Any Vegetarians/Vegans here?

[James2014]

That same link again. Ok then
Meat better for bone heath
http://press.endocrine.org/doi/full/10.1...003-031466
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/89/5/1357.abstract

Blood pressure
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/83/4/780.short

Brain health of children
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10966896

Firstly, great to see some primary references. Secondly all those studies only look at specific diseases, and therefore do not analyse the effect of diet on all-cause mortality. There is no point improving bone health if one then dies of cancer or cardiovascular disease! That is why the study that I posted is so much more relevant. It looks at all causes of death, and veganism decreases mortality.

Now the individual studies... the first two studies look at effect of meat on bone health, but they make no comparisons on how consumption of high amounts of vegan protein could also improve bone health. As they make no comparison between vegan and meat eating diets, one cannot make the assumption that one is healthier than the other.

Next the blood pressure study, again there is no comparison to a vegan protein rich diet making comparison impossible. Additionally the trial only lasted 8 weeks and only looked at a marker of cardiovascular disease (ie blood pressure). Meat eating has been associated with cardiovascular disease, but no one thinks it only takes 8 weeks of a high meat diet to cause it. Therefore the study is too short to see how meat affects cardiovascular disease.

Brain health in children, that study looked at MACROBIOTIC vegans. That means they take no B12 supplements of fortified foods. This is not a well balanced diet. If I were to claim that scurvy (vitamin C deficiency) in meat eaters who happened to not eat enough fruit and veg was due to the fact they were omnivores I would be talking nonsense. It would be incidental to this. similarly, the people in the study had b12 deficiency incidentally to the fact they were vegan but because they were macrobiotic.

---

Once again you make no sense. What does the mental capacity of human children have to do with eating animals?

The point is that the actions of those without the ability to make ethical decisions cannot be said to be right or wrong. It is therefore not wrong for an animal to kill another amoral animal, whereas it would be wrong for a person because they have the ability to choose.

---

Here's another link for ya

In that firstly the comparison was not with a vegan diet, which has shown to also produce a significant benefit to diabetics.



Secondly the study also notes that the "Paleolithic diet was markedly lower in cereals and dairy products, and lower in potatoes, beans and bakery, and much higher in fruits, vegetables, meat and eggs"
As the study goes on to explain, many of the benefits were likely due to increased consumption of fruit and veg, decreased consumption of things like sugary sweets, increased protein intake and decreased calorie consumption overall. All these things can be better achieved with a vegan diet without the risks high meat consumption brings over time (ie longer than the 3 months looked at in the trial)