Meat eating vs. Vegan debate
Options
Replies
-
edit for double post
Very interesting. I have read dozens of studies on this subject, the most noteable being the China study and most sound like this (a recent 30 year longitudinal study):
This March, a study from the Harvard School of Public Health left vegans smiling, the meat industry grumbling–and the media buzzing. The 30-year study showed that eating red meat was associated with a sharply increased risk of premature death–especially from heart disease and cancer. Researchers followed more than 120,000 men and women from 1980 to 2006, and found that each daily increase of three ounces of red meat carried a 13-percent greater risk of dying during the course of the study. The risks linked to processed meat were even greater–eating one hot dog or two strips of bacon per day was linked to a 20 percent increased risk of death.
N= 120,000+
Now why do you suppose your study is so radically different? Believe me the vast majority of studies are on my side.0 -
Really? So colorectal cancer was found in this study to be higher in vegetarians? Interesting. Selecting samples is so difficult though, because you don't know their food history and what else they may be eating / not eating that may be causing these problems.
I know, sampling for something like this is tough. I'm sure there are counter studies. I always read through the sources of the study before I deem it totally accurate.
You just cannot take stand-alone studies as complete proof. Especially large-scale studies like this. Although numbers do speak loudly when correlating, there's always going to be a skew in either direction, and you don't know what the real reasons are. Maybe veggies are more generally concerned with their health and they do other things to ensure their physical and mental wellbeing? Too many variables.
Your comments reminded me that I want to track down the British study referred to in this short video:
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/vegetarians-versus-healthy-omnivores/0 -
edit for double post
Very interesting. I have read dozens of studies on this subject, the most noteable being the China study and most sound like this (a recent 30 year longitudinal study):
This March, a study from the Harvard School of Public Health left vegans smiling, the meat industry grumbling–and the media buzzing. The 30-year study showed that eating red meat was associated with a sharply increased risk of premature death–especially from heart disease and cancer. Researchers followed more than 120,000 men and women from 1980 to 2006, and found that each daily increase of three ounces of red meat carried a 13-percent greater risk of dying during the course of the study. The risks linked to processed meat were even greater–eating one hot dog or two strips of bacon per day was linked to a 20 percent increased risk of death.
Now why do you suppose your study is so radically different? Believe me the vast majority of studies are on my side.
There will be a number of studies that argue the opposite. There always are contrasts in the world of research. I have heard a little about the effect of red meat on heart disease. Although I don't suppose people will care much. Gotta die of something, right? I think that people are immune to what studies say now - the ones that the media have presented - just because of the contradictory evidence they were pushing for so long. One week they'd say potato gives you cancer. The next it doesn't (an example based on nothing, just making a point). So i'm guessing the public doesn't take food issues seriously anymore.0 -
Hmmm, this is just a thought, but how about everyone eat whatever they want and don't worry about what other people eat?
I know, crazy right?0 -
edit for double post
Very interesting. I have read dozens of studies on this subject, the most noteable being the China study and most sound like this (a recent 30 year longitudinal study):
This March, a study from the Harvard School of Public Health left vegans smiling, the meat industry grumbling–and the media buzzing. The 30-year study showed that eating red meat was associated with a sharply increased risk of premature death–especially from heart disease and cancer. Researchers followed more than 120,000 men and women from 1980 to 2006, and found that each daily increase of three ounces of red meat carried a 13-percent greater risk of dying during the course of the study. The risks linked to processed meat were even greater–eating one hot dog or two strips of bacon per day was linked to a 20 percent increased risk of death.
Now why do you suppose your study is so radically different? Believe me the vast majority of studies are on my side.
It's not "my study" and and please don't assign me a "side". I was merely pointing out that vegetarians do get colorectal cancer.
I can see merit in vegan/vegetarian diet; just don't make claims that are unsubstantiated and then call people dumb (as did the poster who made the statement about vegetarians rarely getting colorectal cancer).0 -
Hmmm, this is just a thought, but how about everyone eat whatever they want and don't worry about what other people eat?
I know, crazy right?
I really hope the OP gives you some history on how this thread came about.
Your glib attitude is sort of out of step with the discussion we've been having.0 -
Hmmm, this is just a thought, but how about everyone eat whatever they want and don't worry about what other people eat?
I know, crazy right?
I really hope the OP gives you some history on how this thread came about.
