Veggie/vegan kids what do you think?

[ewloe 10]

Originally posted by Cyclone

sorry, that's not a control. They need to be identical in every way (or in as many as possible given human studies) to be considered a control.

For people this would mean a twin study, where one had followed the vegan, and the other a normal diet. No other differences.

 

Quite hard to set up, and still needs a large sample size to eliminate differences.

 

well that is impossible which parent in their right mind would, when knowing the harms a meat diet can do to you would feed it to one twin and feed the other with a much healthier and natural vegan diet?

[Cyclone 10]

Originally posted by ewloe

well that is impossible which parent in their right mind would, when knowing the harms a meat diet can do to you would feed it to one twin and feed the other with a much healthier and natural vegan diet?

 

lol

What parent in there right mind would partake knowing the harm that not having meat in the diet can do to a childs development.

 

Where do you get the idea that it's natural, we have incisors for a reason.

[Rubysoho 10]

Originally posted by Cyclone

lol

What parent in there right mind would partake knowing the harm that not having meat in the diet can do to a childs development.

 

Where do you get the idea that it's natural, we have incisors for a reason.

 

Oh dear, I don't know about you Cyclone, but I would find it quite difficult trying to rip through the neck of a live cow, pig, deer etc with my teeny, tiny little incisors, or are yours different? Are you really a vampire (or even a lion/tiger human hybrid) with extremely large, sharp, pointy teeth just made for slicing through and ripping apart live flesh??

 

There are PLENTY of research articles/studies that show the BENEFITS of a vegan (and vegetarian) diet for both children AND adults if you care to find them, however seeing as you seem to spend most of your time nitpicking over the validity of them just because no-one has (of yet) commisioned one on a large number of twins.

 

Some examples of such research can be found

 

here , here , here andhere .

[Cyclone 10]

Originally posted by Rubysoho

Oh dear, I don't know about you Cyclone, but I would find it quite difficult trying to rip through the neck of a live cow, pig, deer etc with my teeny, tiny little incisors, or are yours different? Are you really a vampire (or even a lion/tiger human hybrid) with extremely large, sharp, pointy teeth just made for slicing through and ripping apart live flesh??

 

There are PLENTY of research articles/studies that show the BENEFITS of a vegan (and vegetarian) diet for both children AND adults if you care to find them, however seeing as you seem to spend most of your time nitpicking over the validity of them just because no-one has (of yet) commisioned one on a large number of twins.

 

Some examples of such research can be found

 

here , here , here andhere .

 

Well, they certainly aren't designed for ripping the life from a lettuce. Unless your teeth are from some sort of human/rabbit or human/cow hibrid.

I believe the theory is that humans were scavengers and hunters of smaller mammals. So ripping the throat out of a squirrel with my incisors, or chewing on a bit of dead meat, I expect they could accomplish that.

 

Obviously those are all completely unbiased websites, and i've no doubt that no matter how hard I tried I couldn't find 'studies' showing the opposite...

 

Interesting, I read the andrews one (assuming it to be the least biased). It says that a vegan diet can be healthy. It certainly doesn't come to the conclusion that being vegan is healthier than being omnivorous.

 

Kristian - sorry, I didn't follow the link before. Well done, you've pointed out that i'm not infallible. I misremembered a fact, and thus presented something incorrectly. So sue me

 

why meat is healthy - links here here and here.

[Rubysoho 10]

There are plenty of other studies out there, just as I'm sure there are MANY that say meat is the better option - but every study will show bias one way or another depending on who paid for it/commissioned it, so I apologise most profusely for not putting up some completely unbiased material - which I am sure the pro-meat eating links (and the material contained within them)you put are absolutely 100% not contaminated with any sponsorship/funding etc from the meat and dairy industry.

 

As regards to the incisor thing, personally I wouldn't want to rip my teeth into the neck of a small mammal, would you?? One thing to go slaughter, gut and clean the animal yourself quite another to go buy a 'nice' piece of clean, safe, non-threatening, 'bears-no-resemblance to the animal it was actually taken from' piece of meat from the supermarket.

 

Given the choice between a diet that is good for my own personal health, good for the environment and helps towards the longevity and survival of the planet as a whole (doesn't contribute towards soil erosion, excessive water usage, deforestation etc), and a diet that is predominantly based on something that does contribute towards some (if not all) of the major diseases in the western world as well as quickly decimating the worlds natural resources in it's production and manufacture - I choose the first option every time.

 

This is my choice, if you want to contribute not only to your own ill health and the ailing health of the planet then that is entirely up to you, but do not denegrate my choice as being unhealthier than the propaganda given out by the oh-so-vested interests of the multi-billion pound/dollar meat and dairy (we give such impartial health advice, we do) industries.

[Cyclone 10]

I wasn't claiming that my links were impartial, just showing that providing links would prove nothing as there are always authorities on the subject claiming the opposite.

