Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Do angry vegans turn you against going vegan?

I don't think I've read anything to suggest that vegans are particularly long-lived either; the idea that vegans (or vegetarians for that matter) are healthier because of what they avoid eating is an odd one. Off the top of my head I can think of three groups of people who tend to live longer and healthier lives than the norm (northern Italy, Okinawa, US seventh day adventists). The Italians eat meat, the Okinawans eat meat and fish and the longest lived adventists eat fish. Then there's the Graz study of vegetarians that found they suffer more ill-health than omnivores (nb - the study did not conclude that a vegetarian diet was responsible for this. It seems that scientists, unlike newspapers, know that if a study divides people into meat / non-meat eaters it doesn't necessarily mean that any effects discovered are down to the presence or absence of meat.)

There is evidence galore that eating whole grains, legumes and lots of vegetables and fruit has a beneficial effect on various disease markers as well as the subjective experience of good health, whether you take out the dead things or not.


I wasn't trying to suggest they live longer, but suggest if they were missing all these nutrients as claimed, they wouldnt live such long lives.

Your totally right about that it's about what you add, rather then not eating dead things.
 
that's your claim, but you haven't established that

carbohydrate
kɑːbəˈhʌɪdreɪt/
noun
  1. any of a large group of organic compounds occurring in foods and living tissues and including sugars, starch, and cellulose. They contain hydrogen and oxygen in the same ratio as water (2:1) and typically can be broken down to release energy in the animal body.
 
Well, I'm not where you've see a "fight", I think you've just made that up. I don't think anybody said that you had e problem with people eating vegan, another thing you've just made up. What you have said is that people can't get enough nutrition from plants.


Where have you backed up your rubbish opening statement that decent nutrition can't be had from plant based sources?
My claim was that you don't get everything you need from plants, eg Vitamin b12 (at least, i'm happy to concede the rest of what i listed since i'm not interested in going through it all).
 
carbohydrate
kɑːbəˈhʌɪdreɪt/
noun
  1. any of a large group of organic compounds occurring in foods and living tissues and including sugars, starch, and cellulose. They contain hydrogen and oxygen in the same ratio as water (2:1) and typically can be broken down to release energy in the animal body.
Why are you posting this and how do you think this answers my question?
 
No, if there was only *one* food created specifically for human consumption it would be human breast milk. :p
lol, ok well, the production of human breast milk, as with all mammalian milks is a temporary arrangement, and that breast milk is created from whatever the mother has eaten, and in any case, for those who have a fetish for this sort of thing, the macronutrient ratio for human breast milk is similar to that of fruit. (quite a bit different to liver)
 
lol, ok well, the production of human breast milk, as with all mammalian milks is a temporary arrangement, and that breast milk is created from whatever the mother has eaten, and in any case, for those who have a fetish for this sort of thing, the macronutrient ratio for human breast milk is similar to that of fruit. (quite a bit different to liver)
I'm no expert on it but i would think breastmilk is the same regardless of waht the mother eats, at least fundamentally. It's not going to turn into cider if the mother starts eating lots of apples :D
 
My claim was that you don't get everything you need from plants, eg Vitamin b12 (at least, i'm happy to concede the rest of what i listed since i'm not interested in going through it all).

You can get it from a few plants in small amounts. It all ultimately comes from bacteria, though. I was more interested in the ‘non-essential nutrients’ angle, really.
 
no one was arguing the scientific defintion of a carbohydrate. You've misunderstood the conversation.

I don't think I have. 'Carbohydrate' is a thing. A specific thing. It includes Glucose, as stated and restated many times by now. I think you've misunderstood the conversation.
 
My claim was that you don't get everything you need from plants, eg Vitamin b12
If what you're claiming is true then veg*ns would be struggling compared to omnivores, and yet you haven't provided any evidence to back that up. Am I supposed to just accept that as a fact just because you say it is?
 
If what you're claiming is true then veg*ns would be struggling compared to omnivores, and yet you haven't provided any evidence to back that up. Am I supposed to just accept that as a fact just because you say it is?
You're straw manning me; I didn't make a claim that vegans were struggling. I said that meat is a better source of nutrition. Clearly vegans can supplement their diet and eat fortiied food products. I also said that wasn't something I endorsed or felt was part of a healthy diet. One shouldn't have to rely on supplements. If you want to, then be my guest.
 
lol, ok well, the production of human breast milk, as with all mammalian milks is a temporary arrangement, and that breast milk is created from whatever the mother has eaten, and in any case, for those who have a fetish for this sort of thing, the macronutrient ratio for human breast milk is similar to that of fruit. (quite a bit different to liver)

Yeah, I was being flippant.
And yeah, lots of sugar in breast milk.
 
