Byron - 'Grass' fed burgers

[GTI]

I think its pretty reprehensible behaviour from this outfit. You benefit from their lowly paid labour for months and years and then dob them into the authorities like this (probably in some kind of plea deal). I am not exactly in favour of illegals, but I think this was a pretty underhand move from Byron, when it is them who fucked up in the first place for hiring them.

IMMIGRATION 'STING' Dozens of workers at burger chain Byron arrested by immigration officials at ‘trap’ training event set up by bosses

#boycottbyron trending online as public slams company's actions

BY KATHRYN CAIN
27th July 2016, 4:28 pm

DOZENS of workers at chain restaurant Byron Burger have been arrested by Home Office officials – after attending a training event set up by company bosses to lure them in.

The Sun understands that earlier this month workers at 15 of the chain’s London restaurants were called in for a 9.30am training event.


Dozens of Byron Burger workers are said to have been deported by the Home Office


It’s alleged that the company set up a training event with immigration officers to lure in workers

However when they arrived they were swooped on by immigration officers said to be carrying lists of names and photos of those under watch.
Dozens of workers are believed to have been arrested and deported almost straight away – most of whom were of Latin American descent.

A spokesman for Byron said: “We can confirm that several of Byron’s London restaurants were visited by representatives of the Home Office.

“These visits resulted in the removal of members of staff who are suspected by the Home Office of not having the right to work in the UK, and of possessing fraudulent personal and right to work documentation that is in breach of immigration and employment regulation.

[BigBird]

Source: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1511483/1511483/

[GTI]

Source: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1511483/1511483/

It has its moments, in this case it happened to be at the top of Google news and be easiest to clip n paste... fuck me, sometimes online papers make it next to impossible to rip their content with in-line quotes, twitter nonsense, adverts etc....

[Mule]

It has its moments, in this case it happened to be at the top of Google news and be easiest to clip n paste... fuck me, sometimes online papers make it next to impossible to rip their content with in-line quotes, twitter nonsense, adverts etc....

I don't think BigBird was criticising the source, just adding it, since you didn't.

[CzarJunkie]

It's a little off topic, but I think the whole business is reprehensible. If there's one thing that will bring an end to our species, it will be how we farm animals for meat. It's totally unsustainable, no matter how they are reared. And beef cattle are particularly harmful to the environment.

[GTI]

It's a little off topic, but I think the whole business is reprehensible. If there's one thing that will bring an end to our species, it will be how we farm animals for meat. It's totally unsustainable, no matter how they are reared. And beef cattle are particularly harmful to the environment.

I think meat should be a rare treat as opposed to a daily staple. As I've grown older I've started to appreciate a more varied vegetarian diet and can happily go without meat for a week or two. I don't think I will ever be a full blown veggie since I love a good roast and New Zealand lamb chops would be my final death row meal, but I won't now beat my missus if she doesn't cook some calves liver with my polenta and shiitake mushroom ragout.

[BigBird]

It has its moments, in this case it happened to be at the top of Google news and be easiest to clip n paste... fuck me, sometimes online papers make it next to impossible to rip their content with in-line quotes, twitter nonsense, adverts etc....

I agree it can be a hassle. I grab a paragraph or two at a time and paste into notepad first. Only problem then is having reformat it to take out unwanted line breaks once its pasted from notepad into the forum. With all the faffing about it's easy to forget to add the link to the source, so rather than pointing it out it was easier to just add it for you. (">

[beansontoast]

It's a little off topic, but I think the whole business is reprehensible. If there's one thing that will bring an end to our species, it will be how we farm animals for meat. It's totally unsustainable, no matter how they are reared. And beef cattle are particularly harmful to the environment.

I agree with this, I find it odd to admit but it makes perfect sense. I've also read up on it in the past, it is obviously more efficient to eat the grain than feed it to animals and eat the animals. But I have to admit I eat meat every day without fail, not as an obsession just habit / ease. Probably twice a day - and "meat" rather than something cooked with a piece of meat. I think I should consider some changes.

[CzarJunkie]

I agree with this, I find it odd to admit but it makes perfect sense. I've also read up on it in the past, it is obviously more efficient to eat the grain than feed it to animals and eat the animals. But I have to admit I eat meat every day without fail, not as an obsession just habit / ease. Probably twice a day - and "meat" rather than something cooked with a piece of meat. I think I should consider some changes.

I thought giving up meat was a hurdle I'd never get over. But the more I read about the health and environmental problems it causes, I gradually started to wean myself off it. It's taken a few years, but I'm now at a stage where I no longer find it palatable.

The health implications are just as shocking as the environmental, and if I'm honest, the health implications were the main driver. So, even if it's for purely selfish reasons, reducing or removing meat from your diet is a good thing.

Nutritionfacts.org is a great resource for science based nutritional advice and it's overwhelming how much evidence there is regarding meat and it's detrimental effect on human health.

