Myth of Vegetarianism

I know, this will probably stir up quite a sh*tstorm of flaming...but this is an article that makes a lot of interesting points. Particularly, points about how organic meat and farming techniques are more environmentally-friendly:

I think it's a meat-industry talking point.

The issue doesn't appear to be not eating meat, but more the low-fat, no-fat mentality in this country. People who don't consume enough fat are often deficient in fat soluble vitamins, as well as calcium. That doesn't mean they should go back to eating meat. They should quit buying into the low-fat craze. People can be so gullible sometimes. Whatever is bad for you today will be good for you next week!

The meat industry is out to get organic meat farmers like this guy

http://www.polyfacefarms.com

I get almost all of my meat from him; it's good, healthy, and clean. And you can even go on the farm and meet the cows and pigs.

someone might read it! :grr:

It must have taken a week for you to read this. Um, if you actually did.

Why did you post this? Does your source need a publisher or something?

I mean shit.

I found some parts that I agreed with, and others I disagreed with. If you can't handle an article that doesn't agree with your every single opinion, you really need to get a grip.

It's bad enough they wanna git married!

Through no fault of my own, the idea of eating animals' flesh makes me feel nauseous, depressed, and just plain like I'm in the middle of a Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie sequel. I've been this way since I've had use of reason. Don't get me wrong, I've eaten flesh before. However, it makes me CRAZY! (And mind you, I'm from a meat-eating family).

As I grew up and found out how animals for consumption are slaughtered, I became more hysterical. When finally I saw a video on how it actually takes place for various types of animals, my hair nearly stood on end. I suddenly understood why PETA even exists.

Anyway, what's your recommendation for me? :(

(Whatever you do, please don't recommend cognitive behavioral therapy).

Even though I've gone through meat eating phases, from my first awareness of what I was being fed I was horrified. I basically viewed my entire family as a nest of insane cannibals, (there was a bizarre movie with Randy Quaid that explored this theme) only to discover that they were perfectly normal. When I was nine or ten my parents made friends with another family whose mom was a vegetarian and I was astounded to discover that there was somebody else like me.

My husband had an epiphany about it when he was about 40 and hasn't eaten meat since, and my kids would no sooner eat meat than they would eat the couch. Meat isn't food to them, it's flesh.

They are both perfectly healthy (as is my husband), and in fact I do believe that ultimately they are healthier for it, because when kids eat meat they tend to eat the cheap stuff, like McDonalds and other fast food. I figure they are avoiding a host of health problems because of that choice.

I can really relate to what you say :pals:.

fruits, vegetables, whole grains, tofu, tempeh.

the tree..AVOCADOS..Yummy!

job of getting them up here in the middle of New York State..I use to live in Cal and Hawaii and they were more types more easily accessible but I'm going back to Hawaii in 3 years and hope I get Avos and other delicacies from the trees that aren't available here. B-)

yummmmmmy

...the previous post lists. Don't fall for the 'no-fat' diet crap. You NEED some fat but you can CHOOSE what types. And non trans-fat, non-saturated, non-hydrogenated vegetable fats are best. The Omega 3s and Omega 9s are esp important - those are found in flaxseed / flaxseed oil and from other sources.

It was a good article. Meanwhile, four people flamed it without reading it.
:spank:

Edit: 5 people

This article is factual.

You're open-minded.

... isn't the same as gullible or stupid. I could tell from the first paragraph that this was a poorly conceived polemic full of misinformation.

If you can't you might not be that bright.

Do you believe everything that's posted on DU?

I decided to quit hounding the quacks and just pimp their products.

Every ka-ching! makes me forget how unethical it is to sell snake oil. :D

Does that make his message any less worthy of consideration?

This is pseudo-scientific trash, posing as the "scientific" Truth about vegetarianism, to indirectly sell a book -- a book that tells you you'll outlive any of those queer-o vegetarian types by a decade, if you just cram enough pig fat and offal down your gullet.

Tsk tsk tsk, people with agendas should do more research.

oops I meant to respond to post #6 wherein it was claimed that us 'flamers' were ignorant.

