wolfchild

Nothing new. I've read that study long time ago. I am just very skeptical of the results of such studies, too many variables.... There are a lot of meat eaters who live long healthy happy lives, everything in moderation, a little bit of meat is OK, just don't go overboard with it.

Spld cyclist

Here's a great blog post about meat consumption and cardiovascular health: Whole Health Source: Is Meat Unhealthy? Part III

For those unfamiliar with Stephen Guyenet, he has heaps of scientific cred (active published researcher in diet/health relationships), takes a very balanced and nuanced approach to the field, and is great at translating science into language lay people can understand. By the way, he is quite sympathetic to paleo diets, but his research into ancestral diets, as well as into more recent human evolution, leads to a somewhat different understanding of what paleo diets actually consisted of and what that means for us today.

elcruxio

Ah you assume and make stuff up again. How surprising. Did I say where I get my nutrition info from? Read my post again if you can find it.

But honestly, I would prefer the vegetarian lifestyle over the reindeer herpers if I only had two choices. The reindeer herders don't live that long. Heart disease and all that, from saturated fat you understand.

elcruxio

Well you see the fact of the matter is that the tofu burger tou eat after the beef burger makes you feel good

ThermionicScott 

I enjoyed that link, especially the author's humble approach to presenting his impressions after combing through so much data. Thanks for posting it.

531Aussie

Cholesterol theory is dead. It's even in the mainstream media
Low-Fat Diet Myth Busted | Fox News

elcruxio

First of all, that's fox news... That should speak volumes in itself...

Secondly, how does that relate to reindeer herders?

And thirdly, funny thing, the theory may or may not be dead but it does work very well in the nordic countries still. People who eat too much meat and butter and eggs still have massive high cholesterol and if they start eating less of that stuff the cholesterol goes down. But there is some evidence that this is a nordic genetic trait. But if it's in the nordic countries it can be in others as well.

Pukeskywalker

I tried going veg (with dairy and eggs allowed) in 2010 and lasted about a month.

In that time I became very pale, lost about 10lbs (and I was already very skinny), and could barely make the 4 miles it took to get to work in the morning.

I was eating veggie burgers, tofu, setain, and soy milk. I looked like a mess and was emotional.

I'm against vegetarianism these days. Read "The Perfect Health Diet" book if you'd like a good counter-argument against vegetarianism. Factory farming sucks, but let's worry about humans first

ThermionicScott 

Did you track calories? Weight loss, being cranky and listless sound like any diet I've been on that involved way too few calories for more than a couple of weeks.

corrado33

Goodness.

So much misinformation and public fear mongering.

I can't directly comment on diets. I'm a 26 year old with the metabolism of a 18 year old. I can eat whatever the heck I want and never gain a pound. (I'm hoping biking and running helps to continue this trend until I'm much older...) In fact, when I stop exercising, I lose weight (annoying actually.)

Anyway, I'll address a few of the particularly bad things I've heard in this thread.

"Not eating meat is OK because you can get your nutrients from other sources."

No crap. Science has progressed to the point where we could make a nutrient "paste" for you to eat and you'd be fine. Saying that you can get the nutrients elsewhere is a moot point. My issue with vegetarianism and veganism is that you HAVE to watch your intake of some vitamins, which means you are NOT eating correctly. If you have to take supplements or specifically eat certain foods to get what you need, you're not eating the way humans are meant to eat. A normal person eating a normal diet should NEVER need supplements. Supplements were invented because people (americans) are stupid and eat skittles and diet coke and expect to be healthy. (Lots of generalizations in that last sentence, but the jist is true.)

"Eating meat is immoral."
First off, let me say this. I grew up in pennsylvania surrounded by meat cow farms. Most of our meat came from there. Those farms are not, in any way, shape, or form immoral. In fact, I've NEVER seen one of those immoral farms. I now live in Montana, and again, the cows and bison are not mistreated in any way. Cows are ANIMALS. We breed them to serve OUR needs. We are at the top of the food chain. Stop personifying an animal and get over it. Sure, it's sad when you see the sob stories and documentaries on animal planet. You want that poor little calf to have a better life because humans feel empathy. You also empathize with the zebra being attacked by a pack of lionesses but it's NATURE. Seriously, get over it, in nature the stronger species always eats the weaker one. Humans have just taken that to a level that allows us to feed our massively growing population. It's NECESSARY.

