Vegetarianism vs meat eating

[DJDannyUhOh]

It's good to have healthy criticism/skepticism of the FDA, but health care is supposed to work as a system and ignoring a whole system isn't wise. I think the FDA is in bed with corporations just as much as anyone else does. You should really pay attention to the FDA in a case-by-case manner as dismissing everything they say may lead to the same disinformation (and I use that particular term because it's related to government). Don't get me started on the FDA's relationship to drug companies, I have 8 pages worth of opinions on that. Politics and healthcare don't mix but inevitably does. But for what it's worth, I referenced CDC and NIH also. If you don't believe them, I don't know how to help you.

 

[skywise]

Not true for all. Some vegetable oils are high in saturated fats... Just because a food doesn't contain cholesterol doesn't mean that specific food will not affect your cholesterol level...

Have you not read my posts or is English a second language for you? In the post you quoted I said that vegetable oils do not contain choesterol but may contain things (such as saturated fats) that can have an effect on one's cholesterol.

Now you've come back and said that my statement is "not true at all" because vegetable oils have saturated fat and can affect cholesterol. How can what I said be "not true at all" when it is the exact same thing that you are saying is true!

The reason these threads get so muddled is because people blab on arguing against what others say without actually paying attention to what they are arguing against. I have said the exact same thing you seem to be trying to get at albeit while trying to clarify some misleading equivocations in your posts – Specifically I've stated:

Taking in foods (such as saturated fats) that affect one's cholesterol is not synonymous with 'taking in cholesterol.' Therefore, while vegan's may need to monitor their cholesterol level and intake of foods that affect it they do not need to monitor their cholesterol intake.

Pure vegetable oil does *not* contain cholesterol (regardless of brand)!

 

[DJDannyUhOh]

Skywise, if you're speaking purely of the chemical cholesterol (C27H46O), no. However, LDL's contain cholesterol within them (amongst other things like triglycerides). Now why would you need to boast that vegetable oil is cholesterol-free when in fact it will raise cholesterol by way of LDL? Introduce even a partially hydrogenated vegetable oil and now you have trans fats to deal with. It would appear that you're giving a false sense of security about vegetable oil and that there is nothing to monitor in consuming it. If you minimize the relationship between vegetable oil and cholesterol, people are likely to use more of it in compensation of other fats and that's going to have the same negative affect on their health, especially someone that is new to this topic.

I apologize if my answer was still LDL oriented, but that's no reason to start with the insults.

 

[mariacallas]

in related reading....

Seafood benefits outweigh risks, government says

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Americans eat about 16 pounds of seafood every year, and they've heard a lot of mixed messages recently about whether it's safe.

Some experts say that it's high in omega-3 fatty acids and that we should consume a lot of it. Others say it's high in toxic substances -- mercury, dioxins and PCBs -- and should be avoided. Now a new report from the Institute of Medicine, which advises the government on health policy, is trying to clarify the advice.

"The benefits of cardiovascular health from eating seafood, including farm fish, far outweigh the risk of cancer from environmental contaminants," said Dr. William Hogarth of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the group that commissioned the report.

Women of child-bearing age and children under 12 can eat up to 12 ounces of seafood a week without worrying about getting too much mercury, the report said; six ounces can be albacore tuna, and fish lower in mercury are also good choices.

All fish contain some mercury, but too much can cause delays in the developing brain of young children. Larger fish such as shark, king mackerel, swordfish, and tilefish tend to be highest in mercury because they eat smaller fish and consume the mercury in them as well. Albacore tuna is higher in mercury than canned light tuna because canned tuna is largely younger, smaller fish that haven't absorbed as much mercury.

"Other fish are much lower in methylmercury and provide benefits to the mother and to the child because of their content of the omega-3s that they provide, so there's a balance between risks and benefits," said Malden Nesheim, the chair of the Institute of Medicine committee

For other adults, adding fish to the diet could reduce the risk of heart disease. The report says that if they eat more than two servings of fish a week they should choose a variety to reduce the chance consuming excess contaminants that might be found in any single species.

The committee members say they aren't sure why fish reduces the risk of heart disease. It could be a direct effect of the omega-3s, or it could simply be that it is lower in saturated fats than other meats, and by adding more fish to the diet, individuals are eating less of the fattier meats

There's additional evidence coming in from a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association this week. In the study researchers from Harvard School of Public Health found that even just eating 1 to 2 servings of fish a week reduced the risk of death from heart disease by 36 percent, and overall death by 17 percent. They say consuming 250 milligrams of omega-3 fatty acids a day -- t he equivilant of 6 ounces a week of wild salmon or other oily fish -- could prevent heart disease.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/10/17/seafood.guidelines/index.html


Carry on.

