About Food.

[Sarge47]

Sarge,

Oh i see where you are at...well maybe, and this is a wild guess, maybe what i post is interesting to someone other than you yes ?

And talk about not answering questions...you haven't answered mine because you are too busy "keeping it real".
So yes, all of that's well and good, but you talking about a subject is not the end all of that subject...you dig ?

Your behavior is getting a little old my friend.



Nell,

Glad you can manage this problem and keep it under control. i think having smaller meals more often is a good thing in general.

VW I'm almost embarrassed to tell you that you've lost me. Did I write something that offended you? If so, I'm sorry. Such was not my intention, I assure you. What questions are you referring to? Also, I've never been diagnosed Hypo-G., however I do experience Weakness, & shakiness if I go without food more than 12 hours. My point on "keeping it real" was simply that the reality is that peoples physical needs vary depending on age, health problems, etc., so going without food for a great length of time might not be the wisest course.

[Sarge47]

Ah...so you do remember the question.

Not that i am offended, but you have a somewhat passive aggressive way of putting down posts and therefore people, that makes it hard to actually follow through with the discussion at hand.

If doing so is not your intention, maybe it is something you are not aware of. Anyway..."Not be the wisest course" is a given in a normal situation...but, we are talking about survival situations, and most of the time food will be scarce...which brings us back to the psychology, physiology, biology and therefore relationship we have with food.

In any relationship, there will be specific needs...and we were addressing some of them with the examples of diabetes or hypoglycemia.

Sorry, my bad, and you are right about the specific needs of certain people and "lack of food being the problem. Passive/aggressive way of putting down P & P? I'm a "closet comedian" and I started driving the transit bus out at the University this week. Part of what I do to keep the students mind off losing their "personal space" when we load up to transport them between classes is to get on the intercom and get them laughing. I'm pretty good at it and don't know when to shut it off, I'm sorry VW if it bugged you, just messin' with you.

[Sarge47]

Ah ok...i understand better now where you come from.

I know this subject can be heavy and complex at times since it is always somewhat personal...and i appreciate your openness .

To go back to the subject, I think it is important to say again that it takes a lot of water for the body to actually digest foods...i think it is at least 16 ounces.
If one does not have that minimum of 16 ounces of water, one should not eat at all...which tells me something about our bodies and the order of importance of food and water.

Having said that i think we can all agree that it also depends on our physical needs. Is the survivor staying put, or must he walk over hard terrain every day in order to find rescue, and we go back to energy conservation which we talked about on another thread.

I think most people would be amazed at how the body is able to function without food...even more so when faced with life or death situations.

...meaning me, of course. So, VW, what about age? I'm older than a lot of the others here in the group, (Maybe everybody else here in the group ) I know I'm more likely to want lay down in the afternoon to take a nap, for example, where the younger people wouldn't nessasarily want too? I guess I'm looking at the human phisiological make-up here as varied. Do you feel that certain human circumstances would dictate certain matters also?

[DEET]

First I want to thank you both for a great discussion. I have never spent so much time thinking about the relationship of food and psyche. In this thinking I have come up with a few questions for each of you respectively and I am wondering if you could clear a few things up for me.

First question is for vol; In your posts I'm getting the feeling that hunger is a state of the human psyche which has been planted by feelings of withdrawal from the maternal being of our person. This being the case how do you explain the fact nature is predominantly control by hunger? Caribou go on the largest migration known to nature by a land animal where in millions of caribou cover thousands of miles in the search for food. Hundreds of bears which are a solitary animal gather in numbers at the same time every year to feed on salmon. Or the fact that the social structures of some of the most intelligent animals in nature are structured around the search, procurement and rationing of said food. I'm not trying to flame I'm actually trying to understand you better.

Second question is for sarge; Do you feel that the quest for food should be the first thing that a person in a survival situation should undertake? If so I think you may want to look into the bodies need for water, also if you are in a desert situation you should keep your eating to a bare minimum to conserve water lost in digestion. If I'm getting the wrong impression from you on your posts my apologies but could you please clarify for me?

