 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Nutrition / October 2004lose weight on vegetarian diet?
It might be hard to believe, but there are overweight vegetarians out there. I am one of them. Heart disease doesn't run in my family (though high blood pressure does), but it's always nice to fit into smaller clothes (I have about 10 pairs of pants just waiting for me to be able to fit into them again). I have weighed as much as 225 lbs. I used to take some drugs that made me gain weight and crave food constantly (now I don't take the drugs anymore, and I don't have health insurance for that matter), and even since I have been overweight. I also practiced martial arts and spent about an hour a day a few times a week punching a punching bag, jumping rope, etc.. A knee injury cause me to stop physical activity altogether many years ago and I avoided walking to let it heal (today, I still have some bursitis in that knee if I stand around too long), for several months, and I packed on weight. I tend to pack on weight around the winter holidays, too. I tend to eat more in the winter, period. Maybe it's because I feel more down during the winter. I lost weight a few months ago, and was down to 204. I started going to the driving range and practicing golfing a few times a week (in the summer this can get "quite" hot, even going in the evening), and this winter I hope to go golfing on a real course for the first time in my life (I've been a fan of computer golf games, but I wanted to try it in real life, despite the fact it's not cheap). But I wasn't really losing weight very quickly. I was eating alot of breads or starch foods, and pizza. I ate whole wheat bread, though, usually with some margarine spread or hummus, also occasionally peanut butter and molasses/jelly sandwiches. Recently I've lost about 6-8 pounds, and my BMI is now at the "non-obese" level, my weight is 195 lbs. I'm about 5-9 or so. I've been eating more green salads and tried cutting down on how much bread and starch I eat- now I only eat about 2 slices a day of bread, and maybe only a little potatoes, rice, or chips. Occasionally I eat a can of vegetarian chili, or I make a curry (but I don't go overboard on the rice). I never really liked salad much, it was flavorless and I always thought it was unsatisfying to eat. But I've been eating spinach salads and romaine lettuce salads, and I make my own Italian dressing using olive oil, balsamic vinegar, and some flaxseed oil, and I put some cheese and almonds on top- I just wish good lettuce were cheaper and salad were more convenient. I also have been eating bread with olive tapenade spreads, and I stopped eating pizza so much (it was convenient to cook). I drink about 6-8 cups of tea or coffee a day. Occasionaly I go to Subway and buy a sandwich there (Burger King in my area stopped selling BK veg. burgers). I'm not really exercising too much, I haven't been to the driving range in weeks, but I'm still losing weight. My knees don't bother me so much, though I still have to watch "standing around" for long periods (walking doesn't bother me so much), and when I go to the driving range, I usually take an ibuprofen because I'll be a bit sore afterwards otherwise. It really sucks to have all these joint problems and only be 28. I feel OK... I don't have food cravings as much anymore, which I used to. But sometimes I feel a little light-headed or weak. > It might be hard to believe, but there are overweight vegetarians out > there. I am one of them. The hardest part of being a healthy vegetarian is to get enough complete protein. Your food as you describe it has very little protein, coming mainly from cheese. Protein from vegetable sources tends to be incomplete, in that it does not incude all the essential amino acids in the needed proportions. Why do you want to be a vegetarian if it is not working out for you? Ben > The hardest part of being a healthy vegetarian is to get enough complete > protein. This is outdated information and not true: http://www.veganhealth.org Steve  SignatureBe A Healthy Vegan Or Vegetarian http://www.geocities.com/beforewisdom/Veg/healthyVeg.html Steve's Home Page http://www.geocities.com/beforewisdom/ "The great American thought trap: It is not real unless it can be seen on television or bought in a shopping mall" I have been a vegetarian for ten years or so... and I was a semi-vegetarian in my adolescence, only eating fish. I wasn't overweight and it's worked for me for a long time. Only within the last 5 years or so have I had weight problems. If I wasn't getting enough protein from being a vegetarian, I should think I would be dead by now. Are you sure you are not? > I have been a vegetarian for ten years or so... and I was a > semi-vegetarian in my adolescence, only eating fish. I wasn't overweight [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > If I wasn't getting enough protein from being a vegetarian, I should think > I would be dead by now. > Are you sure you are not? Why would I be unsure? My hair is growing just fine, my nails are fine- if I wasn't getting enough protein my hair wouldn't grow, would it? Well, you are posting so you cannot be dead in the medical sense. > > Are you sure you are not? > > Why would I be unsure? My hair is growing just fine, my nails are fine- > if I wasn't getting enough protein my hair wouldn't grow, would it? I get the protein crap all the time, and it is simply a myth that vegetarian diets are so low in protein that they aren't adequate. The body, and muscles, are built mostly upon water. The lining of cells are made from fats. Human breast milk is only 5 percent protein. A bigger risk of vegetarian/vegan dieting is low B-12 (and even then, there's a very simple solution). Not because frank B-12 deficiency is common among vegetarians- it isn't, but becaues B-12 deficiency's consequences can be irreversable, especially to children. Meat eaters can also get B-12 deficiency, though it is caused by malabsorbtion more often (especially in the elderly). The best natural food source of B-12 for meat eaters, is actually