the great vegetarian debate

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
seeker242
Posts: 1114
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 3:01 am

Re: Not a vegan debate.

Post by seeker242 »

ihrjordan wrote:
seeker242 wrote:It's worse because desiring a fruit smoothy causes much less harm to others, than meat does.
Says who? This is the common asumption and of course we can say that "desiring meat is bad" but that's the equal case with everything!
Ecologists, environmental scientists, doctors, and oneself if one were to visit a factory farm personally. It's not really about "desiring" it's about the "harm to others" that the activity causes. The harm to the environment that is caused. It's well established that some types of food production cause more harm than others. Therefore, all things are not equal with regards to causing harm.

And so if "desiring meat" held a special place amongst those things of which we should not seek out because it leads to countless suffering then why wouldn't the Buddha at least say to his lay followers "Ok kind of take it easy on the meat guys" But he didn't do this, now I don't think he would want his lay support to be accumulating all kinds of bad merit by feeding the beef machine...right?
He probably didn't mention it because back then factory farms didn't exist. Deforestation didn't exist. Mass scale water pollution didn't exist. Man made global warming didn't exist. The "beef machine" we see today, didn't exist back then. And of course it's not reasonable to expect him to speak about things that didn't exist.

Although, it's not entirely correct to say he didn't speak about it at all. He spoke about it a little when he said that business in meat is a wrong livelihood. Meanwhile, business in other kinds of foods like vegetables is not a wrong livelihood. Here the Buddha himself is making a distinction between the two.

However, if modern day factory farms did exist back then I think it's quite reasonable to assume, given his stance on non-harming, that he would have denounced such practices because such practices are extraordinarily and unnecessarily harmful.

:anjali:
User avatar
samseva
Posts: 3045
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by samseva »

YouTube comment wrote:Allowing others to create negative karma on your behalf is in itself an act of selfishness and therefore negative karma. The idea that eating meat has no karmic repercussions is absolutely ridiculous.
What are other's thoughts on this?
User avatar
Ron-The-Elder
Posts: 1909
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:42 pm
Location: Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Ron-The-Elder »

Postby lyndon taylor » Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:49 am

Except no one has to eat meat to keep from dying, there's plenty of vegetarian food.
Hi lydon (a.k.a. former Monk named John): Hate to keep repeating the same retorts, but there are regions of the world where vegetables just don't grow. In these regions people and other animals routinely kill other animal occupants.

Inuit Hunter

Image

Tibetan Hunter

Image
What Makes an Elder? :
A head of gray hairs doesn't mean one's an elder. Advanced in years, one's called an old fool.
But one in whom there is truth, restraint, rectitude, gentleness,self-control, he's called an elder, his impurities disgorged, enlightened.
-Dhammpada, 19, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
User avatar
lyndon taylor
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
Contact:

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by lyndon taylor »

Except you're not living in one of them, now what??
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/
User avatar
Ron-The-Elder
Posts: 1909
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:42 pm
Location: Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Ron-The-Elder »

Lyndon: "Except no one has to eat meat to keep from dying, there's plenty of vegetarian food."
Just responding to your "absolute" statement, Lyndon. I am answerable for my kamma, just as you are for yours. Where I live allows me a few more options than The Inuit and/or The Tibetans. In my case as in every case my first precept should be to cause the least harm to sentient beings.

Karmic effect is beyond any need for human discernment, or godly scolding, judgement, or enforcement, except for the part of the actor, or the actor's parents in the case of our progeny. How ever responsible adults choose to act intentionally results in beneficial or detrimental consequences that we and we alone will have to absorb. There are even consequences for smugly lecturing others on how they should behave out of some sense of moral indignance or superiority. :soap:

That is The Law of Kamma. :reading:
What Makes an Elder? :
A head of gray hairs doesn't mean one's an elder. Advanced in years, one's called an old fool.
But one in whom there is truth, restraint, rectitude, gentleness,self-control, he's called an elder, his impurities disgorged, enlightened.
-Dhammpada, 19, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Mkoll »

Continuing with my postings of scientific studies...

