Giving up Meat

AnninStPaul

I agree that there is no obligation to provide links ever on MFP but don't you think if someone is going to make a statement (for example) linking certain foods with disease that it's reasonable to ask them where they got their information from? No, they don't have to answer but I'm surprised that they get upset when people asked them to support what they're saying.

Several people have posted links to support what they are saying, but they seem to have been ignored.

Timing is everything, just got this in my email -- note I am an omnivore and have no intention of changing my habits.

Red Meat Consumption Linked With Risk for Kidney Cancer
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/756157?sssdmh=dm1.747366&src=nldne

In a nine-year study of 500,000 US adults, where < 1/2 of 1% got kidney cancer (~1800 of the 500,000), those in the top quintile of red meat consumption were 19% more likely to be diagnosed with kidney cancer than those in the bottom quintile. Those who ate well done or barbecued meat had greater risk than those who did not eat red meat cooked in that fashion.

The link between red meat consumption and kidney cancer also varied based upon the types of kidney cancer: " the association between red meat and cancer was stronger for papillary cancers, but there was no effect for clear-cell kidney cancers."

At the end of it all...if I'm in the top quintile, it sounds like my odds of kidney cancer are 0.43%. Or about 1/28th of my lifetime risk for breast cancer just because I'm female.

_VoV

If you want evidence, perhaps the best there is is The China Study, by T. Colin Campbell, Ph.D., a Cornell Professor of Nutritional Biochemistry. Dr Campbell noticed that people in certain parts of China had no colon cancer, no osteoporosis, very low incidence of heart disease and stroke, and he set about to study the reasons why. I strongly urge you to get the book, 'The China Study', and read about his ten-year longitudinal study of a representative population of rural China. It is not that these people were ethical vegetarians, but they were poor and meat in China is expensive. Thus if you will, they were vegetarians (with a very small amount of fish or meat) by circumstance. The study made some shocking conclusions about meat eating and the Western diet. Those who were the subject of the study, had zero presentation of colon cancer and osteoporosis, and very low incidence of heart disease and stroke. Moreover, when some of this population moved to cities where people "enjoyed" the Western meat centered diet, their health deteriorated, and they started succumbing to Western diseases. The China Study is very strong evidence ( and it is not the only scientific evidence) that the vegetarian diet prevents certain diseases that are chronic in Western Society.

AnninStPaul

If you want evidence, perhaps the best there is is The China Study, by T. Colin Campbell, Ph.D., a Cornell Professor of Nutritional Biochemistry. Dr Campbell noticed that people in certain parts of China had no colon cancer, no osteoporosis, very low incidence of heart disease and stroke, and he set about to study the reasons why. I strongly urge you to get the book, 'The China Study', and read about his ten-year longitudinal study of a representative population of rural China. It is not that these people were ethical vegetarians, but they were poor and meat in China is expensive. Thus if you will, they were vegetarians (with a very small amount of fish or meat) by circumstance. The study made some shocking conclusions about meat eating and the Western diet. Those who were the subject of the study, had zero presentation of colon cancer and osteoporosis, and very low incidence of heart disease and stroke. Moreover, when some of this population moved to cities where people "enjoyed" the Western meat centered diet, their health deteriorated, and they started succumbing to Western diseases. The China Study is very strong evidence ( and it is not the only scientific evidence) that the vegetarian diet prevents certain diseases that are chronic in Western Society.

Another view on Campbell's work --
http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/China-Study.html

"Only 39 of 350 pages are actually devoted to the China Study"

The proteins he used to conclude that animal proteins are bad was a MILK protein.

"Sugar, soluble carbohydrates, and fiber all have correlations with cancer mortality about seven times the magnitude of that with animal protein, and total fat and fat as a percentage of calories were both negatively correlated with cancer mortality."

veganbaum

-- note I am an omnivore and have no intention of changing my habits.

The point of this thread was not to debate diets or convince anyone to change anything. The poor OP asked for suggestions for vegetarian meals. She said her mother's oncologists were in support of her giving up at least red meat. That people then come on and want to argue has taken away from the point that she made the decision, with the support of oncologists, and asked for ideas. That's it.