[Sarge47]

First I want to thank you both for a great discussion. I have never spent so much time thinking about the relationship of food and psyche. In this thinking I have come up with a few questions for each of you respectively and I am wondering if you could clear a few things up for me.

First question is for vol; In your posts I'm getting the feeling that hunger is a state of the human psyche which has been planted by feelings of withdrawal from the maternal being of our person. This being the case how do you explain the fact nature is predominantly control by hunger? Caribou go on the largest migration known to nature by a land animal where in millions of caribou cover thousands of miles in the search for food. Hundreds of bears which are a solitary animal gather in numbers at the same time every year to feed on salmon. Or the fact that the social structures of some of the most intelligent animals in nature are structured around the search, procurement and rationing of said food. I'm not trying to flame I'm actually trying to understand you better.

Second question is for sarge; Do you feel that the quest for food should be the first thing that a person in a survival situation should undertake? If so I think you may want to look into the bodies need for water, also if you are in a desert situation you should keep your eating to a bare minimum to conserve water lost in digestion. If I'm getting the wrong impression from you on your posts my apologies but could you please clarify for me?

Sorry for the confusion, I believe in being as prepared as you possibly can. I subscribe to the "Backpacker's code" which mandates a "10 essentials" kit to be carried into the wilds at all times. This kit contains extra food (as well as extra water, BTW) that you would already have on your person for emergency situations. This would keep one's energy level up until they take whatever steps needed 1st. The geography of the area is going to dictate what that is. Also the time of day. Is it getting dark or is it earlier? Are you in need of a shelter, or are you with your vehicle? Fire may be your 1st step, unless you're on a snow-covered mountain above tree-line. I do believe that food is important, just more so to some individuals than others. IMO, if you take some with you going in you're going to be better off than if you didn't. Also, What affect do you think "lack of food will have on someone with "type II diabetes" no matter where they are? The "quest for food" will, IMO, be a priority established by the needs of the individual. That being said, I believe that going without food for 3 weeks is going to be hard on anyone no matter who they are. There are also some foods that have liquid with them. For example a rabbit also has blood that can help quench thirst. If this doesn't help clear things up let me know, I'm famous for my long-winded posts, just ask anybody.

[owl_girl]

Caribous or bears or any other animal for that matter, go through a different process of major importance. They are able as a new born to find the mother's breast on their own...while a human new born is completely dependent on his mother to bring him to the breast and feed. This fact on it's own has tremendous repercussions on our development.

Volwest if you put a new born on the mothers stomach most of them will crawl to the breast on their own to feed. A lot of breastfeeding mothers practice this.

[nell67]

owl_ girl,I never knew that,and I breastfed my children,Idid notice that they "root" that is when picked up an held close,they instictively turned their head with their mouth open in preperation to feed .

[Sarge47]

What I meant was, VW, if doesn't the circumstances dictate what course of action is to be taken: i.e.: age, health, etc.?

[owl_girl]

No...a new born humanoid cannot even carry the weight of their heads. If someone told you this, or if you read it somewhere, they were probably talking about older infants that have the strength of a gorilla, or they lied.
All a new born can do, is lay there, move their arms and legs in totally uncontrolled motions, because the brain is not developed yet to coordinate movements, let along crawl.

They will not only move to the breast but attach themselves. Its called delivery self attachment. In babies that are immediately placed on the mothers stomach will do this within 50 minutes. However if their taken away to be weighed and stuff or if there was medication involved the infant will often have problems suckling. Most births in America are interfered with so that’s probably why you never heard this. My moms a lactation consultant and her sister has given birth to 11 kids most of them where unassisted at there house. I think they know what they’re talking about, also I’ve seen videos of it, here’s a good one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvWg4TKKWuw

you can buy it here. Look up DR. Lennart Righard
http://www.amazon.com/Delivery-Self-.../dp/1885748132

[trax]

That was an informative video owl_girl and of interest to me for a reason completely separate from the things we usually discuss here. One of the projects I'm heading up here at work is diabetes prevention and there is powerful evidence that prevention can begin before birth based on the mother's diet, and that breast-feeding only helps increase the chances of prevention. That evidence comes as no surprise, what surprised me was when a local nurse told me that the hospital here discourages breast feeding. I'm hiring a lactation consultant for a one day workshop for expectant mothers because of that. The difference between the non-interfered and interfered with babies in the footage was remarkable. It would have been better if they'd put the total numbers for each group and how well the non-interfered, non-medicated babies fared as a total. I'm sure all of that is in the published report, though.