liver- not a very popular meat from what I have observed (BTW, animals don't make B-12, bacteria that live in them make B-12 in their guts). For vegetarians, there aren't actually many "good" natural source of B-12, though most ovo-lacto vegetarians won't have B-12 deficiency (the body's gut bacteria actually make some, a small amount will be present on the surface of organic foods or sprouts, and dairy and eggs have some as well) Nutritional yeast usually contains some bioavailable B-12 in good amounts. The best way is to simply take a multivitamin or eat food fortified with B-12 (almost any "meat substitute", such as soy burgers, texturized vegetable protein, many soymilks, Quorn, etc.), or take a large supplement (200-2,000 mcg or so) of B-12 weekly or monthly. Now, the myth that vegetarians get enough protein, or that their diet is inadequate, is still widespread. Society, and social workers, in particular, often view vegetarian parents with suspicion, just a step away from child abuse. Especially if the children are a few inches shorter than their peers, which, IMO, is not abnormal (Asians are often short statured too, and much of it is attributed to a lower-energy diet). Yet millions of parents are feeding their omnivorous kids blatantly unhealthy foods, many children already have signs of diabetes and heart disease, and society doesn't give the same level of scrutiny to their "abuse". In reality, almost all cases of malnourished vegetarian children are due to "raw food" regimes, or similarly hyper-restrictive diets. The people aren't being neglectful in the traditional sense- often the people hold intensely paranoid, insular beliefs, but they really believe they are doing the best for their children. Raw food simply won't provide the energy intake that a child will need to thrive at all (often, children do better on lower fiber diets than adults, too). This is why the natural hygenist movement is moving more towards allowing cooked tubers in their diet. > I get the protein crap all the time, and it is simply a myth that > vegetarian diets are so low in protein that they aren't adequate. The body, > and muscles, are built mostly upon water. The lining of cells are made from > fats. Human breast milk is only 5 percent protein. It is not a concern about the amount of protein, it is a concern about specific essential proteins, as well as specific essential fats and specific vitamins that, by definition, are essential. No vegetarian diet can provide all the essential proteins, fats and micro-nutrients and for idiots to come onto a science forum and try to say otherwise is plainly ridiculous. Animal source foods are essential for optimum health. TC > > I get the protein crap all the time, and it is simply a myth that > > vegetarian diets are so low in protein that they aren't adequate. The body, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > say otherwise is plainly ridiculous. Animal source foods are essential > for optimum health. or on the other hand for a 'knowitall' know nothing troll to come into rec.food.veg and spout utter nonsense... By the way knowall I am 95 and I've ate vegetarian all my life, never tasted meat or any food that contains animal produce. I am as fit and healthy as most people half my age. I've just finished my daily 20 mile cycle ride that's after a twenty minute sea swim in very cold water, I do that every day rain, shine or snow. I've never had a day's sickness in my life unless you count hangovers and tomorrow I'm doing a 25 mile walk. Protein? I get plenty from a varied vegetarian diet. > > "magnulus" <magnulus@bellsouth.net> wrote in message > news:<ZwIad.74867$yp.40622@bignews1.bellsouth.net>... [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > tomorrow I'm doing a 25 mile walk. > Protein? I get plenty from a varied vegetarian diet. No mother's milk? No dairy? No fish? No jello or gelatin? No B-12 capsules? No grain weevil parts? No preformed vitamin A supplements? No vitamin D3 supplements? Why should I believe you? How do I know I am not being trolled? > No vegetarian diet can provide all the essential proteins, fats and > micro-nutrients You might want to read the "position paper on vegetarianism" from The American Dietetic Association: http://www.eatright.org/Public/GovernmentAffairs/92_17084.cfm Steve http://www.geocities.com/beforewisdom/ Be a healthy Vegan or Vegetarian http://geocities.com/beforewisdom/Veg/healthyVeg.html "The great American thought trap: It is not real unless it can be seen on television or bought in a shopping mall" > It is not a concern about the amount of protein, it is a concern about > specific essential proteins There are 8 essential proteins, right? Well, a vegetarian diet can provide all of them. What exactly is this mystery protein the vegetarian diet lacks? > as well as specific essential fats A vegetarian diet can provide all of them. Flax seed and green leaf vegetables are good sources of essential fatty acids. The only good source of essential fatty acids for meat is cold water fish (beef, chicken, etc., have almost none). > and > specific vitamins that, by definition, are essential. And, like I said, there's only one vitamin that vegetarians should be concerned about... and much of our food is already fortified with it anyways. > > It is not a concern about the amount of protein, it is a concern about > > specific essential proteins > > There are 8 essential proteins, right? Well, a vegetarian diet can > provide all of them. What exactly is this mystery protein the vegetarian > diet lacks? Err..... that number can be stretched and it's not proteins, its is amino acids. You're obviously not a chemistry major. Some so-called non-essential amino acid quite good for the health. > > as well as specific essential fats > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > concerned about... and much of our food is already fortified with it > anyways. B-12 >> It is not a concern about the amount of protein, it is a concern about >> specific essential proteins > > There are 8 essential proteins, right? Well, a vegetarian diet can >provide all of them. What exactly is this mystery protein the vegetarian >diet lacks? Actually, proteins--and there are millions--are composed of amino acids. There are an array of 20 amino acids that make up all the proteins in any body (whether a paramecium, an oak tree or us). Some the body synthesizes; others need to be acquired from consumed foods and are thus "essential" amino acids. Here's a good review. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amino_acid http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_amino_acid The thing to consider is how diverse one's diet is. As a vegetarian, MOST of these amino acids can indeed be obtained. Otherwise, use of a supplement like a whey protein may help (especially for cysteine). George M. Carter > Actually, proteins--and there are millions--are composed of amino > acids. There are an array of 20 amino acids that make up all the > proteins in any body (whether a paramecium, an oak tree or us). Some > the body synthesizes; others need to be acquired from consumed foods > and are thus "essential" amino acids. I forgot about that. There are tyrosine, tryptophan, etc. I like I was saying... if a vegetarian diet were not nutrative... I would be dead by now, and definitely not overweight. > >> It is not a concern about the amount of protein, it is a concern about > >> specific essential proteins [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > George M. Carter It is indeed a very complex and diverse group of nutrients that we humans need. I high;y doubt that even the most educated vegetarian can manage a diet without animal source foods and ensure that they get the optimum amounts of each essential nutrient. And I know that the typical vegetarian can't do it and the typical teenage or child vegetarian has no clue. TC > It is indeed a very complex and diverse group of nutrients that we > humans need. It is not. > I high;y doubt that even the most educated vegetarian can manage a > diet without animal source foods and ensure that they get the optimum > amounts of each essential nutrient. And I know that the typical > vegetarian can't do it and the typical teenage or child vegetarian has > no clue. The American Dietetic Association contradicts your opinion http://www.eatright.org/Public/GovernmentAffairs/92_17084.cfm Who are you? Are you an M.D., an R.D. or otherwise degreed in a health science/medical related field? > > It is indeed a very complex and diverse group of nutrients that we > > humans need. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Who are you? Are you an M.D., an R.D. or otherwise degreed in a health > science/medical related field? The more important question is who I am not. I am not affilated with the food and pharma industry. Unlike the American Dietetic Association whose opinion you value so highly. Here is some info about the ADA: *** source: http://www.cspinet.org/integrity/nonprofits/american_dietetic_association.html Non-Profit Organizations Receiving Corporate Funding Index of Non-Profit Organizations Receiving Corporate Funding AMERICAN DIETETIC ASSOCIATION A public policy workshop held in March 2001 was sponsored by American Soy Products, California Dried Plum Board, Egg Nutrition Center, Food Marketing Institute, Grocery Manufacturers of America, Kashi, National Soft Drink Association, Sodexho, and Marriott Services. (ADA Courier, 5/01) Published a "Biotechnology Resource Kit," which was funded by the Council for Biotechnology Information." (ADA "Dear Member" letter; 2000) [See entry for Council for Biotechnology Information] ADA and DuPont have an agreement that enables ADA to place nutrition information on the web site http://www.webmd.com/. Dupont is an investor in WebMD. (ADA Press Release, 10/16/00) In fiscal year 2000, the following companies contributed $10,000 or more: BASF Corp., Bristol Myers/Squibb, California Avocado Company, The Catfish Institute, ConAgra Foods, DMI Management, EcoLab, Galaxy Nutritional Foods, Gerber Products Company, Kellogg, Knoll Pharmaceuticals, Lipton, Mars, Inc., Mead Johnson Nutritionals, McNeil Consumer Products Company, Monsanto, National Cattlemen's Beef Association, National Dairy Council, National Fisheries Institute, National Pasta Association, The Peanut Institute, Potato Board, Procter & Gamble, Roche Pharmaceuticals, Ross Products Division, Abbott Laboratories, Viactiv, Worthington Foods. (ADA/ADAF 2000 Annual Report, http://www.eat right.org/; November 11, 2000) ADA and American Pharmaceutical Association (pharmacists) announced a joint consumer-education program on supplements; it is funded by Monsanto Life Sciences Company (press release, 11/8/99). The ADA co-produced, with funding from the ConAgra Foundation, a packet of information on food safety titled "Home Food Safety: It's in Your Hands." (Funding disclosed on packet on file at CSPI, Nov. 1999) The American Dietetic Association has announced that it will be seeking to endorse food products (Nov.-Dec. 1997 ADA Courier). The American Dietetic Association has received funding from numerous companies and receives underwriting for "fact sheets" on topics related to the companies' products. Major ($100,000+) donors include: Kellogg, Kraft Foods, Weight Watchers International, Campbell Soup, National Dairy Council, Nestlé USA, Ross Products Division of Abbott Labs., Sandoz, Coca-Cola, Florida Department of Citrus, General Mills, Monsanto, Nabisco, Procter & Gamble, Uncle Ben's, Wyeth-Ayerst Labs. (Nov-Dec 1996 ADA Courier) The following companies and organizations sponsored information sessions at the ADA's 2002 Food and Nutrition Conference, held in Philadelphia, PA: Almond Board of California American Egg Board/Egg Nutrition Center Aramark ADM Kao LLC Balance Bar Company ConAgra Foods DuPont Protein Technologies General Mills Gatorade Company Gerber Products Company H.J. Heinz Hormel Internationl Food Information Council International Life Sciences Institute Mars, Inc. McNeil Nutritionals MET-Rx National Cattlemen's Beef Association National Dairy Council Pharmavite Procter and Gamble Quaker Oats