(February 21, 2014 at 11:12 pm)Chas Wrote: That is not evidence - it is anecdotes. This is science.

National Institutes of Health Wrote:According to pure vegetarian ideologists, people consuming vegetarian diet have better health and live longer than nonvegetarians, because persons consuming milk, dairy products, meat, eggs and fish are at health risk. In fact the most healthy people in Europe are inhabitants of Iceland, Switzerland and Scandinavia, consuming great amounts of food of animal origin. Meta-analysis of several prospective studies showed no significant differences in the mortality caused by colorectal, stomach, lung, prostate or breast cancers and stroke between vegetarians and "health-conscious" nonvegetarians.

New studies show that even when you control for physical activity level, overall calorie intake, BMI, and smoking (amongst a host of other factors) a vegetarian diet (including vegan) still reduces mortality, so its not just down to how health conscious an individual is. The nurse study showed the same thing. As for why those countries have a good health but also eat lots of meat, those countries also have very good health care systems. To be able to draw any conclusions from their good health however one would have to take into account many of the factors that I mentioned were controlled for in the study I posted above.

(February 22, 2014 at 5:48 am)bennyboy Wrote:

(February 22, 2014 at 1:51 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote: Unlike someone whose whole food supply is from somewhere else and wouldn't know one plant from another?

brilliant

The cited article talks about "non-animal" vs "animal" foods, and the latter can still be vegetarian if it's primarily dairy. So I'm asking for more information.

I don't know what made you so snarky, but please knock it off. At this point, you are becoming so pointlessly insulting that I might have to put you on ignore. It's too bad-- I thought we were making some good progress for a few days, there.

No, I am the one that is saddened by your lack of understanding and research into just how the food industry, biology, economies and generally how everything works.

Pity, I thought you were after direction not this forum to provide you with an education.

Quote: You see Chas the problem with people like you is that you may study for years and years at the uni but in practical situations you know absolutely nothing.
In yoga after a day of fasting it is well known that by mixing salt with lemon juice and water you get the best result as far as cleaning the stomach from impurities and feeling so much better.
Now if you take only salt or only lemon with water the effect is totally different so it is by experience that you can better understand what is good or bad for you.

Is this that "intuitional science" you were never able to define for me? "It feels good so I know it's true"?


I've never been a creationist but enrico, you make me question evolution. How did your genes ever make it this far?

(February 22, 2014 at 2:52 pm)Jacob(smooth) Wrote:

Quote: You see Chas the problem with people like you is that you may study for years and years at the uni but in practical situations you know absolutely nothing.
In yoga after a day of fasting it is well known that by mixing salt with lemon juice and water you get the best result as far as cleaning the stomach from impurities and feeling so much better.
Now if you take only salt or only lemon with water the effect is totally different so it is by experience that you can better understand what is good or bad for you.

Is this that "intuitional science" you were never able to define for me? "It feels good so I know it's true"?


I've never been a creationist but enrico, you make me question evolution. How did your genes ever make it this far?

He "balances" his wind apparently

Well, nobody likes unbalanced wind!

Shame he's still passing it through the wrong orifice.

Holy crap. If ever there was someone who needed to stay in school!

(February 22, 2014 at 11:51 am)jg2014 Wrote:

(February 21, 2014 at 11:12 pm)Chas Wrote: That is not evidence - it is anecdotes. This is science.

New studies show that even when you control for physical activity level, overall calorie intake, BMI, and smoking (amongst a host of other factors) a vegetarian diet (including vegan) still reduces mortality, so its not just down to how health conscious an individual is. The nurse study showed the same thing. As for why those countries have a good health but also eat lots of meat, those countries also have very good health care systems. To be able to draw any conclusions from their good health however one would have to take into account many of the factors that I mentioned were controlled for in the study I posted above.

Yes. "Correlation is not causation," right guys?

To be fair, the various studies we've talked about seem to indicate that humans are a highly flexible species (as you'd expect from omnivores): we can live healthily on almost anything from plant roots to elk meat, given enough dietary variety to avoid diseases caused by vitamin deficiency, and a lifestyle that is conducive to maintaining cardiovasucular health.

Right now, my opinion is that diet type is not a health issue, but an issue of economics or morals.

