Vegetarian diet and mental disorders

VMarkV

There are plenty of nutritional deficiencies that can cause mental status changes...too little salt, B12, dietary fat, low cholesterol (interestingly, there is no benefit in having low cholesterol, even LDL or "bad" cholesterol), electrolyte imbalances, low iron, low magnesium, etc...

I think healthier people who tend to eat very "clean" foods are more prone to avoiding these nutrients and many happen to be vegetarian. It's pretty easy to have a deficiency if one thinks in absolutes when it comes to diet and nutrition.

From personal experience, eating animals has made me much happier and smarter than when I didn't

cloud2011

Oh really!!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6180753.stm

In this study:
Men who were vegetarian had an IQ score of 106, compared with 101 for non-vegetarians; while female vegetarians averaged 104, compared with 99 for non-vegetarians.

I am happy to be vegetarian and have no mental disorder to switch to meat.

Having a slightly higher IQ is not a guarantee of avoiding mental disorders.

cloud2011

6. This like most posts on any public forum are much like any other discussion of politics and religion. Maybe diet needs to be added to the list of forbidden topics to talk about on a first date, Religion, Politics, Sex and Diet.

My question is, what would we do with our spare time then?

Cold_Steel

^^

7. People are extremely sensitive to the word 'sensitive' and assume that people that use it are claiming a moral high ground despite it being a morally neutral term. People who are more sensitive (prone to stronger physical and emotional reactions) are possibly more predisposed to various mental health conditions. Someone mentioned Borderline Personality--research is suggesting that many people with BPD are biologically more predisposed to sensitivity and difficulty with emotion regulation, though this wouldn't be enough usually to cause BPD. Just as having a higher degree of sensitivity (strength of a reaction) wouldn't be enough to "cause" vegetarianism. (See the example of a very sensitive person who does not have a moral problem with eating meat. Just because they are more sensitive does not mean they are going to be a vegetarian.) On the other hand, someone with problems morally with eating meat who experiences LESS emotional reaction will be more likely to be able to "turn off" in order to avoid cognitive dissonance because they enjoy eating meat, despite having moral problems with it. (My husband will say that if we had pigs and chickens and cows, he would be a vegetarian, and he admits that if I wanted to eat cats, which we do have, he'd be furious and horrified. Because he can react less strongly, it would require more stimulus-the animal being in front of him or something he can't detach from-to change his decision.) He is not insensitive, but I don't think he would argue that of the two of us, I have a higher degree of sensitivity--emotional reactions--to not just meat but to most issues. I don't feel morally superior to him for this and often envy his more laidback abilities.)

8. If people who are more sensitive are more prone to emotional disorders, it's logical to question if the reason vegetarians have more emotional disorders is because they are more sensitive.

9. No vegetarian here actually called someone an insensitive prick (that I read) while others did call vegetarians half baked and liberals as having a mental disorder.

10. Compassionate =/= sensitive.

11. I know I said I was done with this thread. My bad.

Every one is a special unique flower, I get it. My point was that both sides are saying the following "derp derpppity derp derp" and your post continued that trend.

wolfi622

OUCH!
I am no vegetarian, but this is quite absurd.
Correlation does not equal causation.
Maybe a half baked mind is what draws some to give up meat. That makes much more sense to me.
To turn one's nose up before a fabulous steak is crazy.
Just an opinion.

Well right, and many here are using the news of this study to support the notion of the moral superiority of vegetarians. Perhaps those prone to feeling morally superior are drawn to vegetarianism.

FlaxMilk

Every one is a special unique flower, I get it. My point was that both sides are saying the following "derp derpppity derp derp" and your post continued that trend.

Calling my post derp derp is an excellent rebuttal of the factual information I presented.

I should go take some Omega-3 and perhaps that will help me stay out of this thread. Reading the derp derp when I actually found the study interesting--as it could prove useful or helpful to vegetarians--is getting old.

wackyfunster

Disclaimer: I am a former vegetarian who has a lot of vegetarian/vegan friends/family. This is intended to provide insight into the results, not to attack anyone's lifestyle choices. You can eat whatever you want... I don't care! If you still get offended at anything below, don't expect me to care

Just my 2c... I would be willing to bet that the findings of this study can be chalked up to two factors:

1) Malnutrition:

There is nothing inherently unhealthy about a vegetarian diet. With that said, if you are not diligent in your diet, it is a lot easier to suffer from various deficiencies as a vegetarian (choline in particular, which results in a variety of disorders of anxiety disregulation). Basically, if you aren't eating a lot of lentils/chickpeas and raw veggies, you are going to be malnourished (soy may work as well, but I never really felt good about eating massive quantities of soy, and haven't studied it enough to know whether it's safe... I suspect not, but that is a whole other discussion). As a former vegetarian, it frustrates me to see how many (typically younger) vegetarians are "doing it wrong" and eating the same crappy SAD minus meat. Talk about unhealthy!