Your glib attitude is sort of out of step with the discussion we've been having.
LOL I read the original one as well as all of this one. My "glib" attitude is perfectly normal for me. Just the way I am. Humor keeps us young. Give it a try.
0 -
I am responding to a bunch of different posts, but I'm combining it into one, so sorry if there is confusion. Just warning you now.
1) I am not a vegetarian, but I tried being one once to see if I would like it, and found out my love for meat surpasses the love to save animals from being my food. =/
2) I do like PC, but I love Xbox360 more, and I hate PS3. I had ps3 and xbox360 at the same time and couldn't stand the PS3.
3) My step-sister is vegetarian (or vegan, not too sure. either way she doesn't eat meat) but she does like chicken broth and other meat-tasting things, so I guess it depends on the person.
4) I know a lot of hunters, and none of them are drunk and lower class. My step-father, who is a millionaire, not including items and property he owns, hunts a lot, and he is not a drunk or in the lower class. There are also many people in my area that hunt and are not drinkers. I suppose if you live in the Southern US (not all of it, but some parts) you would see a lot of that, or watching some of those weird shows on TV, but not in most normal places.0 -
Hmmm, this is just a thought, but how about everyone eat whatever they want and don't worry about what other people eat?
I know, crazy right?
I really hope the OP gives you some history on how this thread came about.
Your glib attitude is sort of out of step with the discussion we've been having.
LOL I read the original one as well as all of this one. My "glib" attitude is perfectly normal for me. Just the way I am. Humor keeps us young. Give it a try.
Nope! We shouldn't care, really! This is purely for my interest and anyone else whose been following!0 -
Really? So colorectal cancer was found in this study to be higher in vegetarians? Interesting. Selecting samples is so difficult though, because you don't know their food history and what else they may be eating / not eating that may be causing these problems.
I know, sampling for something like this is tough. I'm sure there are counter studies. I always read through the sources of the study before I deem it totally accurate.
N=63,000+ and they corrected for things like age, sex, and smoking. Pretty valid overall I'd say.
The reason I posted this though was to refute the statement that vegetarians rarely got colorectal cancer, they were virtually immune.
Here's the link:
http://www.ajcn.org/content/89/5/1620S.full
Just a quick scan of your study and I think I found out why they came to the conclusion they did. Your study was controlled for things like smoking, for example. Now how many vegetarians do you think smoke? I've never met one. Yet your study probably eliminated meat eating smokers. Similarly, your study probably eliminated overweight chronically ill people as well. So what you were in effect doing was comparing virtually ALL Vegetyarians to some meat-eaters. Yes, I am sure there were some overweight and ill vegetarians, but probably not many. I would guess among the meat eating population, the unhealthy were to a large extent eliminated from the study do to correcting for "lifestyle." In effect, vegetarians do have a healthier lifestyle. Although I do believe in controlled studies, I think in this case it resulted in an unbalanced study. They were in effect controling for things vegetarians rarely do.0 -
Hmmm, this is just a thought, but how about everyone eat whatever they want and don't worry about what other people eat?
I know, crazy right?
I really hope the OP gives you some history on how this thread came about.
Your glib attitude is sort of out of step with the discussion we've been having.
LOL I read the original one as well as all of this one. My "glib" attitude is perfectly normal for me. Just the way I am. Humor keeps us young. Give it a try.
I do have a sense of humor, but right now, this discussion is a serious one, and no one is getting bent out of shape. Your comment just came across as 'STOP TALKING!'--albeit light-hearted and friendly. If this discussion doesn't matter to you, and if the matter of eating meat vs not eating meat is all the same to you, I'm guessing there are threads which might interest you more than this one (at least right this moment).0 -
I am responding to a bunch of different posts, but I'm combining it into one, so sorry if there is confusion. Just warning you now.
1) I am not a vegetarian, but I tried being one once to see if I would like it, and found out my love for meat surpasses the love to save animals from being my food. =/
2) I do like PC, but I love Xbox360 more, and I hate PS3. I had ps3 and xbox360 at the same time and couldn't stand the PS3.
3) My step-sister is vegetarian (or vegan, not too sure. either way she doesn't eat meat) but she does like chicken broth and other meat-tasting things, so I guess it depends on the person.