I will just leave this here. The site itself is very interesting

http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/hist...lism.shtml

Exploring the Roots of Naturalism in the Vegetarian, Raw Foods, Natural Hygiene, and Vegan Movements
- See more at: http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/hist...V58Ew.dpuf

---

This also might be worthy of perusal

http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/comp...t-1a.shtml


Comparative Anatomy
and Physiology Brought Up to Date
Are Humans Natural Frugivores/Vegetarians,
or Omnivores/Faunivores?
by Tom Billings
Copyright © 1999 by Thomas E. Billings. All rights reserved.
Contact author for permission to republish.

(February 22, 2014 at 9:07 pm)bennyboy Wrote:

(February 22, 2014 at 11:51 am)jg2014 Wrote: New studies show that even when you control for physical activity level, overall calorie intake, BMI, and smoking (amongst a host of other factors) a vegetarian diet (including vegan) still reduces mortality, so its not just down to how health conscious an individual is. The nurse study showed the same thing. As for why those countries have a good health but also eat lots of meat, those countries also have very good health care systems. To be able to draw any conclusions from their good health however one would have to take into account many of the factors that I mentioned were controlled for in the study I posted above.

Yes. "Correlation is not causation," right guys?

To be fair, the various studies we've talked about seem to indicate that humans are a highly flexible species (as you'd expect from omnivores): we can live healthily on almost anything from plant roots to elk meat, given enough dietary variety to avoid diseases caused by vitamin deficiency, and a lifestyle that is conducive to maintaining cardiovasucular health.

Right now, my opinion is that diet type is not a health issue, but an issue of economics or morals.

Seems a reasonable conclusion to me.

(February 23, 2014 at 3:03 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote: I will just leave this here. The site itself is very interesting

http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/hist...lism.shtml

From the intro of the first link:

Quote:•An idealistic model of nature, i.e., the belief in a “paradise” vegetarian or vegan diet in the distant past. This may be presented in analogue form as the belief that humans evolved on a strict, raw vegan diet. (The latter is – in effect - a creationist belief, falsely presented as evolutionary.)
•Some natural hygienists and raw fooders present as fact the absurd claims that “wild animals never get sick” and that use of tools in acquisition of food is somehow unnatural.
•Comparative anatomy provides strong “scientific” evidence that a vegetarian diet is “natural” for humans.
•Idealistic and exaggerated claims that an activist’s specific veg diet is a cure-all for disease.
•Some activists for the listed diets are infamous for their hostile attitudes towards those who don’t agree with them on diet. To non-vegetarians, such attitudes are seen as arrogance and a reflection of egocentric feelings of self-superiority by the activist.
- See more at: http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/hist...arian_diet

I agree with all of this. Basically, they've encapsulated enrico into a brief little summary.

One caveat, though: I think a lot of the perceived "hostile attitudes" are a projection or an unintended implication. For example, if a vegetarian says, "I think it is more moral to avoid eating meat," then a meat-eater is likely to think, "That guy's so condescending-- he thinks he's better than me." That's certainly the case with some vegetarians, but much more rarely than people think.

For example, I believe that causing suffering or death in food animals is wrong, and that meat-eating is therefore immoral. BUT I also have many other faults and moral weaknesses of my own. Nothing about being vegetarian makes me think I'm better than others in a general sense.

(February 22, 2014 at 9:07 pm)bennyboy Wrote: Yes. "Correlation is not causation," right guys?

To be fair, the various studies we've talked about seem to indicate that humans are a highly flexible species (as you'd expect from omnivores): we can live healthily on almost anything from plant roots to elk meat, given enough dietary variety to avoid diseases caused by vitamin deficiency, and a lifestyle that is conducive to maintaining cardiovasucular health.

Right now, my opinion is that diet type is not a health issue, but an issue of economics or morals.

Why then does a vegan diet improve health in diabetic patients to a greater extent than a Mediterranean diet(which was varied and not vitamin deficient), as the following study shows?

If one eats a Mediterranean diet that includes meat one will certainly be healthier than eating a standard western diet, and even then one can still be healthy in the short term. But one could also say the same thing with smoking. We know that meat contains a number of toxins. We know consumption of these worsens health both in populations and in randomised controlled trials. There may be some minimal amount of meat eating that does not harm health, just as their maybe some minimal level of smoking. We do not know what this is however, and therefore no level of either smoking or meat eating is without risk.

I do broadly agree though that the primary reasons for veganism should be moral and environmental/economic.