 

[skywise]

It would appear that you're giving a false sense of security about vegetable oil and that there is nothing to monitor in consuming it.

I don't see how sentences like, "Maybe you mean that [vegans] need to monitor their cholesterol *level* as affected by foods that are not cholesterol but affect their level nonetheless?" suggest in any way whatsoever that there is nothing to monitor in consuming something like vegetable oil. Its right there, clear as crystal, that I think there is something to monitor in vegan food that can affect one's cholesterol level.

Saying that something contains the actual substance "cholesterol" (which is what you did) when in fact, it does not, however does appear to be giving a false sense of what is actually in vegan food.

The reason I think this is important is because I think conflating the two marginalizes a health benefit of veganism. Given the choice between eating something that contains cholesterol and not eating something that contains cholesterol – it seems to me that choosing not to eat cholesterol is the healthier choice. I realize, as you pointed out, that a vegan could still go on to eat something even more unhealthy (and that could even raise his cholesterol more than eating chemical cholesterol) but "being a vegan" doesn't mean you have to eat trans fats etc., it just that you are not going to eat animal products (which happens to rule out the consumption of "chemical"cholesterol).

...that's no reason to start with the insults.

I apologize if I caused you to feel insulted – It honestly appeared to me that you either had not read my posts before responding or didn't understand the words I was using.

 

[DJDannyUhOh]

Also, I don't understand how your sentence "LDL's contain cholesterol within them (and vegetable oil contains LDL's)" and your admission that "chemical cholesterol (C27H46O)" is not in vegetable oil can both be true. If vegetable oil contains LDL's which contain cholesterol then vegetable oil contains cholesterol. Yet when I look at the back of my vegetable oil bottle it reads: 0mg cholesterol.

Vegetable oil does not contain LDL's, it raises them within your bloodstream. LDL's are manufactured by the body and contain cholesterol within them, therefore raising the amount of LDL will raise the amount of cholesterol. LDL's are essentially transport molecules that will deposit cholesterol in elevated numbers. LDL's also carries apolipoproteins, triglycerides, and fat soluble vitamins such as E.

 

[skywise]

^^ Yeah, I figured that out. Thanks though. For some reasons I was equating "LDL"'s with "saturated fats" for a couple of minutes. Thats what running off of 3 hours of sleep does to me.

 

[Coolio]

Coconut oil as a replacement for butter in diet results in greatly reduced LDL cholesterol levels:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...t_uids=9756121&query_hl=4&itool=pubmed_docsum

Palmitic acid raises HDL cholesterol levels:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...=Retrieve&dopt=abstractplus&list_uids=2236108

In women with high cholesterol levels, eating butter or coconut oil raised HDL cholesterol while safflower oil lowered HDL cholesterol levels:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...=Retrieve&dopt=abstractplus&list_uids=7595099

Eating margarine made of palm oil results in higher HDL levels and a better LDL:HDL ratio than eating margarine with trans fatty acids in it:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...=Retrieve&dopt=abstractplus&list_uids=9778135

Trans fats are not metabolically equivalent to their cis isomers, and adversely effect serum lipid profiles:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/..._uids=8445333&query_hl=10&itool=pubmed_docsum


What am I getting at? These doctors have no clue what they're doing. Looking at HDL and LDL and VLDL and apolipoprotein A-I and apolipoprotein B levels to determine the health of a patient is like looking at the color of the smoke coming out of a car to diagnose what the problem with it is. They've found some interesting correlations but anyone who thinks cholesterol levels are the cause of heart disease or heart attacks is not looking deep enough.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...=Retrieve&dopt=abstractplus&list_uids=9778135
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...=Retrieve&dopt=abstractplus&list_uids=7595099

 

[DJDannyUhOh]

Coconut oil as a replacement for butter in diet results in greatly reduced LDL cholesterol levels:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_docsum

All this says is that lipid levels are lower on a diet of coconut oil than animal-derived butter. Well, duh! That still doesn't negate the fact that coconut oil is still a source of saturated fat and will raise LDL.