"Stephen Byrnes grew up in New York and attended Hunter College in New York City where he received his B.A. in Comparative Religion. After moving to Los Angeles, he completed his M.A. in Humanities at California State University at Dominguez Hills. He then received his Diploma in Homeobotanical Therapy from the Australasian College, USA, a state-licensed college in Lake Oswego, Oregon, and his Doctorate of Alternative Medicines from the Alternative Medicines Research Institute (AMRI), a licensed and registered educational institution in Gibraltar, European Union, affiliated with the Open International University of Complimentary Medicines, Colombo, Sri Lanka. He later received his Graduate Diploma in Naturopathy from the Canadian Alternative Medicines Research Institute (CAMRI), Vancouver, British Columbia. CAMRI is licensed and registered with the Private Post-Secondary Education Commission of British Columbia."

One of his other profound utterances:
"Overcoming AIDS with Natural Medicine"
http://www.westonaprice.org/federalupdate/aa2004/infoalert_090704.html

He died from a stroke related to issues associated with AIDS.

So the late Mr. Byrnes was a Naturopath with 'degrees' in pseudo-science that would make vegetarianism look solidly grounded.

Here is another examination of one of the late Mr. Byrnes' claims:

Stephen Byrnes: A myth-making "debunker"
By Stephen Walsh
Stephen Byrnes (http://www.powerhealth.net/selected_articles.htm) devotes a lot of effort to attacking the "myths of vegetarianism". He scores the odd hit, as vegetarians are not exempt from saying foolish things, but on the whole his efforts at "debunking" are ill founded and create larger and more dangerous myths than those he sets out to demolish. I have taken just one example - vitamin B12 - to illustrate how he replaces one myth with another. This example was chosen for its relevance to the vegetarian and vegan movement and for its educational value rather than for exceptional inaccuracy. Indeed, it is unusually accurate by comparison with many of Byrnes' other "myths". Extracts from Stephen Byrnes' essay are indented.

MYTH #2: Vitamin B12 can be obtained from plant sources.

Of all the myths, this is perhaps the most dangerous. While lacto and lacto-ovo vegetarians have sources of vitamin B12 in their diets (from dairy products and eggs), vegans (total vegetarians) do not. Vegans who do not supplement their diet with vitamin B12 will eventually get anemia (a fatal condition) as well as severe nervous and digestive system damage; most, if not all, vegans have impaired B12 metabolism and every study of vegan groups has demonstrated low vitamin B12 concentrations in the majority of individuals. Several studies have been done documenting B12 deficiencies in vegan children, often with dire consequences. Additionally, claims are made in vegan and vegetarian literature that B12 is present in certain algae, tempeh (a fermented soy product) and Brewer's yeast. All of them are false as vitamin B12 is only found in animal foods. Brewer's and nutritional yeasts do not contain B12 naturally; they are always fortified from an outside source.

A small but vocal minority of vegans do claim that B12-fortified foods and supplements are unnecessary. In criticising this claim, Byrnes is merely repeating the majority view in the vegan community (www.vegansociety.com/html/info/b12sheet.htm), but adding his own distinctive spin. The seeds of his counter-mythology are already being sown with the claim that "every study of vegan groups has demonstrated low vitamin B12 concentrations in the majority of individuals". This is incorrect. Studies of vegan groups with adequate average intakes of B12 from fortified foods or supplements, such as Haddad (1999), demonstrate excellent average B12 status in vegans including desirably low homocysteine levels. The claim "vitamin B12 is only found in animal foods" is also incorrect as the primary source of B12 is bacteria (no animal synthesises its own B12, all rely on B12 from bacteria). B12 is found wherever B12-producing bacteria are found.

http://www.vegsource.com/articles/walsh_byrnes_b12_print.htm

:D

I stopped eating meat, and developed a B12 deficiency that could have done some serious damage to my system, had my doctor not found it in time. Not many doctors routinely do B12 tests, so thank God mine does.

I'm trying to incorporate more meat and animal products into my diet now. I've realized that the healthiest diet is one of moderation in all things, rather than just cutting some things out completely. I still take multivitamins and other supplements, but the best nutrition comes from food, not pills.

I knew in the mid 60s that you should take B supplements. Did you do any research? Talk to other vegetarians? The myth is that you have to eat meat to get B12.

It was from The Townsend Letter about six years ago. I've seen it elsewhere, too.

And there are better critical analyses of vegetarianism, anyway.

--p!

Seems tailor made for them.

