EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Wed Oct 18, 2017 9:13 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 6:54 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 5:33 am
Posts: 1179
Location: Glastonbury, England.
A lovely video of vegan strongman Patrik Baboumian
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFpip6rxcYY

Patrik recently became a world record holder, lifting a weight equivalent to that of a large horse or 22 sacks of potatoes!
http://www.ecorazzi.com/2013/09/09/patr ... gan-power/

_________________
'Where mercy, love and pity dwell, there God is dwelling too'

http://holy-lance.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 19, 2015 8:58 pm 
Offline
Member with 200 posts
Member with 200 posts

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 9:23 pm
Posts: 257
Sure, he become a vegan in 2011 - having enough reserves of essentials to go vegan for a while. Tell me he takes no vitamin or other supplements... Any life-long vegan world champion athletes out there?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 20, 2015 1:29 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 5:33 am
Posts: 1179
Location: Glastonbury, England.
Cobie wrote:
Sure, he become a vegan in 2011 - having enough reserves of essentials to go vegan for a while. Tell me he takes no vitamin or other supplements... Any life-long vegan world champion athletes out there?


Vegan into his 4th year. Before that he was vegetarian. So none of that strength is down to meat eating.

What are you saying? He's able to lift that huge weight because he had a glass of milk ten years ago?!! We have a daily requirement for protein. Daily. So ALL of that strength is down to plant protein.

What's your point? Over half Americans for example take a daily multivitamin. Livestock is routinely fed fortified feed. Many foods are fortified; bread for example....

There are many and a growing number of vegan athletes/sportsmen and women.
http://www.greatveganathletes.com

_________________
'Where mercy, love and pity dwell, there God is dwelling too'

http://holy-lance.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 2:48 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:42 am
Posts: 1473
knightofalbion wrote:
Cobie wrote:
Sure, he become a vegan in 2011 - having enough reserves of essentials to go vegan for a while. Tell me he takes no vitamin or other supplements... Any life-long vegan world champion athletes out there?


Vegan into his 4th year. Before that he was vegetarian. So none of that strength is down to meat eating.

What are you saying? He's able to lift that huge weight because he had a glass of milk ten years ago?!! We have a daily requirement for protein. Daily. So ALL of that strength is down to plant protein.

What's your point? Over half Americans for example take a daily multivitamin. Livestock is routinely fed fortified feed. Many foods are fortified; bread for example....

There are many and a growing number of vegan athletes/sportsmen and women.
http://www.greatveganathletes.com


Quote:
What's your point?


Her point is that she is a sane, rational, educated human being while there are many out there who are just simply "out there". And this is true. She is coming from that sane, logical place of science. One must give her credit. One must admire and appreciate the ability to grasp the actualities of life amidst the conspiracy nuts and other do-gooder health nuts. She absolutely knows that human life is vitally important. She knows that our ancestors have always had meat as part of their diet and that hunting enabled our ancestors brains to evolve. The protein in the hunted meat was, according to the theory, paramount to our brain development and evolution as a human species. And because it is quite obvious that our ancestors hunted animals, it is quite obvious that we must now house millions of animals in confinement operations in order to feed the billions of human animals. Is that not a sane, rational and educated conclusion?

Are we not animals, and do not other animals hunt their prey? We do have canine teeth after all.

And there are tribal peoples the world over who hunt animals .... and fish.

But, yes, what do our ancestors or tribal people of present day know about confining pigs to sow crates for 3 months until they give birth and then 3 months again until they give birth again .... over and over .... so that the human animal can gorge on this ever popular product called Bacon. Did you know that you can now buy lottery tickets that are infused with the scent of bacon? I wonder who sponsored such a winner? What did our ancestors know of this habit of eating meat every single day? And did our ancestors knowingly cause such suffering when they only killed wild animals out of need? They would turn over in their graves if they knew we were using their need for survival as a justification for our torturing of animals in the present day. The way we treat animals as a commodity in the economic system is insane. But we are all caught up in that system. Millions of people are employed in this economic system (capitalism), where actual sentient beings are nothing more than units of production.

Some might object to the word "torturing". They might see that language as too radical. But I would say, just LOOK at the industry.

