There was:
(seek10) We would like to ask how many children are getting killed each year. This Epstein‑related activity is more of a Western phenomenon. Are these victims supposed to be Western children?
A: Not just Western children!! Aliens like vegetarian children the most.
Below are some transcripts that relate. (I did not check if all the excerpt had already been included, but found that at least one was not.) Later, I include transcript relating to meat and diet, followed by a comparison of food for meat eating aliens, elites and humans. Next some statistics for dressing weight (what remains of an animal after it is slaughtered) and number for how much of a live animal ends up at the butcher or in the supermarket. After all we live in an STS world. At the end, an preliminary outlook for the future of food production.
They most prefer children with high body fat content
Session 19 July 1997
Q: Do you mean that 4h density STS likes particularly to eat Aryans?
A: Only the reptilian types.
Q: But, they don't like to eat Jews, is that it?
A: They most prefer children with high body fat content.
Below are more comments on Aryans and children:
Regarding "eat Aryans", there was:
Why do so many Missing 411 cases involve people of German heritage? ... Can it get any worse than that?? - Yes - Consumed.
Session 14 January 2023
(Ze Germans) Why do so many Missing 411 cases involve people of German heritage?
A: They are used for genes.
Q: (L) So they want their genes?
A: Yes
Q: (Pierre) Why do they want German genes?
A: Close to Aryan.
Q: (L) Are they using them to build new bodies?
A: In some cases and also for growing spare parts for repairs.
Q: (Andromeda) Lovely!
(Joe) My arm fell off! [laughter]
(Pierre) Not a problem!
(Joe) Which model would you like? We have a good deal on Aryan arms this week!
(L) Are they using genetic samples to grow like clones and stuff?
A: Some.
Q: (L) Do they grow organs?
A: Yes
Q: (L) Do they grow babies?
A: Yes
Q: (L) Can it get any worse than that??
A: Yes
Q: (L) What do you mean?
A: Consumed.
And regarding "
children with high body fat content"
As we once pointed out, higher density beings derive nourishment from some humans and human body products. Preferred are fat children and nonsmoking vegetarians
Session 11 June 2011
Q: (L) In other words, we get optimal energy from eating creatures that eat vegetables. That way, we get our vegetables. But another carnivore processes all of that so that what we would get from eating another carnivore would not be optimal nutrition?
A: Yes.
Q: (Andromeda) But then we could eat vegetarians. [laughter]
A: Don't laugh! That has been the case for some groups at certain times and places. In fact, that is still the case in some dark circles extant on Earth today. As we once pointed out, higher density beings derive nourishment from some humans and human body products. Preferred are fat children and nonsmoking vegetarians.
Q: (Psyche) There are some religions that say that you have to be vegetarians. (Burma Jones) They're basically just farms for 4D STS looking for a good lunch. (Belibaste) Good food. And it's organic vegetarians usually! (PoB) Does it mean that the meat from meat-eating predators is not good for us? (L) That's what they said, yes. (Burma Jones) So then India is just one big cattle ranch. (L) And with so many people that they have there, nobody would even notice when people go missing. People go missing there all the time. (Burma Jones) And they have the worst poverty in the world. (Belibaste) Remember in the sessions they were talking about the missing children, and there was a lot from India - vegetarian children.
It has been puzzling to me why aliens like well nourished children and nonsmoking vegetarians. However as an analogy, for taste the majority of people like farmed animals compared to game meat.
Foods. 2025 Nov 24;14(23):4021. doi:
10.3390/foods14234021[PubMed Central - National Center for Biotechnology Information - National Library of Medicine - National Institute of Health]
Differences in Game Meat Consumer Behaviour in a Game Meat-Producing Region: The Case of Andalusia [A study from Spain.]
Foods. 2020 Sep 24;9(10):1357. doi:
10.3390/foods9101357
Game Meat Consumption—Conscious Choice or Just a Game? [A study from Poland.]
