NO ANIMAL FOOD: CHAPTER VI
THE EXCLUSION OF DAIRY PRODUCE
It is unfortunate that many flesh-abstainers
who agree with the general trend of the foregoing
arguments do not realise that these same arguments
also apply to abstinence from those animal foods known
as dairy produce. In considering this further
aspect it is necessary for reasons already given,
to place hygienic considerations first.
Is it reasonable to suppose that Nature
ever intended the milk of the cow or the egg of the
fowl for the use of man as food? Can anyone deny
that Nature intended the cow’s milk for the nourishment
of her calf and the hen’s egg for the propagation
of her species? It is begging the question to
say that the cow furnishes more milk than her calf
requires, or that it does not injure the hen to steal
her eggs. Besides, it is not true.
Regarding the dietetic value of milk
and eggs, which is the question of first importance,
are we correct in drawing the inference that as Nature
did not intend these foods for man, therefore they
are not suitable for him? As far as the chemical
constituents of these foods are concerned, it is true
they contain compounds essential to the nourishment
of the human body, and if this is going to be set
up as an argument in favor of their consumption, let
it be remembered that flesh food also contains compounds
essential to nourishment. But the point is this:
not what valuable nutritive compounds does any food-substance
contain, but what value, taking into consideration
its total effects, has the food in question as
a wholesome article of diet?
It seems to be quite generally acknowledged
by the medical profession that raw milk is a dangerous
food on account of the fact that it is liable from
various causes, sometimes inevitable, to contain impurities.
Dr. Kellogg writes: Typhoid fever, cholera infantum,
tuberculosis and tubercular consumption three
of the most deadly diseases known; it is very probable
also, that diphtheria, scarlet fever and several other
maladies are communicated through the medium of milk....
It is safe to say that very few people indeed are
fully acquainted with the dangers to life and health
which lurk in the milk supply.... The teeming
millions of China, a country which contains nearly
one-third of the entire population of the globe, are
practically ignorant of this article of food.
The high-class Hindoo regards milk as a loathsome and
impure article of food, speaking of it with the greatest
contempt as “cow-juice,” doubtless because
of his observations of the deleterious effect of the
use of milk in its raw state.
The germs of tuberculosis seem to
be the most dangerous in milk, for they thrive and
retain their vitality for many weeks, even in butter
and cheese. An eminent German authority, Hirschberger,
is said to have found 10 per cent of the cows in the
vicinity of large cities to be affected by tuberculosis.
Many other authorities might be quoted supporting the
contention that a large percentage of cows are afflicted
by this deadly disease. Other germs, quite as
dangerous, find their way into milk in numerous ways.
Excreta, clinging to the hairs of the udder, are frequently
rubbed off into the pail by the action of the hand
whilst milking. Under the most careful sanitary
precautions it is impossible to obtain milk free from
manure, from the ordinary germs of putrefaction to
the most deadly microbes known to science. There
is little doubt but that milk is one of the uncleanest
and impurest of all foods.
Milk is constipating, and as constipation
is one of the commonest complaints, a preventive may
be found in abstinence from this food. As regards
eggs, there is perhaps not so much to be said, although
eggs so quickly undergo a change akin to putrefaction
that unless eaten fresh they are unfit for food; moreover,
(according to Dr. Haig) they contain a considerable
amount of xanthins, and cannot, therefore, be considered
a desirable food.
Dairy foods, we emphatically affirm,
are not necessary to health. In the section dealing
with ‘Physical Considerations’ sufficient
was said to prove the eminent value of an exclusive
vegetable diet, and the reader is referred to that
and the subsequent essay on Nutrition and Diet for
proof that man can and should live without animal food
of any kind. Such nutritive properties as are
possessed by milk and eggs are abundantly found in
the vegetable kingdom. The table of comparative
values given, exhibits this quite plainly. That
man can live a thoroughly healthy life upon vegetable
foods alone there is ample evidence to prove, and there
is good cause to believe that milk and eggs not only
are quite unnecessary, but are foods unsuited to the
human organism, and may be, and often are, the cause
of disease. Of course, it is recognized that
with scrupulous care this danger can be minimized to
a great extent, but still it is always there, and
as there is no reason why we should consume such foods,
it is not foolish to continue to do so?
But this is not all. It is quite
as impossible to consume dairy produce without slaughter
as it is to eat flesh without slaughter. There
are probably as many bulls born as cows. One
bull for breeding purposes suffices for many cows
and lives for many years, so what is to be done with
the bull calves if our humanitarian scruples debar
us from providing a vocation for the butcher?
The country would soon be overrun with vast herds
of wild animals and the whole populace would have to
take to arms for self-preservation. So it comes
to the same thing. If we did not breed these
animals for their flesh, or milk, or eggs, or labour,
we should have no use for them, and so should breed
them no longer, and they would quickly become extinct.
The wild goat and sheep and the feathered life might
survive indefinitely in mountainous districts, but
large animals that are not domesticated, or bred for
slaughter, soon disappear before the approach of civilisation.
The Irish elk is extinct, and the buffalo of North
America has been wiped out during quite recent years.
If leather became more expensive (much of it is derived
from horse hide) manufacturers of leather substitutes
would have a better market than they have at present.