20/4 Fasting

[Tayaout]

"Micronutrients of special concern for the vegan include vitamins B-12 and D, calcium, and long-chain n-3 (omega-3) fatty acids. Unless vegans regularly consume foods that are fortified with these nutrients, appropriate supplements should be consumed. In some cases, iron and zinc status of vegans may also be of concern because of the limited bioavailability of these minerals."

https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/89/5/1627S/4596952

 

 

[stephenterry]

38 minutes ago, Tayaout said:

"Micronutrients of special concern for the vegan include vitamins B-12 and D, calcium, and long-chain n-3 (omega-3) fatty acids. Unless vegans regularly consume foods that are fortified with these nutrients, appropriate supplements should be consumed. In some cases, iron and zinc status of vegans may also be of concern because of the limited bioavailability of these minerals."

https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/89/5/1627S/4596952

 

 

Again, you're cherry picking a very weak argument, with many maybes included. Wheras I cherry pick scientific fact.

 

Neither animals nor humans can produce B12. Bacteria is in the soil (or water that animals drink). Humans who eat meat also consume the B12 from animal consumption. Humans who don't consume a B12 supplement it can be found in nutritional yeast and algae. Vit D3 (which is an essential hormone not a vitamin) can be obtained by skin exposure to sunlight (or ultraviolet light) for about 15 minutes per day. D2 is also obtained by plants and exposing mushrooms to sunlight - bet you didn't know that !

 

All other nutrients that the human body needs can be found in plant based foods. Omega 3, (flax and sesame) seeds,  Iron and zinc included. That's factual. Deficiencies are often caused by people's junk food consumption.

 

What meats lack is fibre - without enriched plant based foods - there is a high risk of colon (gut) cancer. That's as crucial as B12 deficiency.

[Tayaout]

You never put any link to your extradionary claim like that fiber is necessary. Just to help you the study you refer said that lack of fiber increase risk of cancer of 18% which is meaningless. 

 

Traditional vegetarian society have endemic lack of certain nutrients and that's real science with link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6540890/

 

Fortunately there has never been traditional vegan society but the results would be worse. You can eat rock to get iron but it doesn't mean you will absorb it. 

Edited February 25, 2020 by Tayaout

[UbonThani]

6 hours ago, stephenterry said:

...which is what animals eat. No getting away from it, humans are destroying the planet.

Which you eat 5555

[UbonThani]

2 hours ago, stephenterry said:

Again, you're cherry picking a very weak argument, with many maybes included. 

Vegans are experts at cherry picking

[UbonThani]

The fruits and vegetables with the highest level of pesticides are:

• spinach.
• strawberries.
• nectarines.
• kale.
• grapes.
• apples.
• cherries.
• peaches.

[stephenterry]

1 hour ago, UbonThani said:

The fruits and vegetables with the highest level of pesticides are:

• spinach.
• strawberries.
• nectarines.
• kale.
• grapes.
• apples.
• cherries.
• peaches.

I don't doubt it - apart from more costly pesticide free organic fruits and veggies found in high quality supermarkets. But the health benefits outweigh the minute content of residue - if any. Far more worrying is the antibiotics and hormones  - and pesticide sprays - given to factory farmed animals. 

 

All in all, though, humans are hell bent in destroying the planet.

 

 

[stephenterry]

2 hours ago, UbonThani said:

Vegans are experts at cherry picking

For clarity, I'm not a vegan as I would never consume processed foods, vegan or otherwise. Yet another profit promotion by the food industries. Who knows what additives are contained in an oily meat-free burger. Probably earns the kudos of being junk vegan food, as would be a fried chip butty.

 

I stick to Whole Foods which are all Plant Based. And I cherry pick evidenced science - which will continue to be debated as the effects of nutrition on the human body is so bloody complicated. 

 

And as we are only 10% human, we're lived upon by the trillions of microorganisms and bacteria. A symbiotic relationship - which is different for everyone - every race and every country. So, while there are majority scientific study results, it's not a perfect science - no 'one cap fits all' solution.

 

What could be healthy for you could be deadly for others and vice versa. In modern times, the only sure health bet is to load up with fruit and veggies, whole grains and legumes, and nuts and seeds. If that forms 85-90% of your dietary regime  - whatever junk food and drink you otherwise consume - you're likely to avoid serious disease and live longer. Well I do, anyway...

[stephenterry]

3 hours ago, Tayaout said:

You never put any link to your extradionary claim like that fiber is necessary. Just to help you the study you refer said that lack of fiber increase risk of cancer of 18% which is meaningless. 