Ross Product Division Sodexho Health Care Services Sysco Corporation United Soybean Board United States Potato Board Wheat Foods Council (http://www.eatright.org/fnce/sponsors02.html; accessed 2/24/03) In 2002, the ADA entered into a partnership with Gerber Products Company to form the Start Healthy Nutrition Advisory Panel. The panel includes both experts from Gerber and ADA. (http://www.eatright.com/pr/2002/102102.html; accessed 2/24/03) **** COUNCIL FOR BIOTECHNOLOGY INFORMATION According to its website, the mission of the Council for Biotechnology Information is to improve understanding and acceptance of biotechnology by collecting balanced, science-based information and communicating it through a variety of channels. The founding member companies are BASF, Bayer CropScience, Dow, DuPont, Monsanto and Syngenta and two trade associations, the Biotechnology Industry Organization and CropLife America. (http://www.whybiotech.com/index.asp?id=1644; accessed 2/24/03) *** You've been sold a bill of goods, my friend. The ADA's priority is not your health, it is the sale of primarily carbohydrate manufactured foods, and they appear to be specifically targeting you vegetarians. TC > The more important question is who I am not. No it isn't. You have not given any medical or professional credentials so that people can evaluate your opinion. You have not even given a name. The American Dietetic Association is an association of degreed professionals whose opinion is based on research. You can say that the ADA has corporate input but so does the USDA and many other government orgs but your point is moot. The ADA position paper on vegetarianism isn't advocating the foods produced by the list of companies you quoted. You are also not disputing the USDA statements that fit with your opinion eventhough they have corporate involvement ( a lot more then the ADA ). In short you are a nameless, credentialist person disputing the conclusion reached by the research of an association of degreed professionals. Given the manner and invective of the way you have been experessing your opinions I would say you are some crank trying to get a rise out of vegetarians. Your opinion has no basis in facts so at this point it is not even worth replying to you. I'll let you have the last word. I am not affilated with > the food and pharma industry. Unlike the American Dietetic Association > whose opinion you value so highly. [quoted text clipped - 118 lines] > > TC SignatureSteve http://www.geocities.com/beforewisdom/ Be a healthy Vegan or Vegetarian http://geocities.com/beforewisdom/Veg/healthyVeg.html "The great American thought trap: It is not real unless it can be seen on television or bought in a shopping mall" > > The more important question is who I am not. > > No it isn't. You have not given any medical or professional credentials > so that people can evaluate your opinion. You have not even given a name. You are not familiar with TC's writing as you would not be asking that question. No one would can confuse TC with being an MD or anything closely related to the medical sciences. He has an advanced degree from online postings on conspiracy theories. He, like his canadian friends, makes him eligible to be a health minister in canada. > The American Dietetic Association is an association of degreed > professionals whose opinion is based on research. [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > > > source: http://www.cspinet.org/integrity/nonprofits/american_dietetic_association.html > > Non-Profit Organizations Receiving Corporate Funding > > Index of Non-Profit Organizations Receiving Corporate Funding [quoted text clipped - 108 lines] > > > > TC > > The more important question is who I am not. > > No it isn't. You have not given any medical or professional credentials > so that people can evaluate your opinion. You have not even given a name. Oddly enough, neither has you or the ada. > The American Dietetic Association is an association of degreed > professionals whose opinion is based on research. Bwahhhh haaaaaa haaaaa..... > You can say that the ADA has corporate input but so does the USDA and > many other government orgs but your point is moot. You just made my point. The fda and the nihs are no less corrupt. And not any more right. > The ADA position paper on vegetarianism isn't advocating the foods > produced by the list of companies you quoted. Look closer. > You are also not disputing the USDA statements that fit with your > opinion eventhough they have corporate involvement ( a lot more then the > ADA ). The info I present is specifically not affiliated with people with corporate. I check these things, don't you. > In short you are a nameless, credentialist person disputing the > conclusion reached by the research of an association of degreed > professionals. Degreed is only two letters away from the crux..... greed. Professional greedy bastards, the lot of them. > Given the manner and invective of the way you have been experessing your > opinions I would say you are some crank trying to get a rise out of > vegetarians. Actually, I am trying to inform the poor wayward souls who believe the vegetarian bullshit that idiots like you try to pass off as science. If you don't like my tone then tough. If you can't take the heat.... > Your opinion has no basis in facts so at this point it is not even worth > replying to you. It is based on a great deal more sience than your vegetarian, peta, pcrm bprne nonsense. > I'll let you have the last word. Thank you. Have a good day. TC > It is indeed a very complex and diverse group of nutrients that we > humans need. > > I high;y doubt that even the most educated vegetarian can manage a > diet without animal source foods and ensure that they get the optimum > amounts of each essential nutrient. Why is it that much harder than an omnivore/meat-eater? There are dozens of different species of plants and fungi available at a supermarket for a human to eat. There are fewer species of animals. > And I know that the typical > vegetarian can't do it and the typical teenage or child