[owl_girl]

I’m glad you enjoyed it trax I hope it helps. That makes me mad when hospitals discourages breast feeding. Good luck un your research.

[owl_girl]

volwest when I said they crawl I didn’t mean like an older baby, I meant they scoot up like a new born puppy or kitten but I don’t really know what to call that motion. Another survival Instinct infants have is the swimming reflex which Disappears after 6 to 7 months but a baby just a couple days old will swim. Although human babies aren’t as strong as caribou babies I think their a lot stronger then you think they are.

[trax]

I’m glad you enjoyed it trax I hope it helps. That makes me mad when hospitals discourages breast feeding. Good luck un your research.

The program's up and running so I'm past research, but thanks. I found out that a lot of hospitals will discourage breast feeding because it's less work for the staff to just keep the babies in a nursery and pop them a bottle of formula than to take them to their mother and let her feed them. Personally, I think it's pathetic.

[owl_girl]

The program's up and running so I'm past research, but thanks. I found out that a lot of hospitals will discourage breast feeding because it's less work for the staff to just keep the babies in a nursery and pop them a bottle of formula than to take them to their mother and let her feed them. Personally, I think it's pathetic.

I think its deeper then that, if the hospital gets the baby hooked on formula then the mother is more likely to keep the baby on formula and the formula companies know this and pay the hospitals to encourage formula and that’s why a lot of hospitals give away free formula to start with because the companies know you’ll then continue to buy their product. So the hospitals and formula companies are benefiting from discouraging breastfeeding. But I guess that’s another subject.

[trax]

You may be on to something there. There's a reason why 4 out of 5 hospitals use a specific over the counter pain med and why 4 out of 5 dentists recommend whatever...they get it cheap or they get a kickback. But you're right, that's a different subject.

[owl_girl]

Volwest I know the baby isn’t able to crawl up onto the mothers stomach on its own obviously. I never said a baby doesn’t need any help to get to the breast, I just said if you put a newborn on the mothers stomach most of them will crawl to the breast on their own to feed, to which you said no they don’t, which It looks to me like they do. You asked why this was so defendable…to that I say it was a difference in opinion, and when I disagree with someone or come to a different conclusion I tell them. You haven’t asked why I defend any of my other opinions dos it seem odd that I defended that one?
Its probably true that if you put the baby upside down it won’t find it but I watched a video where the breast was below the babies head and to the side and the baby turned himself around to get to it. I can post that video if you or anyone would like to see it? I’ve seen clearer videos of the breast crawl then the one I posted, I agree the camera angles on that one weren’t the best. But I’ll do more research on the subject.

[Sarge47]

I started a thread about the importance of food and we somehow got into the area of breast feeding, which triggered an interesting thought; what if you have a mother & baby in your survival situation & the baby breast-feeds? What if the mother is dead? Horrible thought, I know, but it could happen. Now you have an infant on your hands that needs either formula, or mother's milk. Any ideas

[owl_girl]

I started a thread about the importance of food and we somehow got into the area of breast feeding, which triggered an interesting thought; what if you have a mother & baby in your survival situation & the baby breast-feeds? What if the mother is dead? Horrible thought, I know, but it could happen. Now you have an infant on your hands that needs either formula, or mother's milk. Any ideas

Is there a goat around?

[Sarge47]

Is there a goat around?

All's we got is a snoring, farting moose calf named Norman. Any other ideas?

[trax]

Sarge...if we're in a survival situation, with all apologies to my very large and tough friend only one province over, we have a very large cache of moose steak named Norman