/ck/ - Food & Cooking

>>12791826
>this is like saying lettuce on a sandwich is just a substitute for meat.
Lettuce added to burgers began as a meat rationing practice.
Also it's funny you bring this up because WWII meat rationing also resulted in the invention of 'Trumanburgers' which are burgers where mashed baked beans are used as substitutes for meat:
>During the last days of meat rationing in 1945-1946, the term Trumanburger was coined. This dish, named after President Harry Truman, consisted of a patty of mashed baked beans! [8: 12]
http://digital.lib.ucdavis.edu/projects/food/panl8ukno.html

>>11802575
>it's not an on/off switch. type 2 diabetes doesn't pop up overnight it's a slow and steady until it reaches that point.
It basically IS an on/off switch (tipping point might be a better term for it though). Something needs to snap before you start developing clinical insulin resistance or full blown Type 2 Diabetes. Before that point blood sugar spikes are irrelevant to your health. The one overwhelmingly predictive risk factor for Type 2 Diabetes isn't your macronutrient ratio. It's your weight. If you've been a 5'10 140 lb man your entire adult life I would without hesitation bet all my life savings on you never getting Type 2 Diabetes so long as you never gain weight. And I would not care in the slightest if you spiked your blood sugar all the time with soda or cake or whatever other extremely high glycemic index foods or drinks you might come up with.
And same way in reverse, I would not feel good at all betting on a 5'10 300 lb man never getting Type 2 Diabetes no matter how much he avoided carbohydrates or kept his blood sugar from spiking.
Blood sugar spiking intolerance / insulin resistance are really the disease itself, not the cause of it. Way more evidence for your weight being the cause of it than the kinds of foods you gained your weight from. This sounds a little counter-intuitive but it's how a lot of phenomena work, both natural and artificial e.g. gasoline isn't going to ever *create* a fire no matter how much you pour on the ground, but if you already have a fire going then adding gasoline to it isn't going to help put it out.
http://clinchem.aaccjnls.org/content/45/8/1339
>The obesity is a cause of insulin resistance rather than a consequence.

>>11729609
>fish dont feel pain
There's no way to ever know that. You can pretty confidently say organisms like plants don't feel pain, but fish are way more debatable, with about as much good evidence for as against. Same with crustaceans. If I had to bet my money would personally be on them having some semblance of pain and suffering.
Also notice a lot of wishful thinking behind the "they obviously don't feel pain because X" arguments. Almost always seems to be pushed by people who eat and in some way promote the infliction of physical damage to these organisms in what would amount to painful stimuli in the event that they do have the experience of it. I eat meat and wouldn't even go out of my way to try to campaign for more humane slaughter practices, although I do think the animals I eat probably suffer and that I'm morally in the wrong both for participating in that system by eating them and in not working towards minimizing their possible suffering within that system.
I can at least say though that my opinions on the topic aren't being motivated by what I want to be true, and I wish more people would do the same when evaluating this because it just adds insult to injury if you're not only inflicting pain on them but willfully denying their pain as real to make yourself feel better about it. If I was being tortured and cut up live for food by extraterrestrials as part of their culture I'd hope at a minimum they'd own up to how they were causing me horrible pain and suffering instead of glossing over it as being impossible because my brain's too primitive and simple. There's something extra evil about not only injuring someone but reveling in it because of how objectified and worthless you've made them in your mind.