4) I know a lot of hunters, and none of them are drunk and lower class. My step-father, who is a millionaire, not including items and property he owns, hunts a lot, and he is not a drunk or in the lower class. There are also many people in my area that hunt and are not drinkers. I suppose if you live in the Southern US (not all of it, but some parts) you would see a lot of that, or watching some of those weird shows on TV, but not in most normal places.
At least you gave it a go! But then you made a decision that was better for you.
I didn't fully understand all of the 'hunters' argument throughout this 2-part thread. Or how socioeconomic status was anything to do with it. I do feel that hunting is much more humane than keeping animals packed together for human needs.0 -
Really? So colorectal cancer was found in this study to be higher in vegetarians? Interesting. Selecting samples is so difficult though, because you don't know their food history and what else they may be eating / not eating that may be causing these problems.
I know, sampling for something like this is tough. I'm sure there are counter studies. I always read through the sources of the study before I deem it totally accurate.
N=63,000+ and they corrected for things like age, sex, and smoking. Pretty valid overall I'd say.
The reason I posted this though was to refute the statement that vegetarians rarely got colorectal cancer, they were virtually immune.
Here's the link:
http://www.ajcn.org/content/89/5/1620S.full
Just a quick scan of your study and I think I found out why they came to the conclusion they did. Your study was controlled for things like smoking, for example. Now how many vegetarians do you think smoke? I've never met one. Yet your study probably eliminated meat eating smokers. Similarly, your study probably eliminated overweight chronically ill people as well. So what you were in effect doing was comparing virtually ALL Vegetyarians to some meat-eaters. Yes, I am sure there were some overweight and ill vegetarians, but probably not many. I would guess among the meat eating population, the unhealthy were to a large extent eliminated from the study do to correcting for "lifestyle." In effect, vegetarians do have a healthier lifestyle. Although I do believe in controlled studies, I think in this case it resulted in an unbalanced study. They were in effect controling for things vegetarians rarely do.
The main point I was making is that vegetarians do get colorectal cancer despite was was said earlier.
They controlled for age and sex. I think vegetarians falls into both those categories?
And btw I do know vegetarians that smoke.0 -
Really? So colorectal cancer was found in this study to be higher in vegetarians? Interesting. Selecting samples is so difficult though, because you don't know their food history and what else they may be eating / not eating that may be causing these problems.
I know, sampling for something like this is tough. I'm sure there are counter studies. I always read through the sources of the study before I deem it totally accurate.
N=63,000+ and they corrected for things like age, sex, and smoking. Pretty valid overall I'd say.
The reason I posted this though was to refute the statement that vegetarians rarely got colorectal cancer, they were virtually immune.
Here's the link:
http://www.ajcn.org/content/89/5/1620S.full
Just a quick scan of your study and I think I found out why they came to the conclusion they did. Your study was controlled for things like smoking, for example. Now how many vegetarians do you think smoke? I've never met one. Yet your study probably eliminated meat eating smokers. Similarly, your study probably eliminated overweight chronically ill people as well. So what you were in effect doing was comparing virtually ALL Vegetyarians to some meat-eaters. Yes, I am sure there were some overweight and ill vegetarians, but probably not many. I would guess among the meat eating population, the unhealthy were to a large extent eliminated from the study do to correcting for "lifestyle." In effect, vegetarians do have a healthier lifestyle. Although I do believe in controlled studies, I think in this case it resulted in an unbalanced study. They were in effect controling for things vegetarians rarely do.
Three of my friends are vegetarians and also smoke...0 -
Hmmm, this is just a thought, but how about everyone eat whatever they want and don't worry about what other people eat?
I know, crazy right?
I really hope the OP gives you some history on how this thread came about.
Your glib attitude is sort of out of step with the discussion we've been having.
LOL I read the original one as well as all of this one. My "glib" attitude is perfectly normal for me. Just the way I am. Humor keeps us young. Give it a try.
I do have a sense of humor, but right now, this discussion is a serious one, and no one is getting bent out of shape. Your comment just came across as 'STOP TALKING!'--albeit light-hearted and friendly. If this discussion doesn't matter to you, and if the matter of eating meat vs not eating meat is all the same to you, I'm guessing there are threads which might interest you more than this one (at least right this moment).
I see, so what you are saying is that you don't feel that I should be posting on this thread? I don't recall telling anyone to stop talking, seems to be a case of misinterpretation on your part (lack of that claimed sense of humor perhaps?).