Palmitic acid raises HDL cholesterol levels:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...t_uids=2236108

This was a study on Hamsters!! ... and hamsters are herbivores. Lipids will assimilate into their metabolisms in a much different manner. You might as well feed gyros to a rabbit for 2 months and study the results. You can't assume our tolerance to lipids are the same as an herbivore.

In women with high cholesterol levels, eating butter or coconut oil raised HDL cholesterol while safflower oil lowered HDL cholesterol levels:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...t_uids=7595099

This is again comparing an animal product to a plant oil. Once again, nobody here ever made the claim plant oils are worse. What were discussing is that they are STILL a source of saturated fat.

Trans fats are not metabolically equivalent to their cis isomers, and adversely effect serum lipid profiles:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docsu m

This study has no practical application to dietary intake. This is mainly to point biochem engineers in a right direction for future foods additives. Levels of particular conjugates of apolipoproteins do not mean that serum LDL isn't being raised just the same. The variable butters used in this study are enriched 50/50 with either olive oil or sunflower oil and it is STILL comparing levels relative to pure animal derived butters.

All these show that plant oils are healthier than animal oils and when they "decrease" the lipid levels, that's only relative to the animal oil control group. That's not the debate here. The fact still remains that, as you were claiming against, saturated plant oils are still going to raise LDL levels.

They've found some interesting correlations but anyone who thinks cholesterol levels are the cause of heart disease or heart attacks is not looking deep enough.

Reduced cholesterol is directly associated with reduced risk of heart disease. The higher your cholersterol, the higher your risk. There is no way around this fact. All the studies you pointed to do not support this fact. In fact, all of your references do not even mention heart disease.

 

[mariacallas]

Coconut oil is wonderful. Just look at how healthy most Asians are.


Consumption of a Solid Fat Rich in Lauric Acid Results in a More Favorable Serum Lipid Profile in Healthy Men and Women than Consumption of a Solid Fat Rich in trans-Fatty Acids
Nicole M. de Roos*2, Evert G. Schouten* and Martijn B. Katan*,{dagger}
* Division of Human Nutrition and Epidemiology, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands and {dagger} The Wageningen Center for Food Sciences, Wageningen, the Netherlands
Can be read here: http://www.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/131/2/242

Also here are other fat & cholesterol links that are well worth a read :
Research on Saturated Fats

Research on Unsaturated Fats

Research on Cholesterol


Back on topic.

 

[DJDannyUhOh]

Coconut oil (not to be confused with coconut milk) IS healthier than animal-derived oils, as long as it is not hydrogenated - as they were referring to virgin coconut oil. Also, Asians live a lifestyle one thousand times healthier than Western society. I know in Japan, outside of the mainstream tourist areas, you'd be hard pressed to find a hamburger or hotdog. You can even tell the oils they use at fast food restaurants such as McDonalds and KFC are much lighter than those in the US. I wouldn't be surprised if they used coconut oil to fry their food.

These findings imply a direct influence of dietary polyunsaturated fatty acids on aortic plaque formation and suggest that current trends favouring increased intake of polyunsaturated fatty acids should be reconsidered.

If this holds to be true in future studies, then vegetarians/vegans shouldn't be as lax as people lead on to believe. As a matter of fact, we all have to be worried about a finding like that. If linoleic acid and alpha-linolenic acids play a large role in plaque build-up, there has to be other factors that contribute to the problem. Maybe genetics plays a more important role than we think. But I think just as important as "what" is found in our arteries is the "why" and "what is depositing it there".

And to directly address the original poster's concern:

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 think there is truth to this. There's more to cancer and CVD than diet. While they play a role in the effects, what we overlook is the comprehensive view of lifestyles. For one, look at lung cancer. It's the number two cancer in the US and about 75 percent of that is related to tobacco. Also, in terms of Western society, we are pretty lazy. I'm sorry to say it. 3 out of every 4 Americans do not exercise enough, let alone regularly. Our ease of obtaining food today has affected our health. Today, McDonalds, Taco Bell, Long John Silvers, Wendys, Popeyes, KFC, Burger King, and other fast food establishments where everything is deep-fried to order provides our meals. We've lost sight of natural foods. We've lost sight of what our bodies need - the vitamins, minerals, phytochemicals, and other nutrients found in fresh vegetables and grains. And it doesn't help that half of the vegetables and grains on our market are processed to the point that it is pointless to eat them. Who really makes the effort to balance their meals anymore? When we're in a rush to eat, where do we go? The drive-thru, that's where. You won't see raw vegetables or whole grains being passed through those windows. People are actually thinking a hamburger and fries comprises a square meal. Those are treats, not meals. And just because there is a leaf of lettuce and a slice of tomato on it doesn't mean that there's a serving of vegetables included with it. If you know what you're doing, carefully considering the type of food and what's in your food, you can enjoy meat now and then without being classified in the typical demographic of the average meat eater.

 

[mindbodysOul]

I think there is truth to this. There's more to cancer and CVD than diet. While they play a role in the effects, what we overlook is the comprehensive view of lifestyles. For one, look at lung cancer. It's the number two cancer in the US and about 75 percent of that is related to tobacco. Also, in terms of Western society, we are pretty lazy. I'm sorry to say it. 3 out of every 4 Americans do not exercise enough, let alone regularly. Our ease of obtaining food today has affected our health. Today, McDonalds, Taco Bell, Long John Silvers, Wendys, Popeyes, KFC, Burger King, and other fast food establishments where everything is deep-fried to order provides our meals. We've lost sight of natural foods. We've lost sight of what our bodies need - the vitamins, minerals, phytochemicals, and other nutrients found in fresh vegetables and grains. And it doesn't help that half of the vegetables and grains on our market are processed to the point that it is pointless to eat them. Who really makes the effort to balance their meals anymore? When we're in a rush to eat, where do we go? The drive-thru, that's where. You won't see raw vegetables or whole grains being passed through those windows. People are actually thinking a hamburger and fries comprises a square meal. Those are treats, not meals. And just because there is a leaf of lettuce and a slice of tomato on it doesn't mean that there's a serving of vegetables included with it. If you know what you're doing, carefully considering the type of food and what's in your food, you can enjoy meat now and then without being classified in the typical demographic of the average meat eater.

Firstly, thankyou for actually answering my original question!

I agree with everything you just posted above although i have to point out that you said there is more to cancer and CVD than diet alone which i do agree with. Then you said alot is also to do with lifestlye such as not enough exercise which i also agree with 100%. Then the rest of your statement pretty much went into specific dietary habits which to me actually highlights to significance of diet alone.

My main point is that diet is overwhelming a huge part of so many of our most prevalent diseases and alot of people are still ignorant to this fact.

It's so easy to prevent alot of the diseases and deaths that occur everyday through simple nutrition and most people dont understand just how much of a difference diet plays because to them, it almost seems too simple. It must be harder than that. 'I cant prevent such a huge disease state such as heart disease merely by what i put in my mouth'. All these pharmaceutical companies have brainwashed people into thinking that only this drug can cure this disease and you must be on it if you want to prevent heart disease. Thats bullshit.

Eat wholesome, clean food, exercise daily, and treat your body with care. That's all it takes. Yes there are hereditary and environmental influences that come into play but genetics doesnt accurately predetermine your life's outcome. You can have a genetic predisposition to high cholesterol but if you eat well and exercise right then your chances of high cholesterol ever becoming a major problem for you are drastically reduced.

Same with type 2 diabetes. It is so so SO easy to prevent through diet. In fact i'd even go so far as to say that diet and exercise are the only factors in effectively preventing this disease, no matter what your genetic background is.

I wish everyone would turn there backs on all this processed food crap and i get angry thinking about all these young kids eating bags of chips washed down with coke, then thinking about the men who lead these corporations, driving home to their mansions in a porsche, having their wives cook dinner using the most expensive ingredients, served up on expensive china. Sitting there at the dinner table thinking they are top shit, that they have such a great life, all at the expense of the health of others.

Its ridiculous. Yes it's an individual choice and alot comes down to the parents but i believe the companies that produce this shit are to blame aswell. All they care about is the money, they dont care where it comes from.

The more people that buy chemically free, fresh, clean local organic food the more demand there will be for it, the less chance people will have to make poor food choices, the better the health of our kids, the less future disease we will have, the less pollution we will produce, the cleaner our earth and bodies will be.

Ok, ill shutup now

 

[mariacallas]

The more people that buy chemically free, fresh, clean local organic food the more demand there will be for it, the less chance people will have to make poor food choices, the better the health of our kids, the less future disease we will have, the less pollution we will produce, the cleaner our earth and bodies will be.

True. I love what you said.

 

[DJDannyUhOh]

I only emphasized diet because I feel it's the aspect of our cultrue that has suffered the most.