Any Vegetarians/Vegans here?

[James2014]

There is ample evidence that the skeletons and skulls from people who live ages ago show no sign of omnivorousess so where is your evidence that they were omnivorous?

Unlike ruminants, eg cows, we do not have the specialized stomach compartments containing the bacteria required to digest cellulose. These bacteria in the cow also create b12, which means they do not require it in the diet. Now, we do have bacteria in our guts, but these live in the large intestine, which is after the small intestine which is where B12 is absorbed from.

We therefore require dietary B12, and the only reliable source of this is either meat, animal products or extracted from bacteria and put into supplements/fortified food. Now the last one wouldn't be available to pre modern people, and while it may be theoretically possible to obtain b12 from vegetables contaminated with b12 producing bacteria, I have never seen any evidence to suggest that this is sufficient.

Anyhow, here is a good summary that we are adapted to eat an omniverous diet from a rather less unbiased source http://www.vrg.org/nutshell/omni.htm

All this stuff about whether ancient civilizations surviving on a vegan/ vegetarian diet or not is completely irrelevant. No ancient society has ever survived while being completely reliant on industrial agriculture either but it doesn't mean that it is wrong. Indeed without modern agriculture and mechanisation etc we would not be able to feed ourselves. Its just ridiculous, do you think that thousands of years ago people debated whether to move away from being a hunter gatherer to start growing crops because no one had done it before? The fact is veganism is better for the environment, better for health and better for the animals.

[Bad Wolf]

We're omnivores.

Bullshit.
If you were correct the remains of people who live ages ago would show a totally different structure similar to omnivorous.

What.....What does that even mean?

In fact it is well shown that meat make people sick.
Hospitals are full of sick people with cardiovascular diseases due to saturated fats, bad colesterol and toxins all things coming from a meat diet.

It isn't the meat that makes people sick, its the saturated fats, bad cholesterol and toxins.

Clearly, billions of people manage to eat meat and not die from it, so we're not herbivores.

Clearly my arse.
Go in any hospital and see how many people are sick with cardiovascular diseases.

You really are a fucking idiot. How do you function in the world? So you think that meat causes so much illness? What is this? Do you think there is some grand world wide conspiracy where the governments are covering up deaths caused by eating meat? And that nutritionists and scientists are lying to us? Fucking idiot.
The sun kills people too.

What sort of idiot are you?
As far as YOUR meat eating cause problem to me and everybody else you have no right to tell me that this is your business.
Climate change are also caused by the meat policy.
1) The fecal or escrement from animals cause air pollution and water pollution.

Air pollution yes, water pollution no

2) The quantity of water use for animals reduce the quantity of water for humans.

Is this a fucking joke? Have you ever heard of the water cycle?

6) The smell of meat cooking make veg. people sick.

Not all of them, not even most of them. A small percentage of vegans/vegetarians can't stand meat

7) The anger discharged when animals are killed is in the air and cause bad feeling everywhere.

No idea what this fucking means.

So grow up, wake up and dust off your brains.

Its just the sheer arrogance and ignorance combined that distinguishes you from any other person on this forum

[James2014]

I'm curious about breakfast cereals as supplements. I have a box of "Choco Hoops," a Tesco-branded cereal, and it has 100g giving about 34% of the RDA for B12, presumably for an adult consuming about 2000 calories/day. For a child, we're looking at about 1600 calories, so close to 43%. Not a bad start. I know for some vitamins there are issues with absorption as well as amount consumed, though. You've hit on a mediating point with me-- children. While I'm bordering on vegan these days, I wouldn't even bother telling my wife to stop giving the kids milk. This thread, though, has really made me start thinking about how much suffering milk-cows involve, even if they live to relative maturity. I'm not sure it's meaningfully less than meat stock. One number I'd like to see is the overall protein/caloric/calcium production of a milk cow over the time period it takes to raise meat stock.