:)

A Critique of "The Myths of Vegetarianism" by Stephen Byrnes
Andrew Paterson—06/2002
http://www.energygrid.com/health/2002/06ap-stephenbyrnes.html

The Myths of Vegetarianism was originally published in the Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients, July 2000, a revised version of which was published in Nexus Magazine (Vol 9, 3 & 4) and on the author's, Stephen Byrnes', website. Whilst I agree with Byrnes on some points, and applaud him for bringing some pertinent issues to the attention of vegetarians, I believe that much of what he has written is invalid and distorted.

KNOW VEGETARIANS who seem distinctly unhealthy: pale faced, weak and unable to concentrate. I also know meat-eaters that are equally unhealthy: red-faced, gasping for air and with high cholesterol. Stereotypes for sure! There are also both vegetarians and meat-eaters who are very healthy — like Byrnes himself who looks the picture of health! That said, statistically, vegetarians are healthier than meat-eaters and there is, contrary to what Byrnes tells us, much supporting evidence for this.

Of course there will be "several authorities" that question this data… there are authorities who question global warming, whether BSE could affect humans, and the wisdom of farming without pesticides and herbicides. Experts have different opinions and anyone who has been in the academic world will be aware that, after degree level, scientific knowledge is often conflicting and open to much interpretation. These "several authorities" have probably been "ignored" (presumably by vegetarians) because most vegetarians are primarily making an ethical stand rather than merely choosing a more healthy lifestyle (unless they have been scared off a meat-based diet by BSE!).

Byrnes' article is very useful to the vegetarian community because it reiterates the fact that just because a diet is vegetarian doesn't automatically mean it healthy — an assumption that has seen many a healthy omnivore turn into an unhealthy vegetarian. Byrnes does us all a favour by bringing this important issue to light. However, in the process, it would seem that he has been overzealous in his dismissal of vegetarianism, to the point whereby he has presented some arguments that make no sense, others that are contradictory, and selected research that that in no way is representative of the pervading opinion on these matters which is based on the total research done in this area. This, of course, is his prerogative, but in doing so he actually ends up diluting the pertinence of his message by trying to make the scope of his argument a little too broad—the "myths" a little too numerous. This is a shame as it is essential to be quite mindful when eating a vegetarian diet to make sure that we get all the nutrients that we need for our particular body type. By dismissing everything about vegetarianism out of hand, Byrnes becomes as imbalanced as the "vege-fanatics" he derides.

Those pale faced, weak, stereotypes are so, um, stereotypical...

but I think it might be due to all the sunscreen and not the vegetarianism.

He was in one camp on this and obviously not objective. Good rebuttal article.

He is now deceased but this was his web-site and he actively promoted the Atkins diet and other low-carb diets:


http://www.powerhealth.net/parking.php4?task=search&domain=powerhealth.net&s=4a1ee17fe8608fab5822&tb=0&a_id=2&language=en&pxy_t=0&start=1&add_c=4215c2dea2f300e897f5b910bb2e67fe&pgt=&keyword=stephen+byrnes

http://www.positivehealth.com/permit/Articles/Nutrition/byrnes82.htm

About the Author
Stephen Byrnes is a nutritionist who utilises low-carb diets in his practice. Visit his website and subscribe to his free newsletter at www.PowerHealth.net.


Diets like the Atkins diet have been viewed with much more skepticism by the vast majority of doctors and nutritionists than vegetarianism ever has. I would take this article with a good sackful of salt ;).

some great information and worth a kick and recommend.

lol

Writer states:

As for the claims that raising livestock requires more water than raising plant foods, water that livestock drink would be drunk by them anyway, even if they were not being raised for food.

......but in a world where livestock were not raised for food would there not be less breeding of livestock, and therefore many fewer animals to drink the water?

:popcorn:

Plus,it's vegetarian safe! :popcorn:

:D

What you eat doesn't piss us off.

(Making fun of us for what we eat does. Thanks for not doing that.)

it does however seem that our food choices piss off some non-veggies. What the heck is up with that?

I wish everyone would stop worrying about other people's dietary choices. I even had one vegetarian on this board tell me that "I wasn't doing it right" when I told him that I couldn't maintain weight as a vegetarian with HIV disease.

But that number is rather small. Oddly Peta's front page features not your meat is murder button but this:

That accompanies an article about Mr. Vick's peculiar passion for dog mutilation.

Plus Pam Anderson. (Sorry no picture link.)