Why Your Game Meat Tastes So Bad posted on October 24, 2022 [NRA Women]
There are many blog entries and articles about gamey tastes.
Game meat may have some benefits.
It would be better if they were "wild fed"
Session 13 February 2011
Q: (Perceval) Is it possible for us to get all of our nutrients from animals without taking supplements?
A: It would be better if they were "wild fed" but you are able to figure this out.
Many supplements are not that tasty, perhaps it is no wonder that food from wild animals that have been feeding on a variety natural foods, taste differently compared to feed lot animals.
"Wild fed" I take to be free range farmed animals that thrive on what they can find in the wild. Often animals that roam are also fed supplements and in the winter harvested crops, therefore free range and "wild fed" is not necessarily the same. Farmed game hardly qualifies as wild fed, if treated like ordinary farmed birds, fishes and animals like sheep, cows and pigs.
The following excerpt goes into more details about the differences between different kinds of meat:
The information of the pig is more in line with the direction of the human. The meat of the pig is composed of proteins with similar receivership capacity.
Session 18 May 2024
(Persej) What is the substance that Weston Price named ‘activator X’? And here's a description of the activator X: ‘He determined that neither total hours of sunshine nor temperature was the chief controlling factor' in how much activator X was present in the milk. Rather, 'the factor most potent was found to be the pasture fodder of the dairy animals. Rapidly growing grass, green or rapidly dried, was most efficient'.’ So what is this activator X?
A: Information! Note the fact that grass of a certain nature provided this. Apply that principle to foods. Studies are most often of little value because subjects are self-selecting. A truly random group is almost never seen. Weighing and measuring constituents of a substance can be indicative if the potentials of information are taken into account. This is why pork is better for advanced humans than beef or many other meats. The information of the pig is more in line with the direction of the human. The meat of the pig is composed of proteins with similar receivership capacity.
Q: (Scottie) So, eat bacon!
(Andromeda) Iberico!
(Niall) Pork is better for us than beef?
(L) Keyhole, do you have any other questions? Did you get all that?
(Keyhole) One quick question about pork. Would you be able to ask about the fatty acid composition of pork fat? Because they just said that pork is in general better than beef, but the composition of pork fat, the ratio of fatty acids has been associated with lots of chronic health issues in the research. So, could you ask them about whether consuming pork that's not been pasture fed - so, for instance, pork from the supermarket - is that still healthy for humans, given the fact that their feed changes the composition of the fatty acid, and that's thought to be a real problem, as per the research anyway?
(L) Can we break this down into simple questions? Is pork from the supermarket okay?
A: No
Q: (L) So, it needs to be pasture fed pork, basically?
A: Yes
Q: (L) So, you're basically talking about things that would be ideal conditions?
A: Yes
Q: (L) And what about the fatty acid composition?
A: If the diet is varied, that issue does not arise.
Q: (Keyhole) Sorry, a quick question. Pasture raised pork is extremely difficult to find, so what's better: beef or supermarket pork?
(L) Grass fed beef or supermarket pork. Well now you're adding another parameter to it.
A: Grass fed is better on both counts. But in absence, pork is better.
Q: (L) And just remember what they said about studies and how the subjects of studies are self-selected.
(Andromeda) Can we ask about why eggs are bad for so many of us?
(L) That's a good question. Why are eggs so bad for so many of us?
A: They are the potential young of another species with linkages to reptiles.
Q: (L) So, it's the information again?
A: Yes
Q: (L) And it's concentrated in the egg?
A: Yes
Q: (L) Just like the information about cows is concentrated in the milk?
A: Yes
Q: (Joe) Is there much information of any consequence in non-meat foods like grains and stuff like that? Is that something that should be considered from an information point of view?
A: Considered, yes.
Q: (L) Well, we know that seeds are the potential young of plants.
(Andromeda) And plants can be going one way or the other.
(L) And grains have been shown to be, you know, pretty detrimental...
(Chu) But from some veggies you get vitamins that you don't get from meat.