I am not advocating that everyone become vegan, or even vegetarian, because apparently some people really do need to eat animals. The need comes from geographical situations and climatic conditions. Sometimes it comes from dietary needs. But mostly it comes from habit and conditioning. It also comes from advertising, which includes the "meat and dairy" board's advertising.

Cobie's response came from that rational place. She makes sense. She is not "out there". Her response, though, is a reaction to irrationality. What she fails to realize is that your logic is not at all irrational.



And if Wayne is temped to respond, which we know he is, .... why not let Cobie respond? Okay?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 8:00 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21214
Location: Southeastern US
Respond to what?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 04, 2015 10:01 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 9:27 am
Posts: 5791
Location: USA
animal-friendly wrote:
What she fails to realize is that your logic is not at all irrational.


What logic?

_________________
TANG SOO!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:20 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:42 am
Posts: 1473
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Respond to what?


You couldn't help yourself, right? It's okay Wayne. The world will not disintegrate if you are not keeping watch.
And of course, Fosgate, being your cheer leader, and having being entertained by our last exchange, would like a little more.

And did you notice the question was addressed to Cobie? Would it be alright for her to answer?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2015 1:05 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 9:27 am
Posts: 5791
Location: USA
animal-friendly wrote:
And of course, Fosgate, being your cheer leader, and having being entertained by our last exchange, would like a little more.


It's no big secret. Wayne and I generally agree. If this makes one a cheerleader, then it's you and me both sister. We just have different color pom poms.

Quote:
And did you notice the question was addressed to Cobie? Would it be alright for her to answer?


Did you notice my question was directed to you? What logic?

_________________
TANG SOO!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2015 11:53 pm 
Offline
Member with 200 posts
Member with 200 posts

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 9:23 pm
Posts: 257
Oh dear... just because one questions the adequacy of a vegan diet for an omnivore species, immediately that means you have no problem with animal cruelty that, I know, does occur, etc etc. The argument ad absurdum.Then out come the red herrings - somehow, the fact that many foods are fortified is relevant. To what? Good thing they are, for vegans.... You really should do Logic 101.

As a medical scientist, I do happen to know that being succesful in weightlifting is first of all, nature (the types of muscles and their constituent power generating units) and second, training of those muscles and acquiring technique. Because of their muscles, good weight-lifters will never be marathon runners, and vice versa. A balanced diet is important but unless you know for sure that if said athlete would not be as successful if he consumed a vegetarian or omnivorous diet, you have no argument.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2015 6:51 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 5:33 am
Posts: 1179
Location: Glastonbury, England.
The 'argument'? There is no 'argument'. The fact is, he has done it and on an entirely plant based diet.

And 'red herring'? Government Health Agencies sanction fortification of foods for a reason. The same with animal feed.

If your 'logic' held water no meat-eater would ever be deficient in any vitamin or mineral. The fact is nutrient deficiencies and multiple nutrient deficiencies are commonplace.

_________________
'Where mercy, love and pity dwell, there God is dwelling too'

http://holy-lance.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2015 7:43 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21214
Location: Southeastern US
knightofalbion wrote:
And 'red herring'? Government Health Agencies sanction fortification of foods for a reason. The same with animal feed.


To help ensure people who generally do not eat a balanced diet get the vitamins and minerals needed for a healthy body.

Quote:
If your 'logic' held water no meat-eater would ever be deficient in any vitamin or mineral.


If every meat-eater ate a balanced diet, this would be true and there would be no need for the fortification of foods.

Quote:
The fact is nutrient deficiencies and multiple nutrient deficiencies are commonplace.


Yes, because people try to alter their weight, are too busy, are uneducated in nutrition, may be lazy, or many other reasons unrelated to the source of their food. However, vegetarians have a more difficult time (depending on degree) and vegans have an impossible goal to remain healthy without artificial supplements. It is that whole requirement for artificial supplements and increased chance of poor nutrition with a vegan diet that is the problem. In theory, one could live solely on supplements and not on natural foods, but would anyone really claim that was naturally better for us?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 11, 2015 6:26 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 5:33 am
Posts: 1179
Location: Glastonbury, England.
Wayne Stollings wrote:
knightofalbion wrote:
And 'red herring'? Government Health Agencies sanction fortification of foods for a reason. The same with animal feed.