_VoV

You are correct about Campbell's early lab work, which he summarizes in his book, but if you read the 'China Study' in its entirety, it goes much beyond the lab. This is an epidemiological study following a huge population for a large number of years, a truly monumental work. The early work which you are referring to talks about excessive protein and especially casein (MILK protein) accelerating the growth of liver cancer. So you are correct as far as you go, but the conclusions, in my opinion go much further.

ninerbuff

If you want evidence, perhaps the best there is is The China Study, by T. Colin Campbell, Ph.D., a Cornell Professor of Nutritional Biochemistry. Dr Campbell noticed that people in certain parts of China had no colon cancer, no osteoporosis, very low incidence of heart disease and stroke, and he set about to study the reasons why. I strongly urge you to get the book, 'The China Study', and read about his ten-year longitudinal study of a representative population of rural China. It is not that these people were ethical vegetarians, but they were poor and meat in China is expensive. Thus if you will, they were vegetarians (with a very small amount of fish or meat) by circumstance. The study made some shocking conclusions about meat eating and the Western diet. Those who were the subject of the study, had zero presentation of colon cancer and osteoporosis, and very low incidence of heart disease and stroke. Moreover, when some of this population moved to cities where people "enjoyed" the Western meat centered diet, their health deteriorated, and they started succumbing to Western diseases. The China Study is very strong evidence ( and it is not the only scientific evidence) that the vegetarian diet prevents certain diseases that are chronic in Western Society.

I do believe that the China Study has been debunked.


A.C.E. Certified Personal Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

_VoV

Veganbaum, you are exactly right, but as much as I respect the OP, I am loath to back away from people who DO want to argue these points. Perhaps we might start a different thread just for this debate?

_VoV

"I do believe that the China Study has been debunked."

I assume you have a proof that the China Study has been debunked, and that, by your own standard of proof are prepared to offer me several peer reviewed journal articles that back up this otherwise, unsubstantiated claim.

sunnyday789

Veganbaum, you are exactly right, but as much as I respect the OP, I am loath to back away from people who DO want to argue these points. Perhaps we might start a different thread just for this debate?

I wasn't really arguing her point just asking for support for it, but anyway just as people aren't obligated to post links to support statements, people are not obligated to keep to the exact topic as long as rules are kept to (no nastiness) . This is what occurs when people have conversations whether face to face or online; the topic sometimes shifts. Nothing wrong with that as long as no-one gets hurt. Some call it hijacking a thread, I call it interaction/conversing/debate and sometimes educational

veganbaum

Veganbaum, you are exactly right, but as much as I respect the OP, I am loath to back away from people who DO want to argue these points. Perhaps we might start a different thread just for this debate?

I wasn't really arguing her point just asking for support for it, but anyway just as people aren't obligated to post links to support statements, people are not obligated to keep to the exact topic as long as rules are kept to (no nastiness) . This is what occurs when people have conversations whether face to face or online; the topic sometimes shifts. Nothing wrong with that as long as no-one gets hurt. Some call it hijacking a thread, I call it interaction/conversing/debate and sometimes educational

Hijacking a thread is actually against the rules. That doesn't mean a topic can't expand. But the OP didn't open with "I've heard meat causes cancer, should I stop eating it?" or even "I've heard meat causes cancer, I'm going to stop eating it." She just wanted ideas for vegetarian meals - that's it! Then when asked WHY she was giving up meat then she said that eating it has been linked to cancer and that her mother's oncologists supported her giving it up. Coming back to the thread she started asking about vegetarian meals and getting a bunch of posts about cancer and meat and factory farming are not on topic with her question. I am not against debate, but it can also be annoying if you are having one conversation with a person in which you are trying to get certain information and someone else comes along and turns the topic in a different direction and you're left there thinking "hey, what about the question I asked? This is interesting and all, but it doesn't answer my question."
You can always start your own thread for debate if that's what you want, or go join the debate group. The point is to make sure the OP has her legitimate question answered and this thread has mostly gone off topic. AND I was making my point more at the person who for some reason felt the need to add that they were omni and had no intention of changing their eating habits - way off the point of this post and no reason to add it.

_VoV

I agree this is not the right place to discuss the relative merits of plant- vs. meat-eating.

My husband (VegesaurusRex) has taken an interest in this topic, and has started a new thread under Chit-Chat. I'm not sure if that's what you meant by the debate boards.

VegesaurusRex

I invite those of you interested in continuing the veggies vs meat debate to go to the Veggies vs Meat thread I just started. Spirited debate welcome.

gingerb85

Well life has been tied to cancer its all tied to it. Just eat your meat how can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat.... I would just make sure you eat enough living food and cut back on your meat I think meat is great. Just don't eat red meat as often and when I do it's lean! Good luck especially in the summer when your friend are BBQing.:ohwell:

Hmm....when we are BBQ-ing, we throw some veggies on there as well - and I love a grilled portobello mushroom on a nice vegan roll with sauteed onions and peppers and some spicy mustard, lettuce, tomato, and pickles. I don't think I'm missing out because I'm not eating animal flesh. In fact, my meat-eating family many times prefers a portobello mushroom "burger" to the ground meat ones.

tidmutt

"I do believe that the China Study has been debunked."

I assume you have a proof that the China Study has been debunked, and that, by your own standard of proof are prepared to offer me several peer reviewed journal articles that back up this otherwise, unsubstantiated claim.

