mindbodysOul
Bluelighter
I know there have been a few discussions on here already about this never ending feud but i'd just like to get a few different opinions on this issue relating to modern meat production.
I eat animal products, mostly fish and eggs, occasionally chicken and turkey and red meat when i feel like a good steak. If i have dairy it's fetta cheese or plain yogurt, but no more than once a week if that. Basically i'll eat any animal product if it's either organic or bio-dynamic.
I have tried being vegetarian for over a year and had no problems abstaining from animal products. I went back to eating fish and the occasional meat simply because i like food and cooking and the nutritional benefits that i believe animal protein gives us.
For a long time i have queried the scientific clinical studies pertaining to increased meat consumption equalling greater risks of CVD and cancer and how vegetarian diets result in reduced incidence of heart attacks, stroke, BP, cholesterol ect.
In my personal opinion there is absolutely no doubt that an increased consumption of vegetables, fruit and wholegrains leads to better overall health, i think we can all agree on that. The thing that gets me though is when it is proven in clinical trials the link between meat eating causing disease.
I do believe that overconsumption of meat can definately cause problems but i dont feel that small amounts of meat consumption in itself is a huge health concern. My main concern and what i believe scientific trials lack is the differentiation of non-organic animal product production compared to organic/bio-dynamic practices.
I feel that ANY consumption of animal products (meat, dairy, eggs, fish) which has been mass-produced using hormones, antibiotics, chemically spayed feeding lots etc will ALWAYS contribute to disease and is the real cause for the link between meat-eating and related diseases. Maybe i'm not searching hard enough but i'm yet to see a trial that was done on the relationship between organic meat and disease in humans (although in reality it would be hard to gather a sample size) and if anyone has seen one please provide me with a link.
Processed meats are probably one of the worst sources of carcinogens with the nitrates that are routinally added. Then there is battery hens, animals not aloud to roam free, milk that is homogenised and pasteurised. Not to mention the hormone and antibiotic traces that have been found in animal products, and yes while they may be minute, if ingested routinely they can still potentially accumulate in the body which i would more accurately associate with disease then eating the meat alone.
Some of you may disagree with my choice of words and and that is ok, i'd like to know your opinions and reasons why.
Do you think that if we were all consuming organic animal products that we would still see this relationship between meat eating = Cancer and CVD, assuming the remaining part of the diet was filled with non processed, fresh wholegrains, legumes, vegetables and fruit on par with a vegetarian?
I eat animal products, mostly fish and eggs, occasionally chicken and turkey and red meat when i feel like a good steak. If i have dairy it's fetta cheese or plain yogurt, but no more than once a week if that. Basically i'll eat any animal product if it's either organic or bio-dynamic.
I have tried being vegetarian for over a year and had no problems abstaining from animal products. I went back to eating fish and the occasional meat simply because i like food and cooking and the nutritional benefits that i believe animal protein gives us.
For a long time i have queried the scientific clinical studies pertaining to increased meat consumption equalling greater risks of CVD and cancer and how vegetarian diets result in reduced incidence of heart attacks, stroke, BP, cholesterol ect.
In my personal opinion there is absolutely no doubt that an increased consumption of vegetables, fruit and wholegrains leads to better overall health, i think we can all agree on that. The thing that gets me though is when it is proven in clinical trials the link between meat eating causing disease.
I do believe that overconsumption of meat can definately cause problems but i dont feel that small amounts of meat consumption in itself is a huge health concern. My main concern and what i believe scientific trials lack is the differentiation of non-organic animal product production compared to organic/bio-dynamic practices.
I feel that ANY consumption of animal products (meat, dairy, eggs, fish) which has been mass-produced using hormones, antibiotics, chemically spayed feeding lots etc will ALWAYS contribute to disease and is the real cause for the link between meat-eating and related diseases. Maybe i'm not searching hard enough but i'm yet to see a trial that was done on the relationship between organic meat and disease in humans (although in reality it would be hard to gather a sample size) and if anyone has seen one please provide me with a link.
Processed meats are probably one of the worst sources of carcinogens with the nitrates that are routinally added. Then there is battery hens, animals not aloud to roam free, milk that is homogenised and pasteurised. Not to mention the hormone and antibiotic traces that have been found in animal products, and yes while they may be minute, if ingested routinely they can still potentially accumulate in the body which i would more accurately associate with disease then eating the meat alone.
Some of you may disagree with my choice of words and and that is ok, i'd like to know your opinions and reasons why.
Do you think that if we were all consuming organic animal products that we would still see this relationship between meat eating = Cancer and CVD, assuming the remaining part of the diet was filled with non processed, fresh wholegrains, legumes, vegetables and fruit on par with a vegetarian?