• HEALTH & RECOVERY
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules Thread Directory 1 Thread Directory 2
    Mindfulness Links Addiction & Mind
    Sober Living Partner Program (SLiPP)
  • H&R Moderators: VerbalTruist

Vegetarianism vs meat eating

BigBenn said:
This isn't grammar school, sorry about your post, feel free to post something on topic.

Until then, you are getting overly personal. This thread is heading to being closed.
Click to expand...

^^ yup. that censorship.
 
^^ Are you implying that vegetables do not contain protein, and that meat does not contain vitamins and minerals?

Such a black-and-white view is simply not the case, nutritionally.
 
Right ... so this thread has evolved since I last looked here :D More philosophy then... but not only

Coolio said:
Ximot, if a vastly superior alien race visited earth, and they developed a taste for humans and didn't consider us sentient beings on the same level as themselves, which would you consider preferable?

a) they continue eating their version of domesticated animals, who are 100x more intelligent than humans.

b) they start eating humans.
Click to expand...

From a human sentient perspective, yeah, of course, I'd rather live than be eaten, of course. Ultimately I strive for survival and will thus be selfish and accept that someone else (another race, superior maybe) shall die. Though I do not think it is intelligence that makes a being valuable. It's to do with the heart. Aaaanyway, I get your point, Coolio. But you're just shifting perspectives and replacing a lifeform we humans do not know for sure to be sentient (plants) with another that we do know is sentient (ourselves).
Anyway, I guess it doesn't matter, really. But as I said before, when you eat grains or other vegetables, lots of animals die just so you can eat them...

Regarding the Quackwatch article - haha, wow. That guy is likely an imposotr indeed. The human body is programmed to live to 120, no more. Lifestyle usually takes a bit off that, and so we die younger. But it is true, I believe, that this tribe has exceptional longevity and fitness levels, old men of 80+ still riding on horseback and what have you.

Quackwatch, though, is not always reliable. I have a feeling it is run by (probably well-intended) conservative highly rational but rigid and not very intuitive Western minds. I mean they even have a go at Qi Ging and acupuncture and "Chinese medicine" on the whole, making it look like folklore and superstition, incapable of diagnosing people.... even ScientificAmerican ran an article some time ago that belittled the benefits of acupuncture, basically equating it to placebo.

All I can say is I don't always trust the narrow view of Quackwatch, even though I do consult it from time to time. Actually, I am not even sure if every article on it is well-intended and I have some supsicion there may be some government/FDA lobbying going on there... They tend to make everything look bad that goes against established (moneyed) ideas. One example is that they suggest GM food is absolutely fine and that there are no risks at all. How can they be so sure?
 
Last edited:
StagnantReaction said:
Here's a thread-valid piece of information: meat retains pesticide residue 14 times more than vegetables
Click to expand...

/\ Can you elaborate? Is it because the pesticides are stored in fat and because the animal has consumed heaps of vegetables and therefore heaps of pesticides?
 
I'm a nine-year veggie... no milk or ice cream... but i love cheese!
I feel that vegetarians are healthier... fuck eating fear. THAT"S an unhealthy chemical. My nails might be weaker but statistically im poven to live longer... except for dangerous amounts of drug use... whatever, im rambling
 
^ Are there really statistics that show vegetarians living longer than omnivores? I'm just asking... I honestly don't know that to be true or false.
 
StagnantReaction said:
^^ Are you implying that vegetables do not contain protein, and that meat does not contain vitamins and minerals?

Such a black-and-white view is simply not the case, nutritionally.
Click to expand...
no im no saying that, but meat does contain a lot more protein than vegetables, and vegetables comtain more vitamins and minerals, i think its better to eat both
 
Ximot said:
/\ Can you elaborate? Is it because the pesticides are stored in fat and because the animal has consumed heaps of vegetables and therefore heaps of pesticides?
Click to expand...

Yes, you are quite correct. Pesticides are also present 6 times moreso in dairy than vegetables because the cows release some of the pesticides through their udders. I believe it has to do with fat transmission.

Plants don't bioaccumulate pesticides significantly, nor do they contain significant amounts of fat.

no im no saying that, but meat does contain a lot more protein than vegetables, and vegetables comtain more vitamins and minerals, i think its better to eat both
Click to expand...