---

No, I don't think they should be more feedlot rather than grass fed. The point is all the studies show that per kg of protein, meat is worse for the environment, producing 11 times as much greenhouse gasses. The measure of how many kg of grain does it take to produce a kg of meat is useful only in so far as it is a measure of inefficiency and harm to the environment. The point is no matter how you raise cattle it is still worse than grain.

I think the winning point is a function of environmental impact, as well as the efficiency of getting nutrients into people's bodies. There are regional issues in some areas (like Tibet) that making sustainable farming of plant foods impossible (afaik).

However, in countries with a choice, unless meat can provide perfect calorie and protein conversion (which it doesn't), then grain-based foods are going to be a big winner in this department (whatever the rate of inefficiency is).

Re B12 from cereals, it depends on what cereals you buy. For example Tesco's Bran flakes contain 100% of our daily requirements of B12 per 100g portion, and you get the benefits of whole grains too. According to this study the B12 in cereals are absorbed well.

With Tibet although the high altitudes make farming crops difficult, they also have poor infrastructure that really reduces yields. Regardless, I don't see anything wrong with being a net importer of food, and it makes sense economically to be more specialised in one industry to gain a competitive advantage when trading with another country, rather than trying to do a bit of everything poorly.

[Anomalocaris]

Ahhh, Enrico is back. This is an interesting commentary on jg2014's inanities about veganism befitting atheism.

1) The fecal or escrement from animals cause air pollution and water pollution..

Good, let's kill all the animals then.

2) The quantity of water use for animals reduce the quantity of water for humans..

And what do you plan to use the water for?

3) The land needed to keep cattle come at the expenses of forests which could give clean air. .

Your residence also comes at the expense of forests which could give clean air. Perhaps you should live in a hollow in a tree.

4) The land needed to cultivate soia and other feed for animals also come at the expenses of less forests..

Soys and other feed for the animals undertake the same processes to give clean air as trees in forests.

5) The remains of animals after they take away the meat cause pollution..

Yeah, and that pollution causes more life, real life, not vegetarians masquarding as life, to sprout.

6) The smell of meat cooking make veg. people sick..

Good, perhaps you would die.

7) The anger discharged when animals are killed is in the air and cause bad feeling everywhere.

I never felt so good as when I feel the vibe of an animal headed towards my dinner plate taking the irrevokable step in its journey.

[KUSA]

The anger discharged when animals are killed is in the air and cause bad feeling everywhere.

Explain this discharge. What exactly is it? Are you claiming that something physical comes out of the animal and hangs around and then makes people feel bad?

[Aractus]

The point is all the studies show that per kg of protein, meat is worse for the environment, producing 11 times as much greenhouse gasses.

Methane breaks down in the atmosphere, and furthermore climate scientists blame the EGHE's contribution mainly on CO2 and Black Carbon and less on Methane.

The measure of how many kg of grain does it take to produce a kg of meat is useful only in so far as it is a measure of inefficiency and harm to the environment. The point is no matter how you raise cattle it is still worse than grain.

What?

How about land that's unsuitable for produce and it's only agricultural use is to raise animals?

Australia is one of the biggest net exporters of grain in the world, mainly because its production of grain per head of population is huge, eg in comparison to the US it has half the total production of wheat, but a tenth of the population.

Yep, we're not running out of wheat anytime soon.

Australia's problems don't stem from a lack of arable land, which it has huge amounts of per head population, but from a lack of water. The best way to deal with that is to increase the efficiency of irrigation, reduce wasteful water use on cattle by stopping eating meat, increase the use of drought resistant crops and reduce global warming.

Oh please, we're not even in the top 30 driest countries. Here's a hint: about 85% of the world's population lives in the driest half of the world. As if that's our problem. It may become our problem if we accept exponential population growth - which I don't think we should and I think we should cap our population now and realize that we're at capacity (22 million).

[KichigaiNeko]

I would like to know how those with Thalassemia minor are supposedly to survive on a vegetarian/ vegan diet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalassemia

[James2014]

The point is all the studies show that per kg of protein, meat is worse for the environment, producing 11 times as much greenhouse gasses.