Cross-sectional and longitudinal comparisons of metabolic profiles between vegetarian and non-vegetarian subjects: a matched cohort study.
Abstract

Several previous cross-sectional studies have shown that vegetarians have a better metabolic profile than non-vegetarians, suggesting that a vegetarian dietary pattern may help prevent chronic degenerative diseases. However, longitudinal studies on the impact of vegetarian diets on metabolic traits are scarce. We studied how several sub-types of vegetarian diets affect metabolic traits, including waist circumference, BMI, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure, fasting blood glucose, total cholesterol (TC), HDL, LDL, TAG and TC:HDL ratio, through both cross-sectional and longitudinal study designs. The study used the MJ Health Screening database, with data collected from 1994 to 2008 in Taiwan, which included 4415 lacto-ovo-vegetarians, 1855 lacto-vegetarians and 1913 vegans; each vegetarian was matched with five non-vegetarians based on age, sex and study site. In the longitudinal follow-up, each additional year of vegan diet lowered the risk of obesity by 7 % (95 % CI 0·88, 0·99), whereas each additional year of lacto-vegetarian diet lowered the risk of elevated SBP by 8 % (95 % CI 0·85, 0·99) and elevated glucose by 7 % (95 % CI 0·87, 0·99), and each additional year of ovo-lacto-vegetarian diet increased abnormal HDL by 7 % (95 % CI 1·03, 1·12), compared with non-vegetarians. In the cross-sectional comparisons, all sub-types of vegetarians had lower likelihoods of abnormalities compared with non-vegetarians on all metabolic traits (P<0·001 for all comparisons), except for HDL and TAG. The better metabolic profile in vegetarians is partially attributable to lower BMI. With proper management of TAG and HDL, along with caution about the intake of refined carbohydrates and fructose, a plant-based diet may benefit all aspects of the metabolic profile.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
Ron-The-Elder
Posts: 1909
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:42 pm
Location: Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Ron-The-Elder »

Great post, Mkoll:

No doubt, "Good News":... if the vegan eats legumes combined with whole grains they will live a healthier and perhaps even a longer life, provided they look both ways before crossing the street, etc..

Better news, if the omnivore chooses to eat less animal protein (including milk and eggs) they too will live longer. This was shown in The Mediterranean diet studies:

http://authoritynutrition.com/5-studies ... nean-diet/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Problem is, folks don't stick to either diet for long. There is something about meat eating that is very attractive, and is a very powerful attachment. :shrug:

Short story: "They can't help themselves." :cry:

The Bad news is : "Everybody dies, no matter what they eat!" :toast:
Last edited by Ron-The-Elder on Sat Sep 19, 2015 7:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
What Makes an Elder? :
A head of gray hairs doesn't mean one's an elder. Advanced in years, one's called an old fool.
But one in whom there is truth, restraint, rectitude, gentleness,self-control, he's called an elder, his impurities disgorged, enlightened.
-Dhammpada, 19, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Mkoll »