Sorry I seem to have touched a nerve with you, but I think I will be the one to choose which threads upon which I will comment and in what tone. I am a good-hearted sort and don't have a mean bone in my body, but I do as I will and don't really care all that much if some people don't get my particular sense of humor. Not my problem, really.
I wish you well.0 -
Really? So colorectal cancer was found in this study to be higher in vegetarians? Interesting. Selecting samples is so difficult though, because you don't know their food history and what else they may be eating / not eating that may be causing these problems.
I know, sampling for something like this is tough. I'm sure there are counter studies. I always read through the sources of the study before I deem it totally accurate.
N=63,000+ and they corrected for things like age, sex, and smoking. Pretty valid overall I'd say.
The reason I posted this though was to refute the statement that vegetarians rarely got colorectal cancer, they were virtually immune.
Here's the link:
http://www.ajcn.org/content/89/5/1620S.full
Just a quick scan of your study and I think I found out why they came to the conclusion they did. Your study was controlled for things like smoking, for example. Now how many vegetarians do you think smoke? I've never met one. Yet your study probably eliminated meat eating smokers. Similarly, your study probably eliminated overweight chronically ill people as well. So what you were in effect doing was comparing virtually ALL Vegetyarians to some meat-eaters. Yes, I am sure there were some overweight and ill vegetarians, but probably not many. I would guess among the meat eating population, the unhealthy were to a large extent eliminated from the study do to correcting for "lifestyle." In effect, vegetarians do have a healthier lifestyle. Although I do believe in controlled studies, I think in this case it resulted in an unbalanced study. They were in effect controling for things vegetarians rarely do.
The main point I was making is that vegetarians do get colorectal cancer despite was was said earlier.
They controlled for age and sex. I think vegetarians falls into both those categories?
Agreed. The previous argument was that 'vegetarians are immune to cancers'. clearly they're not if vegetarians have been found to have it. HOWEVER, we don't know how long they were vegetarian for.0 -
Hmmm, this is just a thought, but how about everyone eat whatever they want and don't worry about what other people eat?
I know, crazy right?
I really hope the OP gives you some history on how this thread came about.
Your glib attitude is sort of out of step with the discussion we've been having.
LOL I read the original one as well as all of this one. My "glib" attitude is perfectly normal for me. Just the way I am. Humor keeps us young. Give it a try.
I do have a sense of humor, but right now, this discussion is a serious one, and no one is getting bent out of shape. Your comment just came across as 'STOP TALKING!'--albeit light-hearted and friendly. If this discussion doesn't matter to you, and if the matter of eating meat vs not eating meat is all the same to you, I'm guessing there are threads which might interest you more than this one (at least right this moment).
I see, so what you are saying is that you don't feel that I should be posting on this thread? I don't recall telling anyone to stop talking, seems to be a case of misinterpretation on your part (lack of that claimed sense of humor perhaps?).
Sorry I seem to have touched a nerve with you, but I think I will be the one to choose which threads upon which I will comment and in what tone. I am a good-hearted sort and don't have a mean bone in my body, but I do as I will and don't really care alll that much if some people don't get my particular sense of humor. Not my problem, really.
I wish you well.
Shh. No arguing. Although light-heartedness is welcome.0 -
Hmmm, this is just a thought, but how about everyone eat whatever they want and don't worry about what other people eat?
I know, crazy right?
I really hope the OP gives you some history on how this thread came about.
Your glib attitude is sort of out of step with the discussion we've been having.
LOL I read the original one as well as all of this one. My "glib" attitude is perfectly normal for me. Just the way I am. Humor keeps us young. Give it a try.
I do have a sense of humor, but right now, this discussion is a serious one, and no one is getting bent out of shape. Your comment just came across as 'STOP TALKING!'--albeit light-hearted and friendly. If this discussion doesn't matter to you, and if the matter of eating meat vs not eating meat is all the same to you, I'm guessing there are threads which might interest you more than this one (at least right this moment).
I see, so what you are saying is that you don't feel that I should be posting on this thread? I don't recall telling anyone to stop talking, seems to be a case of misinterpretation on your part (lack of that claimed sense of humor perhaps?).