[BigBird]

Don't know how accurate this is but its something I came across a few years ago but never looked into it any further. Apparently humans are not physically designed to eat meat. (">

Meat-eaters: have claws
Herbivores: no claws
Humans: no claws

Meat-eaters: have no skin pores and perspire through the tongue
Herbivores: perspire through skin pores
Humans: perspire through skin pores

Meat-eaters: have sharp front teeth for tearing, with no flat molar teeth for grinding
Herbivores: no sharp front teeth, but flat rear molars for grinding
Humans: no sharp front teeth, but flat rear molars for grinding

Meat-eaters: have intestinal tract that is only 3 times their body length so that rapidly decaying meat can pass through quickly
Herbivores: have intestinal tract 10-12 times their body length.
Humans: have intestinal tract 10-12 times their body length.

Meat-eaters: have strong hydrochloric acid in stomach to digest meat
Herbivores: have stomach acid that is 20 times weaker than that of a meat-eater
Humans: have stomach acid that is 20 times weaker than that of a meat-eater

Meat-eaters: salivary glands in mouth not needed to pre-digest grains and fruits.
Herbivores: well-developed salivary glands which are necessary to pre-digest grains and fruits
Humans: well-developed salivary glands, which are necessary to pre-digest, grains and fruits

Meat-eaters: have acid saliva with no enzyme ptyalin to pre-digest grains
Herbivores: have alkaline saliva with ptyalin to pre-digest grains
Humans: have alkaline saliva with ptyalin to pre-digest grains

More info on the site if anyone is interested: http://www.celestialhealing.net/physicalveg3.htm

[Mule]

Humans aren't designed full stop

[Bald Bouncer]

Don't know how accurate this is but its something I came across a few years ago but never looked into it any further. Apparently humans are not physically designed to eat meat. (">

Meat-eaters: have claws
Herbivores: no claws
Humans: no claws

Meat-eaters: have no skin pores and perspire through the tongue
Herbivores: perspire through skin pores
Humans: perspire through skin pores

Meat-eaters: have sharp front teeth for tearing, with no flat molar teeth for grinding
Herbivores: no sharp front teeth, but flat rear molars for grinding
Humans: no sharp front teeth, but flat rear molars for grinding

Meat-eaters: have intestinal tract that is only 3 times their body length so that rapidly decaying meat can pass through quickly
Herbivores: have intestinal tract 10-12 times their body length.
Humans: have intestinal tract 10-12 times their body length.

Meat-eaters: have strong hydrochloric acid in stomach to digest meat
Herbivores: have stomach acid that is 20 times weaker than that of a meat-eater
Humans: have stomach acid that is 20 times weaker than that of a meat-eater

Meat-eaters: salivary glands in mouth not needed to pre-digest grains and fruits.
Herbivores: well-developed salivary glands which are necessary to pre-digest grains and fruits
Humans: well-developed salivary glands, which are necessary to pre-digest, grains and fruits

Meat-eaters: have acid saliva with no enzyme ptyalin to pre-digest grains
Herbivores: have alkaline saliva with ptyalin to pre-digest grains
Humans: have alkaline saliva with ptyalin to pre-digest grains

More info on the site if anyone is interested: http://www.celestialhealing.net/physicalveg3.htm

One thing I would say is animals who eat other animals (hunters who are not prey) have eyes in the front of their heads, hunted animals at the side (not checked so not sure if this is always the case), humans certainly do or did not survive well on raw meat as a species but would have to look it up to refresh my memory on the history of evolution on the details.

I eat meat about 3-4 times a week but believe as a nation we are ranked fairly low in the world as meat eaters per head and I am more concerned with avoiding processed foods than meat.

[CzarJunkie]

I think there's a lot of debate as to whether humans evolved as meat eaters, or whether we simply got the calories from the cheapest possible source, which was usually plant based with a few animal sources thrown in if we could catch them. Humans have evolved with more starch receptors than our closest ape cousins, so that suggests that when we left the trees for the savannah we moved from a mostly fruit based diet to eating starchy tubers, as they are calorie dense.

The argument for eating meat, especially amongst those who claim our ancestors were meat eaters, is plausible. But our ancestors had a lifespan of 30-40 years. We certainly haven't evolved to live 70 or 80 years as meat eaters. Our ancestors certainly won't have eaten meat every day either, or in the quantities that modern humans in developed nations eat it. And then there's the quality of the meat too, today's factory farming pumps most meat full of steroids, hormones and antibiotics.

All in all, I think the case for eating meat, purely from a health standpoint, is weak for modern humans.

[Bald Bouncer]

I think there's a lot of debate as to whether humans evolved as meat eaters, or whether we simply got the calories from the cheapest possible source, which was usually plant based with a few animal sources thrown in if we could catch them. Humans have evolved with more starch receptors than our closest ape cousins, so that suggests that when we left the trees for the savannah we moved from a mostly fruit based diet to eating starchy tubers, as they are calorie dense.

The argument for eating meat, especially amongst those who claim our ancestors were meat eaters, is plausible. But our ancestors had a lifespan of 30-40 years. We certainly haven't evolved to live 70 or 80 years as meat eaters. Our ancestors certainly won't have eaten meat every day either, or in the quantities that modern humans in developed nations eat it. And then there's the quality of the meat too, today's factory farming pumps most meat full of steroids, hormones and antibiotics.

All in all, I think the case for eating meat, purely from a health standpoint, is weak for modern humans.