Ron-The-Elder wrote:Problem is, folks don't stick to either diet for long. There is something about meat eating that is very attractive, and is a very powerful attachment.
It's true that most folks don't and I agree that meat and especially dairy (usually pizza or ice cream!) have a certain special appeal. Personally, I don't think there's much harm in eating them once in awhile, as a special treat. However, when it becomes a 2-3 times a day habit, I think the science is clear that this leads to poor health outcomes for most people.

~~~

Here are two studies—randomized controlled studies no less—looking at the link between diet and mood. They indicate an association between less animal product consumption and improved mental health.

A multicenter randomized controlled trial of a nutrition intervention program in a multiethnic adult population in the corporate setting reduces depression and anxiety and improves quality of life: the GEICO study.
Abstract
PURPOSE:
To determine whether a plant-based nutrition program in a multicenter, corporate setting improves depression, anxiety, and productivity.

DESIGN:
A quasi-experimental study examined the impact of diet on emotional well-being and productivity.

SETTING:
The study was conducted in 10 corporate sites of a major U.S. insurance company.

SUBJECTS:
There were 292 participants (79.8% women, 20.2% men), with body mass index ≥25 kg/m(2) and/or previous diagnosis of type 2 diabetes.

INTERVENTION:
Either weekly instruction in following a vegan diet or no instruction was given for 18 weeks.

MEASURES:
Depression and anxiety were measured using the Short Form-36 questionnaire. Work productivity was measured using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire.

ANALYSIS:
Baseline characteristics were examined by t-test for continuous variables and χ(2) test for categorical variables. Analysis of covariance models were adjusted for baseline covariates. Paired t-tests were used to determine within-group changes and t-tests for between-group differences.

RESULTS:
In an intention-to-treat analysis, improvements in impairment because of health (p < .001), overall work impairment because of health (p = .02), non-work-related activity impairment because of health (p < .001), depression (p = .02), anxiety (p = .04), fatigue (p < .001), emotional well-being (p = .01), daily functioning because of physical health (p = .01), and general health (p = 0.02) in the intervention group were significantly greater than in the control group. Results were similar for study completers.

CONCLUSION:
A dietary intervention improves depression, anxiety, and productivity in a multicenter, corporate setting.
Restriction of meat, fish, and poultry in omnivores improves mood: a pilot randomized controlled trial.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Omnivorous diets are high in arachidonic acid (AA) compared to vegetarian diets. Research shows that high intakes of AA promote changes in brain that can disturb mood. Omnivores who eat fish regularly increase their intakes of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), fats that oppose the negative effects of AA in vivo. In a recent cross-sectional study, omnivores reported significantly worse mood than vegetarians despite higher intakes of EPA and DHA. This study investigated the impact of restricting meat, fish, and poultry on mood.

FINDINGS:
Thirty-nine omnivores were randomly assigned to a control group consuming meat, fish, and poultry daily (OMN); a group consuming fish 3-4 times weekly but avoiding meat and poultry (FISH), or a vegetarian group avoiding meat, fish, and poultry (VEG). At baseline and after two weeks, participants completed a food frequency questionnaire, the Profile of Mood States questionnaire and the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scales. After the diet intervention, VEG participants reduced their EPA, DHA, and AA intakes, while FISH participants increased their EPA and DHA intakes. Mood scores were unchanged for OMN or FISH participants, but several mood scores for VEG participants improved significantly after two weeks.

CONCLUSIONS:
Restricting meat, fish, and poultry improved some domains of short-term mood state in modern omnivores. To our knowledge, this is the first trial to examine the impact of restricting meat, fish, and poultry on mood state in omnivores.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
Ron-The-Elder
Posts: 1909
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:42 pm
Location: Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Ron-The-Elder »

I posted the following also under Global Warming thread:

51% of All Issues / Abuses Causing Global Warming Are Due to One Single Cause: "Animal Agribusiness"

Sound like a preposterous statement to put into a headline regarding Global Warming? And, if it were true, why haven't we heard it before?

How about this headline, then? :

If Humans Stop Eating Animal Protein / Change to a Vegan Diet All of the Problems Leading to Global Warming Will Be at an End, Even if All Forms of Energy Used in Manufacturing and Transportation Remain Unchanged! :pig:

Sound even more preposterous?.....then watch the documentary "Cowspiracy" and learn why both statements are true, and why none of the so-called environmental protection organizations have been raising this issue.