Plus lots of information about how to transition to a vegetarian diet.

No Meat is Murder button.

Along with this:



and this



and this



and this



Now are all vegetarians/vegans like that? No. Never said it, but unfortunately, I have met one too many and it's soured my opinion of people who want to have a superiority complex over their dietary choices.

It's silly.

How many murderers, on average, eat their victims?

Thank you, thank you. I'm here, all weak. <rimshot>

...by putting it in their 'catalog of buttons and apparel' where only those meat-eaters who are actively searching out something to be offended by will ever find them...

And anyone who criticized your diet (especially in light of serious health challenges) is a dunderhead.

it seems like most of the anti-vegi stuff is just fact and logic free ad hominem insults that totally dodge the issues raised by vegetarians.

you've heard of implied criticism?

You're talking about inferred criticism.

How do you tell if a human cell "feels well"? :rofl:

Thats hilarious. So no ordinary cell needs carbs? Krebs cycle anyone? Please don't tell me this guy has a phD..please.....:crazy:

I confess, I only read the first three paragraphs of Myth #1 before arriving at this piece of analytic "brilliance": "As for the claims that raising livestock requires more water than raising plant foods, water that livestock drink would be drunk by them anyway, even if they were not being raised for food."

OMFG!, are they arguing that all those feedlots would be filled with equal numbers of animals being raised as pets, or as a hobby?

A No American continent with parking lots from one end to the other.

At first it looked just bizarre. Parking lots end to end across the continent as some sort of punishment if we stop eating meat? If you want, and can tolerate, a small dose of reality, read "Diet for a Small Planet."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diet_for_a_Small_Planet

The short version, it takes far more acres to produce plant nutrients than to produce the equivalent meat nutrients by first feeding animals plant nutrients and then eating the animals.

For the record, I am an omnivore.

(edit typo because spell check is too forgiving)

Excellent book.

But people wanna make a profit on their real estate. If the beef and the lamb and the other critters go, what incentive will a farmer have to keep the land as is??

And if the critters go, so goes their poop. Remember what happened to Oklahoma about sixty years after we got rid of those pesky bison? Yep, dust storms.

Animal poop is part of an ecosystem. You get insects and birds and prairie dogs and all sorts of life from the bovine species.

I'm living in a wondrous dairy land right now - yet all about me, the farmers are selling their meadows off for casinos and for vineyards

If you wanna really really really be sustainable - don't drink wine... I mean, the vintners pesticide hundreds of thousands of acres here in California - and the new vineyards do not even have little scraps of turf with bushes on them - can't have those nasty birds, squirrels and bunnies eating the grapes.


Words cannot describe the desolate difference between a vineyard with its vastness of nothing but vines versus the ecosystem of a meadow.

That site is a real piece of work.

I'm an omnivore. My body digest plants and animals with equal delight.

If you want to be a vegetarian, go for it.

If you want to be a strict meat eater, go for it.

When you start buying the food that is in my refrigerator, then you can feel free to tell me what I should be eating.

Until then, I wish all sides of this idiocy (vegans, vegetarians, carnivores, omnivores) would stop proselytizing.

I don't give a fuck what you put in your stomach and I demand the same respect from others.

irrational piece of garbage story. I won't be wasting my time on the rest.

Does this guy look emaciated or healthy to you?



His vegan mom enjoyed a healthy vegan pregnancy and raised him as a vegan, which he still is.

Happens every day.


What a load of bull.

"Can a world-class athlete get enough protein from a vegetarian diet to compete? I've found that a person does not need protein from meat to be a successful athlete. In fact, my best year of track competition was the first year I ate a vegan diet. Moreover, by continuing to eat a vegan diet, my weight is under control, I like the way I look (I know that sounds vain, but all of us want to like the way we look), I enjoy eating more, and I feel great. Here's my story."

http://www.vegsource.com/articles/lewis_intro.htm

How about this guy? Roy Hilligenn


at 55:

at 77:


http://www.cbass.com/Hilligenn.htm

Famous vegetarians:
http://www.ivu.org/people/

I have a very difficult time imagining a healthy two-four year old, with their eating habits, eating only vegan food and not nursing a freaking ton. Which I find wholly natural and healthy, but just sayin'.

...that the OP of this drive-by hit piece has argued that
breastfeeding is disgusting, and the "Minutemen" are a
bunch of patriots.