vegetarian has > no clue. This is simply not the case. It is true that a vegetarian teenager or child might require dietary guidance, but this is why there are books on vegetarian diet planning and cooking. The American Dietetic Assosciation also has guidelines for vegetarians. Vegetarian diets are generally somewhat lower in energy than meat-based diets, but, as is being shown by the government and various other groups... most Americans are getting an excess of energy, particularly from saturated fats and sugars. OTOH, they are not eating anything but a small amount of plant-based foods, and often a very limited selection (it is pathetic that potatoes and onions are America's top selling vegetables). If a teenager has problems with a vegetarian diet, it is sometimes the case for a girl trying to mask an eating disorder. But vegetarian diets in themselves are not eating disorders, and there is nothing remotely cruel about feeding a child a vegetarian diet. Like any other diet, a vegetarian diet with a wide variety of foods is likely to provide optimum nutrition. What exactly is an optimum diet for humans is actually unknown, so how can you pretend that a vegetarian diet cannot be healthy just because it excluds animal flesh? > > >> It is not a concern about the amount of protein, it is a concern about > > >> specific essential proteins [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > TC This would be why there are no life long vegan centenarians. A simple but significant fact. Not to mention that ALL centenarians and super centenarians eat high quality animal source foods (like full fat dairy), or have eaten them for the majority of their life. It is pretty sad how these people try to exist on such an extreme unnatural diet and pretend that the science and research supports it and yet it has absolutely no basis in the real world. It is unfortunate that it takes so many years or even decades for many vegans to realize their mistake. By then their bodies are usually suffering greatly and who knows how much damage has been done. > This would be why there are no life long vegan centenarians. A simple > but significant fact. Not to mention that ALL centenarians and super > centenarians eat high quality animal source foods (like full fat > dairy), or have eaten them for the majority of their life. A few things- 1. Centinnarians often have a genetic makeup for longevity. More than a few centenarians have even been cigarette smokers. Your genetics determine in part how long you will live and how resistant to disease you can be. 2. Full fat milk is a sure way to an early grave, or at least a life of misery and drugs for a failing heart. I had this professor that was working on his second heart attack. Not surprisingly, he loved butter and all sorts of haute quisine and couldn't live without it, even though it was killing him literally. 3. Most vegetarians in the US became vegetarians after it became socially acceptable to do so, and after the consciouness raising of the environmental movement and the animal rights movement, along with knowledge that high fat junk diets are bad for you- this happened mostly in the 1960-70's. So of course you are going to find more centenarian meat eaters than centenarian vegetarians. > It is > pretty sad how these people try to exist on such an extreme unnatural > diet and pretend that the science and research supports it and yet it > has absolutely no basis in the real world. The American Dietetic Assosciation and dozens of medical studies disagrees with you. > > This would be why there are no life long vegan centenarians. A simple > > but significant fact. Not to mention that ALL centenarians and super [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > The American Dietetic Assosciation and dozens of medical studies disagrees > with you. Is this all about the USA again? > > This would be why there are no life long vegan centenarians. A simple > > but significant fact. Not to mention that ALL centenarians and super [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > The American Dietetic Assosciation and dozens of medical studies disagrees > with you. Ok dupe. Whatever you say. Lets all be like you and not think for ourselves and accept the lies and distortions of corrupt and immoral organizations. After all its only our health. Idiot. Every last word you said was pure stupidity. > > > This would be why there are no life long vegan centenarians. A simple > > > but significant fact. Not to mention that ALL centenarians and super [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > organizations. After all its only our health. Idiot. Every last > word you said was pure stupidity. I reckon you lost that one Wolfie! tcomeau wrote (snipped): > No vegetarian diet can provide all the essential proteins, fats and > micro-nutrients and for idiots to come onto a science forum and try to > say otherwise is plainly ridiculous. Animal source foods are essential > for optimum health. Please name 1 essential protein, fat or micro-nutrient which cannot be provided by a vegetarian diet. > tcomeau wrote (snipped): > > No vegetarian diet can provide all the essential proteins, fats and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Please name 1 essential protein, fat or micro-nutrient which cannot be provided > by a vegetarian diet. Vegetarians run the risk of deficiencies in these specific nutrients unless they really do their homework and specifically strive to ensure that their diets contains enough of these from quality sources. Needless to say, most vegetarians will not have a clue unless they've been specifically trained in nutrition and cooking and they work meticulously to ensure that they do get, not just some of these nutrients, but all of them, and not just a *bit* of them of the *optimum* amount of them. Vitamins: Vitamin B-12 Vitamin B-6 Vitamin D Amino Acids (Proteins): Tryptophan Methionine Lysine Isoleucine Threonine Minerals: Calcium ferritin zinc Fatty acids (fats): linoleic acid linolenic acid They may get some of these nutrients but they will be hard