http://www.cowspiracy.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I just watched this documentary this morning on NetFlix and as a result have rededicated my lifestyle to veganism. That is my part. I will also commit to urging my government representatives to view it as well. Unfortunately, the film points out why the latter will likely fall on deaf ears due to the animal agriculture lobby's influence upon world government representatives.

This documentary is a "must see" for all Buddhists, Christians now aware of their responsibility as stewards of the environment as stated recently by Pope Francis and those who consider themselves environmental activists.
What Makes an Elder? :
A head of gray hairs doesn't mean one's an elder. Advanced in years, one's called an old fool.
But one in whom there is truth, restraint, rectitude, gentleness,self-control, he's called an elder, his impurities disgorged, enlightened.
-Dhammpada, 19, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
User avatar
NotMe
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:41 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by NotMe »

Ron-The-Elder wrote: This documentary is a "must see" for all Buddhists, Christians now aware of their responsibility as stewards of the environment as stated recently by Pope Francis and those who consider themselves environmental activists.
Ah, um, True Catholics and those "other" Christians who will allow Catholicism to be considered Christian will have awareness. How many "Christians" does that leave out? The Pope gave a worldly "lion's roar" to my ears. grin

Starting early 70's, been organic and veggie off and on, most recently went 'off' veggies because Dr. said B vita's were low and i do not do pills if avoidable - man, did i regret it, thinking i could buy meat and not feel an active part of "wrongness". Still got some "all grass fed organic" frozen flesh in the freezer of the fridge to consume, sigh. Regardless, if out and about at any inpromptu or otherwise "feeding" where meat is the main course and the only veggies are catsup on fries, I chow down! Burp. Cholesterol/over-weight are a non-issues i ascribe to being veggie, mostly.

Any way, last summer was a crazy one that spent/drained way too much energy, which is why the B was low, imho. Next blood test will be telling.

Off topic, but as far as pollution into water in America, (study did not include fracking waste injections), the worst contributer was the homeowner's chemical fertilizer, herbacide and insecticide run-off.

Lawns have all been organic for decades, this previous year started transitioning to a turfless yard, which takes much more work up front than mowing ever did, but man, does it feel good! The legacy left will be one of more life and less burden.

metta
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Mkoll »

NotMe wrote:
Ron-The-Elder wrote: This documentary is a "must see" for all Buddhists, Christians now aware of their responsibility as stewards of the environment as stated recently by Pope Francis and those who consider themselves environmental activists.
Ah, um, True Catholics and those "other" Christians who will allow Catholicism to be considered Christian will have awareness. How many "Christians" does that leave out? The Pope gave a worldly "lion's roar" to my ears. grin

Starting early 70's, been organic and veggie off and on, most recently went 'off' veggies because Dr. said B vita's were low and i do not do pills if avoidable - man, did i regret it, thinking i could buy meat and not feel an active part of "wrongness". Still got some "all grass fed organic" frozen flesh in the freezer of the fridge to consume, sigh. Regardless, if out and about at any inpromptu or otherwise "feeding" where meat is the main course and the only veggies are catsup on fries, I chow down! Burp. Cholesterol/over-weight are a non-issues i ascribe to being veggie, mostly.

Any way, last summer was a crazy one that spent/drained way too much energy, which is why the B was low, imho. Next blood test will be telling.

Off topic, but as far as pollution into water in America, (study did not include fracking waste injections), the worst contributer was the homeowner's chemical fertilizer, herbacide and insecticide run-off.

Lawns have all been organic for decades, this previous year started transitioning to a turfless yard, which takes much more work up front than mowing ever did, but man, does it feel good! The legacy left will be one of more life and less burden.

metta
Apart from B12, there is no need to eat animal products to get B-vitamins when eating smart vegan diet. And B12 can be supplemented. B12 is needed in miniscule amounts (the RDA is a few micrograms) and no studies I've seen show ill effects from supplementation.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
samseva
Posts: 3045
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by samseva »

NotMe wrote:most recently went 'off' veggies because Dr. said B vita's were low and i do not do pills if avoidable - man, did i regret it, thinking i could buy meat and not feel an active part of "wrongness".
Medication and supplements are two very different things, even though they both come in pill form. Would you avoid taking these to reduce intestinal inflammation, because they are "pills"? They are simply powdered turmeric in capsules.
User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 7797
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Aloka »

Apart from B12, there is no need to eat animal products to get B-vitamins when eating smart vegan diet. And B12 can be supplemented. B12 is needed in miniscule amounts (the RDA is a few micrograms) and no studies I've seen show ill effects from supplementation.