I guess I'm just saying, "consider the source".

Then why am I here posting? I never said breastfeeding is disgusting, just that it should be done in private instead of in public. I *support* breastfeeding, as I believe it creates healthier children.

And what's wrong with wanting to protect our country from illegals? Until you live in a border state, you have NO clue as to what the immigration issue really is. And I notice you've conveniently overlooked my posts in which I've said that people coming here illegally are being EXPLOITED by unethical employers.

But I guess you can't expect honesty from someone who would attack a poster, instead of discussing the contents of their post. You might want to apply for a job at Fox News, with the way you're so good at twisting facts to suit your attacks on people.

All you've done now is "return to the scene of the flamebait".
In the MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, no less. Getting a bunch of "replies"
typed in at an hour when you'll be long gone again before almost
anyone wakes up and sees them.

Yeah, that really inspires CONFIDENCE in your genuine desire
to have a discussion about this issue. :eyes:

So, what's the purpose of posting this pseudoscientific bunk, anyway?
Are you part of the marketing department for the quack snake-oil
that website is hawking?

http://www.flex.com/~jai/articles/nomeatht.html

Wait I'll post the whole damned article like anyone will read it! Maybe I expect everyone to read it bwahahahaha!

U.S. Physicians Say Meat Not Necessary,
Actually Harmful

Posted by Dr. Jai Maharaj
Recent Nutritional Research Affirms
Superiority of the Vegetarian Diet for Humans

Thirty-five years ago the US Department of Agriculture said we should daily eat from four food groups: 1. meat, fish and poultry; 2. grains; 3. dairy products; and 4. fruits and vegetables.

On April 9, 1991 the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, a prestigious non-profit organization active in health and research policy and based in Washington, D.C., said basing our diet on those groups not only will not ensure adequate nutrition, consumption of meat, fish, poultry and dairy products actually causes disease.

Instead PCRM recommends a "New Four Food Groups." They are: 1. fruits; 2. grains; 3. vegetables; and 4. legumes.

This is a very significant development for vegetarians whose traditional vegetarian diet -- which easily fulfills the requirements of the "new" groups -- has been under attack in many countries by physicians sharing the common ignorance of modern medicine toward diet.

For example, numerous physicians have insisted that mothers feed their children meat -- "A real mistake," says Dr. Neal Barnard, leading to all sorts of diseases such as colic, juvenile diabetes, diarrhea and later problems such as cancer of the colon. Dr. Devananda Tandavan points out that the average doctor in America has had almost no training whatsoever in nutrition by the time he has finished medical school and may remain ignorant for the rest of his professional life on the importance of diet for good health.

Though others have made similar recommendations to revise the American diet, none have done so with quite the authority of the 4,000-plus member PCRM. The committee's president, Dr. Neal D. Barnard -- himself a vegetarian -- is a director of Behavioral Studies at the Institute for Disease Prevention at George Washington University.

PCRM members instrumental in formulating the new food groups include Dr. T. Colin Campbell, Professor of Nutritional Biochemistry at Cornell University and Director of the massive China Health Project. Collaborator Dr. Oliver Alabaster is Director of the Institute for Disease Prevention at the George Washington University.

How did we end up with such a poor choice of food groups 35 years ago? Inadequate nutritional research for one thing. But more insidiously, since food guides were first established in 1916, there has been a tendency to give animal products a "preferred" designation. "This element of food guides has persisted until the present time, due in part to the intensive lobbying efforts of the food industry, and despite evidence of the adverse health effects of such foods, " says the PCRM report.

The situation is similar to the tobacco industry's continual denial of the harmful effects of smoking. In response to the four new food groups, a former US Secretary of Agriculture, John R. Block (president of the National American Wholesale Grocers' Association and a pig farmer in Illinois) denounced the committee's recommendations as the "height of irresponsibility."

Other reactions focused more on the difficulty of altering the food habits of the steak- and hamburger-eating American public than on the scientific validity of the new diet.

PCRM attacks the old, traditional four food groups on three major fronts. First, they say, "The old food groups fail to assure nutritional adequacy." The four food groups were established according to the understanding of nutritional needs in 1953. Since that time, the required daily allowances (RDA's) for protein, vitamins, minerals, etc. have been extensively revised and expanded. A 1978 study showed that only 9 of the 17 RDA's were met by the typical diet based on the old groups.