Honestly, a journal article is not required. Common sense is all that is needed to be skeptical of the china study. I already posted this but correlation does not equal causation. A statistical correlation is not proof of anything, it indicates that there might be something to look at nothing more. So a 10 year study correlating various health measures with a food survey indicates nothing other than there are interesting correlations everywhere. You can find various people have looked at the study and shown how when you look at multiple correlations they can show inconsistent findings an indicator that there a confounding variables in there somewhere. Ultimately we don't need to go that deep, I wouldn't base a decision on this sort of science, it's less than half the process that helps us uncover the truth.

tidmutt

I agree this is not the right place to discuss the relative merits of plant- vs. meat-eating.

My husband (VegesaurusRex) has taken an interest in this topic, and has started a new thread under Chit-Chat. I'm not sure if that's what you meant by the debate boards.

Agreed, this thread has wandered far off topic although I don't think any harm has been done. I'll take a look for your husband's thread.

sunnyday789

Veganbaum, you are exactly right, but as much as I respect the OP, I am loath to back away from people who DO want to argue these points. Perhaps we might start a different thread just for this debate?

You make some good points but don't you think that maybe she should have titled her thread "want vegetarian recipes" rather than "giving up meat" as it would attract a different crowd than the one she got? If i was following atkins (I'm not; love carbs) and started a thread "looking for atkins recipes" I would get different responses by naming a thread "I'm giving up carbs". and then mention in one of my post that carbs are bad for you. She did make points about meat being bad for you. People are not hijacking if they respond to part of her post.

VegesaurusRex

I do not want to continue this debate on THIS string. Search "Veggies vs Meat" and I will respond to your Statistics 101 claim, which by the way, is not valid.

tidmutt

Veganbaum, you are exactly right, but as much as I respect the OP, I am loath to back away from people who DO want to argue these points. Perhaps we might start a different thread just for this debate?

I wasn't really arguing her point just asking for support for it, but anyway just as people aren't obligated to post links to support statements, people are not obligated to keep to the exact topic as long as rules are kept to (no nastiness) . This is what occurs when people have conversations whether face to face or online; the topic sometimes shifts. Nothing wrong with that as long as no-one gets hurt. Some call it hijacking a thread, I call it interaction/conversing/debate and sometimes educational

You make some good points but don't you think that maybe she should have titled her thread "want vegetarian recipes" rather than "giving up meat" as it would attract a different crowd than the one she got? If i was following atkins (I'm not; love carbs) and started a thread "looking for atkins recipes" I would get different responses by naming a thread "I'm giving up carbs". and then mention in one of my post that carbs are bad for you. She did make points about meat being bad for you. People are not hijacking if they respond to part of her post.

+1

JeccaLauren

Fantastic list, thank you for sharing.

gdjenn

Here are a couple of soup recipes that really hit the spot when you want something warm and filling.

Jen's Fabulous Lentil Soup

1 bag green lentils
2-3 cups cooked pearl barley
3-4 stalks celery, cut into elbows
5-6 carrots, cut into circles
1 yellow onion
4 cloves garlic, whole
2 bay leaves
2 quarts broth (chicken or vegetable)
1 head of Swiss Chard, chopped

* Sort lentils while dry. Do a quick wash, cover lentils in a pot with water, boil 5 min. Drain and rinse.
* Meanwhile, cook pearl barley according to directions.
* Add small handful of salt and pepper; NOTE: some handfuls are bigger than others...
* Chop celery, carrot, onions and add to pot with lentils.
* Add garlic cloves, bay leaves and broth.
* Cook on low stirring often for 1-1/2 to 2 hours.
* Remove garlic and bay leaves.
* Add cooked barley and cook 1/2 hour more.
* Add chopped swiss chard and cook 15 more minutes.

White Bean & Kale Soup
1 onion, chopped
1 bunch kale, chopped, about 6 cups (You can''t have too much!)
1 garnet yam, diced ( not necessary to peel)
1 tablespoon smoked sweet paprika plus more for garnish or paprika plus 1 to 1/2
teaspoon liquid smoke
1 tablespoon curry powder
1 bay leaf
4 cups low- sodium vegetable broth
2 15.5 ounce cans great norther beans, drained and rinsed, divided
3/4 cup water
2 tablespoons red wine vinegar
pepper to taste


In soup pot stir-fry onions adding liquid as necessary until just beginning to brown
Wash chopped kale so it goes in the pot wet and add to onions cooking 4 to 5 minutes until wilted.
Stir in yam, paprika, curry and bay leaf and cook 1 minute more for spices to release their fragrance
Add broth and bring to a boil. Reduce heat to low and cook 30 minutes or until kale and yams are tender.
Puree 1 cup beans with 3/4 cup water in blender or by putting beans and water in a small bowl and blending with an immersion blender.
Add bean puree and remaining beans to soup and simmer 10 minutes.
Add vinegar and pepper to taste and serve with a sprinkle of paprika in each bowl.