pressed to get the optimum amounts of these nutrients. They will always run the risk of these deficiencies. They also run the risk of too much of these substances which are very unhealthy: Phytates oxalates alpha-amylase inhitors protease inhibitors alkylrescorcinols Look, if you want to be a vegetarian for the purpose of saving animals and keeping a clear conscience on the animal rights issues, fine, all the power to you. Just don't go pissing on us and then tell us that it's raining. Don't try to claim that vegetarianism is a healthy diet, 'cause it most certainly is not. That is a scientific fact. And don't go imposing vegetarianinsm on children. IMO, that is child abuse and should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. TC tcomeau wrote (snipped): > No vegetarian diet can provide all the essential proteins, fats and > micro-nutrients and for idiots to come onto a science forum and try to > say otherwise is plainly ridiculous. to which I replied (snipped): > Please name 1 essential protein, fat or micro-nutrient which cannot be provided > by a vegetarian diet. and tcomeau wrote (snipped): > Vegetarians run the risk of deficiencies in these specific nutrients > unless they really do their homework and specifically strive to ensure > that their diets contains enough of these from quality sources. Oh, I see. So you've changed the position you're defending from "No vegetarian diet can provide all the essential proteins ..." to "Vegetarians run the risk of deficiencies ... unless they really do their homework ...". > Needless to say, most vegetarians will not have a clue unless they've > been specifically trained in nutrition and cooking and they work [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Vitamins: > Vitamin B-12 To take the first one (I can't be bothered to deal with the others). We hear about B12 about three times a week on rec.food.veg. I certainly agree that vegetarians need to make sure they get enough B12, but there are plenty of vegan, or at least vegetarian, sources. The ADA position paper lists several. If you don't like that, you can check the figures on the FNIC page the US government provides here: http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/etext/000020.html British people like me can get B12 from Marmite. > Don't try to claim that vegetarianism is a healthy diet, > 'cause it most certainly is not. That is a scientific fact. People who make controversial statements and claim them to be "scientific facts" are normally supposed to give references to them in the scientific literature. > And don't go imposing vegetarianinsm on children. IMO, that is child > abuse and should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. I'm afraid your opinion is not worth very much to me, unless you indulge in more actual scientific facts and less rhetoric. > tcomeau wrote (snipped): > > No vegetarian diet can provide all the essential proteins, fats and [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > To take the first one (I can't be bothered to deal with the others). <snip> You can't be bothered because you don't know. Why can you morons not just admit that they don't know something? TC >tcomeau wrote: <snip> Content free crank. Kill filed. Steve Be A Healthy Vegan Or Vegetarian http://www.geocities.com/beforewisdom/Veg/healthyVeg.html Steve's Home Page http://www.geocities.com/beforewisdom/ "The great American thought trap: It is not real unless it can be seen on television or bought in a shopping mall" You are saying you don't know? > You can't be bothered because you don't know. Why can you morons not > just admit that they don't know something? > > TC tcomeau wrote (snipped): > You can't be bothered because you don't know. Why can you morons not > just admit that they don't know something? I can't be bothered to attempt serious discussion with someone who has no response but personal abuse. I have bookmarked tcomeau's last message so that I can cite it next time he attempts to troll around here. > tcomeau wrote (snipped): > > You can't be bothered because you don't know. Why can you morons not [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > response but personal abuse. I have bookmarked tcomeau's last message so > that I can cite it next time he attempts to troll around here. If you can't take the heat.... That's ok, don't put up any credible arguments. I can imagine how hard it is to present credible arguments when you have none to offer. TC > > tcomeau wrote (snipped): > > > You can't be bothered because you don't know. Why can you morons not [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > TC I've offered several and you curiously haven't responded. Thats typical of your type though. > > Don't try to claim that vegetarianism is a healthy diet, >> 'cause it most certainly is not. That is a scientific fact. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > are normally supposed to give references to them in the scientific > literature. TC are you back to your silly trolling for Low Carb and everything else is bad? You promised your psychiatrist you would stop tilting at this windmill. . >> And don't go imposing vegetarianinsm on children. IMO, that is child >> abuse and should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. > > I'm afraid your opinion is not worth very much to me, unless you > indulge > in more actual scientific facts and less rhetoric. He is all BS and any study you show him, he will claim the were paid off by some unscrupulous people or organization. He's really sad person looking for attention. _DF tunderbar@hotmail.com (tcomeau) wrote in message > Look, if you want to be a vegetarian for the purpose of saving animals > and keeping a clear conscience on the animal rights issues, fine, all > the power to you. Just don't go pissing on us and then tell us that > it's raining. Don't try to claim that vegetarianism is a healthy diet, > 'cause it most certainly is not. That is a scientific fact. The scientific data speaks for itself - vegetarians have 36% less heart disease and a longer life expectancy than meat eaters. What's your "scientific fact"? LM > tunderbar@hotmail.com (tcomeau) wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > LM As well as many other benefits listed here: http://www.pcrm.org/health/veginfo/vegetarian_foods.html >tunderbar@hotmail.com (tcomeau) wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >LM If you have a close look at those studies, you tend to find that they have been rigged to favour vegetarianism. Often this is done by ignoring obvious risk factors such as smoking and obesity. For instance, there was recently a study that purported to show that eating green leafy vegetables protects against dementia. A group of nurses were surveyed on their dietary habits, and given some tests to determine their level of dementia. The study found a much lower rate of dementia in the vegetable-eaters. However, the authors of the study had completely failed to take into account how much the participants weighed, whether they exercised regularly, and whether they smoked or not. Obesity, smoking and a lack of exercise are all known major risk factors for dementia. I'm sure if the survey had taken these risk factors into account, it would have found that the nurses who ate a lot of green leafy vegetables were also the ones who exercised regularly, watched their weight and didn't smoke. In other words, the reason they have less dementia is in all likelihood simply because they tend to exercise regularly, watch their weight and don't smoke, rather than because of anything in the vegetables themselves. > >tunderbar@hotmail.com (tcomeau) wrote in message > > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > weight and don't smoke, rather than because of anything in the > vegetables themselves. Well there you have it folks, we can all go back to eating meat now because all the studies that show vegetarianism is healthy have "all been rigged"! I guess we were all fooled due to a lack of some nutrient we weren't getting enough of. > >tunderbar@hotmail.com (tcomeau) wrote in message > > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > weight and don't smoke, rather than because of anything in the > vegetables themselves. Hence, the Health Food Store Shoppers study, conducted in Great Britain. They concentrated on only the people who regularly shop at a health-food store, and compared meat-eaters with vegetarians from that group. Those people, whether meat-eaters or vegetarians, are much less likely to smoke, more likely to exercise, more likely to eat healthy food. In that group, the vegetarians were still much less likely to die of cardiovascular disease - 36% less likely. Look up "Oxford Health Food Shoppers Study" on PubMed. LM >> >tunderbar@hotmail.com (tcomeau) wrote in message >> > [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] >likely to die of cardiovascular disease - 36% less likely. Look up >"Oxford Health Food Shoppers Study" on PubMed. Another thing I forgot to mention is that vegetarians are more often women than men, so if you do a survey and group the participants into "vegetarian" and "non-vegetarian", the vegetarian group is going to have significantly more women in it than the non-vegetarian one. Women have a much lower risk of heart disease than men, hence the vegetarian group will show a lower rate of heart disease purely because there are more women in it. There was at least one famous study I read about (which might have been the one above), where the supposed lower risk of heart disease for vegetarians could be entirely explained by this skewed sex ratio, which hadn't been taken into account by the researchers. >LM Hugh wrote (snipped): > There was at least one famous study I read about > (which might have been the one above), where the supposed lower risk > of heart disease for vegetarians could be entirely explained by this > skewed sex ratio, which hadn't been taken into account by the > researchers. I don't think it can be, because I think the study Larisa was referring to was that described in this paper: http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/313/7060/775 which certainly did control for age and sex. >>> >tunderbar@hotmail.com (tcomeau) wrote in message >>> > [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] >skewed sex ratio, which hadn't been taken into account by the >researchers. This doesn't really mean much unless you cite the study. I've never seen a study that doesn't control for gender. > tunderbar@hotmail.com (tcomeau) wrote in message > The scientific data speaks for itself - vegetarians have 36% less > heart disease and a longer life expectancy than meat eaters. Please don't confuse facts with a good story. he still believes in the flat earth theory. < What's your "scientific fact"? We have been waiting years for this. -DF >>tcomeau wrote (snipped): >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Vitamins: > Vitamin B-12 This is worldwide problem that has little to do with meat Meat-eaters who don't supplement suffer from B12 deficiency as well There was a recent reports about how widespread actually is B12 amonsts meat-eaters and the whole population Homocysteine levels (which show if you have enough B12 or you deficient in it) should be below 9; this is the optimal level Meat-eaters (who don't supplement) on average have a level of 13 Vegetarians (who don't supplement) on average have a level of 15 Vegans (who don't supplement) on average have a level of 19 Meat-eaters are deficient too, like anyone else and we all should take a B12 supplement whether we eat tons of pork or not animal foods at all > Vitamin B-6 > Vitamin D This is a problem for anyone who live in cold climate People in North Europe suffer from vitamin D deficiency even if they drink milk (where the vitamin is chemically added and not a natural part of milk)of eat fish > Amino Acids (Proteins): > Tryptophan > Methionine > Lysine > Isoleucine > Threonine All this amino acids are provided by plants In fact 2500 calories of beans would provide more than our RDA for these amino acids ------------------------------------------------------- 