To help ensure people who generally do not eat a balanced diet get the vitamins and minerals needed for a healthy body.

Quote:
If your 'logic' held water no meat-eater would ever be deficient in any vitamin or mineral.


If every meat-eater ate a balanced diet, this would be true and there would be no need for the fortification of foods.

Quote:
The fact is nutrient deficiencies and multiple nutrient deficiencies are commonplace.


Yes, because people try to alter their weight, are too busy, are uneducated in nutrition, may be lazy, or many other reasons unrelated to the source of their food. However, vegetarians have a more difficult time (depending on degree) and vegans have an impossible goal to remain healthy without artificial supplements. It is that whole requirement for artificial supplements and increased chance of poor nutrition with a vegan diet that is the problem. In theory, one could live solely on supplements and not on natural foods, but would anyone really claim that was naturally better for us?


93 - 95% of the population are meat-eaters and eating higher intakes of red meat and dairy than ever before (and have the highest incidence of degenerative disease than ever before. - Waiting for the penny to drop...)
If your theory was correct there'd be no nutritional deficiencies at all and you'd all be fighting fit.

And a stance like that on what is supposed to be an environmental forum... You should read 'Diet For A New America'.
The Livestock Industry is killing the planet, that's at the present rate. There'll be 40% more mouths to feed by the middle of the century.

There are no nutrients you couldn't get on a meat-based diet that you couldn't get on a vegetarian diet. Or a vegan one come to that.

And protein is protein. It isn't magically transformed by passing through an animal's guts!
Patrik Baboumian is testament to that.

Have you ever been on a vegan diet to qualify you to speak with any authority on the subject?
You could follow the diet without supplements. Though I'd always advise a general supplement as 'insurance'. Mind you, I'd recommend the same to anyone, no matter what diet they were on.
Nutrient levels in the soil are lower nowadays.

And as we've already covered, many (human) foods are fortified. Animal feed is fortified. Every human, pretty much all livestock, are eating supplemented food.

Then there's the compassionate side to things....

_________________
'Where mercy, love and pity dwell, there God is dwelling too'

http://holy-lance.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 11, 2015 9:23 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21214
Location: Southeastern US
knightofalbion wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
knightofalbion wrote:
And 'red herring'? Government Health Agencies sanction fortification of foods for a reason. The same with animal feed.


To help ensure people who generally do not eat a balanced diet get the vitamins and minerals needed for a healthy body.

Quote:
If your 'logic' held water no meat-eater would ever be deficient in any vitamin or mineral.


If every meat-eater ate a balanced diet, this would be true and there would be no need for the fortification of foods.

Quote:
The fact is nutrient deficiencies and multiple nutrient deficiencies are commonplace.


Yes, because people try to alter their weight, are too busy, are uneducated in nutrition, may be lazy, or many other reasons unrelated to the source of their food. However, vegetarians have a more difficult time (depending on degree) and vegans have an impossible goal to remain healthy without artificial supplements. It is that whole requirement for artificial supplements and increased chance of poor nutrition with a vegan diet that is the problem. In theory, one could live solely on supplements and not on natural foods, but would anyone really claim that was naturally better for us?


93 - 95% of the population are meat-eaters and eating higher intakes of red meat and dairy than ever before (and have the highest incidence of degenerative disease than ever before. - Waiting for the penny to drop...)

Also the longest average lifespan than ever before, more people than ever before, more environmental conditions which can cause issues than ever before and somehow the only problem is eating the natural diet for our species?

Quote:
If your theory was correct there'd be no nutritional deficiencies at all and you'd all be fighting fit.


No, you need to read more closely because a balanced diet is needed to acquire the natural requirements. In a vegatarian diet, this is also possible if dairy is included, but in a vegan diet it is impossible without the artificial supplements. Humans have thirved for centuries on this diet without artificial supplements. Even a newborn must have a diet based solely on animal products to make it to the point they can convert to a more vegetarian diet.

Quote:
And a stance like that on what is supposed to be an environmental forum... You should read 'Diet For A New America'.


Yes, because animal husbandry can be environmentally friendly. In fact it has been for thousands of years.

Quote:
The Livestock Industry is killing the planet, that's at the present rate. There'll be 40% more mouths to feed by the middle of the century.


