Veganism! Please aid me in destroying this article.

[mr.selfdestruct]

http://www.goveg.com/feat/ns-health.html

Just reading through myself I can tell a lot of it is rubbish, but if any of you have any specific rebutals for distinct points made in the article I would be glad to hear them! This just makes me so angry!

[jcorsello]

I think I'll stick with eggs

[Cool Abe]

I know Joe K. or OldSchool will dismantle this fallacy in a more scientifical way, but here's my base to say that this article is just nonsense:

Genesis 1:29-30 (New International Version)

29 Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food.

30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground - everything that has the breath of life in it-I give every green plant for food." And it was so.

[a-folov]

[ QUOTE ]
How many of us salivate at the idea of chasing a small animal, ripping her limb from limb, and then devouring her, blood and all? I hope that no one listening has that reaction, but every carnivore does.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's because we have easier ways of getting meat. I'm sure that a few thousand years back, people salivated at the thought of catching their dinner, because they couldn't get meat otherwise (catching, or farming it. Same result).

[ QUOTE ]
How many of us, if we’re walking down the street and see an animal carcass on the road, think, “Mmmmmm ... I’d like to eat that!”? No. We think, “Oh, how sad,” or, “Blech.” Every single carnivore, if hungry, digs in.

[/ QUOTE ]
Once again, difference in availability. I'm sure that when a vegetarian walks down the street and sees a half-eaten, rotten apple crawling with bugs, their first reaction isn't "mmmm" either.

[ QUOTE ]
And a long time ago, when there was no vegetation for us, we started eating meat.

[/ QUOTE ]
[img]/forum/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] I don't really like red paint on cars. I prefer more of a metallic finish.

[ QUOTE ]
Dr. Caldwell Esselstyn has replicated Dr. Ornish’s findings, taking patients who were suffering from clogged arteries and making them “heart attack proof” (to quote Dr. Esselstyn in the August 1999 issue of the American Journal of Cardiology) by getting their cholesterol levels down below 150.

[/ QUOTE ]
So, because they didn't die from a heart-attack, they are "heart attack proof?" I guess I can't be killed by a speeding train, because it hasn't happened to me yet.
Also, I will bet any amount of money that those "patients" of his with sub-150 cholesterol had horrible HDL levels.

[ QUOTE ]
Although the medical establishment may say “Well, you’ve done your best,” at 210, people are still dropping like flies.

[/ QUOTE ]
Never heard "the medical establishment" say that about cholesterol levels.

[ QUOTE ]
There is complete scientific unanimity: As much cancer is caused by diet as is caused by smoking, which is a lot!

[/ QUOTE ]
Complete scientific unanimity? I'm not one to use foul-language, but that's a bunch of %*&$@! bull****. Also, the author very conveniently does not descriminate between a diet that contains meat, and a diet that contains meat and 60% junk food. Works very well for the propaganda.

[ QUOTE ]
Just to be clear, it’s not the fat and cholesterol that cause cancer; it’s the animal protein. The fat and cholesterol cause heart disease; the animal protein causes cancer. Dr. T. Colin Campbell states that “human studies also support this carcinogenic effect of animal protein, even at usual levels of consumption … no chemical carcinogen is nearly so important in causing human cancer as animal protein.”

[/ QUOTE ]
To quote 99% of the internet, "lol."

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, vegetarians are one-third as likely to be obese as meat-eaters, and vegans are about one-tenth as likely to be obese.

[/ QUOTE ]
Anorexics are 99% less likely to be fat as vegetarians and vegans, and are almost twice as thin on average. I guess they must be hell of a lot healthier than vegans, right?

[ QUOTE ]
Vegans tend to be much lighter than ovo-lacto vegetarians and meat-eaters, and they tend to have more energy, need less sleep, and so on. Clearly, these aspects of veganism can be good for a person’s sex life.

[/ QUOTE ]
I dated three vegans and two vegetarians, and that's a complete load of bull****.

[ QUOTE ]
But clogged arteries will block the blood flow to your extremities before they cut off the blood to your heart and kill you. This results in poor circulation and, for guys, impotence.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, getting killed leads to impotence. Getting shot will take a toll on your sex life as well.

[ QUOTE ]
if it’s not good for pregnant women, it can’t be good for anyone else, either.

[/ QUOTE ]
Doing practice of track-and-field isn't good for pregnant women either; so it's not good for anyone else, right? I've heard four-year-olds formulate arguments better.

[ QUOTE ]
The one thing we hear about is the cholesterol-lowering properties of Omega 3 and 6 fatty acids, but one finds Omega 3’s and 6’s in many vegan foods as well, like flaxseed oil.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, the EPA/DHA content of flaxseed oil is simply off the charts [img]/forum/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]


I can write about 10 times as much about that one article, but I'm tired and it makes me sick that someone would actually push propaganda like that.