2) Sample self-selection

It is impossible to generate a truly random sample of vegetarians, as it is a self-selecting group. Even contrasting with an identically sampled group from a gender/socioeconomic status/race/etc. perspective will NOT yield a functionally identical sample group. To explain this, imagine we are looking at studying people with 37 or more facial piercings. Even comparing that group to an "identical" control group with 0 piercings is NOT an apples to apples comparison, as the experiment group self-selects, and has a propensity to social deviance (not in the pejorative but as in deviation from the norm). In the US, vegetarianism is still not "normal" in most places, and so I suspect a portion of the sample will have chosen vegetarianism as a form of self-expression/defiance. Even if a small portion of the vegetarian group has done so, then that would be enough to skew the results for the entire population (social deviance is highly correlated to incidence of mental illness). If you performed the same experiment in e.g. India, where vegetarianism is more the norm, then this factor could be reduced or eliminated.

kayemme

What we have learned from this thread:


1. Some meat eaters think that vegetarians suffer from a superiority complex.
2. Some vegetarians apparently do suffer from a superiority complex claiming that they are predisposed to mental health conditions like anxiety disorders etc because their "compassion" for animals leads them to have a moral high ground that is much higher than meat eaters through their complexity of compassion.
3. The vegetarians on this and many other threads constantly strive to prove and validate their lifestyle while the meat eaters ridicule the lifestyle and constantly disprove it.
4. Both sides make some generalizations in epic proportions, quite amusing really i.e..e Vegans are mentally challenged/ carnivores are insensitive pricks.
5. The initial case study is extremely flawed with one or two people ACTUALLY reading the study and it clear indicates that their is no causal relationship between vegetarianism and mental health issues yet 5 pages of thread continues from it.
6. This like most posts on any public forum are much like any other discussion of politics and religion. Maybe diet needs to be added to the list of forbidden topics to talk about on a first date, Religion, Politics, Sex and Diet.

i have learned that people of all types are prone to making assumptions based on very little fact.

lilylight

Interesting thread, at least from those who wrote thoughtful comments.

I'm sceptical about the "sensitivity leads to vegetarianism" argument. First, people need to read flaxmilk's posts and understand that calling someone "sensitive" is NOT the same thing as calling them morally superior. Having said that, I'm a highly sensitive person. This is NOT a boast - it's a pain in the butt. Google "highly sensitive person," and you'll find that it is a term used by some psychologists to have a particular meaning. Features include being over sensitive to social stimuli, etc. Anyways, I'm both highly sensitive and a meat-eater. I'm over-sensitive in a lot of contexts, but this hasn't led me to shun meat, except for a brief period in college. Also, I've had plenty of friends who are vegetarian, and some of them can be downright insensitive (at least by my over-sensitive standards)!

To the extent that the study is reliable, I'm inclined to think that the correlation between vegetarianism and "mental status" is due to factors other than "degree of sensitivity," at least by my understanding of the definition.

FlaxMilk

Thank you Lily. I'm curious about the time you went vegetarian in college. What was your motivation?

spiregrain

Lol. My study indicates that both groups have a majority of pretty normal people and a minority of total d-bags.

Anyone see that article in Forbes about how eating less meat is our best bet for stopping global climate change? It was interesting, regardless of what side you're on.

Bobby_Clerici

OUCH!
I am no vegetarian, but this is quite absurd.
Correlation does not equal causation.
Maybe a half baked mind is what draws some to give up meat. That makes much more sense to me.
To turn one's nose up before a fabulous steak is crazy.
Just an opinion.

Well right, and many here are using the news of this study to support the notion of the moral superiority of vegetarians. Perhaps those prone to feeling morally superior are drawn to vegetarianism.

