Changes

In the short term, eating non-kosher food often appears to have no dramatic ill effects in general. For example, the Arabs, who do not eat kosher, consider camel to be a delicacy. Clearly, non-kosher Arabs do not fall dead right after eating camel meat. However, the long term optimality of eating clean versus unclean meat is an unanswered question of science. Also, eating non-kosher foods clearly has some nutritional benefit. For example, shrimp and pork contain protein. The New Testament declares, {{Bible quote|For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.|book=1_Timothy|chap=4|verses=4-5|version=NKJV}}

In the short term, eating non-kosher food often appears to have no dramatic ill effects in general. For example, the Arabs, who do not eat kosher, consider camel to be a delicacy. Clearly, non-kosher Arabs do not fall dead right after eating camel meat. However, the long term optimality of eating clean versus unclean meat is an unanswered question of science. Also, eating non-kosher foods clearly has some nutritional benefit. For example, shrimp and pork contain protein. The New Testament declares, {{Bible quote|For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.|book=1_Timothy|chap=4|verses=4-5|version=NKJV}}

In regard to the aforementioned verse, it could be argued that prayer does sanctify food. The Bible has plenty of verses regarding God's protection. Also, it could be argued that the benefits outweigh the costs in all foods and thus all food is good. Clearly there is  some nutritional goodness in foods that the Torah declared unclean (for example, shrimp has protein).  What foods are optimal from an empirically tested science viewpoint is often controversial. In short, in regard to eating strictly a kosher diet versus a non-kosher diet, science has no definitive answers at the present time. From a Christian theological point of view, it could be argued that food should not be an impediment to anyone making a decision to become a Christian. It should be noted that orthodox Christian believers in Biblical scientific foreknowledge believe that Christians can eat the food that was declared [[Clean and unclean animals|unclean]] in the Old Testament, and {{Bible ref|book=1_Timothy|chap=4|verses=4-5}} and {{Bible ref|book=Galations|chap=2|verses=7-16}} make this very clear.

In regard to the aforementioned verse, it could be argued that prayer does sanctify food. The Bible has plenty of verses regarding God's protection. Also, it could be argued that the benefits outweigh the costs in all foods and thus all food is good. Clearly there is  some nutritional goodness in foods that the Torah declared unclean (for example, shrimp has protein).  What foods are optimal from an empirically tested science viewpoint is often controversial. In short, in regard to eating strictly a kosher diet versus a non-kosher diet, science has no definitive answers at the present time. From a Christian theological point of view, it could be argued that food should not be an impediment to anyone making a decision to become a Christian. It should be noted that orthodox Christian believers in Biblical scientific foreknowledge believe that Christians can eat the food that was declared unclean in the Old Testament, and {{Bible ref|book=1_Timothy|chap=4|verses=4-5}} and {{Bible ref|book=Galations|chap=2|verses=7-16}} make this very clear.

In addition to the aforementioned study testing kosher and non-kosher foods for toxicity levels, Macht developed evidence indicating that combining meat and milk tended to be more toxic than either foodstuff alone.<ref name=Macht4>David I. Macht, Medical Leaves 1940; 3:174-184</ref>  In addition, he compared conventional animal slaughtering versus kosher slaughtering and determined that kosher slaughtering produced less toxic meat.<ref name=Macht4/>

In addition to the aforementioned study testing kosher and non-kosher foods for toxicity levels, Macht developed evidence indicating that combining meat and milk tended to be more toxic than either foodstuff alone.<ref name=Macht4>David I. Macht, Medical Leaves 1940; 3:174-184</ref>  In addition, he compared conventional animal slaughtering versus kosher slaughtering and determined that kosher slaughtering produced less toxic meat.<ref name=Macht4/>

A 1985 study by Nanji and French found that there was a significant correlation between cirrhosis and pork consumption (Macht claimed that swine was more toxic than the animal meat the Bible called clean).<ref name=Nanji>Nanji AA, and French SW. "[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2858627&dopt=Abstract Relationship between pork consumption and cirrhosis]." ''Lancet'' 1985 Mar 23, 1(8430):681-3. Accessed September 12, 2008.</ref> Modern pork production methods are different from ancient methods of raising pigs, so the result of this study might be hard to apply to the ancients or those who raise pigs by organic farming methods, without the use of hormones or antibiotics.