(L) Yeah. But veggies are different from grains. I mean there's a lot of root vegetables, leafy vegetables or fruits, all those kinds of things that do not entail eating the seeds or the potential young. So, maybe there's... Is there some kind of cosmic law about consuming the young of other creatures?
A: Close
Q: (Chu) Okay, so sprouts for example would be worse than a head of lettuce?
(L) Yeah.
(Chu) 'Cause it's a bunch of babies.
(Andromeda) It's a bunch of babies in one bite. [laughter]
(Chu) What about the cooking alterations when you fry with lard or tallow? Which one is better?
A: A mix would be ideal.
Q: (Joe) 50/50?
A: Yes
Q: (Chu) And reusing the fats is bad?
A: Yes
Q: (Andromeda) Even bacon fat?
A: No
Q: (Andromeda) I knew it!
(L) That's because it's freshly rendered.
A: Yes
Q: (Andromeda) And it's smoky. [laughter]
A: Yes
Q: (L) Okay.
(Temperance) May I piggyback on the pork feed questions? So, from what I've understood based on what I've learned about pork diets or pig diets, they're not able to survive on pasture alone. Is this true?
A: Close. Omnivores like humans.
Q: (Temperance) Okay. What is the optimal supplementation with grain to balance out their diet?
A: Avoid grain. Feed veggies etc.
Q: (Joe) And acorns.
(L) Acorns are seeds of oak trees.
(Temperance) Are they able to digest milk better than humans?
A: Yes
Q: (Temperance) Okay. I remember hearing something about people having dairy cows, then using the excess milk or excess whey to then fatten up pigs. So, I suppose that's one way to do it and I'll look to avoid grains. Thank you very much.
(Joe) Are acorn-fed pigs that we get, are they bad because they've been eating baby oak trees?
A: No.
Q: (Joe) That law doesn't apply to pigs.
A: Yes
Q: (Niall) The tree drops them freely. They're not taken from it.
(Andromeda) Where does fish fit into all of this? Fish and fish oil?
(L) Well, they already told us about that once; that fish substitute semi-adequately. Man does not live by fish alone. So, buy every piece of bacon. [laughter] So, okay, let's move on to the next questions.
Most pigs farmed today live on a vegetarian diet, though there may be some supplements containing fish and bonemeal, but it is minor. The diet of a wild or feral pig,
one article said, is 85-90 % vegetarian and 10 % animal products.
Whether it is a pig from a small farn enclosure or from a more open space, they are exposed to some dangers that have parallels among humans
I have a question concerning swine flu. A few days ago in Norway a virus was discovered and identified, and two days ago it was discovered in France. So I guess it wasn't a random mutation? - Yes - And how did they spread this mutation, through vaccine? - Partly.
Session 28 November 2009
Q: (P*****) I have a question concerning swine flu. A few days ago in Norway a virus was discovered and identified, and two days ago it was discovered in France. So I guess it wasn't a random mutation?
A: Yes
Q: (P*****) And how did they spread this mutation, through vaccine?
A: Partly. But you can easily figure these things by reading the history of other experiments.
Q: (L) They've got all kinds of stuff where they tell what the CIA used to do. They used to fly over with airplanes, send agents into subways, or... There is just no limit to the way that they can do these things. And they that they DO do these things!
(Ark) And when they have these vaccines, they always...
(L) It always produces the illness it's supposed to prevent.
(Ark) And it produces mutations. Always. And it's always engineered. But they don't want mutations right away, because first they have to sell enough drugs. Then there is some kind of saturation, so it's good if there is mutation because now the drug companies have to work on a universal vaccine! Now we will have universal vaccine!
In the same session:
Most mental conditions today are a result of autoimmune disorders. - The degradation has been in process for almost a hundred years.
(C**) There was a documentary that we were speculating a week ago where they were talking about some of the side effects of Tamiflu and possibly the vaccines. They were saying that they had run studies in Japan and other countries and the biggest problem was mental problems. Psychological problems.