"The meat industry is subsidized."
No crap. So is every single farming industry. Have you SEEN the multi hundred thousand dollar tractors farmers use to plow their fields?

"Cholesterol is bad for you."
No, cholesterol without moderation is bad for you. If you eat like the 30+% of americans that are obese, then yes, it becomes a problem. If you eat meat like a healthy person, you'll be just fine. Any food eaten in excess can be bad for you. Many VITAMINS, taken in excess, are bad for you! It just so happens that unhealthy people like to eat meat and don't exercise. That does not make it an inherently unhealthy food.

"People who don't eat meat are healthier."
This has been mentioned a few times, and a few people have responded with the same thing I'm about to do. People who stick to a diet, whether or not it's vegetarianism/veganism, are going to be more healthy that people that don't. People who make conscious decisions about the food they're eating most likely will also make conscious decisions about their daily activities to stay healthier. Saying this and comparing it to the typical american (since I'm picking on them) is actually pretty funny. I could probably make a study where I only ate microwaveable cheeseburgers that just so happened to have a balance of the things I need and say that I was more healthy than the general public. Saying the above statement and BELIEVING it is extremely naive.

Look, I'm not against vegetarianism or veganism. You can eat whatever you'd like. I will continue to eat all foods in moderation, especially delicious meat. (Except swordfish. I don't like swordfish.) I also REALLY enjoy vegetarian subs and wraps. Artichoke is extremely good. I'm sure there are perfectly acceptable medical reasons to not eat meat. I'm sure you can be a perfectly good athlete without eating meat. Again, science allows this. I'm sure becoming a vegetarianism has cured many people of many ailments they had before they went on a strict diet.

Eating in a healthy manner is about MODERATION. Not about what you eat. You can eat ANYTHING in moderation.

Wesley36

Of course. You once tried a vegetarian diet, you screwed it up, therefore no one else should be a vegetarian. Right.

Can you at least acknowledge that there are lots of vegetarians who are healthy, in fact, some of whom are professional endurance athletes? So perhaps the problem is not vegetarianism?

And way to set up a false choice. I am a vegetarian, and I also worry about humans first, and I also care about the broader effect of human activities on the environment. It is possible to artificially create all sorts of either/or situations, but for the most part, taking care of one of those things also means taking care of the others. Feed lots, to take an easy example, are neither good for human health, cows, water conservation, or the environment.

Wesley36

lol So which supplements do I need to be taking, I seem to have been doing it wrong for the last 20 years.

Thanks also for your fatwa on the morality of meat eating and cow farms, glad you set me straight.

Pukeskywalker

Tell me how you keep your Omega-3 to Omega-6 ratio in a healthy balance. And also where you get your B12 on a veg diet.

The problem is the size of the human population. Not the meat. Switching the globe on the vegetarianism only opens the flood gates for another population explosion, like we saw in the 70s with the Green Revolution

There are certainly vegetarians performing athletic feats. I don't know if extreme endurance events qualify as a measure of health, rather than a measure of masochism.

Compared to someone who eats well and includes grass-fed meat in their diet, I'd wager a vegetarian dies earlier

Wesley36

I can't tell you, because my Omega levels and b12 levels have never been a problem. I eat, mostly plants, not too much, and I stay really healthy. When I was younger my mother sent me to nutritionists, I see my family doctor every once in awhile, every health professional that has examined my diet and blood work has told me to keep up the good work *shrug* You can set all of us straight, I am sure we have just been wrong.

Also, your understanding of demography is so weak it is hilarious. Because of the second law of thermodynamics it is obvious that meat eating is wasteful, but even still, there is more than enough food produced each year to feed everyone, and then some. There is a problem with hunger, but it is not a problem related to the raw tonnage of food produced. And an increase in food production does not equal an increase in population.