So how does the livestock industry force this increase in population again? I am not sure I see the logical connection this is supposed to make.

Quote:
There are no nutrients you couldn't get on a meat-based diet that you couldn't get on a vegetarian diet. Or a vegan one come to that.


A balanced natural meat based diet, yes. A careful and balanced natural vegetarian diet including dairy products. A vegan diet, only if you add artifical supplements, which have an environmental impact and the last time I checked some of the supplements were produced using animal components.

Quote:
And protein is protein. It isn't magically transformed by passing through an animal's guts!
Patrik Baboumian is testament to that.


Protein is not B-12 either. To use your own claim with slight modification:

If your theory was correct there'd be no nutritional deficiencies at all and vegans would all be fighting fit.

If a vegan diet is so much better, why are there so few professional atheletes who do not follow said diet to give them the edge you claim is evident? These people's income is connected to their preformance so it would seem they should flock to a vegan diet if it gives their opponents such an advantage.

Quote:
Have you ever been on a vegan diet to qualify you to speak with any authority on the subject?


You mean am I biased? No, I have read numerous studies over the decades on diet, environmental impacts, and nutritional differences.

Quote:
You could follow the diet without supplements.


You could and if you had built up a sufficient reserve of B-12, for example, you would do ok for a while. You see there are no sources of B-12 in a vegan diet so without the initial meat based diet you cannot have a healthly life span.

Quote:
Though I'd always advise a general supplement as 'insurance'. Mind you, I'd recommend the same to anyone, no matter what diet they were on.


I would agree on this as few eat a properly balanced diet.

Quote:
Nutrient levels in the soil are lower nowadays.


Especially the ones from animal sources, since the benefit of using manure for fertilizer and lax streilization of food allows the animal products to be introduced into the diet without being that obvious.

Quote:
And as we've already covered, many (human) foods are fortified. Animal feed is fortified. Every human, pretty much all livestock, are eating supplemented food.


They are when they eat processed food now, yes. The fresh organic foods, no. Thus the natural unsupplemented diet, which is the new trend is not.

Quote:
Then there's the compassionate side to things....


And that whole survival thing which is tied to the natural diet. Perhaps we should manufacture complete food in a bar and see how that works for the einvironment too.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2015 6:29 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 5:33 am
Posts: 1179
Location: Glastonbury, England.
Wayne Stollings wrote:
*) Also the longest average lifespan than ever before, more people than ever before, more environmental conditions which can cause issues than ever before and somehow the only problem is eating the natural diet for our species?


1) No, you need to read more closely because a balanced diet is needed to acquire the natural requirements. In a vegatarian diet, this is also possible if dairy is included, but in a vegan diet it is impossible without the artificial supplements. Humans have thirved for centuries on this diet without artificial supplements. Even a newborn must have a diet based solely on animal products to make it to the point they can convert to a more vegetarian diet.



2) Yes, because animal husbandry can be environmentally friendly. In fact it has been for thousands of years

3) So how does the livestock industry force this increase in population again? I am not sure I see the logical connection this is supposed to make.


4) A balanced natural meat based diet, yes. A careful and balanced natural vegetarian diet including dairy products. A vegan diet, only if you add artifical supplements, which have an environmental impact and the last time I checked some of the supplements were produced using animal components.



5) Protein is not B-12 either. To use your own claim with slight modification:



6) If a vegan diet is so much better, why are there so few professional atheletes who do not follow said diet to give them the edge you claim is evident? These people's income is connected to their preformance so it would seem they should flock to a vegan diet if it gives their opponents such an advantage.



7) You mean am I biased? No, I have read numerous studies over the decades on diet, environmental impacts, and nutritional differences.



8) You could and if you had built up a sufficient reserve of B-12, for example, you would do ok for a while. You see there are no sources of B-12 in a vegan diet so without the initial meat based diet you cannot have a healthly life span.



9) I would agree on this as few eat a properly balanced diet.



10) Especially the ones from animal sources, since the benefit of using manure for fertilizer and lax streilization of food allows the animal products to be introduced into the diet without being that obvious.


11) They are when they eat processed food now, yes. The fresh organic foods, no. Thus the natural unsupplemented diet, which is the new trend is not.

