Is a Vegetarian or Vegan Diet Healthy?
- Thread starter StarryEyed
- Start date
It happens on such a regular basis with people who don't know me, yet, that I'm suspecting I have a neon sign on me that reads, "I'm a vegetarian. Please discuss this with me." somewhere where I can't see it.
That comes as standard - you have to submit a written request to the Vegetarian High Council if you want to opt out of the advertising program.
It's only annoying to me when I entertain. I've had instances where one person in a fairly large group is a vegetarian or vegan. He or she then gets all indignant because I had to tenacity to cook meat knowing he/she would be there--even thought I also included a significant number of vegan dishes.
Of course, I don't generally associate with these people as they're just generally assholes. I don't usually have a problem with friends/family aside from the occasional playful, snide quip.
Of course, I don't generally associate with these people as they're just generally assholes. I don't usually have a problem with friends/family aside from the occasional playful, snide quip.
Had homemade pizzas with homemade flour tortillas this evening, and it was a great success! Thanks for the suggestion
I'm grateful in that even though I have a lot of vegetarian friends, none of them care if meat is served in their presence (and a lot of them will cook it, but not eat it). I'm not used to making vegan dishes though, so that would take a bit of thought.
Meat is an important part of the diet. Anyone who claims it's not is either using psuedo-science or completely ignorant to the fact we're built to eat meat in addition to vegetarian food.
Sure, most of us eat too much meat but that's not the same as saying we don't need meat. If your vegetarian/vegan diet includes the need to take supplements or go out of the way to find vegetarian/vegean sources of certain essential dietary requirements found commonly in meat, it's not a valid arguement that it's "what nature intended" or any of that other bullshit I often hear. It's no better than someone who solely eats meat and nothing else.
It's a failure to eat healthy. Too many vegetarians/vegans I've known are underweight and often have health problems of their own that seem less important on the surface but if their diet is so good for them, why are they underweight and having health problems?
Sure, most of us eat too much meat but that's not the same as saying we don't need meat. If your vegetarian/vegan diet includes the need to take supplements or go out of the way to find vegetarian/vegean sources of certain essential dietary requirements found commonly in meat, it's not a valid arguement that it's "what nature intended" or any of that other bullshit I often hear. It's no better than someone who solely eats meat and nothing else.
It's a failure to eat healthy. Too many vegetarians/vegans I've known are underweight and often have health problems of their own that seem less important on the surface but if their diet is so good for them, why are they underweight and having health problems?
^That's not true. Eating vegetarian or vegan is just as healthy as eating meat. Like I said before, it's more about what you eat than what you don't eat: a well-balanced diet that includes meat is healthier than an unbalanced vegan or vegetarian diet, and likewise a well-balanced vegan/vegetarian diet is healthier than an unbalanced omnivorous diet. You've met some underweight and malnourished vegans? I had a morbidly obese vegan roommate in college (300+ lbs). Both my sisters, on the other hand, and my nephew, are all very healthy vegans who don't bother with vitamin supplements because they eat well-balanced diets.
Yes, I've met a number of them who are malnourished or rather, border on it as they lack enough protein, amino acids and other things in their diet gained from eating meat.
I'm sure the overweight vegan/vegetarians you know may not have been physically active (eating only greens does not equal physically fit) or had another problem just as those I know who are underweight don't eat right or don't get enough of what they need in another way.
Regardless, it's a myth that vegetarian/vegan diets are better than a diet with meat which is my original point (and contrary to the claims of virtually every vegan or vegetarian who has tried to "convert" others). It's true you can get most of the dietary requirements from a vegan diet but it's going to still lead to long term effects, minor or otherwise. Things that aren't as dangerous as heart disease but none the less a health issue.
People who espouse this ideal that no meat is better are as ignorant as those who claim meat and potatoes is a good meal and requires none of that green stuff to live right.
And as an aside to whoever remarked about vegetarian animals that get all that stuff they need from their diet, their bodies are built to take more nutrients out of vegetable matter than a human beings. Just as a true carnivore has a body to process all that meat, a human's body is built to process both.
I'm sure the overweight vegan/vegetarians you know may not have been physically active (eating only greens does not equal physically fit) or had another problem just as those I know who are underweight don't eat right or don't get enough of what they need in another way.
