the great vegetarian debate

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17186
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by DNS »

samseva wrote: To anyone up for the discussion...

If saturated fat is unhealthy, why are lipids in breast milk composed of 32-55% saturated fat?
Infants and small children need it. Grown adults do not. We are the only species that consumes dairy and dairy products beyond the first year of life.

I admit dairy products taste good, but know it is not good for me, as someone who is over one year old.
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by daverupa »

David N. Snyder wrote:We are the only species that consumes dairy and dairy products beyond the first year of life.
That's not quite accurate.

Northern Europeans have genetic coding that allows for lactase, but this happened within the last 5000 years or so, and only in that part of the world - about 75% of the world's adults are lactose-intolerant.

Anyway, the migration of these milk-drinkers is the reason for the current map of milk-drinkers; still not enough to call it a species-wide thing, though...
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
Vanda
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 7:56 am

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Vanda »

So what is this vegan idea any way? Not to consume any animal products, no milk, no honey? Just grains, vegetable oils high in omega-6, soy, and other similar foods? But insect animals are still killed in the production of such foods, so I don't see how this leads to any special status. Even the Jains cannot successfully avoid all animal killing.
“Don’t go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, ‘This contemplative is our teacher.’ When you know for yourselves that, ‘These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted and carried out, lead to welfare and to happiness’ — then you should enter and remain in them.”
- Kalama Sutta, Anguttara Nikaya
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17186
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by DNS »

Veganism in a nutshell

Not all vegans are eating that way for ethical reasons. Many do so for nutritional reasons alone. Former president Bill Clinton stated in an interview that he doesn't care about the [lives of] animals, that he is a vegan so he can be healthy and live long.
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 »

David N. Snyder wrote: "Not all vegans are eating that way for ethical reasons. Many do so for nutritional reasons alone."
True. When I was recovering from cardiovascular disease I followed a vegan diet to help reversing my atherosclerosis. :tongue: It was a diet developed by Dr. Dean Ornish, a cardiovascular-thorasic surgeon:

Dean Ornish diet
Last edited by DNS on Mon Aug 24, 2015 10:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: fixed quoted part and link
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 »

samseva wrote:
samseva wrote:Demonizing saturated fat originated from the 1950's, by a scientist called Ancel Keys. The scientific information is outdated and downright false. There is so much information against these claims that the following Wikipedia page mentioning many studies would be best.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturated ... ontroversy
To anyone up for the discussion...

If saturated fat is unhealthy, why are lipids in breast milk composed of 32-55% saturated fat?
For example, typical milk from French mothers has an average of 44 percent saturated fatty acids, with a range from 39-47 percent. Studies of milk from Dutch mothers showed averages of 38-52 percent saturated fatty acids. Typical milk from Sudanese mothers has an average of 46 percent saturated fatty acids with a range of 36-55 percent. From Spanish mothers the average reported is 41 percent saturated fatty acids and the range is 32-51 percent.1
http://www.westonaprice.org/health-topi ... uman-milk/
Do humans continue to drink breast milk as adults? No. Breast milk is the perfect food...for young infants.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Mkoll »

samseva wrote:
lyndon taylor wrote:As a diabetic with an illness cause by sugar consumption, I can definitely assure you that too much sugar is BAD!!!!
Maybe you know this already. The best way to counter the effects of moderate-high glycemic foods is to eat fiber, protein and fat with the carbohydrates.
But you may not know this! Relevant part highlighted.
Association between dietary meat consumption and incident type 2 diabetes: the EPIC-InterAct study. wrote:AIMS/HYPOTHESIS:

A diet rich in meat has been reported to contribute to the risk of type 2 diabetes. The present study aims to investigate the association between meat consumption and incident type 2 diabetes in the EPIC-InterAct study, a large prospective case-cohort study nested within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study.
METHODS:

During 11.7 years of follow-up, 12,403 incident cases of type 2 diabetes were identified among 340,234 adults from eight European countries. A centre-stratified random subsample of 16,835 individuals was selected in order to perform a case-cohort design. Prentice-weighted Cox regression analyses were used to estimate HR and 95% CI for incident diabetes according to meat consumption.
RESULTS:

Overall, multivariate analyses showed significant positive associations with incident type 2 diabetes for increasing consumption of total meat (50 g increments: HR 1.08; 95% CI 1.05, 1.12), red meat (HR 1.08; 95% CI 1.03, 1.13) and processed meat (HR 1.12; 95% CI 1.05, 1.19), and a borderline positive association with meat iron intake. Effect modifications by sex and class of BMI were observed. In men, the results of the overall analyses were confirmed. In women, the association with total and red meat persisted, although attenuated, while an association with poultry consumption also emerged (HR 1.20; 95% CI 1.07, 1.34). These associations were not evident among obese participants.
CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION:

This prospective study confirms a positive association between high consumption of total and red meat and incident type 2 diabetes in a large cohort of European adults.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
Vanda
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 7:56 am

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Vanda »

It's a personal choice, in terms of a food plan. Everyone is different.
“Don’t go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, ‘This contemplative is our teacher.’ When you know for yourselves that, ‘These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted and carried out, lead to welfare and to happiness’ — then you should enter and remain in them.”
- Kalama Sutta, Anguttara Nikaya
User avatar
samseva
Posts: 3045
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by samseva »

David N. Snyder wrote:Infants and small children need it. Grown adults do not. We are the only species that consumes dairy and dairy products beyond the first year of life.
Mkoll wrote:Do humans continue to drink breast milk as adults? No. Breast milk is the perfect food...for young infants.
What are your sources? Did you both arrive at that conclusion by common sense? This is the first time I am hearing this.

I don't see the science behind "saturated fat is perfectly healthy for an infant, but downright unhealthy for anyone beyond 1 or 2 years old", as if our biological and nutritional needs change completely past that age.
User avatar
samseva
Posts: 3045
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by samseva »

Mkoll wrote:But you may not know this! Relevant part highlighted.
Association between dietary meat consumption and incident type 2 diabetes: the EPIC-InterAct study. wrote:AIMS/HYPOTHESIS:

A diet rich in meat has been reported to contribute to the risk of type 2 diabetes. The present study aims to investigate the association between meat consumption and incident type 2 diabetes in the EPIC-InterAct study, a large prospective case-cohort study nested within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study.

[...]
It is important not to confuse correlation with causation.

Here is a full study with 37 083 men and 167 074 women as subjects.

If you look at the 4th page, you will see other factors which contribute much more to type 2 diabetes than red meat consumption, such as little physical activity, smoking, alcohol consumption (much worst than white sugar) and soft drinks.

The study is deceptive and erroneous.
Folks in the highest quintiles of meat intake were the least active and the most sedentary. They exercised the least and smoked the most tobacco. They drank more alcohol than any other quintile. They guzzled more soda and other sweetened beverages. In the high meat quintiles, folks ate 800 more calories per day than folks in the low meat quintiles. They were much heavier, too. Trans fat intake was higher in the high-meat quintiles, too, as was potato intake (possibly a good portion as French fries). They ate the least amount of fiber from grains, indicating they probably ate the most refined grains, drank the most coffee, and ate the fewest fruits and vegetables.
Correlation does not imply causation.
Last edited by samseva on Tue Aug 25, 2015 2:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17186
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by DNS »

samseva wrote:What are your sources? Did you both arrive at that conclusion by common sense? This is the first time I am hearing this.
An infant or small child is growing rapidly, much faster than at any other stage in their life. Adults normally don't grow at all or if they do if it is very small amounts from perhaps 18 to 25 years old. Can you name any other species which drinks milk and eats dairy products beyond the age of one?
User avatar
samseva
Posts: 3045
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by samseva »

David N. Snyder wrote:
samseva wrote:What are your sources? Did you both arrive at that conclusion by common sense? This is the first time I am hearing this.
An infant or small child is growing rapidly, much faster than at any other stage in their life. Adults normally don't grow at all or if they do if it is very small amounts from perhaps 18 to 25 years old. Can you name any other species which drinks milk and eats dairy products beyond the age of one?
The fact that our growth is minimal compared to infants doesn't make saturated fat unhealthy. The logic just doesn't add up; there are false and missing premises.