 

Traditional vegetarian society have endemic lack of certain nutrients and that's real science with link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6540890/

 

Fortunately there has never been traditional vegan society but the results would be worse. You can eat rock to get iron but it doesn't mean you will absorb it. 

You're clearly well off the pace Tay. Of course fibre is essential for a healthy gut and colon cancer prevention. There are countless scientific studies that acknowledge that. It's clear to me that you have only a superficial understanding of nutrition, and are easily influenced by one study that fits your opinion. No offence, but to cherry pick this one study from thousands is ridiculous. Nutritional science is never a reductionist solution, more a combo.

 

i'll give you a research clue. Look up the consequences of a lack of DHA on a vegan diet. i'm surprised you haven't mentioned that in your supplement list. Perhaps look up one study???

 

Look, I don't want to continue this debate that UT kindly let us loose on nutrition posts rather than IF, so I'll discontinue to add more. As you are mostly consuming a healthy veggie diet, just carry on...

[Tayaout]

"Idiopathic constipation and its associated symptoms can be effectively reduced by stopping or even lowering the intake of dietary fiber." 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3435786/

 

This is only a part of the picture but it goes agaisnt the "common wisdom" that you need to eat more fiber if you get constipated. 

 

Fiber is overrated and unnecessary at least when I tried à carnivore diet I did not experience any issues quite the opposite. The stool size and frequency diminish and there is no more bloating. 

 

"For decades, fiber has been touted as an essential component of a healthy diet. The supposed benefits of a high-fiber diet have been drilled into us through recommendations by our doctors, government, and the food industry alike, yet many of these health claims have not been proven by research.

 

In fact, many studies have demonstrated that excess intake of fiber may actually be harmful, particularly for gut health."

https://chriskresser.com/myths-and-truths-about-fiber/

 

I did not talk about DHA because it would be too much time consuming to find a study for each nutrients that vegetarian/vegan lack in their diet. Not all vegan eat processed food like not all vegetarian eat a whole food diet (whole wheat bread is still processed food). My point was simply that most of them need a supplementation to stay healthy. It's possible to be defficient for a long period of time without noticing it and the only solution is to do a blood analysis and then take the required (often synthetic) supplements to fix the situation.

Edited February 25, 2020 by Tayaout

[UbonThani]

7 hours ago, stephenterry said:

whole grains and legumes, and nuts and seeds.

Very high in anti nutrients

[UbonThani]

7 hours ago, stephenterry said:

Far more worrying is the antibiotics and hormones 

Humans consume antibiotics directly.

 

Also which hormones are you talking about?

[UbonThani]

 

Research published by SAFEMEAT, the partnership between the red meat livestock industry and Australia’s state and federal governments, reports that a 100-gram serving of beef from a steer treated with HGPs contains just 2 nanograms of estrogenic activity. The same-sized serving from a non-HGP-treated steer contains 1.4 nanograms.

You would need to eat more than 77kg of beef from treated steers in one sitting to ingest the same estrogenic activity as you do from eating one egg, or 200kg to receive the same as from a single average serving of cabbage. According to the US-based ENOUGH Movement, tofu contains 10 million times the estrogenic activity of implanted beef, and soy flour 67.5 million times that beef’s level.

[stephenterry]

5 hours ago, UbonThani said:

 

Research published by SAFEMEAT, the partnership between the red meat livestock industry and Australia’s state and federal governments, reports that a 100-gram serving of beef from a steer treated with HGPs contains just 2 nanograms of estrogenic activity. The same-sized serving from a non-HGP-treated steer contains 1.4 nanograms.

You would need to eat more than 77kg of beef from treated steers in one sitting to ingest the same estrogenic activity as you do from eating one egg, or 200kg to receive the same as from a single average serving of cabbage. According to the US-based ENOUGH Movement, tofu contains 10 million times the estrogenic activity of implanted beef, and soy flour 67.5 million times that beef’s level.

You've been conned by the meat industry which is also a key money maker by the OZ government - that is their norm to retain power and profit. There are different types of estrogen, the soy one from plant sources is a good estrogen and not harmful to health. 

 

Extract from Harvard School of Public Health - probably the least biased of any scientific report because they're neutral and have no conflict of interest.

 

Soy is a unique food that is widely studied for its estrogenic and anti-estrogenic effects on the body. Studies may seem to present conflicting conclusions about soy, but this is largely due to the wide variation in how soy is studied. Results of recent population studies suggest that soy has either a beneficial or neutral effect on various health conditions. Soy is a nutrient-dense source of protein that can safely be consumed several times a week, and is likely to provide health benefits—especially when eaten as an alternative to red and processed meat.

 

 

[UbonThani]

You have been conned. Massive difference in levels.

 

 

[UbonThani]

The grain industry is bigger than meat.

 

"You've been conned by the meat industry which is also a key money maker by the OZ government"

 

 

[UbonThani]

The soy industry was aware of many of the detrimental effects associated with hydrogenated vegetable oils and trans fats, but they succeeded in demonizing all saturated fats, including healthy coconut and palm oils, for the sake of profit. The plan was an overwhelming financial success.

Over the next two decades hydrogenated vegetable oils found their way into over 40 percent of all the foods on supermarket shelves, amounting to about 40,000 different products. Hydrogenated soybean oil consumption dramatically increased, and so did numerous diseases now known to be associated with trans fats.

Original article at: https://www.smallfootprintfamily.com/why-soy-is-bad-for-you-and-the-planet#ixzz6F1eNnZu6
 

 

Edited February 26, 2020 by UbonThani

[stephenterry]

13 hours ago, Tayaout said:

I did not talk about DHA because it would be too much time consuming to find a study for each nutrients that vegetarian/vegan lack in their diet. Not all vegan eat processed food like not all vegetarian eat a whole food diet (whole wheat bread is still processed food). My point was simply that most of them need a supplementation to stay healthy. It's possible to be defficient for a long period of time without noticing it and the only solution is to do a blood analysis and then take the required (often synthetic) supplements to fix the situation.

As it happened, I watched a YouTube video last night. The guy had been a vegan for 20 years, without ANY supplementation, even B12. And being healthy he had not needed any meds, but he hadn't had any comprehensive blood tests, so he took them. 

 

The medical report results he showed viewers, surprised me. After 20 years without any supplements - he was slightly low on a couple of non essential markers, but well within the normal range for EVERY other marker, including B12. The doctor told him he was perfectly healthy, just carry on with his life.

 

Okay, that's just one person, but from your points above, you also have no scientific evidence to support your assertion that 'most of them (vegans) need supplementation to stay healthy'. In fact, it's an impossible conclusion if a vegan follows a strict WFPB +B12 nutrition regime.

 

If I was you, I would worry more about the health effects on your body from your meat consumption. Arterial plaque takes several decades to build up to a (surprise) heart attack, which is the biggest killer in today's modern society. Maybe you could consider taking a ECG and chest X-ray.

OAO.

Edited February 26, 2020 by stephenterry
correction

[Tayaout]

19 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

As it happened, I watched a YouTube video last night. The guy had been a vegan for 20 years, without ANY supplementation, even B12. And being healthy he had not needed any meds, but he hadn't had any comprehensive blood tests, so he took them. 

 

The medical report results he showed viewers, surprised me. After 20 years without any supplements - he was slightly low on a couple of non essential markers, but well within the normal range for EVERY other marker, including B12. The doctor told him he was perfectly healthy, just carry on with his life.

 

Okay, that's just one person, but from your points above, you also have no scientific evidence to support your assertion that 'most of them (vegans) need supplementation to stay healthy'. In fact, it's an impossible conclusion if a vegan follows a strict WFPB +B12 nutrition regime.

 

If I was you, I would worry more about the health effects on your body from your meat consumption. Arterial plaque takes several decades to build up to a (surprise) heart attack, which is the biggest killer in today's modern society. Maybe you could consider taking a ECG and chest X-ray.

OAO.

If you took the time to read the study from northern India it said not all vegetarian needed supplementation. Only around 47-75%. 88% of vegan dont sustain this diet many for health reason. I agree we won't agree especially since you never cite the source for your claim. Very nice that your single case was healthy. 

Edited February 26, 2020 by Tayaout

[UbonThani]

6 minutes ago, Tayaout said:

Very nice that your single case was healthy. 

55555555

 

 

[UbonThani]

The only thing we agree on is fasting is good for you. Whatever you eat regular fasts allow the body to heal.

 

 

[Tayaout]

I also took the time to read the page that stephenterry cited without posting the link. I took the time to check the drop down text and most of the study are inconclusive or show weak benefits. I then went on reading a more detailed study and the reasons became clear but it's a long read. 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1480510/

 

Unrelated:

Most soy is GMO (except some exceptions like Thailand but they import 98% of it) and is sprayed with pesticides. Large monoculture also have their issues: https://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/monoculture-crops-environment/

Even tho most of it goes to animal feeds this is not the correct diet for herbivore in the first place and should not be used. The planet is losing topsoil at an alarming rate and the most effecient way to restore it is with regenerative agriculture that involves animals eating their natural diet and giving back manure promoting carbon trapping in the soil. 

 

"Thailand produces only 60,000 tonnes of soybeans a year, meeting only two percent of a total demand nearing three million tonnes." 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_Thailand

 

My wife and extended family do consume soy milk but it has to be enriched with a large amount of sugar to make it paletable. Most of them also have a low meat diet and have various illness like blood pressure and type 2 diabete. They don't even eat a lot of processed food. It's mostly rice and veggies that they forage. I did eat their diet for some time and gained a lot of weight. 

Edited February 26, 2020 by Tayaout

[Tayaout]

You cannot remove the animals from the equation but the current practice in most cases are inhumane and bad for the environment because it ignores nature to maximise profit. Feeding herbivore with grain make them fatter than grass while increasing methane. Feed lot increase polution and erosion by concentring too many animals in a small space. 

Edited February 26, 2020 by Tayaout

[stephenterry]

3 hours ago, Tayaout said:

If you took the time to read the study from northern India it said not all vegetarian needed supplementation. Only around 47-75%. 88% of vegan dont sustain this diet many for health reason. I agree we won't agree especially since you never cite the source for your claim. Very nice that your single case was healthy. 

If you read Michael Greger (Whole Food Plant Based Vegan) latest 2019 book, How Not To Diet, and whatever you think of him, there are c.5,000 numbered and up to date scientific study references in the appendix to evidence his statements on nutrition. I'm not going to trawl through these sources to please you. 

 

You also have to bear in mind population lifestyle and nutrition in N India would differ from Caucasian, not only from genetic makeup, but differences in their bodily microbiomes and bacteria symbiotic presence - which makes up 90% of the human body. And probably it could be the main cause of why people react differently to nutrition consumption, and why nutritional science is not an exact science.

 

For example, I haven't eaten any meat for 50 years, you have. During most of my life I've been vegetarian. I wouldn't have the necessary beneficial microbiomes and bacteria to absorb meat that you have - and worse case scenario, my body could trigger an inflammatory response - yours wouldn't. The same would apply to supplements - one man's meat is another man's poison.

[Tayaout]

[UbonThani]

You eat eggs and seafood?

[Tayaout]

I kill one beef and I'm good for a year. 

[UbonThani]

 Concentrations of natural pesticides in plants are usually measured in parts per thousand or million (16-23) rather than parts per billion, the usual concentration of synthetic pesticide residues or of water pollutants (1, 24). It is estimated that humans ingest roughly 5000 to 10,000 different natural pesticides and their breakdown products (16-23). For example, Table 1 shows 49 natural pesticides (and metabolites) that are ingested when cabbage is eaten, and indicates how few have been tested for carcinogenicity or clastogenicity. Lima beans contain a completely different array of 23 natural toxins that, in stressed plants, range in concentration from 0.2 to 33 parts per thousand fresh weight; none appears to have been tested yet for carcinogenicity or teratogenicity (19). Many Leguminosae contain canavanine, a toxin arginine analog that, after being eaten by animals, is incorporated into protein in place of arginine. Feeding alfalfa sprouts (1.5% canavanine dry weight) or canavanine to monkeys causes a lupus erythema- tosus-like syndrome (44). Lupus in humans is characterized by a defect in the immune system that is associated with autoimmunity, anti-nuclear antibodies, chromosome breaks, and various types of pathology. The toxicity of nonfood plants is well known: plants are among the most commonly ingested poisonous substances for children under 5 years. Surprisingly few plant toxins have been tested for carcinogenicity (10-13, 45). Among 1052 chemicals tested in at least one species in chronic cancer tests, only 52 are naturally occurring plant pesticides (10-13). Among these, about half (27/52) are carcinogenic. 11 Even though only a tiny proportion of the plant toxins in the human diet have been tested so far, the 27 natural pesticides that are rodent carcinogens are present in the following foods: anise, apple, apricot, banana, basil, broccoli, brussels sprouts, cabbage, cantaloupe, caraway, carrot, cauliflower, celery, cherries, cinnamon, cloves, cocoa, coffee, collard greens, comfrey herb tea, currants, dill, eggplant, endive, fennel, grapefruit juice, grapes, guava, honey, honeydew melon, horseradish, kale, lentils, lettuce, mango, mushrooms, mustard, nutmeg, orange juice, parsley, parsnip, peach, pear, peas, black pepper, pineapple, plum, potato, radish, raspberries, rosemary, sesame seeds, tarragon, tea, tomato, and turnip. Thus, it is probable that almost every fruit and vegetable in the supermarket contains natural plant pesticides that are rodent carcinogens. The levels of these 27 rodent carcinogens in the above plants are commonly thousands of times higher than the levels of synthetic pesticides. Table 2 shows a variety of natural pes