Regardless, it's a myth that vegetarian/vegan diets are better than a diet with meat which is my original point (and contrary to the claims of virtually every vegan or vegetarian who has tried to "convert" others). It's true you can get most of the dietary requirements from a vegan diet but it's going to still lead to long term effects, minor or otherwise. Things that aren't as dangerous as heart disease but none the less a health issue.
People who espouse this ideal that no meat is better are as ignorant as those who claim meat and potatoes is a good meal and requires none of that green stuff to live right.
And as an aside to whoever remarked about vegetarian animals that get all that stuff they need from their diet, their bodies are built to take more nutrients out of vegetable matter than a human beings. Just as a true carnivore has a body to process all that meat, a human's body is built to process both.
Firstly, vegans do not eat only greens. Secondly, my sister (vegetarian since the age of 12 and vegan for 5 years) runs half marathons. She is active -- remember what they say about assuming.
Are they better than diets including meat? Some yes, some no -- again, it depends on the diet. But saying that one cannot get the nutrition one needs from a vegan diet is patently untrue.
This I agree with, though it's a case by case situation: some vegan diets are better, some are worse.
This is true in a way. Omnivores are diet opportunists -- we are indeed built to consume both plant matter and meat. Just because we can consume both to be healthy doesn't mean we must. We are also built to consume larvae and beetles and worms, and some cultures do so quite regularly. Just because my body is built to consume fat sago grubs doesn't mean I have any intention of doing so or will be any less healthy for lacking insects in my diet.
Same goes for beef, in my case, and all animal products in the cases of my sisters and nephew.
A
Amaris
Guest
Just to remark on the need for Vegetarians and Vegans to take dietary supplements, Teelie, surely you're not using that as a point against Vegeterianism. If so, then you ignore all of the people who also eat meat and still take a vitamin supplement every day. Studies have shown that millions in the United States alone suffer from a lack of Vitamin B and Vitamin D. There are too many factors for you to single out vitamin supplements as a reason against Vegetarianism, or to indicate that Vegetarianism is somehow insufficient. Wait, no, I want to comment on other aspects of this. You stated that anyone who didn't believe meat was an important part of one's diet to be completely ignorant and party to belief in pseudo-science. Well, to be frank, you're wrong.
In fact, In 1993, the American Dietetic Association stated that a vegetarian diet is healthful and nutritionally adequate.
They also found that it's adequate for children and also for women who are pregnant or nursing.
They also noted, in those articles, that Vegetarian and Vegan diets are beneficial and adequate for babies, children, teens, adults, pregnant women and even athletes. I invite you to explain away their pseudo-science.
In fact, In 1993, the American Dietetic Association stated that a vegetarian diet is healthful and nutritionally adequate.
They also found that it's adequate for children and also for women who are pregnant or nursing.
They also noted, in those articles, that Vegetarian and Vegan diets are beneficial and adequate for babies, children, teens, adults, pregnant women and even athletes. I invite you to explain away their pseudo-science.
That was me and I was talking about protein, not nutrients. All creatures including carnivores build their protein from the amino acids in the food the eat - not by direct use of what ever protein is in their diet.
Pure vegetarians do have digestive systems which are better than ours at extracting nutrients from vegetable matter. We could not live on what a cow eats but the vegetables we do eat have everything we need. The only potential drawback in a vegetarian diet is that you have to eat more to get the same amount of calories. That could be a problem for people with very high metabolisms on a vegan diet.
Sarek of Vulcan already pointed out that the fact that our digestive system is capable of processing meat does not mean we SHOULD eat meat. It is an evolutionary advantage that we are capable of surviving long enough to pass on our genes on either a meat diet, vegetarian diet or a mixed diet. Including meat in one's diet is NOT optimal though. The problem is that meat contains a butt-load of toxins associated with metabolism and cooking does not get rid of them - in fact cooking creates more toxins. A pure carnivore has a very short intestinal tract to pass the toxins as quickly as possible. Additionally, a carnivore's liver is far superior to ours at dealing with these toxins. Even so, carnivores still have short lifespans.
Let's fix some misconceptions here. First, I never said taking supplements was only something vegetarians did. I said it's something often done because their diet doesn't always include what they need (shockingly, people who only eat meat seem to be lacking too). Second, I never said an all meat or mostly meat diet was good either. In fact I went to lengths to say balance was important and that eating only one or the other is not a long term goal one should live with.
