Vegetarians Live Longer and Healthier

Pangui

I found this article to be encouraging, affirming and inspirational. I am so glad I adopted a plant-based diet. Hopefully, I too, can avoid the lifestyle diseases (coronary artery disease, type II diabetes, stroke, most cancers, alzheimers, and obesity) caused by the Standard American Diet.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/02/the-lovely-hill-where-people-live-longer-and-happier/272798/

"The death rate from cancer for Adventist men is 60 percent lower than that of the average California male; for Adventist women, it is 75 percent lower. According to Loma Linda University, ground zero in the Adventist Health Studies, "Death from coronary heart disease among Adventist men was 66 percent [lower compared to their California peers]; for Adventist women, it was 98 percent [lower]. Stroke death rates for Adventist men were 72 percent [lower], compared to their non-Adventist counterparts. For Adventist women, death from stroke was 82 percent [lower]."

holly1283

I don't necessarily agree. I'm glad your plan works for you>

ladyraven68

Phew, good job i live in the UK.

live2dream

Great article! I'm glad some more real studies are coming out from people doing this long-term! It's exciting how easy it is to drop our risks of disease by such a dramatic amount! I do want to live a long time, but the quality of life during is what really matters. Getting colon cancer or something from eating meat is not the way I want to go out suffering miserably.


I hadn't heard of Seventh-Day Adventurists and I'm not Christian, but I find that their beliefs fascinating! Especially that they will do anything to treat their body like it's the temple of god, and following a plant-based diet, getting exercise and helping others is the best way to do that! All the power to them! I love it! :flowerforyou:

Pangui

I grew up next to this small town. My mom owned a flower shop there and we used to joke that at 5 PM on Friday evening, they would roll up the sidewalks. Everything was closed on Saturday. I wish I had known back then that they were onto something with their diet.

Viva_Karina

good, more meat and bacon for me!

Akimajuktuq

There are other factors that play a role in the health of Seventh Day Adventists (there are some in my family). To just jump to the assumption that a plant-based diet is the cause, rather than a correlation, is incorrect. Someone using the studies to back up their opinion might make that claim but I can bet that the researchers did not.

I invest incredible amounts of time researching, observing my Inuit neighbours (who, until recently, had a diet of almost totally animal sources and yet had no heart disease, cancer, diabetes, etc, and lived long if they didn't have an accident or a food shortage) and experimenting on myself and your assertion is not fact. I'm sure it fits your beliefs, but that doesn't make it true.

It's interesting that there is not one single Paleolithic society, or even current hunger/gatherer society, that had/have a completely plant-based diet. So, what do you suppose we are genetically designed to eat? Monocultured grains? Sorry, I don't buy it. And no, it's not "ethical" to eat monocultured grains over wild or grass fed animals. Not when one considers soil organisms and environmental impacts, and even the impacts on people and their livelihoods/culture. Oh and if you think one can survive on just vegetables, I beg to differ on that too. Fat is not an optional nutrient.

Seventh Day Adventists certainly do eat a diet that is, in many ways, superior to the Standard American Diet (remember most people are eating grain fed animals raised on factory farms) and they also have a completely different lifestyle than the average American. Factors abound. Correlation versus causation.

Pangui

There are other factors that play a role in the health of Seventh Day Adventists (there are some in my family). To just jump to the assumption that a plant-based diet is the cause, rather than a correlation, is incorrect. Someone using the studies to back up their opinion might make that claim but I can bet that the researchers did not.

I invest incredible amounts of time researching, observing my Inuit neighbours (who, until recently, had a diet of almost totally animal sources and yet had no heart disease, cancer, diabetes, etc, and lived long if they didn't have an accident or a food shortage) and experimenting on myself and your assertion is not fact. I'm sure it fits your beliefs, but that doesn't make it true.

It's interesting that there is not one single Paleolithic society, or even current hunger/gatherer society, that had/have a completely plant-based diet. So, what do you suppose we are genetically designed to eat? Monocultured grains? Sorry, I don't buy it. And no, it's not "ethical" to eat monocultured grains over wild or grass fed animals. Not when one considers soil organisms and environmental impacts, and even the impacts on people and their livelihoods/culture. Oh and if you think one can survive on just vegetables, I beg to differ on that too. Fat is not an optional nutrient.

Seventh Day Adventists certainly do eat a diet that is, in many ways, superior to the Standard American Diet (remember most people are eating grain fed animals raised on factory farms) and they also have a completely different lifestyle than the average American. Factors abound. Correlation versus causation.

You are exactly correct that correlation does not equal causation. It would be foolish to rely upon the findings of any given study. Now we have decades of research and tons of studies to show that plant-based diets are ideal. I find it interesting that folks seeking to find support for a high fat high animal protein diet have to resort to the Inuit as their primary example. This is a people that have learned and evolved to live in an extreme climate and relegated to live on fish, whale blubber and seal blood. It's not really a diet that can be practically translated for large warm climate societies. Nevertheless, there are numerous studies on the Inuit that indicate they suffered comparable rates of cancer and disease as those eating a western diet (at the time of the study). (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/1097-0142(196902)23:2<468::AID-CNCR2820230225>3.0.CO;2-9/pdf)

While you may be correct in stating that there is not one major society that is COMPLETELY plant-based, I think you are missing the point that MOST large, successful long-lived societies ate mostly a diet of whole grains (corn, wheat, barley, sorghum, or rice) and vegetables, supplemented by small amounts of meat and animal products. They didn't suffer from cancer, heart disease and diabetes they way people do today eating the Standard American Diet. The more research that is done, the clearer it becomes that as the amount of animal products decrease in a diet, the healthier the population becomes. This doesn't prove that an animal-free diet is superior to one with very little animal protein, but the studies do suggest that the closer we approach zero animal products, the less disease occurs.

