". --Macrakis 19:04, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