And just how much of that study, single study mind you, has been repeated or I'm assuming you didn't bother reading even the first page as it clearly includes "In some cases, supplements or fortified foods can provide useful amounts of important nutrients." What's that? You have to take supplements to make this diet work?
Sounds to me like picking and choosing our evidence and ignoring the inconvienent details. So my point still stands, you should eat at least some meat in your diet to fulfill all your needs.
And to the point of carnivores with short lifespans. It's a necessity. Too many carnivores and not enough food means they wipe out the food source, their food source dies off, they die off. It's a stretch to say that because they eat meat their lifespan is shorter as a result. There are a number of carnivores who also fail to ascribe to that either. Yeah, dogs, cats and their families don't live long but whales, sharks and several other mammal and nonmammalian carnivores can live for decades, even centuries so the logic there is again flawed.
My original point, once more, eating meat should be a part of your diet. It doesn't mean it needs to be a large part of it or that it's healthy to primarily eat only meat but then again I know people like to pick and choose comments and excerpt them to make their own claims look better. Meat is important, doesn't mean go deep fry a cow and eat it every night for a week or anything.
And just how much of that study, single study mind you, has been repeated or I'm assuming you didn't bother reading even the first page as it clearly includes "In some cases, supplements or fortified foods can provide useful amounts of important nutrients." What's that? You have to take supplements to make this diet work?
Sounds to me like picking and choosing our evidence and ignoring the inconvienent details. So my point still stands, you should eat at least some meat in your diet to fulfill all your needs.
And to the point of carnivores with short lifespans. It's a necessity. Too many carnivores and not enough food means they wipe out the food source, their food source dies off, they die off. It's a stretch to say that because they eat meat their lifespan is shorter as a result. There are a number of carnivores who also fail to ascribe to that either. Yeah, dogs, cats and their families don't live long but whales, sharks and several other mammal and nonmammalian carnivores can live for decades, even centuries so the logic there is again flawed.
My original point, once more, eating meat should be a part of your diet. It doesn't mean it needs to be a large part of it or that it's healthy to primarily eat only meat but then again I know people like to pick and choose comments and excerpt them to make their own claims look better. Meat is important, doesn't mean go deep fry a cow and eat it every night for a week or anything.
A
Amaris
Guest
I didn't say just people who ate only meat, I'm talking about people who eat meat and vegetables and still need to take supplements, of which there are millions, many of them children.
I have read this study because, years ago, when I had decided to become a Vegetarian (for the record I am currently not a vegetarian), I did research before I started that diet.
Your point does not stand. Your point is an opinion.
I backed up my claim with scientific study.
No. Eating meat is not essential to an overall healthy diet. You complained that I only posted one study, even though what I posted was from the American Dietetic Association, which consists of 75,000+ Physicians, Registered Dieticians, Nurses, Professors, Researchers and Consultants. You dismissed them out of hand.
So here are some articles based on different studies that I hope you will read:
Texas Tech Health Sciences Center Lubbock Online Article
Oxford Journal of Medicine
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
American Heart Association
Arthritis Research & Therapy
World Cancer Research Fund International
Medical News Today
British Medical Journal BBC News Article
All of these articles explain the plausibility, possibility, benefits and positive health maintained from a vegetarian, vegan and even one case of a raw natural foods diet (fruits, nuts, etc).
As I explained in my prior post, a side[effect of eating meat is taking in a great deal of toxins. It's hardly a stretch to predict that carnivores will have shorter lives than herbivores. The mechanisms are well-understood.
As to the evolution angle, that sounds like something you came up with on your own. Got any references to actual theories that short carnivore life span is evolution-driven? I doubt it because the same argument you gave would apply to herbivores. They could wipe out their own food source too.
Some people theorize if it wasn't for meat we wouldn't be here.
http://www.amazon.com/Hunting-Apes-Craig-B-Stanford/dp/0691011605
http://www.amazon.com/Hunting-Apes-Craig-B-Stanford/dp/0691011605
Interesting, but not really relevant to the question of whether or not our present optimum diet should include meat.
A
Amaris
Guest
Where did you read it?
Similar threads