More protein is not always better. Studies have shown that Americans already have more than their RDA of protein, which means that vegetarians generally get less protein than non-veggies. This could be good for vegetarians for two reasons:

>>
Due to excess protein intake, people in affluent societies commonly lose about 30 percent of their kidney function by the time they reach their 80s.

>>
Excessive protein intake — particularly sulfurous amino acids which predominate in animal proteins — causes systemic acidity. To counter this acidity the body then leaches calcium from bones, potentially causing osteoporosis. High consumption of vegetables, however, mitigates this effect.

And it is not always precise to say that meat contains more protein than veggies. Certain vegetables and concentrated veggie meat substitutes contain more protein per pound than say, beef.

^ Are there really statistics that show vegetarians living longer than omnivores? I'm just asking... I honestly don't know that to be true or false.
Click to expand...

FWIW:

American vegetarians tend to have lower body mass indices, lower levels of cholesterol, lower blood pressure, and less incidence of heart disease, hypertension, some forms of cancer, type 2 diabetes, renal disease, osteoporosis, dementias such as Alzheimer’s Disease and other disorders that may be diet-related.

The health of a cohort of 27,000 vegetarians is currently being followed at a UK centre of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC), the largest study of the long-term effects of vegetarian diet. Recruitment to the study took place between 1993 and 1999, and follow up is planned for at least ten years, with repeat interview/questionnaires every three to five years. The main prospective data collected are standardised dietary questionnaires (self administered or interview based), seven-day food diaries, blood samples and anthropometric measurements, such as body mass index and waist-to-hip ratio.
http://www.epic-oxford.org/epicrefs.html

AS for life expectancy, as we explored above, it is a tricky riddle, filled with many factors that get measured when we try to single out diet. Here is what I've found in comparisons:

Death rate ratios for vegetarians compared with non-vegetarians, adjusted for age, sex and smoking, were calculated for each of the 5 studies and then combined to give an 'all studies' DRR. The results for all-cause mortality were as follows:
Study No.of deaths DRR (95% CI)
Adventist Mortality

1635
0.83 (0.76-0.92)
Health Food Shoppers

2127
1.11 (1.02-1.21)
Adventist Health

3564
0.80 (0.74-0.87)
Heidelberg

185
1.17 (0.85-1.63)
Oxford Vegetarian

819
1.00 (0.87-1.15)
All studies

8330
0.95 (0.82-1.11)

The results of the collaborative analysis suggest that vegetarians may have a lower overall mortality than comparable non-vegetarians (by about 5%), perhaps enough to confer a slightly greater life expectancy.

In the same analysis, vegetarians were found to have a significantly lower mortality for ischaemic heart disease (heart attack), but not for other common causes of death, as shown below:
Cause of death No.of deaths DRR (95% CI)
Ischaemic heart disease

2264
0.76 (0.62-0.94)
Cerebrovascular disease (stroke)

909
0.93 (0.74-1.17)
Colorectal cancer

278
0.99 (0.77-1.27)
Breast cancer

210
0.95 (0.55-1.63)
Lung cancer

203
0.84 (0.59-1.18)
Prostate cancer

137
0.91 (0.60-1.39)
Stomach cancer

107
1.02 (0.64-1.62)
All other causes combined

4222
1.06 (0.90-1.24)

HOWEVER:
A recent re-analysis of mortality data from the two British studies found no differences in overall death rates between vegetarian and non-vegetarian participants. The researchers concluded that the low mortality of British vegetarians compared with the general population "may be attributed to non-dietary lifestyle factors such as a low prevalence of smoking and a generally high socio-economic status, or to aspects of the diet other than the avoidance of meat and fish".

A more positive outcome for vegetarians was found in a recent analysis of data from the Adventist Health Study which predicted life expectancy in Seventh-day Adventists following different behaviour patterns. The researchers found that a combination of different lifestyle choices could influence life expectancy by as much as 10 years. Among the lifestyle choices investigated, a vegetarian diet was estimated to confer an extra 1½ to 2 years of life. The researchers concluded that "the life expectancies of California Adventist men and women are higher than those of any other well-described natural population" at 78.5 years for men and 82.3 years for women. The estimated life expectancies of vegetarian California Adventists were 80.2 years for men and 84.8 years for women. Other beneficial lifestyle choices included high nut consumption and a high level of exercise.