Methane breaks down in the atmosphere, and furthermore climate scientists blame the EGHE's contribution mainly on CO2 and Black Carbon and less on Methane.

The measure of how many kg of grain does it take to produce a kg of meat is useful only in so far as it is a measure of inefficiency and harm to the environment. The point is no matter how you raise cattle it is still worse than grain.

What?

How about land that's unsuitable for produce and it's only agricultural use is to raise animals?

Australia's problems don't stem from a lack of arable land, which it has huge amounts of per head population, but from a lack of water. The best way to deal with that is to increase the efficiency of irrigation, reduce wasteful water use on cattle by stopping eating meat, increase the use of drought resistant crops and reduce global warming.

Oh please, we're not even in the top 30 driest countries. Here's a hint: about 85% of the world's population lives in the driest half of the world. As if that's our problem. It may become our problem if we accept exponential population growth - which I don't think we should and I think we should cap our population now and realize that we're at capacity (22 million).

Firstly, while it may be true that methane is second to CO2 in driving global warming, as it breaks down in the atmosphere relatively quickly, pound for pound it is 20 times more potent than CO2! Even NASA agree that it has an important role in climate change

Secondly they also produce CO2, and a lot of CO2 is created through transport/herding etc.

Now, as for farming on land unsuitable for crops, as I said before the emissions from grass fed beef are just as high as feedlot beef. So as long as some arable land is available then it will always be better to use the arable land for growing crops.

As for water and Australia, in the severe droughts that have happened recently the production of many grains reduced significantly, so yes it does have a problem.

---

I would like to know how those with Thalassemia minor are supposedly to survive on a vegetarian/ vegan diet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalassemia

People with thalassemia have a mutation which means their haemoglobin doesn't form properly, however that doesn't mean people can just eat some meat and use the haemoglobin from the animal. Haemoglobin, like virtually all proteins we consume, is broken down into its constituent amino acids in the gut which are only then absorbed. One of the big problems people with thalassemia get is actually too much iron, which sounds rather counterintuitive. Essentially because they have less haemoglobin to bind iron in their blood and the patient then receives blood transfusions, they can then have too much free iron which can be toxic. Many patients are told to eat less meat, and vegetables containing lots of iron for exactly this reason. Of course because they have less haemoglobin they can also become iron deficient very easily if they are pregnant for example, which is why careful supplementation is required under the supervision of a doctor. A diet containing meat however is not required.

[KichigaiNeko]

I don't think so. And again a diet that requires "supplementation" can not be good. Daughter seems to fare better on a low meat high vegie diet than strict vegetarian which just makes her ill.

As I have said before, Vegetarianism isn't for everyone vegan even less so. Don't care about your supposed statistics, am watching closely how imediate family are dealing with various "Fad Diets" the outcomes so far are not in favour of "Fad Diets"

---

Also you haven't addressed the land use of areas that are not suitable to "cropping"

[James2014]

I don't think so. And again a diet that requires "supplementation" can not be good. Daughter seems to fare better on a low meat high vegie diet than strict vegetarian which just makes her ill.

As I have said before, Vegetarianism isn't for everyone vegan even less so. Don't care about your supposed statistics, am watching closely how imediate family are dealing with various "Fad Diets" the outcomes so far are not in favour of "Fad Diets"

---

Also you haven't addressed the land use of areas that are not suitable to "cropping"

This argument against supplementation really does not make sense. Adding meat to a diet is merely supplementing a plant based diet with meat, therefore meat could be considered a "supplement". The only reason why you are against vitamin supplements and not meat supplements is because of an appeal to natural which says that because vitamin supplements are made by humans they are additional to the "natural" diet. Its just nonsense.

You might not like statistics, but they are always going to be more reliable than anecdotes. If your daughter is having problems with her diet I would suggest talking to a nutritionist.