A 1985 study by Nanji and French found that there was a significant correlation between cirrhosis and pork consumption (Macht claimed that swine was more toxic than the animal meat the Bible called clean).<ref name=Nanji>Nanji AA, and French SW. "[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2858627&dopt=Abstract Relationship between pork consumption and cirrhosis]." ''Lancet'' 1985 Mar 23, 1(8430):681-3. Accessed September 12, 2008.</ref> Modern pork production methods are different from ancient methods of raising pigs, so the result of this study might be hard to apply to the ancients or those who raise pigs by organic farming methods, without the use of hormones or antibiotics.

Jane Cahill reported in ''Biblical Archaeological Review'' that the toilets of a Jewish household in [[Jerusalem]] were examined and no [[parasite]]s or [[infectious disease|infectious agents]] were found.<ref name=Cahill>[http://cojs.org/cojswiki/It_Had_to_Happen,_Jane_M._Cahill,_Karl_Reinhard,_David_Tarler_and_Peter_Warnock,_BAR_17:03,_May/Jun_1991. It had to happen, Scientist Examines Ancient Bathrooms of Romans 586 B.C.] by Jane Cahill and Peter Warnock. BAR May/June 1991</ref>

Jane Cahill reported in ''Biblical Archaeological Review'' that the toilets of a Jewish household in [[Jerusalem]] were examined and no [[parasite]]s or infectious agents were found.<ref name=Cahill>[http://cojs.org/cojswiki/It_Had_to_Happen,_Jane_M._Cahill,_Karl_Reinhard,_David_Tarler_and_Peter_Warnock,_BAR_17:03,_May/Jun_1991. It had to happen, Scientist Examines Ancient Bathrooms of Romans 586 B.C.] by Jane Cahill and Peter Warnock. BAR May/June 1991</ref>

Today, some "alternative medicine" practitioners do not recommend pork to their patients. Their reasons include the possible content of hormones, antibiotics, and pesticides, and also the undiscriminating diet of the pig. Joseph Mercola, DO, who has a private practice in alternative general medicine, writes:{{cquote|Pigs are scavenger animals and will eat just about anything. Their appetite for less-than-wholesome foods makes pigs a breeding ground for potentially dangerous infections. Even cooking pork for long periods is not enough to kill many of the retroviruses and other parasites that many of them harbor.<ref name=Mercola>Mercola, Joseph, DO, ed. "[http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/07/12/are-there-deadly-superbugs-in-your-pork.aspx?source=nl Are There Deadly Superbugs In Your Pork]?" <http://www.mercola.com/>, July 12, 2008. Accessed September 12, 2008.</ref>}}

Today, some "alternative medicine" practitioners do not recommend pork to their patients. Their reasons include the possible content of hormones, antibiotics, and pesticides, and also the undiscriminating diet of the pig. Joseph Mercola, DO, who has a private practice in alternative general medicine, writes:{{cquote|Pigs are scavenger animals and will eat just about anything. Their appetite for less-than-wholesome foods makes pigs a breeding ground for potentially dangerous infections. Even cooking pork for long periods is not enough to kill many of the retroviruses and other parasites that many of them harbor.<ref name=Mercola>Mercola, Joseph, DO, ed. "[http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/07/12/are-there-deadly-superbugs-in-your-pork.aspx?source=nl Are There Deadly Superbugs In Your Pork]?" <http://www.mercola.com/>, July 12, 2008. Accessed September 12, 2008.</ref>}}