(Ark) Now they say, "Oh, we found 70 cases of this, it's not enough to..."
A: Massive inflammation on top of already epidemic autoimmune conditions.
Q: (L) If you're inflamed, your brain is inflamed.
(C**) So, my question is more...
A: Most mental conditions today are a result of autoimmune disorders.
Q: (L) So what's your question?
(C**) Well, if their plan is not just to kill people but to contribute to disintegration, personality disintegration, and make them more either vulnerable or paranoid of others, or...?
A: It is just the straw and the camel. The degradation has been in process for almost a hundred years.
Q: (L) You mean the degradation of human health, and destroying people, and breaking them down and making them vulnerable and all that sort of thing?
A: Yes
Q: (Allen) By-product of the Industrial Revolution?
A: Yes
Q: (C**) And they say joy is coming?!
A: You work on the other side and don't anticipate what the universe can and will do if the ground is prepared!
The following excerpts explains what can happen when some humans eat vegetarian food. I don't know if pigs having similar "mental" issues, but one can wonder if a diet they were not designed for, mainly grain products, affects the life experience of some of them, in case they are ensouled.
Primitive societies that eat according to the normal diet for human beings do not have "schizophrenics", but they do have shamans who can "see".
Session 20 August 2011
Q: (L) Okay. What's the next question? (Psyche) We were checking some statistics and we realized that full siblings of schizophrenics are nine times more likely than the general population to have schizophrenia, and four times more likely to have bipolar disorder. Is {name redacted} affected by this genetic tendency?
A: Oh indeed! However this requires explanation. First of all, the genetics that are associated with schizophrenia can be either a doorway or a barrier. Second, the manifestation of schizophrenia can take non-ordinary pathways. That is to say that diet can activate the pathway without the concomitant benefits.
Q: (Burma) I think that they're saying that schizophrenia could essentially be a way to be open to seeing other aspects of reality but diet can make it so it basically just makes you crazy without actually seeing anything.
A: Primitive societies that eat according to the normal diet for human beings do not have "schizophrenics", but they do have shamans who can "see".
Q: (Perceval) So a schizophrenic on animal fat is a shaman. (L) Well, wait a minute. There's something real subtle here. What I think you're saying is that when these genetic pathways are activated through wrong diet, it screws up the shamanic capacity?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) So, schizophrenia as we understand it or have witnessed it is a screw-up of something that could or might manifest in a completely different way on a different diet? Is that it?
A: Yes
Q: (L) And that's what you meant by not only a doorway, but also a barrier because the person who is on the wrong diet and has schizophrenia is barred from being able to be a bridge between the worlds. They kind of get lost. They're barred from having a normal life, and they're also barred from coming back from their delusions or whatever they're seeing even if they're not delusions. Maybe they’re seeing, but they're unable to help or do anything.
Okay. Now, you made a remark about the diet that is normal for the human being. And I know {name redacted} and a lot of people - not just {name redacted}, but a lot of people - have a problem with a diet that requires you to consume the flesh of other creatures. And I know that we've read what Lierre Keith has written about it, and it's a very moving statement about life and earth and so on and so forth. But I'd like to know if there's something a little more esoteric that we could understand about this? I mean, I don't understand why and how a person can achieve spiritual growth, which is what you seem to be implying throughout all of this stuff that we've been learning, from eating meat. How many other groups have taken a vegetarian pathway and said that this is... I mean, aside from the fact that we now know that agriculture and vegetables and the owning of the land is pure STS destruction... What about fruit? Well of course they didn't have fruit then. Like everybody, I'm having a little problem with this. So can you help me out here?
A: You know the saying: Only through the shedding of blood is there remission of sins?
Q: (L) Yes.
A: And what about: Take eat, this is my body?
Q: (L) Yes.
A: And: Take, drink, this is my blood?