Have no real arguments to the points apart from the lifespan I would say there are far too many other factors involved as well as pre 19th century was around 30 years in all regions of the world and life expectancy started to increase in the early industrialised countries while it remained at the lower levels in the non industrialised countries, again I think there are many factors involved not least advances in medicine.

This was something I read before that I was referring back to I had read when I said "humans certainly do or did not survive well on raw meat as a species but would have to look it up to refresh my memory on the history of evolution on the details" it's more speculation that hard fact.

---

Did Neanderthals Die Off Because They Couldn't Harness Fire?

SAN FRANCISCO — Neanderthals may have died off because they failed to harness the power of fire to the extent their human cousins did, a new data analysis suggests.

Using fire for cooking would have allowed these other groups of ancient human relatives to get more calories from the same amount of food, thereby edging out the Neanderthal population. Over time, the anatomically modern human population would have risen, whilethe Neanderthal population plummeted toward extinction, according to the model.

"Fire use would have provided a significant advantage for the human population and may indeed have been an important factor in the overall collapse or absorption of the Neanderthal population," said Anna Goldfield, a doctoral candidate in archaeology at Boston University, who presented the findings here on Thursday (April 16) at the 80th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology.

Mysterious disappearance

One of the enduring mysteries of human history is why the Neanderthals went extinct in most of Europe around 40,000 years ago. Neanderthals had been living on the continent for hundreds of thousands of years when the first modern humans showed up about 45,000 years ago, Goldfield said. Then, in a relatively short span of time, the Neanderthals vanished.

"The arrival of humans had something to do with the extinction of Neanderthals," Goldfield told Live Science.

But the exact cause has been a matter of hot debate. Some have postulated that Neanderthals found it increasingly difficult to access resources they needed given their small group sizes and relatively local trading networks. Other scientists have even proposed that humans cannibalized their Neanderthal rivals.

"The issue of Neanderthal extinction is very complex, and very little is agreed upon," Goldfield said.

Goldfield and her colleague Ross Booton, a mathematical biologist at the University of Sheffield in the United Kingdom, wondered whether fire use had something to do with the demise, they said.

One big difference between the Neanderthals and humans may have been modern humans' mastery of fire. Not only can it provide warmth, but fire also enables people to cook their food. This can kill bacteria, making food safer, and denature proteins, meaning the body can harness more calories from the same amount of food. In addition, Neanderthals may have required more calories to survive in the first place because they had higher average body mass. Thus, modern humans' lower food needs could have given them a decisive edge in the cold, nutritionally sparse environment of Western Europe at the time, Goldfield said.

While some fossil sites suggest Neanderthals used fire, they may not have used it often or consistently. For instance, Neanderthals occupied two sites in southwest France — Roc de Marsal, and Pech de l'Aze IV — for tens of thousands of years. The sites contain tens of thousands of stone tools and animal bones, but almost no evidence of fire making, said Dennis Sandgathe, an archaeologist at Simon Fraser University who has excavated the sites.

"The Neanderthals are somehow just getting by without fire," Sandgathe told Live Science.

Competing resources

To understand the effects of fire use on Neanderthals, the researchers used mathematical models. The simulations helped estimate how the populations of anatomically modern humans and Neanderthals changed when humans were using fire more frequently than Neanderthals, or when both groups used fire about equally. The researchers also looked at the population of reindeer, which both groups ate, under those scenarios.

The numbers showed that the more that modern humans used fire relative to their Neanderthal cousins, the more likely the human population was to increase slightly. That, in turn, would have reduced the number of reindeer available for the Neanderthals to eat. Over time, the human population would have simply outcompeted the Neanderthals for resources, leading to this population's eventual demise.

However, because so much remains unknown about Neanderthals, it's tough to draw firm conclusions about the causes of their decline, Sandgathe said. For instance, estimates for how many calories Neanderthals needed to survive are rough, he said. In addition, scientists still don't agree on exactly what Neanderthals ate. Whether Neanderthals ate plants or were ultra-carnivorous (or even cannibals) could affect the extent to which fire affected their survival, he added.

Source

---

Personally I think adaptation has been and is the key to human survival and future and that may well be the elimination or reduction in meat intake but also think the problems associated with eating meat have a lot more to do with how meat is produced now than meat in the human diet causing problems and go along the lines of everything in moderation and each to their own.

And just to lighten the thread...

[piggzy]

Have to agree with BB, although I do know I should eat less meat, I am more concerned about avoiding processed food as I believe that to be more harmful to us than anything else.
Trying to use the NutriBullet more and only use fresh fruit and veg. Nothing apart from pulses from a tin and we even got rid of our Microwave about a year ago now.

P.S I stand to be corrected, but I never met a vegan that wasn't a cunt. I even know one vegan who has dogs and she actually will not allow her dogs to eat meat either... what a cunt.

[Mule]

What did the microwave do wrong? Microwaving is a very healthy way of cooking veg.

[BigBird]

What did the microwave do wrong? Microwaving is a very healthy way of cooking veg.

And with the door switch disabled its brilliant for quickly warming your hands up when you've been working outside on the car in winter. (">