Sorry I seem to have touched a nerve with you, but I think I will be the one to choose which threads upon which I will comment and in what tone. I am a good-hearted sort and don't have a mean bone in my body, but I do as I will and don't really care alll that much if some people don't get my particular sense of humor. Not my problem, really.
I wish you well.
Shh. No arguing. Although light-heartedness is welcome. 0 -
Really? So colorectal cancer was found in this study to be higher in vegetarians? Interesting. Selecting samples is so difficult though, because you don't know their food history and what else they may be eating / not eating that may be causing these problems.
I know, sampling for something like this is tough. I'm sure there are counter studies. I always read through the sources of the study before I deem it totally accurate.
N=63,000+ and they corrected for things like age, sex, and smoking. Pretty valid overall I'd say.
The reason I posted this though was to refute the statement that vegetarians rarely got colorectal cancer, they were virtually immune.
Here's the link:
http://www.ajcn.org/content/89/5/1620S.full
Just a quick scan of your study and I think I found out why they came to the conclusion they did. Your study was controlled for things like smoking, for example. Now how many vegetarians do you think smoke? I've never met one. Yet your study probably eliminated meat eating smokers. Similarly, your study probably eliminated overweight chronically ill people as well. So what you were in effect doing was comparing virtually ALL Vegetyarians to some meat-eaters. Yes, I am sure there were some overweight and ill vegetarians, but probably not many. I would guess among the meat eating population, the unhealthy were to a large extent eliminated from the study do to correcting for "lifestyle." In effect, vegetarians do have a healthier lifestyle. Although I do believe in controlled studies, I think in this case it resulted in an unbalanced study. They were in effect controling for things vegetarians rarely do.
The main point I was making is that vegetarians do get colorectal cancer despite was was said earlier.
They controlled for age and sex. I think vegetarians falls into both those categories?
Agreed. The previous argument was that 'vegetarians are immune to cancers'. clearly they're not if vegetarians have been found to have it. HOWEVER, we don't know how long they were vegetarian for.
Of course any study is open to criticism, and the paper I posted like any good study does discuss potential flaws in its methodology. It's hard to control all variables and stay within ethical boundaries.
The China study which has been referred to in this thread also has had many criticism for its methodology and analysis. If you're interested, here's one link
http://rawfoodsos.com/2010/07/07/the-china-study-fact-or-fallac/0 -
Really? So colorectal cancer was found in this study to be higher in vegetarians? Interesting. Selecting samples is so difficult though, because you don't know their food history and what else they may be eating / not eating that may be causing these problems.
I know, sampling for something like this is tough. I'm sure there are counter studies. I always read through the sources of the study before I deem it totally accurate.
N=63,000+ and they corrected for things like age, sex, and smoking. Pretty valid overall I'd say.
The reason I posted this though was to refute the statement that vegetarians rarely got colorectal cancer, they were virtually immune.
Here's the link:
http://www.ajcn.org/content/89/5/1620S.full
Just a quick scan of your study and I think I found out why they came to the conclusion they did. Your study was controlled for things like smoking, for example. Now how many vegetarians do you think smoke? I've never met one. Yet your study probably eliminated meat eating smokers. Similarly, your study probably eliminated overweight chronically ill people as well. So what you were in effect doing was comparing virtually ALL Vegetyarians to some meat-eaters. Yes, I am sure there were some overweight and ill vegetarians, but probably not many. I would guess among the meat eating population, the unhealthy were to a large extent eliminated from the study do to correcting for "lifestyle." In effect, vegetarians do have a healthier lifestyle. Although I do believe in controlled studies, I think in this case it resulted in an unbalanced study. They were in effect controling for things vegetarians rarely do.
The main point I was making is that vegetarians do get colorectal cancer despite was was said earlier.
They controlled for age and sex. I think vegetarians falls into both those categories?
And btw I do know vegetarians that smoke.
Okay, I urge you to listen to this: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2699384/ Cancer Incidence in British Vegetarians, which I believe was the same study you referred to. The person introducing the study explains several things:
1. The study was admittedly unfair to vegetarians because it eliminated all INDIRECT benefits of vegetariansim
2. Even so VEGETARIANS HAD A LOWER INCIDENCE OF CANCER THAN MEAT EATERS. Total cancer incidence was significantly lower among vegetarians than meat eaters. THIS STUDY found no difference in colorecatal cancer, but clearly most other studies have.
Please go to this link.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 393 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 934 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions