tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post5076256282058168528..comments2024-03-27T23:47:41.656-07:00Comments on Whole Health Source: Is Meat Unhealthy? Part IStephan Guyenethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218114625524777250noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-56773843244879962552014-11-12T00:19:41.700-08:002014-11-12T00:19:41.700-08:00Beans are not only healthy but they are great nitr...Beans are not only healthy but they are great nitrogen fixers for the soil<br /> I No longer believe that grass fed beef is a real solution to any long term enviormnetnal strategy . it seems like an unrealistic pipe dream and I'm sure the promotors of this even know these things. <br /><br />Walkitouthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17329646052733274807noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-38426510178055827392014-11-01T07:31:04.641-07:002014-11-01T07:31:04.641-07:00Stephan,
Are you familiar with the work of Gary L...Stephan,<br /><br />Are you familiar with the work of Gary L. Francione? He is an "abolitionist" vegan who believes that an animal's sentience (consciousness, capacity to feel pain) is sufficient to proscribe the use of that animal as a resource in any way whatsoever. Under analysis, an animal's relative intelligence to humans or other animals (as with pigs) is wholly irrelevant to the moral calculus; all that matters is the capacity for pain and suffering. I am curious to know what your position is on this issue (the sufficiency of sentience vs. the relevance of intelligence) -- I think a commitment to the former would significantly alter your analysis.JMohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03793925589078170668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-60763286614261278992014-10-31T13:44:41.023-07:002014-10-31T13:44:41.023-07:00I highly recommend reading "All Flesh is Gras...I highly recommend reading "All Flesh is Grass: Pleasures and Promises of Pasture Farming" by Gene Logsdon. And "The Vegetarian Myth" by Lierre Keith. I was a vegetarian for 20+ years and almost ruined my digestive system. Been eating basically Paleo style for 4 years and at 61 years of age feel healthier, stronger and younger than I have since I was 40.truthseekerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06507460450684676745noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-82359959820126829982014-10-28T03:57:58.960-07:002014-10-28T03:57:58.960-07:00Hi Stephen, I just read both parts of the blog. An...Hi Stephen, I just read both parts of the blog. And I am commenting on this one because I am a vegetarian both by choice and because my religion insists so. Most people I have seen around me those from my religion who also practice vegetarianism are a mix of healthy and unhealthy. However most of the older generation have had a pretty long life. Upto 100 years even. I think the subgroup of people following the religion have adapted well to the meatless diets and are thriving well. And I think there may have been some genetic adaptations as well which a proper scientific study might reveal.CJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07633291405359858121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-55317012868703794352014-10-27T09:44:47.034-07:002014-10-27T09:44:47.034-07:00"I'm not going to discuss the ethical imp..."I'm not going to discuss the ethical implications of meat consumption further in this series-- the rest will focus on health. I just wanted to take a moment to acknowledge that these issues are important."<br /><br />Kudos for this. One thing I don't like about many vegan/vegetarians is how they go back and forth with nutritional, ethical and environmental arguments. Those are three separate issues. I prefer reading McDougal, Fuhrman, et. al. on plant-based diets. They stick to their area of expertise.ICGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08544708750452507085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-28243626223953174312014-10-27T06:44:07.285-07:002014-10-27T06:44:07.285-07:00For Galina L. - an organic diet with more fruits a...For Galina L. - an organic diet with more fruits and vegetables than most Americans currenty eat is possible on a food-stamp budget. The Cook for Good project explores this, at first for vegetarian and now for vegan diets.<br /><br />Stephan, I'm looking forward to next posts in this series. I hope you address the effects of soy and pesticides. The recent research that usually received headlines such as "Vegetarians And Vegans Have Lower Sperm Counts Than Meat Eaters, Research Finds" actually put the blame on soy, pesticides, and B12 deficiency, not an absence of food from animals.<br /><br />Our individual choices do matter. What is any ocean but a multitude of drops?Linda Watsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08499388558087895537noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-75115322965347597182014-10-27T06:16:23.412-07:002014-10-27T06:16:23.412-07:00Hi Stephan, I look forward to the remainder of thi...Hi Stephan, I look forward to the remainder of this series! I was wondering if you might consider a future post or series on "Is Wheat Unhealthy"? I'd be very interested to read your assessment of what the literature has to say about this topic.Jason Voegelehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16938133385202930039noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-37141273910769092752014-10-25T05:14:43.372-07:002014-10-25T05:14:43.372-07:00In modern times we shouldn't use abstract thin...In modern times we shouldn't use abstract thinking as a solution to environmentaly-friendly purchases. Abstractions hide information, so the are faulty. <br /><br />Eg. you can make any plant environmentaly-unfriendly by sprying gobs of pesticides on it. If this particular plant you buy is in a good-species category (statistically environment-friendly) but individually it was oversprayed, then you end up buying the wrong plant from the wrong producer based on abstract thinking. <br /><br />Right now we have enough spying and big-data technologies to trace each individual carrot from planting to the purchase. Why not utulize it and process information per-item, rather than per-category?tomRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05250648754955371165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-92114097063872847022014-10-24T15:39:43.675-07:002014-10-24T15:39:43.675-07:00Refering to muscle issues on non-meat diets:
what...Refering to muscle issues on non-meat diets: <br />what do you think about the reccomendation of the vegetarian powerlifter Jason Blaha to use supplemental essential amino acids? These powders are claimed to be for vegetarians (not vegan). <br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8R20EVSwn88&index=178&list=UUNqbcf-5nORpyfzrqQNLSVw<br /><br />The recommended essential amino acids 15g serving contains:<br /><br />Leucine 5g <br />Valine 2.2g <br />Lysine 2.2g <br />Phenylalanine 1.8g <br />Threonine 1.5g <br />Isoleucine 0.9g <br />Histidine 0.7g <br />Methionine 0.5g <br />Tryptophan 0.2gtomRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05250648754955371165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-5550747404565974312014-10-24T12:17:18.147-07:002014-10-24T12:17:18.147-07:00I very much enjoyed your article -- looking forwar...I very much enjoyed your article -- looking forward to the next part in the series!<br /><br />Like you, I would eat nothing but meat (and chocolate!) all day if there were no consequences. I came to almost the exact same conclusions that you did, and my family started to eat a vegetarian diet for a few months as well. I even wrote a blog post detailing my experience being vegetarian and lifting weights. Anecdotally, I found that being a vegetarian no effect on my strength or stamina, but I didn't stay on that diet too long before I was back to eating meat.<br /><br />My wife would have no problem keeping this diet indefinitely, as she doesn't really like meat that much, but both my son and I love the taste of meat. So we decided to eat it again, just less often. Maybe once or twice a week.<br /><br />I'm not so much worried about the ethics of eating meat, but there is no denying that a large part of climate change and environmental pollution is due to raising livestock for meat. I'm all about sustainability and efficiency, and your conclusion is spot on: Most meat is a horrible choice for caloric intake due to it being very inefficient to raise and unsustainable in the long term.<br /><br />Can't wait to read the real meat of this series (pun intended)!Nate Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03335379604153696464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-48141871237416678072014-10-23T20:48:35.100-07:002014-10-23T20:48:35.100-07:00I dislike a premise of this post, which is that me...I dislike a premise of this post, which is that meat from insects is similar to meat from beef. It is not. You can raise, given appropriate facilities, 500 kcal of insects daily, out of your own excrement. They would have superior zinc, calcium, iron, B12, and I am guessing, K2, compared to "regular" meat, and of course provide proteins. They would even provide compost. <br /><br />Also, for warm blooded animals, the most efficient meat is rabbit. I have a friend who raises them solely out of acorns raked from the woods, hay from under the fruit trees, and table scraps. It is amazing to see so much meat (150 plus rabbits a year) raised out of zero feed. And rabbit is superior meat when it comes to the above minerals and vitamins (not a surprise since rabbits, too, are coprophagous). Other meats are currently sustainable, including lion fish, asian carp, and feral hog.glibhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17667027419577956753noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-67544542729173348682014-10-23T14:39:25.815-07:002014-10-23T14:39:25.815-07:00Hi Biryon,
I disagree. My actions have a small i...Hi Biryon,<br /><br />I disagree. My actions have a small impact on billions of people.<br /><br />Hi Chris,<br /><br />Good thoughts. I remain quite skeptical of most observational studies on diet, in large part because the typical assessment methods are remarkably inaccurate and thus leave open the possibility that the researchers are actually measuring something other than their variable of interest (e.g., wishful thinking). The relationship between BMI and self-reported energy intake is a perfect example of a misreporting bias that led to incorrect conclusions. But I agree that observational studies are part of the scientific picture. We can't just ignore them.<br /><br />Also, RCTs have their own substantial limitations, particularly when they're studying diseases that may take decades to develop. Different methods complement one another and we have to consider the totality of the evidence, while remembering the limitations of each method. Stephan Guyenethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09218114625524777250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-12500911867371256032014-10-23T09:02:22.621-07:002014-10-23T09:02:22.621-07:00Stephan wrote, "Mechanism is interesting but ...Stephan wrote, "Mechanism is interesting but it only serves to explain or support a demonstrated biological effect-- it is not sufficient by itself to demonstrate that an effect exists or is biologically significant. That's where a lot of diet-health folks get tripped up trying to make arguments from biochemistry etc. It sounds impressive but it's not empirically grounded."<br />Yes to this! Excellent explanation. It reminds me how in applied work with statistical tests/models "statistically significant" is often conflated with *biologically significant*. So the corollary is that any number of effects can be demonstrated to exist, but only a few are biologically significant.<br /><br /> The problem is to analyze where the weight of evidence is when meaningful effects at a population level can be rather small, say 10% reduction in relative risk on average for some dietary pattern or another. In noisy systems, you either need tons of data or strong priors to estimate those effects properly. <br /><br />I used to buy the simplistic argument that since correlation != causation, we can pretty safely ignore all the epidemiological models and rely on our favorite lines of mechanistic/evolutionary reasoning + RCTs when favorable. But now, having done lots of applied regression models and seen lots of alternative diet ideas turn out flat, I'm not so sure. I think we DO need observational and cohort work to understand real-world effects better...<br /><br />I'm looking forward to your continued explorations and how you currently are thinking about reconciling these different kinds of evidence.<br /><br />Cheers!Chris Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07791413012165238990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-48145548949022132392014-10-22T21:26:31.776-07:002014-10-22T21:26:31.776-07:00Hello Dr. Guyenet. I understand why you don't ...Hello Dr. Guyenet. I understand why you don't eat Pork, since you don't feel comfortable eating an animal of that level of intelligence. But the rest of your reasoning is flawed; since your individual eating habits, or any other individual comforts, have no impact on the environment as a whole, nor on how many cows are slaughtered... In fact, you could do 100% of what you feel like, or even a 1000 times that, and not move the needle one blip with regards to the big picture. Therefore, why are you punishing yourself in this manner? This is actually a question I have of most people who restrain themselves thusly. Yes, I understand that if everyone did what they wanted this could have an impact; however, your individual choices, or any other individuals' individual choices, don't change the collectives behavior. So why shouldn't I, or anyone else just do what they like and enjoy? Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01466941241063519747noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-64302570184963701112014-10-22T19:13:58.744-07:002014-10-22T19:13:58.744-07:00Another environmental impact of beef and lamb prod...Another environmental impact of beef and lamb production is the killing of predators (coyotes, mountain lions, wolves, foxes, eagles, crows, bears ...) by ranchers and the federal government.Kevinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16875953886869169282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-75896792207460108782014-10-22T14:41:12.007-07:002014-10-22T14:41:12.007-07:00The suspense!!!!
I assuming it wont be to negativ...The suspense!!!!<br /><br />I assuming it wont be to negative because it does not sound like you are going to give up meat anytime soon.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17956498683541693086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-59597904300435276842014-10-22T13:00:34.616-07:002014-10-22T13:00:34.616-07:00Hi Stephan,
I was wondering if you had any sugges...Hi Stephan,<br /><br />I was wondering if you had any suggestions in regards to someone who would like to ground themselves in a more vegetarian diet (that's not too low in fat), but has rather significant GI issues (precluding them from consuming any fodmap containing foods). psychic24https://www.blogger.com/profile/02007506132069495095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-89293148063090377262014-10-22T10:47:16.985-07:002014-10-22T10:47:16.985-07:00I also await the upcoming posts, having followed a...I also await the upcoming posts, having followed a very similar nutritional journey.<br /><br />Having done my own research, I came to the conclusion that eating grass fed beef and lamb was actually a better choice for the environment and animals, in the UK at least...<br /><br />I think the latter is key however. The most sustainable food is that which can be produced locally, with the minimal input of energy or disruption to the local ecosystem.<br /><br />Industrial meat production is bad, there's no question about that. Can everyone eat grass fed beef? Probably not, but then eating bananas in the UK isn't sustainable either. I'd wager the typical veggie/vegan diet has a far greater impact on the planet then mine.<br /><br />With regards to assessing the health aspects, I think the cofounder will be that as groups, vegans and veggies are much more homogenous than "meat eaters" I.e. a typical meat eater most likely eats SAD, probably a very different diet to that eaten by those reading this blog. <br /><br />So Stefan, your work is cut out for you, good luck!<br />Simon Whyatthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13456942536224143190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-74883599584764590722014-10-22T10:28:45.291-07:002014-10-22T10:28:45.291-07:00I look forward to this discussion. Right now I...I look forward to this discussion. Right now I'm eating mostly vegan, but still eat some meat/dairy with my family and other social occasions. So far I've lost weight, feel better and have more energy, for whatever my N=1 experiment is worth.<br /><br />I'd be interested to see some discussion of the so-called blue zones. These are regions with the longest lifespans. While their diets differ a bit, they all eat largely plant-based meals with small doses of animal products and oils. Longevity in these regions may also be associated with lifestyles, exercise, social/community ties, etc., which are beyond the scope of this.ICGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08544708750452507085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-33898394393825549902014-10-22T09:17:07.525-07:002014-10-22T09:17:07.525-07:00Hi Giantess,
I don't think beans are toxic. ...Hi Giantess,<br /><br />I don't think beans are toxic. The supposed dire consequences of bean consumption don't seem to materialize in cultures that consume them daily for a lifetime, and the scientific literature overall suggests they're healthy to eat. The only significant exception I'm aware of is that some people are sensitive to the fermentable fiber they contain, which can cause flatulence and exacerbate IBS.<br /><br />If you poke around enough in the literature, you can make an argument that just about any food is unhealthy. See Melissa McEwen's article "Just Kale Me". That's why I like to ground myself by considering 1) what healthy traditional cultures eat, and 2) what the WEIGHT of the scientific evidence says. Mechanism is interesting but it only serves to explain or support a demonstrated biological effect-- it is not sufficient by itself to demonstrate that an effect exists or is biologically significant. That's where a lot of diet-health folks get tripped up trying to make arguments from biochemistry etc. It sounds impressive but it's not empirically grounded.Stephan Guyenethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09218114625524777250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-41184271796379225662014-10-22T08:01:51.788-07:002014-10-22T08:01:51.788-07:00Here is an interesting excerpt from Robin Hanson o...