And if you want to argue about environmental impact, there is no industry more destructive to the earth than that of commercial animal feed operations. I would be happy to cite specific examples if needed.

heymirth

As a vegitarian how to you get 30-40% of calories of protien? Pm

moustache_flavored_lube

ldrosophila

This study is telling me that if you want to live longer become a 7th day adventist. All other Christian sects are doomed! So what is your life expectancy if you are Jewish or Muslim and avoid pork and sea bottom dwelling animals?

Pangui

As a vegitarian how to you get 30-40% of calories of protien? Pm

I don't get 30-40% of my calories from protein. That would be very unhealthy and it would overwork my kidneys. Standard plant foods provide all the protein I need in just the right proportions, usually between 6-15%. Human breast milk is only 5%-8% protein and that's for a growing baby, when protein needs are high. Too many of us believe what we see on TV and hear from the meat industry when it comes to protein requirements.

llsncernoch93

Adventists also don't drink alcohol or smoke. My grandfather is as Adventist as you can get. He's 91 and still chopping down trees in his yard but he has delt with many, many bouts of skin cancer.

BonaFideUK

As a vegitarian how to you get 30-40% of calories of protien? Pm

I don't get 30-40% of my calories from protein. That would be very unhealthy and it would overwork my kidneys. Standard plant foods provide all the protein I need in just the right proportions, usually between 6-15%. Human breast milk is only 5%-8% protein and that's for a growing baby, when protein needs are high. Too many of us believe what we see on TV and hear from the meat industry when it comes to protein requirements.

Thats your opinion. Most people get on just fine having 40% protein in their diet. Its not "very unhealthy" at all. How many supplements do you take because you're a vegetarian btw?

redheaddee

If it works for you, than good on ya.

However, the 3rd tooth from the middle on each side is called a canine. The canine sole function is to grasp and tear meat. Therefore, it is in our basic evolutionary design to eat meat. Herbivores do not have them, because they are designed to be unable to process meat; therefore, they do not need the teeth to tear meat. As humans are omnivores, we have both canines for tearing meat and the flat molars for grinding plant matter.

Scientific studies are great, but for every one you have proving, I can do the same from the opposite opinion. I prefer to defer to Mother Nature and her grand design, as it has proven very effective.

sexyduckie

Okay - if the canine is proof that we are designed to eat meat. Go out in the woods today - catch yourself a deer with your bare hands and gnaw on it raw. Humans are only opportunistic meat eaters. In the beginning we relied on the leftovers.

Or go out in the woods, grab some berries and gnaw on those. Yep - that is actually possible... how were we designed?

Acg67

There are other factors that play a role in the health of Seventh Day Adventists (there are some in my family). To just jump to the assumption that a plant-based diet is the cause, rather than a correlation, is incorrect. Someone using the studies to back up their opinion might make that claim but I can bet that the researchers did not.

I invest incredible amounts of time researching, observing my Inuit neighbours (who, until recently, had a diet of almost totally animal sources and yet had no heart disease, cancer, diabetes, etc, and lived long if they didn't have an accident or a food shortage) and experimenting on myself and your assertion is not fact. I'm sure it fits your beliefs, but that doesn't make it true.

It's interesting that there is not one single Paleolithic society, or even current hunger/gatherer society, that had/have a completely plant-based diet. So, what do you suppose we are genetically designed to eat? Monocultured grains? Sorry, I don't buy it. And no, it's not "ethical" to eat monocultured grains over wild or grass fed animals. Not when one considers soil organisms and environmental impacts, and even the impacts on people and their livelihoods/culture. Oh and if you think one can survive on just vegetables, I beg to differ on that too. Fat is not an optional nutrient.

Seventh Day Adventists certainly do eat a diet that is, in many ways, superior to the Standard American Diet (remember most people are eating grain fed animals raised on factory farms) and they also have a completely different lifestyle than the average American. Factors abound. Correlation versus causation.

By your own admission, this is not a valid opinion as you do not have first hand experience with everything you stated

Reply to L Cordain et al

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/72/6/1590.full

Mortality in vegetarians and nonvegetarians: detailed findings from a collaborative analysis of 5 prospective studies.

ajcn.nutrition.org/content/70/3/516s.full.pdf

redheaddee

Okay - if the canine is proof that we are designed to eat meat. Go out in the woods today - catch yourself a deer with your bare hands and gnaw on it raw. Humans are only opportunistic meat eaters. In the beginning we relied on the leftovers.

Or go out in the woods, grab some berries and gnaw on those. Yep - that is actually possible... how were we designed?

Because that is what man has been doing since day one...gnawing on live deer. Come on, that is not even a reaslitic analogy. We hunted with sticks and rocks and cooked the meat over fire. We have been hunters and gatherers since walking the planet. You are really trying to argue evolution? Then what is the canine for, decoration? :noway:

thekyleo

Okay - if the canine is proof that we are designed to eat meat. Go out in the woods today - catch yourself a deer with your bare hands and gnaw on it raw. Humans are only opportunistic meat eaters. In the beginning we relied on the leftovers.

Or go out in the woods, grab some berries and gnaw on those. Yep - that is actually possible... how were we designed?

you chew...not gnaw

dietstokes

I knew this topic would spark debate, and that I would hear many of the comments posted. However, I did want to correct one argument. Someone posted about Inuit being healthy and living long lives. In fact, this is not true. Many Inuit live to about the age of 50, with the average age around 43. I've also seen reports with a slightly older age, but still reporting that Inuit live 12-15 years less than other Canadians (The study was Canadian).

Anyway, I'm done. Don;t know why, but not correcting that was driving me crazy!

Acg67

http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2013/01/dog-domestication-tied-to-starch.html