Vegetarianism: what if we didn't eat meat

[d_brennen]

KILL ALL HUMANS

 

[Amp34]

That isn't an example about combine harvesters, that's an article about hay shredders.

EDIT: I notice it seems to combine (no pun intended) them into one group in the article, so I guess this is where the difference is.

I'll admit it's probably my fault as well, I mentioned combines exclusively whereas the whole original point was the entire agricultural process from ploughing, sowing, spraying and harvesting/collecting.

Combines are one source of "death" but there are many more.

 

[Lycosa]

I'd be vegetarian if I wasn't so lazy. Not for animal welfare issues but for ecological issues.

Farmed meat takes an enormous amount of resources for what you get in return and too much natural wilderness is destroyed all over the world for it, which harms global ecosystems and thus ourselves.

If it were up to me, no animals would be bred purely for meat production, all domestic meat would come from animals that have multiple uses besides meat and all other meat would be from sustainable hunting.

We simply don't need meat in the quantities we currently consume.

 

[Elixir]

I'll admit it's probably my fault as well, I mentioned combines exclusively whereas the whole original point was the entire agricultural process from ploughing, sowing, spraying and harvesting/collecting.

Combines are one source of "death" but there are many more.

Fertiliser and pesticides/herbicides are the main environmental issue for obvious reasons, ploughing/sowing absolutely not.

 

[Glaucus]

Try to argue coherently so we understand you.

Please provide at least some evidence to support your position, if you can. But you clearly can't.

My other thread shows I am not a fan of cruelty to animals. Something that I want to speak volumes about me.

It is coherent and there's plenty off evidence. You just ignore it.
You didn't know when you posted your statement. Then when pointed out. Went googling and found something that doesn't apply to most meat.

So are you denying that most meat doesn't use grain or harvested grass?

 

[aardvark]

i'm pretty sure there isn't enough arable land to sustain the population.
oh yeah, and we would have to kill all the animals to stop them eating all the grain.
and we would have to cut down all the rain forests to convert to farm land.

the problems are immense.

just be an omnivore, its what we were designed to be

 

[Amp34]

Fertiliser and pesticides/herbicides are the main environmental issue for obvious reasons, ploughing/sowing absolutely not.

I was commenting more on the machinery and application rather than the obvious environmental impacts they have to both the wildlife in the fields and nearby watercourses. They do cause significantly more deaths and damage than the ploughing and sowing though as you say.

 

[Tuppy_Glossop]

just be an omnivore, its what we were designed to be

Intelligent design ?

 

[BunnyKillBot]

Veg can be incredibly expensive, unless you buy frozen everything, which has it's own implications for health (quality and source of frozen goods over fresh - more relating to meat than veg though).

Erm. No. In comparison to meat, veg/protein source alternatives are incredibly cheap.

The sainsbury's love soya mince costs £1.50 for 454g.

500g of beef mince, 10% fat is £3.50

The fat in the beef is high in saturated. The fat in the soya is mono/poly.

It is literally cheaper and healthier. I don't think meat eaters realise quite how much the 'meat' component of their meal bumps up its price. Vegetarians actually eat very cheaply

 

[aardvark]

Intelligent design ?

nah - evolutionary design.

 

[Jakeee]

Its a controversial subject but in my opinion, if we were meant to survive and thrive off a vegetarian diet, there wouldn't be so many nutrient deficiencies linked to it.

 

[Glaucus]

Out of interest did you read the linked article by George Monbiot?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/sep/06/meat-production-veganism-deforestation

Interesting take on the subject.

Essentially big business is, as usual, not great. However it can be done, but as usual, you have to pay for it.

.

Yep. I agree. Never going to happen though.


Oh and lol saturated fat isn't bad. Something else they are doing a u-turn with the already u-turn off cholesterol.

 

[C.R.A.Z.Y]

Its a controversial subject but in my opinion, if we were meant to survive and thrive off a vegetarian diet, there wouldn't be so many nutrient deficiencies linked to it.

Ignorant dribble!
Plant based diets are the healthiest, I suggest you look at the evidence and studies done before making such silly incorrect comments.

Processed meat (especially red) is BAD for your health even in relatively small doses!!

Here is a quote from the largest ever study into meat consumption from Harvard Medical School'

In the study, published April 9, 2012, in the Archives of Internal Medicine, a team of Harvard researchers looked for statistical links between meat consumption and cause of death. The populations scrutinized included about 84,000 women from the Nurses' Health Study and 38,000 men in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study.

People in the study who ate the most red meat tended to die younger, and to die more often from cardiovascular disease and cancer. These people also tended to weigh more, exercise less, smoke tobacco more, and drink more alcohol than healthier people in the study. Yet even when the researchers compensated for the effects of unhealthy lifestyle, mortality and meat remained associated.

A new study by Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) researchers finds a strong association between the consumption of red meat—particularly when the meat is processed—and an increased risk of type 2 diabetes. The study also shows that replacing red meat with healthier proteins, such as low-fat dairy, nuts, or whole grains, can significantly lower the risk.

Pan, senior author Frank Hu, professor of nutrition and epidemiology at HSPH, and colleagues analyzed questionnaire responses from 37,083 men followed for 20 years in the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study; 79,570 women followed for 28 years in the Nurses’ Health Study I; and 87,504 women followed for 14 years in the Nurses’ Health Study II.
They also conducted an updated meta-analysis, combining data from their new study with data from existing studies that included a total of 442,101 participants, 28,228 of whom developed type 2 diabetes during the study.
After adjusting for age, body mass index (BMI), and other lifestyle and dietary risk factors, the researchers found that a daily 100-gram serving of unprocessed red meat (about the size of a deck of cards) was associated with a 19% increased risk of type 2 diabetes. They also found that one daily serving of half that quantity of processed meat—50 grams (for example, one hot dog or sausage or two slices of bacon)—was associated with a 51% increased risk.

“Our study clearly shows that eating both unprocessed and processed red meat—particularly processed—is associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes,” said Pan. He noted that the 2010 U.S. dietary guidelines continue to lump red meat together with fish, poultry, eggs, nuts, seeds, beans, and soy products in the “protein foods” group. But since red meat appears to have significant negative health effects—increased risk of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and even total mortality, as suggested by several recent studies—Pan suggested the guidelines should distinguish red meat from healthier protein sources and promote the latter instead.

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/red-meat-type-2-diabetes/


Vegetarians Can Expect to Live Longer, Study Shows

Michael J. Orlich, M.D., an assistant professor of preventive medicine at Loma Linda University in California, and his colleagues examined data on a group of 73,308 Seventh Day Adventists in the Adventist Health Study 2 cohort of nearly 100,000 people.

Over a period of six years, 2,579 deaths occurred. The nearly 38,000 vegetarians in the study had a 12 percent lower risk of death from all causes. Vegetarian men fared even better, with a significantly lower risk of death from cardiovascular disease and ischemic heart disease compared to non-vegetarians.

Pesco-vegetarians had an even lower risk of death—19 percent for all causes—as well as a 35 percent lower risk of death from heart disease.

Orlich said he found that the benefits of vegetarianism were more pronounced when he looked at specific diseases. “We found a striking association with renal failure and endocrine disorders,” he said. Vegetarians were 52 percent less likely to die from kidney failure and 39 percent less likely to die from endocrine and diabetes-related disorders.

http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1710093

 

[Energize]

It's the same with sugar though, diets full of high calorie foods result in obesity which causes diabetes etc, doesn't necessarily mean it's the foodstuff causing it.

 

[Lightnix]

HMMMMMMMMMMMMM want.

Looks overcooked.

 

[Glaucus]

Ignorant dribble!
Plant based diets are the healthiest, I suggest you look at the evidence and studies done before making such silly incorrect comments.

Processed meat (especially red) is BAD for your health even in relatively small doses!!

Here is a quote from the largest ever study into meat consumption from Harvard Medical School'

And yet non off those took into account healthy eating.
Those meat eaters will be eating far more processed food. With more hydrogenated oils etc.
These studys proof little. Other than on average a vegetarian will think about their diet more than a meat eater.

What known has showed is that vegetarian is healthier than meat. Now I would like to see a clinical study off a clean meat eater vs clean vegaterian. Both well thought out diets.


Ll

 

[C.R.A.Z.Y]

They obviously compensated for the effects of unhealthy lifestyle and clearly state this, but hey I guess the experts and multiple recent studies combined with large meta-data is completely wrong and meat especially processed meat (the meat most meat eaters consume) is REALLY healthy and good for you

I'm sorry but claiming meat and especially the cheap processed stuff isn't unhealthy is laughable, the overwhelming and recent scientific evidence clearly says otherwise! But hey you keep deluding yourself if it makes you feel better while chomping into your bacon & sausage butty

 

[Glaucus]

No they compensated for some, they can not compensate for all, no where does it say they compensate for unhealthy diet down to that level of detail. This is the issue with meta research. Just because there's a correlation. Does not mean there's a causation. Such meta studies should be used to determine what to look at in the lab. Unlike what the media portrays them as, which is a done facts.

I didn't say processed foods weren't unhealthy but there's lots of different levels. These are the things that should be account for, but rarely are and never in enough detail. And when you.mean processed what level of processed. What chemicals are you including or disallowing. This is the problem and why such studies are pretty useless. They can not account for other causations as they are not detailed enough. The other issue, are nearly all are volunteer regulated. Ie there's no checking what the volunteer is eating is what they are. And again not enough detail. Is it frozen microwave bacon with god knows what in. Or small produced old fashioned bacon. Or mass produced in the middle.

It does not show that the bacon is unhealthy. Just that people who eat more bacon are generally less healthy. No surprise. Look at the demographic that generally eat more bacon. They also generally eat a load of other trash.


Meta studies do not prove anything. They are useful analytical studies. Which point in directions for further study.

If you belive meta analysis you would have to believe cholesterol and saturated fat. Guess what both have been chucked out in recent years. So much so organisations likeNHS gave statements saying its safe to eat eggs as dietary cholesterol has virtually no bearing on bodily cholesterol. Thanks to advances in technology we can now eat high cholesterol and measure it in the veins.

 

[estebanrey]

They obviously compensated for the effects of unhealthy lifestyle and clearly state this, but hey I guess the experts and multiple recent studies combined with large meta-data is completely wrong and meat especially processed meat (the meat most meat eaters consume) is REALLY healthy and good for you

I'm sorry but claiming meat and especially the cheap processed stuff isn't unhealthy is laughable, the overwhelming and recent scientific evidence clearly says otherwise! But hey you keep deluding yourself if it makes you feel better while chomping into your bacon & sausage butty

I'd rather live to 75 eating bacon butties everyday than live to 90 living off rabbit food. But each to their own.

 

[C.R.A.Z.Y]

It's not just meta data but also other research and lab work which adds to the evidence that red meat (especially processed) is significantly bad for your health.

But I guess you'll just dismiss that research as well as you appear to rather arrogantly think you are better informed then these highly respected experts who have studied the field for years.
The British Heart foundation also agree with the findings of the vast research, I guess they have it all wrong as well???

I'd rather live to 75 eating bacon butties everyday than live to 90 living off rabbit food. But each to their own.

Meat is massively over-rated tbh, I make far tastier and healthier fish/seafood meals 3-4 times a week