There's no way that I'd ever consider eating meat or fish in my diet. I've been vegetaran/vegan for most of my life and take a veggie capsule of B12 supplement every day and feel fine.

If there's a serious problem with B12 levels which show up in a blood test, its also possible to get a B12 injection from one's doctor here in the UK.


.
User avatar
tattoogunman
Posts: 129
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 8:08 pm
Location: Plano, TX

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by tattoogunman »

Unless someone is vegan, you can get B12 from dairy products (milk, cheese, etc.) and eggs, so eating meat is not a necessity. You can also buy cereals and most of them are fortified with B12. Even if vegan, some tofu has B12 in it.
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Mkoll »

To continue with my postings of studies supporting a whole foods, plant-based diet...(I posted these in another thread but feel they belong here as well.)

Here are a few studies about heme iron (edit: I forgot to mention that heme iron is the kind of iron found in meat, fish, and poultry; the iron in plants is non-heme iron) and its links to cancer and CVD and a few studies on animal protein and its links to obesity, IHD, and kidney stones(!).

Meat and heme iron intake and esophageal adenocarcinoma in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition study.
Abstract

Although recent studies suggest that high intakes of meat and heme iron are risk factors for several types of cancer, studies in relation to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) are scarce. Previous results in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) based on a relatively small number of cases suggested a positive association between processed meat and EAC. In this study, we investigate the association between intake of different types of meats and heme iron intake and EAC risk in a larger number of cases from EPIC. The study included 481,419 individuals and 137 incident cases of EAC that occurred during an average of 11 years of follow-up. Dietary intake of meat (unprocessed/processed red and white meat) was assessed by validated center-specific questionnaires. Heme iron was calculated as a type-specific percentage of the total iron content in meat. After adjusting for relevant confounders, we observed a statistically significant positive association of EAC risk with heme iron and processed meat intake, with HR: 1.67, 95% CI: 1.05-2.68 and HR: 2.27, 95% CI:1.33-3.89, respectively, for comparison of the highest vs. lowest tertile of intake. Our results suggest a potential association between higher intakes of processed meat and heme iron and risk of EAC.
Is heme iron intake associated with risk of coronary heart disease? A meta-analysis of prospective studies.
Abstract

PURPOSE:
Heme iron may contribute to the development of atherosclerosis by catalyzing production of hydroxyl-free radicals and promoting low-density lipoprotein oxidation. However, epidemiologic findings regarding the association between heme iron intake and risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) are inconsistent. We aimed to investigate the association by carrying out a meta-analysis of prospective studies.

METHODS:
Relevant studies were identified by using PubMed and EMBASE databases between January 1966 and April 2013 and also by manually reviewing the reference lists of retrieved publications. Summary relative risks (RRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS:
Six prospective studies, which contained a total of 131,553 participants and 2,459 CHD cases, met the inclusion criteria. Combined results indicated that participants with higher heme iron intake had a 31% increased risk of CHD, compared with those with lower intake (RR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.04-1.67), with significant heterogeneity (P(heterogeneity) = 0.05, I(2) = 55.0%). Excluding the only study from Japan (limiting to Western studies) yielded a RR of 1.46 (95% CI 1.21-1.76), with no study heterogeneity (P(heterogeneity) = 0.44, I(2) = 0.0%). The dose-response RR of CHD for an increase in heme iron intake of 1 mg/day was 1.27 (95% CI 1.10-1.47), with low heterogeneity (P (heterogeneity) = 0.25, I (2) = 25.8%). We observed no significant publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS:
This meta-analysis suggests that heme iron intake was associated with an increased risk of CHD.
A central role for heme iron in colon carcinogenesis associated with red meat intake.
Abstract
Epidemiology shows that red and processed meat intake is associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer. Heme iron, heterocyclic amines, and endogenous N-nitroso compounds (NOC) are proposed to explain this effect, but their relative contribution is unknown. Our study aimed at determining, at nutritional doses, which is the main factor involved and proposing a mechanism of cancer promotion by red meat. The relative part of heme iron (1% in diet), heterocyclic amines (PhIP + MeIQx, 50 + 25 μg/kg in diet), and NOC (induced by NaNO₂+ NaNO₂; 0.17 + 0.23 g/L of drinking water) was determined by a factorial design and preneoplastic endpoints in chemically induced rats and validated on tumors in Min mice. The molecular mechanisms (genotoxicity, cytotoxicity) were analyzed in vitro in normal and Apc-deficient cell lines and confirmed on colon mucosa. Heme iron increased the number of preneoplastic lesions, but dietary heterocyclic amines and NOC had no effect on carcinogenesis in rats. Dietary hemoglobin increased tumor load in Min mice (control diet: 67 ± 39 mm²; 2.5% hemoglobin diet: 114 ± 47 mm², P = 0.004). In vitro, fecal water from rats given hemoglobin was rich in aldehydes and was cytotoxic to normal cells, but not to premalignant cells. The aldehydes 4-hydroxynonenal and 4-hydroxyhexenal were more toxic to normal versus mutated cells and were only genotoxic to normal cells. Genotoxicity was also observed in colon mucosa of mice given hemoglobin. These results highlight the role of heme iron in the promotion of colon cancer by red meat and suggest that heme iron could initiate carcinogenesis through lipid peroxidation.