I am very morally superior...and I'd never give up meat.
Maybe actually being morally superior as opposed to merely having the feeling keeps me eating meat.
That makes perfect sense:drinker:

Jezebel9

Just because you are not aware of the sentience of another being does not mean it does not have sentience... it could mean you are just unaware
of the slaughter
you are mindlessly committing
when you kill
the life that certainly wants to live
when you cut
that
lettuce or
broccoli or
kale.
It dies.
Just as we all do or don't... (depending on how you think of it)

Kahlil Gibran
Would that you could live on the fragrance of the earth, and like an air plant be sustained by the light.
But since you must kill to eat, and rob the newly born of its mother's milk to quench your thirst, let it then be an act of worship.
And let your board stand an altar on which the pure and the innocent of forest and plain are sacrificed for that which is purer and still more innocent in man.


When you kill a beast say to him in your heart,
"By the same power that slays you, I too am slain; and I too shall be consumed.
For the law that delivered you into my hand shall deliver me into a mightier hand.
Your blood and my blood is naught but the sap that feeds the tree of heaven."


And when you crush an apple with your teeth, say to it in your heart,
"Your seeds shall live in my body,
And the buds of your tomorrow shall blossom in my heart,
And your fragrance shall be my breath,
And together we shall rejoice through all the seasons."


And in the autumn, when you gather the grapes of your vineyards for the winepress, say in your heart,
"I too am a vineyard, and my fruit shall be gathered for the winepress,
And like new wine I shall be kept in eternal vessels."
And in winter, when you draw the wine, let there be in your heart a song for each cup;
And let there be in the song a remembrance for the autumn days, and for the vineyard, and for the winepress.

cjudesaenz

I might be repeating what others have said, but was not going to read 6+ pages of posts, mental disorder with a PURE/STRICT vegan diet is possible, usually due to the lack of vitamin B12, which can lead to permanent brain damage if not treated. B12 is usually found in meat/fish/cheeses/ and eggs. But vegans can replace this with fortified cereals. I usually see this condition in my elderly patients, due to dietary deficits. I Remember one case of a young vegan having issues, but all they needed was education, and all was good and we found what could fit into her lifestyle.

EDITED TO ADD: I find nothing wrong with either lifestyle, and one is not superior than the other. Both lifestyles can do damage to the human body, for example, incidences of gouty attacks/increased uric acids levels in individuals who eat TONS of red meat and aged foods, and the example above of B12 deficiency and dementia. It is all about education and knowing what is lacking in your diet and to supplement with an alternative that fits into your ideas and lifestyle. I dont eat chicken or meat, but i do it fish/eggs/cheese, with a whole lot of fresh veggies and fruits. I dont care if you eat cardboard boxes and silk panties, know what you are lacking in your current diet and know how to replace it without going against what you believe so you dont run into problems. that is all

GoTakizawa

What if you choose to be vegetarian simply because you find eating flesh to be totally disgusting? I have always been repulsed by meat, even as a child. I think if I had to eat meat I would be very unhappy, probably severely depressed.

lilylight

Thank you Lily. I'm curious about the time you went vegetarian in college. What was your motivation?

As well as I can remember, I got into it because I had friends who were vegetarians, and they got me thinking and reading about it, and I was persuaded by all the arguments in favor. I particularly remember reading "Diet For a Small Planet." I've also never been a huge meat-eater -- e.g., when I was a kid I didn't like it at all -- too gross and hard to chew! I think I was most persuaded by the arguments about health, and about how large scale raising of animals for slaughter is a waste of resources, etc. It wasn't so much a strong sense of being philosophically opposed to ever eating any animal. (Having said that, I could never go hunting, unless my life depended on it, and I don't like to think too much about where this hunk of steak or chicken breast actually comes from).

But I found trying to avoid all meat while living in a dorm (in the 1970s) too hard. Not enough alternatives. Since then, I've gone through short periods where I dropped meat for awhile. But I find that's it's just too... Inconvenient is I guess the word! Also, these days my approach to food is "moderation in all things" and "few or no absolutes". I don't do well with any kind of diet that tells me "absolutely NO 'X', ever!". And it sometimes seems to me that such admonitions are a bit obsessive -- whether it is sugar, white bread, or even meat. I guess for vegetarians whose aversion to meat rises to the level of a strong moral commitment, that's different.