12)
And that whole survival thing which is tied to the natural diet. Perhaps we should manufacture complete food in a bar and see how that works for the einvironment too.


*) I rather think its the quality of life that is the important issue, not the length of life. How many people with the indignity of dementia do you know?.... And people living longer is down to central heating/better housing & medicines. Though with over-population 'this' is also linked, see below.

1) "In theory, one could live solely on supplements and not on natural foods" - You.
You couldn't and nor could you live solely on meat. You can on plant food. Indeed without plant food there would be no human or animal life on earth.
Have you ever tried a vegan diet to be in a position to make any judgement?
Supplementation. Food you eat is fortified. Animal feed is fortified. Over half all Americans take a supplement. It's the world we live in.
You can get all nutrients from a plant diet.

2) WAYNE!!!!!!!!! There weren't over 7 BILLION people on the planet back then. Heading to 10 BILLION by the middle of the century.

3) See the above!
More people = less land, more food needed.
Livestock production = waste of precious dwindling resources, more waste, more greenhouse gas, more deforestation.

4) Totally wrong.

5) Your point? You can get B-12 from vegan sources. Vegan B-12 supplements.
A recent general population study found around 40% had 'low levels', 'near deficiency' or 'outright deficiency' of B-12.

6) The number is growing all the time.
"In fact my best year of track competition was the first year I ate a vegan diet. I've found that a person does not need protein from meat to be a successful athlete" - Carl Lewis

7) You need to have walked the walk before you can talk the talk.

8) Over 400 million life long vegetarians in India, for example, who have never eaten meat yet doing fine.
Vegan B-12 supplements are just that vegan, derived from yeasts or spirulina.
A recent study discovered B-12 in white button mushrooms.

9) But Americans are eating more red meat and dairy than ever before!

10/11) http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... tion-loss/

12) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UO-yI9eoOSg

_________________
'Where mercy, love and pity dwell, there God is dwelling too'

http://holy-lance.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2015 9:49 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21214
Location: Southeastern US
knightofalbion wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
*) Also the longest average lifespan than ever before, more people than ever before, more environmental conditions which can cause issues than ever before and somehow the only problem is eating the natural diet for our species?


1) No, you need to read more closely because a balanced diet is needed to acquire the natural requirements. In a vegatarian diet, this is also possible if dairy is included, but in a vegan diet it is impossible without the artificial supplements. Humans have thirved for centuries on this diet without artificial supplements. Even a newborn must have a diet based solely on animal products to make it to the point they can convert to a more vegetarian diet.



2) Yes, because animal husbandry can be environmentally friendly. In fact it has been for thousands of years

3) So how does the livestock industry force this increase in population again? I am not sure I see the logical connection this is supposed to make.


4) A balanced natural meat based diet, yes. A careful and balanced natural vegetarian diet including dairy products. A vegan diet, only if you add artifical supplements, which have an environmental impact and the last time I checked some of the supplements were produced using animal components.



5) Protein is not B-12 either. To use your own claim with slight modification:



6) If a vegan diet is so much better, why are there so few professional atheletes who do not follow said diet to give them the edge you claim is evident? These people's income is connected to their preformance so it would seem they should flock to a vegan diet if it gives their opponents such an advantage.



7) You mean am I biased? No, I have read numerous studies over the decades on diet, environmental impacts, and nutritional differences.



8) You could and if you had built up a sufficient reserve of B-12, for example, you would do ok for a while. You see there are no sources of B-12 in a vegan diet so without the initial meat based diet you cannot have a healthly life span.



9) I would agree on this as few eat a properly balanced diet.



10) Especially the ones from animal sources, since the benefit of using manure for fertilizer and lax streilization of food allows the animal products to be introduced into the diet without being that obvious.


11) They are when they eat processed food now, yes. The fresh organic foods, no. Thus the natural unsupplemented diet, which is the new trend is not.

12)
And that whole survival thing which is tied to the natural diet. Perhaps we should manufacture complete food in a bar and see how that works for the einvironment too.


*) I rather think its the quality of life that is the important issue, not the length of life. How many people with the indignity of dementia do you know?.... And people living longer is down to central heating/better housing & medicines. Though with over-population 'this' is also linked, see below.