Heme iron intake and acute myocardial infarction: a prospective study of men.
Abstract

BACKGROUND:
Epidemiologic studies of heme iron and non-heme iron intake in relation to risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are lacking. Therefore, we examine the associations between heme iron and non-heme iron intake and fatal and nonfatal AMI in men. Moreover, we investigated whether the associations were modified by intake of minerals (calcium, magnesium, and zinc) that decreases iron absorption.

METHODS:
The population-based prospective cohort of Swedish Men (COSM) included 36882 men, aged 45-79 years, who completed a self-administered questionnaire on diet and had no history of coronary heart disease, stroke, diabetes, or cancer at baseline.

RESULTS:
During an 11.7 year follow-up, 678 fatal and 2593 nonfatal AMI events were registered. The hazard ratio (HR) of fatal AMI among men in the highest compared with the lowest quintile of heme iron intake was 1.51 (95%CI: 1.07-2.13, P-trend=0.02). The association was confined to men with a low intake of minerals that can decrease iron absorption. Among men with combined intakes of calcium, magnesium, and zinc below the medians, the HR of fatal AMI was 2.89 (95%CI: 1.43-5.82) for the highest vs. the lowest quintile of heme iron intake. There was no association between heme iron intake and nonfatal AMI, or between non-heme iron intake and fatal or nonfatal AMI.

CONCLUSIONS:
Findings from this prospective study indicate that a high heme iron intake, particularly with simultaneous low intake of minerals that can decrease iron absorption, may increase the risk of fatal AMI.
Dietary intake of heme iron and risk of cardiovascular disease: a dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS:
Iron is thought to play a fundamentally important role in the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD). This meta-analysis was performed to investigate the dose-response association between dietary intake of iron (including heme and non-heme iron) and the risk of CVD.

METHODS AND RESULTS:
We performed a search of the PubMed and Embase databases for prospective cohort studies of the association between dietary iron intake and CVD risk. Thirteen articles comprising 252,164 participants and 15,040 CVD cases were eligible for inclusion. Heme iron intake was associated significantly with increased risk of cardiovascular disease, and the pooled relative risk (RR) for each 1 mg/day increment was 1.07 (95% confidence interval: 1.01 to 1.14, I² = 59.7%). We also found evidence of a curvilinear association (P < 0.05 for non-linearity). In contrast, we found no association between CVD risk and dietary non-heme (0.98, 0.96 to 1.01, I² = 15.8%) or total iron (1.00, 0.94 to 1.06, I² = 30.4%). Subgroup analyses revealed that the association between heme iron intake and CVD risk was stronger among non-fatal cases (1.19, 1.07-1.33) and American patients (1.31, 1.11-1.56).

CONCLUSIONS:
Higher dietary intake of heme iron is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, whereas no association was found between CVD and non-heme iron intake or total iron intake. These findings may have important public health implications with respect to preventing cardiovascular disease.
Dietary protein and risk of ischemic heart disease in middle-aged men
ABSTRACT

Background: Prospective studies in US women have suggested an inverse relation between dietary protein and risk of ischemic heart disease (IHD). However, no large-scale prospective studies have been conducted in US men.

Objective: The objective was to examine the association between dietary protein and risk of IHD in a prospective study of US men. Design: Intakes of protein and other nutrients were assessed by using a validated food-frequency questionnaire at 4 time points during follow-up of 43,960 men participating in the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate multivariable-adjusted relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs.

Results: During 18 y of follow-up, we documented 2959 incident cases of IHD. The RR of IHD was 1.08 (95% CI: 0.95, 1.23; P for trend = 0.30) comparing the top with the bottom quintile of percentage of energy from total protein. RRs for animal and vegetable protein were 1.11 (95% CI: 0.97, 1.28; P for trend = 0.18) and 0.93
(95% CI: 0.78, 1.12; P for trend = 0.49), respectively. When the population was restricted to “healthy” men (those free of hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, and diabetes at baseline), the RR of IHD was 1.21 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.44; P for trend = 0.02) for total protein, 1.25 (95% CI: 1.04, 1.51; P for trend = 0.02) for animal protein, and 0.93 (95% CI: 0.72, 1.19; P for trend = 0.65) for vegetable protein.