You're straw manning me; I didn't make a claim that vegans were struggling. I said that meat is a better source of nutrition.
Again, vague nonsense with nothing to back it up with. The evidence would be in the outcomes, which would mean that those vegans would be missing out on "essential" nutrients only available in meat, and yet they appear on nearly every reliable measure to be doing better. You have yet to provide evidence to back up what you've said. That's not strawmanning at all. As Mr Cruise was forced to say "show me the money".

Clearly vegans can supplement their diet and eat fortiied food products. I also said that wasn't something I endorsed or felt was part of a healthy diet. One shouldn't have to rely on supplements. If you want to, then be my guest.
Well I have been vegetarian for 30 years and vegan for 20 years with no supplementation apart from an occasional B12 spray. My blood work is all within the normal range and compared to my peers, some of whom were very scathing of my dietry choice (I'm not suggesting that you are) I'm doing fine thanks. In fact two of my fiercest critics have already died from cancer.
 
the production of human breast milk, as with all mammalian milks is a temporary arrangement

It is, but unlike other mammals, humanity has evolved in a way that most people continue producing lactase into adulthood, which means we uniquely can keep drinking milk of all kinds for as long as we like.
 
It is, but unlike other mammals, humanity has evolved in a way that most people continue producing lactase into adulthood, which means we uniquely can keep drinking milk of all kinds for as long as we like.
...and according to wiki lactase persistence is a fairly recent adaptation to the consumption of nonhuman milk, so it might be a bit of a stretch saying "we can drink it for as long as we like". Some of us can with no obvious symptoms, however "the majority of people around the world remain lactase nonpersistent".

Lactase persistence - Wikipedia
 
Again, vague nonsense with nothing to back it up with. The evidence would be in the outcomes, which would mean that those vegans would be missing out on "essential" nutrients only available in meat, and yet they appear on nearly every reliable measure to be doing better. You have yet to provide evidence to back up what you've said. That's not strawmanning at all. As Mr Cruise was forced to say "show me the money".


Well I have been vegetarian for 30 years and vegan for 20 years with no supplementation apart from an occasional B12 spray. My blood work is all within the normal range and compared to my peers, some of whom were very scathing of my dietry choice (I'm not suggesting that you are) I'm doing fine thanks. In fact two of my fiercest critics have already died from cancer.
There was nothing vague therein at all.

Your other comment is just irrrelevant.
 
...and according to wiki lactase persistence is a fairly recent adaptation to the consumption of nonhuman milk, so it might be a bit of a stretch saying "we can drink it for as long as we like". Some of us can with no obvious symptoms, however "the majority of people around the world remain lactase nonpersistent"

I know that, which is why i used the word ''humanity'' rather than humans, or people. Not every single actual person is lactase-persistent and yet it's true to say that humanity in general has evolved that trait. Similarly, I can't touch my thumb and little finger together without using my other hand to push them together, that doesn't mean humanity hasn't evolved opposable digits.
 
No doubt lactase persistence is once of those traits that will be considered an aberrant mutation in the brave new vegan world, and presumably we'll be purged from the gene pool like the affronts to nature that we all are. :thumbs:
 
There was nothing vague therein at all.
It so is. You claim that meat has better nutrition, but you have produced no evidence to back up your claim. Just repeating your claim doesn't magic it into truth.

Your other comment is just irrrelevant.
Again, I'm not just going to accept that on your say so given that most of what you've written so far has been fairly low quality.
The relevance is that you're implying that vegans need supplementation moreso than their meat eating peers. Well here stands a non-meat eating person in defiance of your claims. Maybe it's divine intervention or something.

Anyway, I think I've been overly generous donating my time to you, so I'm calling time.
 
I know that, which is why i used the word ''humanity'' rather than humans, or people. Not every single actual person is lactase-persistent and yet it's true to say that humanity in general has evolved that trait. Similarly, I can't touch my thumb and little finger together without using my other hand to push them together, that doesn't mean humanity hasn't evolved opposable digits.
Your opposable digits comparison would work if the majority of "humanity" didn't have them, but all of us do have them even though some may be a bit less dexterous. The majority of humanity is not lactase-persistent.
 
The majority of humanity has black hair and brown skin. Therefore humanity hasn't evolved other levels of pigmentation.
 
Back
Top Bottom