We've been over the disease issues. Firstly it is the brains and the prions that come with said neural tissues, on both humans and other creatures this is a severe issue. Easily solved by NOT eating the brain and spine. Next humans are about as unclean as any other animal on the earth, our only difference is that we commonly attempt to cure and constantly disinfect ourselves, and I am still unsure why nobody has been able to hear me yet...so here it is in big text.


As for morality I can accept that at the time it can be a good reason why you yourself don't. I just don't find it valid scientifically, but that is the only argument I have against that one.

I know its the prions... but if you're eating human flesh, I assume you would eat the brain too, yes? Hmm, another issue is the spine touches most of the back tissue... So would you also NOT eat the back tissue?

I know you wouldn't get AIDs from eating the flesh, but think of it, so many other disease have come from one creature eating another... There's so many diseases that have yet to be discovered, so whose to say another one wouldn't sprout up from the consumption of human flesh?

Screw humans... If we're worried about food waste here, lets start eating ants! They weigh a thousand times more than the humans do on this planet and they're yummy. Lol.

I dunno ants don't have many necessary nutrients. I would prefer we moved to cockroaches, FAR more disgusting, but also far more nutritious. Maybe if we genetically engineered supernutritious ants and created a superqueen to make them like some sort of vitamin it might work out.

Also we don't need to avoid the back tissue, we just need to avoid the vertebrae. As for if eating human flesh means eating the brain, it doesn't have to. For the most part it would be how we eat most other creatures just the muscle mass. Also any diseases caused by cannibalism have been proven to be caused by prion proteins. Therefore if we avoid the brain and vertebrae we would be able to avoid those diseases.

Geh, it is awkwardly frustrating going over arguments placated in the pages before, but I guess it is necessary to clarify since it is a bigger headache to have everyone read the past pages.

EDIT: Remember that AIDS would be everywhere. That is understandable. Yes it would infect them, we wouldn't keep AIDS infected corpses, we would dump them as being unfit for human consumption. It is impossible to remove the disease from the muscles, I never said it was, but the thing that causes the disease to occur are the prion proteins in the spine and brain, if the creature is already infected with the disease caused by the proteins then much like the AIDS infected corpses they are dumped for being unfit for human consumption.

