Dr. Doug Graham (80-10-10 raw vegan)

[Aractus]

Well, actually, there's a pretty good theory. In a brain with Alzheimer's plaques of iron, copper and zinc are found that promote free radicals, and so the oxidation of the brain leading to memory loss. Also, if we can prevent it we no longer have a need to cure it.

Incorrect. Even if we can prevent it then we still need to find a cure and better treatment for people who still get it. Example: just because we know how to prevent HIV infection doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

I meant to ask if our bodies actually changed, as in our brains and blood vessels and lungs. Perhaps I should have phrased that differently, sorry.

Yes, the physiological difference is that we're getting fatter which is due to hormonal imbalance, i.e. "leptin resistance". There are some interesting hypothesise about how this happens, and one is that we're not eating enough fat because we're eating too much added sugars. Other research is looking at the roles that genes play in this. But ultimately no one knows for sure what causes it or how to prevent it at this time.

Although it might not be a problem it contradicts your notion that eating meat is a sufficient source of b12. I don't know what makes you convinced that it is not a problem in this 17% but it is a problem in vegans.

Animal products are the only dietary source of B12, it says so in my anatomy textbook (Saladin 2012). We do not get any B12 from water, from fruits and vegetables, from fungi or from grains.

And dietary cholesterol has no direct effect on blood cholesterol levels.

That's just not true.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/44/2/299.long

I'll quote my textbook for you:

"It is true that hereditary and dietary factors can elevate blood cholesterol to dangerously high levels. ... Only about 15% of our cholesterol comes from the diet; the other 85% is internally synthesised, primarily by the liver."

It is as I mentioned saturated fat that causes blood cholesterol levels to rise, not dietary cholesterol.

Yes, trans fats are found in vegetable oils because through hydrogenation the vegetable fats are rearranged in a way that makes them behave more like animal fats.

Which is a good reason to avoid deep-fried food.

Half of our trans fat intake still comes from animal products though (Link). According to the official USDA nutrient database cheese, milk, yoghurt, beef and chicken contain 1 to 5% trans fats (Link). Some non-hydrogenated vegetable oils also have some, but that's from 0,1 to 0,5. Are a few grams a problem? Well, as any increase in trans fat intake increases your risk of CVD the only safe intake seems to be 0 (Link).

As I understand it, it's only trace amounts in meat, not 1-5%.

How did you determine that and how is that relevant?

Because we require meat for balanced nutrition. Because we can digest meat, but not lectins and not cellulose.

I do not find anecdotal evidence very compelling either.

Well you should, becuase no one should follow a diet that has negative health consequences for them. Wouldn't you agree that anyone wanting to try veganisim should also put their health first?

Wow, I thought only the religious made that claim. This report from the IPCC makes clear that if we want to avoid irreversible impacts on our planet we may need to reduce our emissions to zero.

I'm not interested in IPCC's recommendation. They're directed to make those reconsiderations by politicians. Thus their motives are political in nature.

In the peer-review literature and scientific discussion on this a lot of the so-called "majority" of climate scientists are very moderate and do not agree with the IPCC projections. There is discussion by both sides as to whether anthropogenic gasses are solely responsible for the present temperature trend, and also what that means for the future. To date every projection made since the 90's has turned out to be wrong, and every IPCC report the projected increase for the next 100 years has been getting smaller. They told us around 2000 that the planet would warm by up to 8 degrees by 2100, now they say 2-4 degrees.

As a sceptic, let's say I agree with that forecast. I also agree that CO2 is 47% responsible for the anthropogenic component with methane 27% or so responsible, black carbon I think is 24% or so and then CFC's and trace GHG's to make up the rest. Let's say I also think that anthropogenic activity overall may contribute 50% of the present climate trend. That would mean that we have "control" over 1-2 out of the 2-4 degrees of warming, and by cutting out CO2 entirely we could only potentially reduce the warming of the planet by 0.47 - 0.94 degrees.

Again, I am not interested in anecdotal evidence.

Why? Are you really saying that people who experience problems on a vegan diet do not matter??