Conclusions: We observed no association between dietary protein and risk of total IHD in this group of men aged 40–75 y. However, higher intake of animal protein may be associated with an increased risk of IHD in “healthy” men.
Animal protein and the risk of kidney stones: a comparative metabolic study of animal protein sources.
Abstract
PURPOSE:
We compared the effect of 3 animal protein sources on urinary stone risk.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:
A total of 15 healthy subjects completed a 3-phase randomized, crossover metabolic study. During each 1-week phase subjects consumed a standard metabolic diet containing beef, chicken or fish. Serum chemistry and 24-hour urine samples collected at the end of each phase were compared using mixed model repeated measures analysis.

RESULTS:
Serum and urinary uric acid were increased for each phase. Beef was associated with lower serum uric acid than chicken or fish (6.5 vs 7.0 and 7.3 mg/dl, respectively, each p <0.05). Fish was associated with higher urinary uric acid than beef or chicken (741 vs 638 and 641 mg per day, p = 0.003 and 0.04, respectively). No significant difference among phases was noted in urinary pH, sulfate, calcium, citrate, oxalate or sodium. Mean saturation index for calcium oxalate was highest for beef (2.48), although the difference attained significance only compared to chicken (1.67, p = 0.02) but not to fish (1.79, p = 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS:
Consuming animal protein is associated with increased serum and urine uric acid in healthy individuals. The higher purine content of fish compared to beef or chicken is reflected in higher 24-hour urinary uric acid. However, as reflected in the saturation index, the stone forming propensity is marginally higher for beef compared to fish or chicken. Stone formers should be advised to limit the intake of all animal proteins, including fish.
The potential impact of animal protein intake on global and abdominal obesity: evidence from the Observation of Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Luxembourg (ORISCAV-LUX) study.
OBJECTIVE:
To examine the association of total animal protein intake and protein derived from different dietary sources (meat; fish and shellfish; eggs; milk products) with global and abdominal obesity among adults in Luxembourg.

DESIGN:
Binary logistic regression analysis was used to assess the relationship between animal protein intake (as a percentage of total energy intake) and global obesity (BMI ≥ 30.0 kg/m(2)) and abdominal obesity (waist circumference ≥ 102 cm for men and ≥ 88 cm for women), after controlling for potential confounders.

SETTING:
Observation of Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Luxembourg (ORISCAV-LUX) study.

SUBJECTS:
The study population was derived from a national cross-sectional stratified sample of 1152 individuals aged 18-69 years, recruited between November 2007 and January 2009.

RESULTS:
There was an independent positive association between total animal protein intake and both global (OR = 1.18; 95% CI 1.12, 1.25) and abdominal obesity (OR = 1.14; 95% CI 1.08, 1.20) after adjustment for age, gender, education, smoking, physical activity and intakes of total fat, carbohydrate, fibre, and fruit and vegetables. Protein intakes from meat, fish and shellfish were positively associated with global and abdominal obesity with further adjustment for vegetal protein and other sources of animal-derived protein (all P < 0.01). Protein derived from eggs or milk products was unrelated to global or abdominal obesity.

CONCLUSIONS:
Our findings suggest that protein derived from animal sources, in particular from meat, fish and shellfish, may be associated with increased risk of both global and abdominal obesity among presumably healthy adults in Luxembourg. These findings suggest that lower animal protein intakes may be important for maintenance of healthy body weight.
Animal protein intake at 12 months is associated with growth factors at the age of six.
Abstract

AIM:
To study the associations between protein intake from different sources with anthropometry and serum insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) in infancy and childhood.

METHODS:
Children (n = 199) born in Iceland were followed up to six years of age. Their intake of various animal proteins and vegetable protein was calculated from weighed food records at 12 months and 6 years. Information about their weight and height at birth, 12 and 18 months, and 6 years was gathered. Serum IGF-1 was measured at 12 months and 6 years.

RESULTS:
At the age of six, children in the highest quartile for animal protein intake at 12 months (≥12.2% of total energy) had 0.8 kg/m(2) (95% CI = 0.1, 1.5) higher body mass index (BMI) than children in the lowest quartile (<7.6% of total energy). They were also heavier and longer in infancy and childhood. At 12 months, dairy protein intake as a percentage of total energy was associated with IGF-1 in six-year-old girls, β = 5.4 μg/L (95% CI = 2.5, 8.2).

CONCLUSION:
High animal protein intake in infancy, but not vegetable protein intake, was associated with accelerated growth and higher BMI in childhood. Dairy protein intake in infancy may be positively associated with linear growth and also with IGF-1 in six-year-old girls.
Last edited by Mkoll on Wed Oct 21, 2015 7:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Post Reply