Dimitri is correct! Blood can be a path rich with disease... And whenever you eat flesh, you eat blood. Vampire or not. Lol. Mm, yes, but when mad cow is spread its usually cuz cows were fed other cows that were cut up entire, brains and all, which allowed the prions to be fed to them also...
~~~~~~~~~~~

@Yoshaki: Actually, ants are rich with vitamins and minerals... Far more than cockroaches. Its just you'd have to eat a LOT of them to get the necessary, daily requirements of vitamins and minerals, which the average person doesn't consume on a regular basis anyways...
I can't imagine eating a cockroach... They're creepy. D;

But the vertebrae is NOT whole... Its pieces of tissue and connective tissue with billions of nerve endings and veins that connect to every piece of your back tissue; therefore, the vertebrae connects to most if not all back tissue.

I know what you mean, when I make threads I usually get too frustrated to read all the same, repetitive and childish remarks. XD haha.

So, you're saying ignore the infected ones and only go for the healthy ones? Well, here's a few facts that are only about AIDS / HIV found on http://projects.psi.org/site/PageSer...FQFvGgodCD-ITA

And these are just the KNOWN cases. Who knows how many unknown cases there are. And that doesn't count other blood-borne pathogens. That doesn't really leave many "uninfected" people. Besides, is it really worth the risk / time / expenses involved to try to find "uninfected" dead people?

Yes, HIV is spreading worse than the plague...
Thats why I don't have sex anymore. I don't wanna die. Lol. XD

Beleive me when I say that you will be able to separate the tissue of the vertebrae from the back muscles. There are just vastly fundamental differences in both tissue types. Just like how you cannot mistake skin and muscle, muscle and bone, bone and cartilage, and in our case muscle and neural. We WILL avoid that kind of tissue in favor of the muscular tissue.

I tend to grow extremely irritable when I feel like I am being insulted. Like when Demetri said it is moot to discuss this with me. I can easily be argued with, just look at Febreze on this page, she made a valid point and I conceded and attempted to do my best to give an alternative. Or when Justin said this was a dream of mine, I'm primarily interested in this because some of my ancestry were cannibals and I wanted to see if it would have been possible to continue today...and why as an intelligent culture that we don't.

On your statistics Demetri, one million people have HIV/AIDS in the United States. The United States' total population is about 300 million as of the 2007 census. In the world 33.5 million have have HIV/AIDS, the total population of the world is about 6.6 BILLION. Assured HIV/AIDS is spreading but it is still a small percentage of the total population. So YES I am saying ignore the infected and go for the pure! And it will be worth the expense since an HIV test costs only $30-65. Is that really so huge? A total bone marrow test that would find EVERYTHING is only $200 WITH anesthesia. I am not even sure how much it is without.

Is it possible to say for sure whether a corpse has HIV or not? If I'm remembering correctly, in biology we learned that HIV doesn't always show up on tests right away and it can take years before it does. That's part of the reason that it's such a terrible disease.

S'alright. Believe me I can be argued about this as well as I can be argued about being a vegetarian(which is actually tied into this argument since I do have sympathy for animals, and if I couldn't eat human I don't think I could eat other animals). I'm open to what others believe...I just have some logical points to prove myself.

EDIT: The truly horrible thing about HIV is the speed by which it mutates. It makes it a terribly difficult to make a vaccine for that works. Though oral tests have been the ones that gain criticism. They sometimes show positive when they aren't. There is also a window period where no HIV might be found. Though nowadays our tests are good enough that not finding the virus is rare. Really there have been three instances.

@Yoshaki: Yes, you can separate the vertebrae from the back tissue, but you would need a scalpel and it would take approximately 10 hrs. I know, because I had to do that in anatomy class (in a morgue)... Its very very very hard... Actually, I gave up after an hr., but the man in the morgue told me it takes around 10 hrs... So every time you want to eat human back, do you think a butcher will really go through the trouble? Yeah riiiiiight.
Its harder than you think...

*nod* Many societies used to be involved in cannibalism... Whether for ritual or just because they didn't like to waste flesh. I understand, but honestly, in today's society I don't think its logical to eat human flesh...

That's the problem, society back in time seems quite illogical for anyone to be cannibal, but nowadays when it can be so easily organized and tested to be safe it seems like the only possible time for us to really be effective cannibals. Cannibals with values. Though I will concede the back would likely be very difficult to take as a butcher, so instead we will have to leave that out. So we avoid the back, assured if you ate me you would be missing out on some damn tender meat, but not really all of it. You could still have my calves, and I love the definition I have there, I'd be delicious. xB

What I want to know is why you keep pushing so hard for cannibalism? ^^
Hahahaha, ok, well if they allowed cannibalism would you be willing to serve yourself to the president as the first cannibalistic meal, if you're so delicious? XD

What you don't understand is of all the animals in the world, humans are the MOST diseased. Why go through the trouble to eat such a diseased creature when there's other animals to eat, like sheep, cow, pultry, fish; ect?

Well I started this argument, and I knew that most people were going to be against cannibalism. It needs at least one supporter for this to be a proper debate otherwise this would get boring, so I figure I have a responsibility to my ancestors, this thread, and my wish not to be vegetarian to argue for cannibalism.

I figure I couldn't unless I was maimed of one of my limbs irrefutably. Beyond that I would be dead and unable to serve anyone anything.

We eat plenty of diseased creatures, humans are the most diseased but who's on second? Birds right? We eat quite a lot of poultry in this world. If we truly wanted to avoid diseased creatures like that we would eat vegetables. Their DNA is FAR from our own, and absolutely safe...except when they get things like botulism and all that. xD

Yes, I could never be a vegetarian either. Lol.
Hahaha, well, thats nice of you... How long will you carry this debate?
Have you not found the answer to your question yet?

As a dead man you'd serve the president a nice treat if our gov. did allow cannibalism. XD

I don't know... I think its debatable whether its poultry or beef.... In fact, I think beef is a little more dirty, just because they carry more disease like mad cow and tongue/foot hives (forget what its called but England had a bad case... )

Yes, but humans CANNOT live on veggies alone, because we need omega 3 fatty acids, and sadly few vegetables have all the fatty acids... In fact the only plant I know of with all of them is hemp and flaxseed, but those are hard to get ahold of.

Assured to get all the nutrients we need we would need to have a very wide diet and be forced to actually pay attention to what we eat...but is that all that bad for us? Heh I'll save this argument for later though, I'll need to make a vegan thread. You could answer here or in PM, I just figure we should stick to the primary argument.

I was thinking about all the crazy flu's that birds have brought to humans.

I would feed myself to the president sure, we'd just put my brain in a clone and then give him my old body like, "Hey buddy, here's a sexy slab of man meat that we have carved the sexy out of so it is worth eating."

Also the question is open ended, why is it that people don't eat it. The only, partially, valid answer I've gotten is morals. All others have been at least mildly disproved.

Zuu's opinion:

The food chain is there for a reason. Other animals live by it and so do we.

No part of the food chain goes like this:

Lion-eats---antalope
Lion-eats---Zebra
Lion-eats---Lion

People should not be harvasted so that we can be cannables. People should be harvasted so that other animals can eat us OR So that we can be buried WITHOUT a box so that we can decompose and become the earth.

*Sings the circle of life song*

Hamsters eat hamsters....


Also I got the harvested thing from the opening paragraph:

Man... I am glad I don't eat my young.

The reason we don't eat meat is because at the moment it is morally incorrect. In the future, that may change. At the moment, it isn't. Women where held down, because that was the moral thing to do. Slaves weren't freed, because that wasn't the thing to do. Gays where blocked out because that is what people morals told them to do.