 

No, I'd rather use a knife. But given that we've progressed beyond a hunter gatherer society I'll do the work I do and use the currency I recieve to pay for some pre prepared food.

I have no qualms about having to kill in order for me to live, I don't have to directly, but I don't pretend that it doesn't happen.

As to the rest, it sounds like propaganda and fud to me. Is there credible evidence to support deforestation caused by animal husbandry?

And the last paragraph, I have nothing against you being vegan, why must you throw around accusations like "contribute not only to your own ill health". I'm perfectly healthy, well adjusted and fit thankyou, whilst i'll happily discuss my lifestyle i'd rather you didn't denigrate in the vein hope that I might change, or even just for the sake of it.

[Rubysoho 10]

Originally posted by Cyclone

I wasn't claiming that my links were impartial, just showing that providing links would prove nothing as there are always authorities on the subject claiming the opposite.

 

No, I'd rather use a knife. But given that we've progressed beyond a hunter gatherer society I'll do the work I do and use the currency I recieve to pay for some pre prepared food.

I have no qualms about having to kill in order for me to live, I don't have to directly, but I don't pretend that it doesn't happen.

As to the rest, it sounds like propaganda and fud to me. Is there credible evidence to support deforestation caused by animal husbandry?

And the last paragraph, I have nothing against you being vegan, why must you throw around accusations like "contribute not only to your own ill health". I'm perfectly healthy, well adjusted and fit thankyou, whilst i'll happily discuss my lifestyle i'd rather you didn't denigrate in the vein hope that I might change, or even just for the sake of it.

 

So McDonalds didn't use deforestation of the rainforest to provide grazing land for their cattle - obviously that was some more propaganda and fud - even though they were found 'guilty' of it in the McLibel trial. So yes there is evidence of it (plenty of evidence) if you can be bothered to find it and read it.

 

I put links up for people who may be interested, not just merely as an argument for arguments sake.

 

As for the last paragraph, why is it acceptable for you to denegrate other's lifestyle choice and question whether it is healthy or sound (as you did with ewloe) and yet no-one dare level anything even slightly untoward back at you. I was not denigrating you in the vain hope that you might change your diet as it was fairly obvious from your stance taken throughout the thread that it is a change you are not open to.

[Cyclone 10]

Originally posted by Rubysoho

So McDonalds didn't use deforestation of the rainforest to provide grazing land for their cattle - obviously that was some more propaganda and fud - even though they were found 'guilty' of it in the McLibel trial. So yes there is evidence of it (plenty of evidence) if you can be bothered to find it and read it.

 

I put links up for people who may be interested, not just merely as an argument for arguments sake.

 

As for the last paragraph, why is it acceptable for you to denegrate other's lifestyle choice and question whether it is healthy or sound (as you did with ewloe) and yet no-one dare level anything even slightly untoward back at you. I was not denigrating you in the vain hope that you might change your diet as it was fairly obvious from your stance taken throughout the thread that it is a change you are not open to.

 

I think you'll find that all I said to ewloe that her anecdote is not evidence that being vegan is healthier than being omnivorous as she has no control to her 'experiment'. Unless you mean my response to this comment by ewloe

written by ewloe - knowing the harms a meat diet can do to you

which i responded to by saying the opposite.

 

So, the attacks on one lifestyle or the other started with the vegan side of this argument. All I argued was that anecdotes are not evidence.

I'm completely open to change, but I can see no convincing argument from either side of the argument. I don't expect you to change and I don't intend too. If either side had a good argument then I'd expect one of us to reconsider.

 

The actions of one company do not make a trend or a fair generalisation to the entire meat industry, which is what you have clearly done. If I find a single farm that uses intensive farming techniques and has cleared forested land would you be happy for me to claim that growing crops for vegans is a cause of deforestation, I doubt it.

[Rubysoho 10]

Originally posted by Cyclone

I think you'll find that all I said to ewloe that her anecdote is not evidence that being vegan is healthier than being omnivorous as she has no control to her 'experiment'. Unless you mean my response to this comment by ewloe

which i responded to by saying the opposite.

 

So, the attacks on one lifestyle or the other started with the vegan side of this argument. All I argued was that anecdotes are not evidence.

I'm completely open to change, but I can see no convincing argument from either side of the argument. I don't expect you to change and I don't intend too. If either side had a good argument then I'd expect one of us to reconsider.

 

The actions of one company do not make a trend or a fair generalisation to the entire meat industry, which is what you have clearly done. If I find a single farm that uses intensive farming techniques and has cleared forested land would you be happy for me to claim that growing crops for vegans is a cause of deforestation, I doubt it.

 

I have lived both sides of the coin, I ate meat until I was 16, then I became veggie, last year I became vegan - I know through personal experience of ALL sides which is the best lifestyle choice for me - can you say the same??

 

It is not a generalisation, I gave McDonalds as an example of just one firm that does it - are you so naive as to think they are the only one???