2500 calories of only beans provide all the essential amino acids one need without needing to complement with grains or other foods: ----------------------------------------------------------- (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) RDA RDA BEANS BEANS Amino Acid mg/kg mg/70kg mg/100g mg/2000kcal %RDA Isoleucine 10 700 363 5299 757% Leucine 14 980 656 9577 977% Lysine 12 840 564 8234 980% Methionine 13 910 124 1810 199% <-- Phenylalanine 14 980 444 6482 661% Threonine 7 490 346 5051 1031% Tryptophan 3.5 245 97 1416 578% Valine 10 700 430 6277 897% What these results show is that eating nothing but beans would result in obtaining a large excess of every essential amino acid. In spite of the fact that beans are _relatively_ low in methionine, they are not _absolutely_ low in methione. Eating nothing but beans would still provide 2 times the RDA of methionine. -------------------- This doesn't mean of course that eating nothing but beans is a good idea, but it would be protein-adequate anyway What you doesn't seem to consider is that meat protein/calories is not a so good source of protein and it not so rich in protein Since we're talking about vegetarians and not vegans maybe it should be mentioned that eggs are a better source of proteins, vitamin D and vitamins B12 than meat > Minerals: > Calcium [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Fatty acids (fats): > linoleic acid LOL What a idiocy This says a lot about your nutritional knowledge Vegetarians consume on average 40% fat mostly from nuts, seeds, avocados and oils A linoleic acid deficiency is impossible and have nothing to do with eating or not eating meat > linolenic acid > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > unhealthy: > Phytates Phytates are powerful anticancers and antioxidants, they're actually healthy substance Although phytic acid content of foods can affect mineral absorption (less than 15 percent though) phytates are not toxic and they actually have beneficial properties They surely not the deadly posions unscientific Paleo Diet books would like us to believe > oxalates > alpha-amylase inhitors > protease inhibitors > alkylrescorcinols Come back when you've done your homeworks LOL... a vegetarian diet deficient in linoleic acid ...ROTFL ... Daniel > > Vitamin B-12 > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > in it) should be below 9; this is the optimal level > Meat-eaters (who don't supplement) on average have a level of 13 As far as I know high homocysteine levels among meat-eaters are caused most often by lack of folic acid, not B12. Jan > As far as I know high homocysteine levels among meat-eaters are caused > most often by lack of folic acid, not B12. This is probably true in youth and middle age, probably less true for the elderly, in which the following potential problems exist for B12 utilization aside from inadequate ingestion: -failure to separate vitamin B12 from food protein -inadequate absorption, utilization, and storage -drug-food interactions leading to malabsorption and metabolic inactivation. Source-- Vitamin B12 deficiency. Recognizing subtle symptoms in older adults. Dharmarajan TS, Adiga GU, Norkus EP. Geriatrics. 2003 Mar;58(3):30-4, 37-8 PMID: 12650116 Magnulus, I read your post and some things jump out at me. Recently obsese - very difficult to lose weight - cravings for carbs. Sounds a lot like me 9 months ago (5'10", 211 lbs, 48 yr old.) I'm now down to 177 lbs. Controlling my blood sugar made it possible. I'm a Type2 diabetic. Have you looked hard at your blood sugars? You may well be diabetic, or pre-diabetic (Impaired fasting glucose, or IFG.) You're without health insurance; even with health insurance you may be reluctant to have a diagnosis of diabetes or IFG on your chart. If I were in your shoes I'd get a cheap blood glucose meter (Relion, at Wal-mart is reputed to be the cheapest 'good enough' meter.) Take readings for a few days at: * First thing after awakening. * One hour after each meal, especially any high carb meals. * Right before bedtime. If you're really broke, and if you know a diabetic (believe me, you do, whether you know it or not) you might borrow a meter (USE A NEW LANCET!) Many of us have more than one. If ANY of your readings are above 140, come on over to alt.support.diabetes with more questions. The silver lining is that IF you're insulin resistant, then there's a drug, metformin. Among it's virtues are that * it's cheap * it has very few side effects. * it's been in use for more than 20 years, so its side effects are well known. * it will improve your blood sugars and lessen the chance of the HORRIBLE complications that high blood sugars cause. * it makes weight loss much easier. Also, many of us find that once you get your blood sugars in control, the carbohydrate cravings are VASTLY lessened. (Sure was true for me.) There have been several how-to threads recently in a.s.d. on eating diabetic-friendly meals cheaply. Adam Becker > I read your post and some things jump out at me. Recently obsese - > very difficult to lose weight - cravings for carbs. When I was around 23 or so, I wasn't overweight. I was not an overweight kid growing up. The drug I was taking was depakene, and it made me hungry all the time and lethargic, I believe. After my knee injury, of course, I spent alot of time resting and almost no physical activity for a while, and people do stupid stuff like give me lots of food during the winter (holidays always do me in, because people eat way too much food at thanksgiving etc.). I took chondroitin for months and it seemed to help. > I'm a Type2 diabetic. Have you looked hard at your blood sugars? You > may well be diabetic, or pre-diabetic (Impaired fasting glucose, or > IFG.) I don't know about my blood sugar. My grandmother's side of the family has diabetes in old age, other than that, it really doesn't run in the family. Some of my very old relatives do have angina and heart disease. But all of them are very old, and they got it later in life and are overweight. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.