Pukeskywalker

Thermodynamics has nothing to do with the nutritional content of food. Sunlight does not contain healthy EPA/DHA Omega-3. Neither does flax seed, which only has ALA. Many vegetarians think they are getting the right Omega-3 from flax, but they're being mislead.

An increase in food production lowers the cost of food. Basic supply and demand. When food price decrease, population increases. Same logic apply to Africa, where food subsidies have caused a population explosion in a place with no infrastructure to support it.

I'm not trying to convince anyone but the OP. I'm going to bow out of this discussion respectfully. Eat veg if you want

Wesley36

You make a number of.strong.claims about demographics without the evidence to back them up. Not really worth saying more than that.

elcruxio

I'd like to point out that vegetariand don't in general have a problem with B12 or fatty acid ratios. Vegans can have a B12 deficiency which can be corrected with a supplement or beer for exampke.

Extreme endurance is what humans are best at. We suck at everything else physical. Even the worlds strongest powerlifters are pretty weak when you compare them against a gorilla or orangutan of the same size. Not to mention apex predators. But there isn't a land animal the human cannot outrun. So yes, endurance is a show of health within our species. It shows a good aerobic function and good energy efficiency.

corrado33

Off topic but this statement couldn't be further from the truth. Many animals can outrun us. Whether it be short distances or long distances. It is true that humans are GOOD at running long distances, but dogs, antelope, ostriches, camels, etc. are better.

Wesley36

Lol, thanks

How running made us human: Endurance running let us evolve to look the way we do -- ScienceDaily

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/stor...-born-runners/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_hunting

elcruxio

Dogs lose to humans over long distances. They overheat and dehydrate. Same with ostritches, camels and especially antelopes. Dude, antelopes are the WORST long distancers. They are quick yes but that speed is their downfall.

wolfchild

Yes we all know that humans are good endurance machines, but so what ??...Just because you have good endurance doesn't mean that you can outrun a brown bear or a mountain lion or a tiger. Human endurance was used by hunters to track down and chase game animals such as antelopes or deer until those animals were too tired to go on, but at the same time human endurance is no match against the explosive power and speed of a bear or a lion. If you think you can outrun a bear or a tiger then you are fooling yourself.

wolfchild

Yes it does... Human population started to increase a lot some time around 13 000-10 000 years ago when humans begun to settle down and practice farming and agriculture which was the beginning of food production.
Before that when humans were hunters/gatherers they just lived in small bands scattered over large territories and never reached great numbers. Food production provided security and more consistent supply of food which allowed human population to increase a lot. Great big cities were being build after humans became farmers and started food production.

Wesley36

This, no doubt, is true. However, note that North America and most of Western Europe has seen natural population decrease (that is, subtracting immigration, the population would be shrinking because fertility rates are so low) for quite some time, in the midst of the greatest abundance and least scarcity of food in human history. A similar phenomenon is apparent in a lot of industrialized countries around the world, it is so common, in fact, that it is known as the "demographic transition". Under conditions of stability and relative affluence, populations do not boom, they slowly shrink.

It is true, there are lots of ways to increase the nutrition available to humans on this planet, but at this point in time, demography is not so simple, an increase in the food supply does not predictably equal an increase in population, not at this point in history.

And even the demographic transition is not so simple - in recent decades in places like Bangladesh, demographers have been baffled to the degree to which fertility rates have begun to decline even when relative affluence is lacking, which is really surprising.

Bottomline, lazy assumptions about food supply and demography, particularly those derived from thought experiments about supply and demand, are not terribly helpful in coming to terms with the real world, which is a messy complicated place that often baffles our preconceptions and expectations.

ThermionicScott 

Education (especially educated women) and access to birth control tend to help curb population growth.

elcruxio

Two words. Long, Distance.
When the topic was endurance I hoped people could, you know, interpret the outrunning as an endurance activity rather than sprint.