RE: Any Vegetarians/Vegans here?
February 21, 2014 at 11:12 pm
(This post was last modified: February 21, 2014 at 11:34 pm by Chas.)
(February 16, 2014 at 10:11 am)enrico Wrote:(February 16, 2014 at 9:37 am)Bad Wolf Wrote: Vegetarians are much much much less common than meat eaters. Of course you are going to see more meat eaters with cardiovascular diseases, because there are more meat eaters, period. Why is this concept so difficult for you to grasp? I also highly doubt that 99% of people you saw with cardiovascular problems were meat eaters.
The ratio (less then 10 compared to about 2000) is far far too much to make any mistakes.
Quote:And didn't you work in a psych ward last time we asked? Apparently?
1) In the last 24 years i worked in different units.
2) It is not only cardiovascular diseases that i saw but also dementia, Parkinson and Alzheimer and all these diseased ring a bell in my mind when i see that only NON veg. are affected.
(February 16, 2014 at 8:49 am)enrico Wrote: And when i know that their arteries are choked with saturated fats and cholesterol then an other bell ring in my head.
Quote:Yes, I'm sure you scraped their arteries and tested the samples yourself. No?
You don't need to study as much as a doctor to know that in most cases arteries are choked with these elements.
There are other cases in which arteries are choked but these cases are much more rare like when the cells in the blood are swollen or other.
(February 16, 2014 at 8:49 am)enrico Wrote: And when i know that this shit can not come other then meat
Quote:How do you know that? They could just eat a lot of chocolate.
I look after these people and i can see what they eat and what they don't eat.
(February 16, 2014 at 8:49 am)enrico Wrote: then one more bell ring in my head so why should i go looking for peer review when i already know the very cause of the problem?
Quote:No you don't know. You think you know, but you don't know. That is why peer review exists, to confirm, to add up the evidence, to evaluate the method and results. Have you ever considered any extraneous variables that could affect cardiovascular disease, such as: age, diet, % of body fat, ethnicity. I'm guessing you haven't. Correlation does not imply causation. You can't go making these grand conclusions from some (poorly collected, inaccurate) data
You would think that these people are all old people.
You would be surprised to find out that most of these people are in their 50 as average.
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.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Science is not a subject, but a method.