Talk:Blood as food

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Physiology (Rated Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article has been classified as relating to blood.
 
WikiProject Food and drink (Rated Stub-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
 

Untitled[edit]

i dont know which cultures but im sure there are african societies who drink blood let directly from the live cow - which i believe was also practised in the past in Europe - anyone know more? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.113.18 (talk) 11:06, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Cultural considerations[edit]

"Some Christian cultures also avoid eating blood, and for this reason blood is not commonly consumed in the United States." First and foremost, this claim is unsourced. I had posted a request for a source for this claim, and none were forthcoming. After an editor removed my request, I decided to remove this sentence for the following secondary and tertiary reasons: The United States is not monolithically Christian, and Christianity does not prohibit per se the consumption of blood. Logically, if blood were taboo in Christian cultures, those of Europe would not have produced blood puddings. Moreover, the Christian sects which do prohibit blood do not necessarily constitute a majority of the people of the United States. All of this suggests a potential non-neutral point of view inherent in this sentence, which makes removing it a good idea for now. -- JeffBillman (talk) 23:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I see what you're saying, but I'm not sure I agree. I mean, the United States was, culturally speaking, founded by Puritans who believed the European churches were not enforcing Biblical rules strictly enough. But I haven't been able to find any sources that comment on the sparsity of blood-based foods in the U.S. I wish I had an adequate source for the claim, but without one I concede that the statement should probably go. – Quadell (talk) 00:11, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
I suspect it has more to do with early 20th century American regulations on food preparation, rather than anything religiously based. As for the Puritans... well, they founded only one of the thirteen colonies. I'd rather not concede to an a priori assumption of the United States as a Christian nation, particularly when there's no practical reason to do so for the purposes of this article. -- JeffBillman (talk) 02:32, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

There's nothing ideological or religious about the modern Americans' dislike of blood sausages. American consumption of organ meats is likewise minimal. Let's face it, dietetically, America is not a a "Christian", but a Wonderbread and McNugget nation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.155.111.59 (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Sounds about right, but without a source it's all original research (including what I wrote above). I just saw need to link blood sausage to neither an alleged US national distaste for it, nor a supposed Christian religious proscription of it, without a source to substantiate the claim. Besides, in a number of parts of the US (Louisiana, Rust Belt communities with concentrations of German and Eastern European populations, Hispanic regions, etc.) sausages made from organ meats and blood are not uncommon. But again, original research: Best that we leave such statements out of the article until sources can be found to back them up. -- JeffBillman (talk) 21:01, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Health risks?[edit]

Cannibalsim can result in fatal diseases, but I've only heard that blood is difficult to digest, doesn't digest, or enduces nausia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.160.77.255 (talk) 23:09, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Nutrition[edit]

It seems like it would be a great source of easily absorbed iron. Adding the nutritional pros and cons would be good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.140.71.43 (talk) 19:58, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I came here specifically to know if blood is unhealthy or not. Why is the nutritional value not mentioned? I hear blood is not something that our stomach's can digest, but after reading this I am shocked it is so often eaten ans now more curious than ever to know if it's okay to eat/drink.--194.80.204.20 (talk) 14:14, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Reorganization[edit]

I've just made an initial attempt to rearrange and organize this page a bit better. The "types" and "dishes" sections were a bit confused and redundant, so I've renamed "types" to "methods of preparation" and moved most of the info on specific dishes down to the "dishes" section. I've also organized the dishes a bit by region to try to give it a bit of structure. It's by no means perfect, and could still use some work, though. (I also didn't make any attempt to check the content for accuracy/citations/etc. It looks to me like this page could use some work in that department, but I don't currently have the expertise or time..) -- Foogod (talk) 21:24, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Additional information[edit]

Additional information regarding nutritional value, digestion and potential health risk should be included in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.180.5.79 (talk) 22:42, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Basic details missing[edit]

The article should contain information on digestibility of blood in humans, yet it contains nothing of the sort. --Wykypydya (talk) 03:39, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Eucharist is Irrelevant[edit]

Reference to Eucharist is irrelevant. Christians do not literally consume blood (but wine). 5.53.16.36 (talk) 09:02, 21 May 2013 (UTC)