FlaxMilk

As well as I can remember, I got into it because I had friends who were vegetarians, and they got me thinking and reading about it, and I was persuaded by all the arguments in favor. I particularly remember reading "Diet For a Small Planet." I've also never been a huge meat-eater -- e.g., when I was a kid I didn't like it at all -- too gross and hard to chew! I think I was most persuaded by the arguments about health, and about how large scale raising of animals for slaughter is a waste of resources, etc. It wasn't so much a strong sense of being philosophically opposed to ever eating any animal. (Having said that, I could never go hunting, unless my life depended on it, and I don't like to think too much about where this hunk of steak or chicken breast actually comes from).

But I found trying to avoid all meat while living in a dorm (in the 1970s) too hard. Not enough alternatives. Since then, I've gone through short periods where I dropped meat for awhile. But I find that's it's just too... Inconvenient is I guess the word! Also, these days my approach to food is "moderation in all things" and "few or no absolutes". I don't do well with any kind of diet that tells me "absolutely NO 'X', ever!". And it sometimes seems to me that such admonitions are a bit obsessive -- whether it is sugar, white bread, or even meat. I guess for vegetarians whose aversion to meat rises to the level of a strong moral commitment, that's different.

Thanks for your answer. Your feelings/beliefs about animals/meat sound a lot like my hubby's. Obviously not every highly sensitive person will be a vegetarian; I would be curious to see if there is a correlation though. (I would also guess that highly sensitive people would choose either social or artistic pursuits in general but not as an absolute rule.)

FlaxMilk

2) Sample self-selection

It is impossible to generate a truly random sample of vegetarians, as it is a self-selecting group. Even contrasting with an identically sampled group from a gender/socioeconomic status/race/etc. perspective will NOT yield a functionally identical sample group. To explain this, imagine we are looking at studying people with 37 or more facial piercings. Even comparing that group to an "identical" control group with 0 piercings is NOT an apples to apples comparison, as the experiment group self-selects, and has a propensity to social deviance (not in the pejorative but as in deviation from the norm). In the US, vegetarianism is still not "normal" in most places, and so I suspect a portion of the sample will have chosen vegetarianism as a form of self-expression/defiance. Even if a small portion of the vegetarian group has done so, then that would be enough to skew the results for the entire population (social deviance is highly correlated to incidence of mental illness). If you performed the same experiment in e.g. India, where vegetarianism is more the norm, then this factor could be reduced or eliminated.

Thanks for that, WF. That's definitely an insight that hasn't been suggested already. I'd love to see more work on this particular issue.

lilylight

As well as I can remember, I got into it because I had friends who were vegetarians, and they got me thinking and reading about it, and I was persuaded by all the arguments in favor. I particularly remember reading "Diet For a Small Planet." I've also never been a huge meat-eater -- e.g., when I was a kid I didn't like it at all -- too gross and hard to chew! I think I was most persuaded by the arguments about health, and about how large scale raising of animals for slaughter is a waste of resources, etc. It wasn't so much a strong sense of being philosophically opposed to ever eating any animal. (Having said that, I could never go hunting, unless my life depended on it, and I don't like to think too much about where this hunk of steak or chicken breast actually comes from).

But I found trying to avoid all meat while living in a dorm (in the 1970s) too hard. Not enough alternatives. Since then, I've gone through short periods where I dropped meat for awhile. But I find that's it's just too... Inconvenient is I guess the word! Also, these days my approach to food is "moderation in all things" and "few or no absolutes". I don't do well with any kind of diet that tells me "absolutely NO 'X', ever!". And it sometimes seems to me that such admonitions are a bit obsessive -- whether it is sugar, white bread, or even meat. I guess for vegetarians whose aversion to meat rises to the level of a strong moral commitment, that's different.

Thanks for your answer. Your feelings/beliefs about animals/meat sound a lot like my hubby's. Obviously not every highly sensitive person will be a vegetarian; I would be curious to see if there is a correlation though. (I would also guess that highly sensitive people would choose either social or artistic pursuits in general but not as an absolute rule.)

Flaxmilk, I agree, that would be an interesting study! Maybe you should suggest it to Elaine Aron - she seems to have pioneered the study of "highly sensitive people". It would be interesting if it turns out that particular personality types are associated with particular diet choices. (You can tell I'm a social scientist!)

Softrbreeze

The meat industry probably funded that study or else the participants in the study were not eating well-balanced meals. Really, you can't trust "science" anymore.

kaseysospacey

Correlation and causation are different things. I'm not talking out my butt, I have a BS in Psychology.