400 



ISIDOK GEEENWALD 



The argument that meat is not the "natural" food of man would seem 

 to be fallacious. (Page 359.) Moreover, any such objection, if valid, 

 would apply equally well to all cooked foods and, indeed, to all cultivated 

 varieties of plants and throw us back upon the wild fruits of the forest 

 and unbroken prairie. 



The place of meat, as of any other food in the diet, is to be decided 

 entirely upon physiological and economic considerations. Physiological 

 investigations indicate no objection to the use of meat save in so far as 

 the unduly large consumption of meat, in increasing the amount of 

 protein, may be unwise. The economic objection is not so readily disposed 

 of. The animals whose flesh is used for food return in that manner only a 

 small proportion of the total energy they receive (Armsby). To a great ex- 

 tent, it is true, this is obtained from materials that are unfit for human con- 

 sumption but to the extent that animals are fed grain, or other products 

 of land that could be used to grow grain, vegetables or fruit, they do com- 

 pete directly with man for readfly utilizable foods. The loss in the ani- 

 mal in converting energy of the vegetable food into potential energy in the 

 form of muscle and fat is one of the factors responsible for the compara- 

 tively high cost of meat in most countries. That is the objection to the 

 free use of meats. So much of the income available for the purchase of 

 food is spent for meat, w T hich can be dispensed with, that not enough is 

 left for milk and vegetables which are practically indispensable. 



Benedict and Roth have shown that the basal metabolism of vegetarians 

 is not appreciably less than that of meat-eaters. Unless the muscular sys- 

 tems of vegetarians are markedly more efficient than those of their fel- 

 lows, the metabolism due to muscular work must be the same. Such 

 economies in food consumption as are claimed for vegetarians and which 

 the observations of Jaffa seem to corroborate must therefore be due to the 

 operation of some other factor, probably the state of nutrition or level of 

 metabolism. (Page 414.) 



One of the great disadvantages of a vegetarian diet is its bulk. With 

 the ordinary vegetarian diet, the work required of the digestive apparatus 

 is considerably greater than with a mixed diet. This objection does not 

 apply to the so-called lacto-vegetarianism, which permits the use of milk 

 and eggs. Such a diet has much to commend it. It need not be bulky. 

 The milk and eggs furnish protein of exceptionally good quality to com- 

 pensate for possible deficiencies in those supplied by other articles of the 

 diet. They contain much phosphorus and calcium, the latter of which 

 is apt to be present in insufficient quantity if milk is not included in the 

 diet, and furnish a considerable, if seasonably varying, quantity of some 

 of the vitamines or protective substances. Moreover, the cow and hen re- 

 turn in the form of milk and eggs much more of the energy they receive 

 than they do if kept for their meat (Armsby) . In spite of what is often 