Q: (L) Yes. (Burma) So it sounds like they're saying that there's a hidden thing in the whole resurrection or salvation by the blood thing. That agriculture is evil and we could return by going on an animal-based diet?
A: No not exactly. When humankind "fell" into gross matter, a way was needed to return. This way simply is a manifestation of the natural laws. Consciousness must "eat" also. This is a natural function of the life giving nature of the environment in balance. The Earth is the Great Mother who gives her body, literally, in the form of creatures with a certain level of consciousness for the sustenance of her children of the cosmos. This is the original meaning of those sayings.
Q: (L) So, eating flesh also means eating consciousness which accumulates, I'm assuming is what is being implied here, or what feeds our consciousness so that it grows in step with our bodies? Is that close?
A: Close enough.
Q: (Ailen) And when you eat veggies you're basically eating a much lower level of consciousness. (L) Not only that, but in a sense you're rejecting the gift and you're not feeding consciousness. And that means that all eating of meat should be a sacrament.
A: Yes
Q: (Burma) With agriculture, you're not only rejecting the gift, you're turning around and beating up the Mother. (L) Well that sure puts a whole different light on the whole Cain and Abel thing! {Interesting that the original “vegetarian” was the first murderer, too.}
A: Yes.
Having found the previous excerpts, below I have tried to compare what might the situation between different societies,
| Some 4D STS aliens | Some dark circles among humans | Ordinary middle class humans | Primitive human society |
| We don't know if they eat each other in some way. The word feeding may have many meanings. | Cannibalism mixed with ordinary human diet. | Cannibalism by error, or during extreme famine and war times, and even then it can be very rare. | Cannibalism generally rare or non-existent. |
| Aryan parts consumed by some 4D STS reptiles. Fatty children and nonsmoking vegetarians. farmed or abducted. | Fatty children, farmed or abducted. | Farmed animals, conditions vary, can be more comfortable than in wild, sometimes no better or worse. Animals usually have less freedom of movement and uniform, sometimes unnatural, diets. | Animals and other food is hunted or found, alternatively grown or kept close to those who later consume the food. Sometimes farmed animals and birds are mistreated. |
| Capture, slaughter and killing using technology. Torture. | Slaughter and killing. Anything goes, - can involve torture. | Slaughtered professionally, mostly according to standards of speed and hygiene. | Slaughtered by the people as passed down from traditions, mostly in the wild, at home or in the local village. Lack of many industrial standards of hygiene. The killing can be traumatic for the animal, depending on the methods, but mostly less than being hunted and killed by a predator. |
| There is probably a variety as to how much consumers know and participate in. Can be bloody or more packaged. | Neat and clean grocery shop packages, no death process, slaughter or blood is visible. The consumer is alienated from the origin of the food and the connection to Nature. Food taken for granted, to be used and disposed of. | People slaughter the animals they have lived close to or in the wild next to. Everyone will know that death and blood is involved, but also for most people, that much effort and hard work goes into procure the food. And if you have a larger animal to slaughter it and make the best use of the meat, skin, and everything.
Food as a gift from Nature or good luck. |
A question might be where do the following expressions have more meaning:
"
The Earth is the Great Mother who gives her body, literally, in the form of creatures with a certain level of consciousness for the sustenance of her children of the cosmos." and "
all eating of meat should be a sacrament - Yes"?
Leaving that question unanswered, but thinking about the experience of the modern urbanized consumer, how much of an animal for consumption is never seen, and that is only the weight, not the live animal in action? It is easier to resolve when asked differently:
How much of a live animal ends up in the shop?