[Invicta]

I salivate when I think of taking down and gutting a white tail or moose and having a bbq afterward-it's darn good meat

[Ultra Man]

[ QUOTE ]
I salivate when I think of taking down and gutting a white tail or moose and having a bbq afterward-it's darn good meat

[/ QUOTE ]

[STAMP OF APPROVAL]

[Andrew G.]

LOL. Good post Afolov.

[mr.selfdestruct]

Thanks A-Folov! Awesome! That's just the way it made me feel too. [img]/forum/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

[boyd888]

I mean no disrespect, but I don't think that giving extreme counter examples is a very good way of dismantling this.

[ QUOTE ]
Anorexics are 99% less likely to be fat as vegetarians and vegans, and are almost twice as thin on average. I guess they must be hell of a lot healthier than vegans, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's a big secret that vegetarians tend to be thinner than the average person. And being less obese is definitely healthier for you. Does this mean that vegetarianism is a healthier lifestyle? I don't know enough to say either way, as the health of the person could be related to being less overweight as opposed to their diet.

[ QUOTE ]
I dated three vegans and two vegetarians, and that's a complete load of bull****.

[/ QUOTE ]

Five people do not represent an entire population. If I live in Europe and I've met only five Americans, none of whom were overweight, does that mean I can say that the fact that most Americans are overweight is wrong? Of course not.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, getting killed leads to impotence. Getting shot will take a toll on your sex life as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

what [img]/forum/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] The point the original article was trying to make was that reduced blood flow leads to impotence. Not sure if that is true or not, but I fail to see how getting shot or dying has anything to do with it.

Surely this must be a scientific way to disprove many of the incorrect things in this article. I think the most obvious problem with this article is that it focuses mainly on obesity, and not everyone who eats meat is obese, and there are probably some obese vegetarians out there as well.

[a-folov]

[ QUOTE ]
I mean no disrespect, but I don't think that giving extreme counter examples is a very good way of dismantling this.

[/ QUOTE ]
Bien au contraire, my friend; the article makes unsupported claims that are "way out there," and extreme examples are the best way of demonstrating the silliness of it.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think it's a big secret that vegetarians tend to be thinner than the average person. And being less obese is definitely healthier for you. Does this mean that vegetarianism is a healthier lifestyle? I don't know enough to say either way, as the health of the person could be related to being less overweight as opposed to their diet.

[/ QUOTE ]
"Thinner" and "less obese" are two very different things, which is why I chose anorexics for the example. Neither vegeterians (for the most part) nor anorexics are obese; nor are the majority sample of people who eat meat. The article uses a very concise choice of words to deliver "shock value" of sorts (non-vegeterians are obese! Oh no!), and so have I; equal counter-point.

[ QUOTE ]
Five people do not represent an entire population. If I live in Europe and I've met only five Americans, none of whom were overweight, does that mean I can say that the fact that most Americans are overweight is wrong? Of course not.

[/ QUOTE ]
But imagine if all five of those Americans were overweight, and someone mentioned to you that "almost everyone across the pond is overweight." Your perceptions of Americans would then include a much higher obesety rate than there really is, due to perception and suggestion. The article is trying to make it seem that being a vegan or a vegeterian turns your into a sexually-charged demigod blessed by Aphrodite herself, while eating meat makes you slow, fat, and impotent, which is obviously not true.
Yes, both points, mine and that of the article, are ignoratio elenchi to the extreme; the reason I used such an example is to illustrate the same thing in the article.

[ QUOTE ]
what [img]/forum/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] The point the original article was trying to make was that reduced blood flow leads to impotence. Not sure if that is true or not, but I fail to see how getting shot or dying has anything to do with it.

[/ QUOTE ]
The article states, and I quote: "But clogged arteries will block the blood flow to your extremities before they cut off the blood to your heart and kill you. This results in poor circulation and, for guys, impotence." It uses the shock value of clogged arteries "killing you" to support their argument of meat making you impotent. There was no reason to place it there (it's actually a mix of three logical fallacies that I can think of off the top of my head). Thus my use in my example.

[ QUOTE ]
Surely this must be a scientific way to disprove many of the incorrect things in this article.

[/ QUOTE ]
There is no need to, since they have no citations. Thus, al there is left to do is to expose it for the propaganda piece that it is, which is what I did (it's always fun to have a scientifically-sound discussion of benefits vs. harm of eating meat, but this piece is just rubbish).

[ QUOTE ]
and there are probably some obese vegetarians out there as well.

[/ QUOTE ]
You better believe it. Quite a few vegetarians looooooove donuts, cake, and pizza, which have no meat at all [img]/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]