In conclusion

* vegetarians have low mortality compared with the general population
* much of this benefit is attributable to non-dietary lifestyle factors such as the avoidance of smoking and a high socio-economic status
* vegetarians have similar mortality to comparable non-vegetarians, although a vegetarian diet may confer an additional 1-2 years of life (at least among US Adventists).

Of course, life expectancy is not the only measure of health status, and other studies have suggested that vegetarians may enjoy a number of health benefits including being generally slimmer and having lower blood cholesterol levels than non-vegetarians.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
StagnantReaction said:
And it is not always precise to say that meat contains more protein than veggies. Certain vegetables and concentrated veggie meat substitutes contain more protein per pound than say, beef.
QUOTE]
i meant that in general, meat is known to have more protein than other foods, like i said its better to have a well rounded diet, even though being a vegetarian is good, having a limited diet isnt
Click to expand...
 
delta_9 said:
i meant that in general, meat is known to have more protein than other foods, like i said its better to have a well rounded diet, even though being a vegetarian is good, having a limited diet isnt
Click to expand...

As I said above, is more protein always a good thing?

Does a "well rounded diet" always have to include meat? In other words, are you inferring that vegetarianism is a limited diet?

In my opinion, always including a small piece of meat to your meal everyday is limiting your diet, since there are thousands of nutritionally beneficial vegetables that you can eat to fully replace that piece of meat, and also because there are only so many types of meats out there. So unless you are implying that a well rounded diet, to you, means creating a huge list of viable food sources, animal and not, and choosing them all based on variety and nutritional benefits (in which case meat would only be eaten once in a very great while), then I believe you to be generally wrong.

When it comes down to food sources, in theory there are so many plants that can completely replace and out compete meat on the dinner plate. Unfortunately, they are not all inexpensive and readily available, so I do sympathize for the limited omnivore and vegetarian alike.
 
no, i suppose more protein is not nesisarilly good unless your lacking protein, and although ur right, there are many many edible plants to choose from, they dont taste good, to me anyway, and i never said that a well rounded diet HAS to include meat everyday, but in my opinion, meat is the best tasting food there is(excluding desserts and other sweets) so why not eat it? i know vegetarians dont eat meat because they think its wrong to eat an animal that was once living, but if they think that this mentality will help the animals, their wrong, plenty of people still eat meat, and as long as they do, animals will be killed everyday
 
Okay, so we've boiled down your opinion to eat meat "because it tastes good". And, conversely, plants "don't taste good", so why eat them?

So, if I were you, I'd stick a label in front of your opinions so that others know it as your beliefs. I'm trying to open up the discussion with health-related items, so let me reapproach the situation..

But I have one question for you: meat tastes good completely alone, to you?

You don't season it, put anything on it, complement it with any other foods?

So do you ask for your burgers to come without bun, lettuce, tomato, pickle, onion, dressings, etc?

My point: you do like vegetables to some extent. I have yet to meet anyone who finds every plant disgusting, or who does not eat plants.

Also, when people say they like meat, it's almost always paired with some plant based seasoning, or complemented with an external garnish.


On a side note, here's McDonalds trying to pair their nutrition facts with vegetables. http://www.mcdonalds.com.pk/nutrition.jpg

Try to spot the meat in the picture..
 
dont be an asshole on purpose, most of the posts on this site are opinions
of course i eat meat with some kind of topping like bbq or hot sauce, but meat like beef and pork has a natural flavor which to me is delicious, when i make chiken or beef at home, i usually fry it, which adds flavor as well, u forgot that the cooking method can add just as much flavor as seasoning can.
and no, i havent liked vegetables since i was a kid, and its been years since ive had one, even though most of them like lettuce are lacking in flavor, i dont like the texture either
oh, and mcdonalds is the farthest thing from healthy there is
 
yeah that McD poster there, amazing! They just want people to associate their name with health, when actually in order to follow the fairly sound advice they give you won't be able to feed off their menu :D
 
The meat= protien argument would only have any value if meat were the ONLY form of protien. I get plenty of protien in my vegetarian diet, which makes the meat for protien argument pretty useless if you ask me.
That mcDonalds poster is so funny. The words Macdonalds and nutrition shouldnt be used in the same sentence.
 
vegmeat.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top