You claim causation while ignoring all other aspects of change. That was the point and you had no credible response to refute your short coming.

Quote:
1) "In theory, one could live solely on supplements and not on natural foods" - You.
You couldn't


Why not? Just saying "no" without some evidence to support your claim is as weak as making the above claim without considering the other factors equally.

Quote:
and nor could you live solely on meat.


Many of the native Inuit came close. They ate a diet very high in animal fat.

Quote:
You can on plant food.


No, you cannot. You cannot get the B-12, for example, from any plant source.

Quote:
Indeed without plant food there would be no human or animal life on earth
.

Because the bottom of the food chain contains animals which are designed to be herbavores, while we are designed to be omnivores and thus require some animal products to remain healthy.

Quote:
Have you ever tried a vegan diet to be in a position to make any judgement?
Supplementation. Food you eat is fortified. Animal feed is fortified. Over half all Americans take a supplement. It's the world we live in.


And if we stop eating natural plant food and start eating only artificial supplements, that would be the world in which we live as well. It would not change the fact that for a natural diet humans need animal products.

Quote:
You can get all nutrients from a plant diet.


No, you cannot. I have pointed out the problems with a natural plant based diet as well as a modern plant based diet.

Quote:
2) WAYNE!!!!!!!!! There weren't over 7 BILLION people on the planet back then. Heading to 10 BILLION by the middle of the century.


Which means a plant based diet will not be able to feed these people because of the limitations of arabel land. The conversion of land suitable only for grazing to plant production is not possible. Thus, the use of that land to produce food makes it possbile to feed more of this population. This still never addressed how the meat industry was supposed to be responsible for the population increase, which was my intitial question.

Quote:
3) See the above!
More people = less land, more food needed.
Livestock production = waste of precious dwindling resources, more waste, more greenhouse gas, more deforestation.


Misunderstanding of the situation is clear, but the reason for the misunderstanding seems to be intentional. Livestock production can ADD to the resources if you just look at the whole picture.

Quote:
4) Totally wrong.


If that were the case you could point to the specifics on what was wrong. Just trying to wave away facts does not do anything but make your position appear to be intent on ingoring facts.

Quote:
5) Your point? You can get B-12 from vegan sources. Vegan B-12 supplements.


As I pointed out the "vegan" supplements the last time I did an in depth check were a lie. They used bacteria to manufacture the B-12, but the bacteria was raised in a solution containing milk. A "vegan" source unsupportable without the animal products is not really vegan.

Quote:
A recent general population study found around 40% had 'low levels', 'near deficiency' or 'outright deficiency' of B-12.


And this is supposed to show what exactly? What of the vegan and vegetarian populations?

Quote:
6) The number is growing all the time.
"In fact my best year of track competition was the first year I ate a vegan diet. I've found that a person does not need protein from meat to be a successful athlete" - Carl Lewis


Not growing very quickly if it were such a clear advantage. It seems your outlook on the advantage is somewhat biased when compared to the actual atheletes whose income is tied to their performance.

Quote:
7) You need to have walked the walk before you can talk the talk.


So you have been an athlete eating a meat based diet?

Quote:
8) Over 400 million life long vegetarians in India, for example, who have never eaten meat yet doing fine.


And when they move to nations with sanitized food they do not do as well. When the trace animal products in the soil are removed the B-12 goes with it.


Quote:
Vegan B-12 supplements are just that vegan, derived from yeasts or spirulina.


Yeasts may have B-12 added, but they are not a source of B-12.

According to the vegan site that tracks such research the spirulina claim is also false:

http://www.veganhealth.org/b12/plant#spiru

Spirulina

An Indian research group published an article in 2010 examining the vitamin B12 content of spirulina (Spirulina platensis). They believed that they found 35 - 38 µg of methylcobalamin per 100 g of dry mass (40).

Table 5 shows the B12 analogue content (µg/30 g) of various spirulina batches from earlier reports:

Table 5. B12 Analogue Content (µg/30 g) of Spirulina
Netherlands4 USA13 Japan14
Assay IF L. leich. IF L. leich. L. leich. IF PC
Spirulina 14.5 67 36.7 193.1 73 2.5 0.44
Spirulina 6 35.3 38 1.9 0.32
Spirulina 1.67 8.7 44 5.2 0.88
IF - Intrinsic factor Assay
PC - Paper Chromotography Assay


The wide range of B12 analogues from one measurement method to another indicates that spirulina has a wide variety of different analogues, many of which are inactive. Some may interfere with B12 activity in humans.