When one goes to a shop, one sees only a fraction of the animal, but how much? To attempt to answer this, there is a term called dressing percentage. One page about cattle had:
Dressing percentage is calculated by dividing the warm carcass weight by the shrunk live weight of the animal and expressing the result as a percentage. For example, suppose that an animal delivered to the packing plant weighs 1300 pounds. After being killed, the hide, head, feet and gut are removed. The carcass then weighs 767 pounds. The dressing percent of this animal would be 767 divided by 1300 multiplied by 100 equaling 59 percent. This “59 percent” represents the meat and skeletal portion of an animal compared to its live weight. Note that the animal is weighed after transportation to the packing plant so that live weight is a shrunk weight. Also note that the carcass is weighed warm as opposed to cold. The dressing percentage for a cold carcass can be 2.0 per cent lower than the warm carcass dressing percentage for the same carcass.
The industry is interested in animal dressing percentage because it establishes the weight upon which payment is calculated for animals sold on a live weight basis. For example, a 0.5 per cent difference in the dressing percentage between steer A and B shown in Table 1, results in a $10.50 difference in price per animal. The higher yielding animal is worth an extra $0.80 per cwt on a live weight basis.
The Wiki for
dressed weight has:
The net dressed weight can vary dramatically from animals of the same type depending on how much fat is trimmed in the dressing process, how lean the animal is at butcher time, and if the animal has eaten shortly before slaughter.[2] From the perspective of economics, understanding the average dressed weight as a ratio to the live weight is a necessary function of the cattle and other meat industries, as it allows a rough estimate of the available return for each animal. The dressed weight of an animal will still be higher than the net retail weight of final product at the market, as additional trimming and deboning generally take place for the individual cuts.
Dressed weight also varies by animal. For example, the dress weight for chickens and other fowl is closer to 75% of the live weight,[3] which is significantly higher than that of cattle, which can be from 50-70% depending on breed and methods used.[2] To compare, a 250-pound pig will typically have a dressed weight of 180 pounds and a retail cuts weight of 144 pounds. This is a net of 72% dressed weight, with only 57% of the original live weight becoming retail cuts.[4]
But what does that mean for what comes into the kitchen?
Without going into detail with all types of animals, here is some information from a
short pdf about Carcass Breakdown and Beef Cuts:
Summarizing the data:
Chuck, 29 % of carcass
Rib, 9 % of carcass
Loin 16 % of carcass
Round 22 % of carcass
Thin Cuts 19 % of carcass
Miscellaneous 5 % of carcass
A 1300-pound, Yield Grade 3 steer yields 638 pounds of retail cuts (79%) from an 806 pound carcass.
Of the 638 pounds of retail cuts:
• 59 % are roasts and steaks
• 41 % are ground beef and stew meat
If one takes the 638/1300, it is 49.1 % of the live animal that shows up in the shop. This means that the 59 % of the 638 pounds carcass, useful for roasts and steaks, corresponds to about 28 %, or just over 1/4 of the live animal. Similarly, the 41 % of the ground beef and stew meat amounts to around 20 % or 1/5 of the live animal. And that is just from a meat perspective.
What more to add? We have two parents, and it then becomes 1024 ancestors going back 10 generations, more than a million after 20, more than a billion after 30, and there were not that many people at the time, so some lines crossed. We don't know, and maybe that is good, how some of these many ancestors lived and survived! However, irrespective of the age of any reader, it is safe to say that even five generations ago, a lot of what we take for granted in the current consumer society, with centralized food production, centralized food processing and food distribution though chains of large supermarkets, was not available. One excerpt indicates that this now dominating trend could eventually change though it is unknown when it will happen.
I think it also has to do with the raising of animals
Session 10 December 2022
Q: (nicklebleu) Is the key to longterm survival and ability to feed ourselves in the current climate a return to non-mechanical farming and old concepts as grassfed gardens, organic home gardens, and regenerative farming techniques?
A: Yes
Q: (L) I think it also has to do with the raising of animals. If you have animals and they're eating some grass and producing stuff you can turn into fertilizer and then you can grow more stuff. The old ways are really good.
Raising animals maybe traditional and meaningful, but is not a walk in the park, neither for the animals nor for the humans tending them. Opinions may differ, but I think many farmers across the world would agree. Some would argue that they can't speak for the animals. That is true, but they can speak for themselves.