I get the argument for dairy, as normally we lose the enzymes to effectively digest milk, but even then, that doesn't make the macronutrients from the milk unhealthy.
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17186
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by DNS »

There are numerous studies demonstrating the negative effects of dairy just as there are numerous studies saying that they are okay. It certainly tastes good and no being is directly killed in the production of dairy and dairy products (although there are other ethical considerations concerning the care of the animals, but in general, no slaughtering).

health concerns about dairy
6 reasons you should avoid it all costs

In the final analysis you can take into account any ethical considerations along with how it feels on your body, nutritionally.
User avatar
samseva
Posts: 3045
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by samseva »

David N. Snyder wrote:There are numerous studies demonstrating the negative effects of dairy just as there are numerous studies saying that they are okay.
Sadly, there are no perfect foods. Everything from mangoes, cashews, tomatoes and fish each have their poison. What is important is moderation, variety and avoiding the worst offenders.
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Mkoll »

samseva wrote:
Mkoll wrote:But you may not know this! Relevant part highlighted.
Association between dietary meat consumption and incident type 2 diabetes: the EPIC-InterAct study. wrote:AIMS/HYPOTHESIS:

A diet rich in meat has been reported to contribute to the risk of type 2 diabetes. The present study aims to investigate the association between meat consumption and incident type 2 diabetes in the EPIC-InterAct study, a large prospective case-cohort study nested within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study.

[...]
It is important not to confuse correlation with causation.

Here is a full study with 37 083 men and 167 074 women as subjects.

If you look at the 4th page, you will see other factors which contribute much more to type 2 diabetes than red meat consumption, such as little physical activity, smoking, alcohol consumption (much worst than white sugar) and soft drinks.

The study is deceptive and erroneous.
Folks in the highest quintiles of meat intake were the least active and the most sedentary. They exercised the least and smoked the most tobacco. They drank more alcohol than any other quintile. They guzzled more soda and other sweetened beverages. In the high meat quintiles, folks ate 800 more calories per day than folks in the low meat quintiles. They were much heavier, too. Trans fat intake was higher in the high-meat quintiles, too, as was potato intake (possibly a good portion as French fries). They ate the least amount of fiber from grains, indicating they probably ate the most refined grains, drank the most coffee, and ate the fewest fruits and vegetables.
Correlation does not imply causation.
This is the second time in this thread that you've referenced something that condemns animal products. From your reference:
In these 3 large prospective cohorts of US men and women, we observed that red meat consumption was positively associated with the risk of T2D, and this association was observed for both unprocessed and processed red meat, with a relatively higher risk for the latter.
That's the first sentence of their discussion and it's crystal clear.

~~~
samseva wrote:The study is deceptive and erroneous.
I'm guessing you're saying that because the results of the study go against your predilections (I'm guessing you eat meat and drink dairy), you therefore conclude that it's deceptive and erroneous. If that's the case, then you're falling for confirmation bias and that simply isn't reasonable.

~~~

Here's a graph from another peer-reviewed study from the journal Nutrients, providing further evidence for the case that meat consumption is associated with higher risk of T2D. It's figure 1 if you scroll down.
Untitled.png
Untitled.png (181.07 KiB) Viewed 1614 times
~~~

So I've provided 2 studies and you've provided 1 supporting the case that meat consumption is associated with increased diabetes risk. You've provided no evidence to support your position, which is itself still unclear.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Post Reply