In the one study published in medical journals testing spirulina, B12 activity actually decreased in people fed a combination of spirulina and nori (Dagnelie et al., 1991, Netherlands).

In the Autumn 2005 issue of their newsletter The Vegan (p. 30) the UK Vegan Society reported on a trial they performed using chlorella and spirulina to treat elevated MMA levels. Three people with abnormal MMA levels were given spirulina and their MMA levels remained abnormal.


Quote:
A recent study discovered B-12 in white button mushrooms.


There was no clear determination of active B-12 according to the vegan site:

A 2012 study from the Watanabe group (35) found what they thought was active vitamin B12 in the following mushrooms (per 100 g of dry weight):

2.9 - 3.9 µg in black trumpet (Craterellus cornucopioides)
1.3 - 2.1 µg in golden chanterelle (Cantharellus cibarius)
1.3 µg in parasol (Macrolepiota procera)
.3 - .4 µg in porcini (Boletus spp.)
.2 µg in oyster (Pleurotus ostreatus)
.1 µg in black morels (Morchella conica)
The authors noted that 100 g of dry weight was the equivalent of about 1 kg of fresh mushrooms. They said that a moderate intake of black trumpet or golden chanterelle "may contribute slightly to the prevention of severe B12 deficiency in vegetarians." They did not know why the mushrooms contained B12 and also did not test the mushrooms in humans to determine their ability to lower MMA levels.

Table 14. B12 in Mushrooms
Button Cup Flat
Most
Cap 1005 567 161
Flesh 233 83 84
Stalk 17 255 465
Peel 217 1015 354
Total (ng / 400 g) 1472 1920 1064
ng / Cupa 257.60 336.00 186.20
mcg / Cup 0.26 0.34 0.19
Cups to meet RDA 9.32 7.14 12.89
Least
Cap 11 8 17
Flesh 4 7 4
Stalk 11 7 12
Peel 36 20 68
Total (ng / 400 g) 62 42 101
ng / Cupa 10.85 7.35 17.68
mcg / Cup 0.01 0.01 0.02
Cups to meet RDA 221.20 326.53 135.79
aAssume 70 g per Cup
In 2009, a paper was published looking at the B12 analogue content of mushrooms in Australia (31). The authors used chromatography and mass spectrometry to determine whether the B12 was an active form, and they believed that it was.

Table 14 shows the B12 analogue content of the batches of each mushroom containing the most B12 and the batches containing the least.

Assuming that the B12 is active analogue, it would take anywhere from 7 to 326 cups of mushrooms to meet the RDA.

As for the source of the B12, the authors were not sure, but they said:

"The high concentration of vitamin B12 in peel suggests that it was not synthesized within the mushrooms but was either absorbed directly from the compost or synthesized by bacteria on the mushroom surface. The latter is more likely because mushrooms have no root system to take up the vitamin in the compost as is the case with the uptake of vitamins by root plants from the soil containing fertilizers."
A 2005 study from Italy found significant amounts of vitamin B12 analogue in mushrooms (33). 250 g of P. nebrodensis contained 4.8 µg of vitamin B12. They used an immunoenzymatic assay. From the paper, it appears that the soil did not have organic waste of any kind. It is not clear if the B12 analogue was active.

Quote:
9) But Americans are eating more red meat and dairy than ever before!


Do you ever read the term "balanced diet" or do you just ignore it as a standard?

Quote:


So you counter with the evidence that farming is damaging the soil? How does that relate to what I said about especially the situations where animal manure is not used? Given that vegetable farming is doing this damage to the soil, it seems that using your logic we should stop eating vegetables, right?

Quote:


How does this relate to what I said exactly?

And that whole survival thing which is tied to the natural diet. Perhaps we should manufacture complete food in a bar and see how that works for the einvironment too.

Just to point out Paul's error, I have been to a slaughterhouse. I have slaughtered hogs, chickens, and cattle for my own consumption and I still eat a dieat containing meat. There are quite a few others with similar experiences.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group