<a href="http://www.overcomingbias.com/2012/12/breeding-happier-livestock-no-futuristic-tech-required.html" rel="nofollow">Here</a> is an interesting excerpt from Robin Hanson on a way to address the ethics of livestock: <br /><br />"But would it really take radical new technologies to produce happy livestock? I suspect that some of these enthusiasts have been distracted by a shiny Far sci-fi solution of genetic engineering, to the point of missing the presence of a powerful, long-used mundane agricultural version: animal breeding."JWOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00004178958481335795noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-72692927319484200652014-10-22T07:47:51.019-07:002014-10-22T07:47:51.019-07:00Interesting. I am guessing that because you eat be...Interesting. I am guessing that because you eat beans and lentils (and if I recall from a past post, peanuts) that you disagree with the stance of other bloggers, namely Paul Jaminet, who maintains that legumes are toxic. Is that the case, or do you just accept the toxic nature of beans in exchange for reducing the environmental impact?<br /><br />I have found since my introduction into being an aware eater, which has been for some 10-15 years that the more I know, the more a grocery store trip can become crippling. I have so much information in my head that it becomes difficult to decide what is the least evil thing to put on my dinner plate. While I can see how poultry is a pretty benign in terms of environmental destruction, I think that lumping fish into that category can be dangerous. So much of our ocean is overfished… so unless you're buying from a source that really tries to harvest ethically (i.e. Whole Foods) it seems to me that a lot of damage is being done. <br /><br />Anyway, excited to read the rest of the series.TheGiantesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01299500671564233913noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-11810384572097339152014-10-22T05:32:16.588-07:002014-10-22T05:32:16.588-07:00I want to join George in his acknowledgement of yo...I want to join George in his acknowledgement of your point about the high environmental cost of eating not-starchy vegetables. Fresh produce is not only a poor source of nutrients, but on the top of it doesn't stay fresh long and it creates more opportunities for a food waste. It could be also a great drain for an individual budget if a person decides to eat a lot of organic produce. <br />I don't think humanity uses resources wisely. Observing massive amount of wasted food in a modern society is upsetting for me. I think animals could be a great way to utilize most of what is going into dumpsters today.Many standards of modern life are bad for the environment - perfect lawns are a source of a water pollution and only picture perfect fruits are sold in stores. May be goats on a front lawn and chicken on a backyard would be better use of our resources. I hope in a future animal waste will be used for growing insects for chicken and farmed fish food, or even for a dogs and cats food.Galina L.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09156132815504279615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-4385566176406136442014-10-22T00:24:07.335-07:002014-10-22T00:24:07.335-07:00The problem is mono-crop agriculture.
There is no...The problem is mono-crop agriculture.<br /><br />There is nothing 'environmentally costly' that is inherent to either a bean, a potato, kale, pork, fish or shellfish. But, in a mono-crop agriculture system where beans, grains & starches are grown to the expense of a variety of other plants (& animals), they become devastating products, sadly.<br /><br />I also do not consume conventional pork or poultry due to their treatment, taste, nutritional profile & because I'd be supporting factory farming.<br /><br />Opting for beans instead is unlikely to be a better alternative. <br /><br />A better alternative is probably consuming local meats/fished fish (!) with a diligent focus on OFFAL. Eating more animals along with all their bits will do a few things<br /><br />1) less waste<br />2) higher nutritional density<br />3) discourage factory farming<br />4) encourage alternative (non-batshit crazy) farming methods<br />5) cut thru the myth that plants = always good / meat = always bad<br /><br />Now, personally, I'm up for trying insects but I sense that isn't in the wheelhouse of most people. If we're still disgusted by liver, we've got a long way to go.raphihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08992252569979714724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1629175743855013102.post-7716046180364226032014-10-21T23:57:53.143-07:002014-10-21T23:57:53.143-07:00Very interesting point of views, thanks for sharin...Very interesting point of views, thanks for sharing! Being 6 months pregnant, I am looking forward to the discussions to come.Benden Bizdenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17215229424078209929noreply@blogger.com