The second problem is that "The old four food groups fail to adequately address the current dietary problems of our population." Specifically, the the 1977-78 Nationwide Food Consumption Survey indicates that Americans who eat diets based on the four food groups consume an excessive amount of fat."

Studies show that dietary fat and associated consumption of excess protein is related to breast cancer, heart disease, obesity, kidney disease and osteoporosis, to name a few.

Third, states the PCRM, "The old four food groups serve to misinform consumers about some aspects of nutrition. Two of the four food groups -- meats and dairy products -- are clearly not necessary for health and, in fact, may be detrimental to health.... Populations with the lowest rates of heart disease, colon and breast cancer, and obesity consume very little meat or no meat at all."

The PCRM concludes that "The average adult can meet nutrient needs by consuming five servings of grains, three servings of legumes, three servings of vegetables and three servings of fruits each day."

The New Four Food Groups

Whole Grains This group includes rice, bread, pasta, hot or cold cereal, corn, millet, barley, bulgur, buckwheat groats and tortillas. Build each of your meals around a hearty grain dish. Grains are rich in fiber and other complex carbohydrates, as well as proteins, B vitamins and zinc.

Vegetables Vegetables are packed with nutrients; they provide vitamin C, beta-carotene, riboflavin and other vitamins, iron, calcium and fiber. Dark green, leafy vegetables such as broccoli, collards, kale, mustard and turnip greens, chicory or bok choy are especially good ources of of these important nutrients. Dark yellow and orange vegetables such as carrots, winter squash, sweet potatoes and pumpkin provide extra beta-carotene. Include generous portions or a variety of vegetables in your diet.

Legumes Legumes, which is another name for beans, peas and lentils, are all good sources of fiber, protein, iron, calcium, zinc and B vitamins. This group also includes the daals in Indian cuisine, pulses, chickpeas, baked and refried beans, soy milk, tofu, and texturized vegetable protein.

Fruit Fruits are rich in fiber, vitamin C and beta-carotene. Be sure to include at least one serving each day of fruits that are high in vitamin C -- citrus fruits, melons and strawberries are all good choices. Choose whole fruit over fruit juices, which don't contain as much healthy fiber.
Food Group

Number of
Servings

Typical Items and Serving Size

Whole Grains


5 or more


1/2 cup hot cereal + 1 ounce dry cereal + 1 slice of bread

Vegetables


3 or more


1 cup raw + 1 cup cooked

Legumes


2 to 3


1/2 cup cooked beans + 4 ounces tofu or tempeh

Fruits


3 or more


1 medium piece of fruit + 1/2 cup cooked fruit

Be sure to include a good source of vitamin B-12, such as fortified cereals and vitamin supplements.

(Based on a 1991 article in Hinduism Today)

Jai Maharaj
http://www.flex.com/~jai
Om Shanti



Copyright © 1997 Mantra Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

I tried being a vegetarian.

Vegetarianism and wasting from advanced HIV disease = bad!

with you completely. I have inflammatory bowel disease and am trying to keep enough nutrients in me period (shortening of the bowel makes malnutrition a real pain in the ass). It is extremely hard for those that don't have chronic conditions to understand just how hard it is to get the basics let alone thrive. I am constantly supplementing for iron and potassium as well as other minerals.
One shoe does NOT fit all. Period.

:rofl:

Seriously though, 67 references? I don't take seriously any relatively short essay, such as this, unless it cites at least 200 sources; 500 or more would really clinch it for me.

On a positive note, though, everyone interested in mathematics, who has not studied it in some time, should check out Whitehead's "An Introduction to Mathematics"; it is available http://www.archive.org/details/anintroductionto00whituoft">freely online -- brilliant little book.

I'm not going to turn down some Venison chili, or some Lox and Bagels.

I try to eat low on the food chain.

What I am threatening to make for this weekend.

Red Lentil Soup


1 large onion, finely chopped 

1 3/4 cups (350 g) split red lentils 

7 1/2 cups (1 3/4 liters) meat or chicken stock or water 

Salt and pepper 

1 teaspoon cumin

juice of 1/2 to 1 lemon

Extra virgin olive oil to drizzle, to taste.

In a saucepan put the onion, lentils, liquid, a little salt and pepper, and simmer 1/2 hour, or until the lentils have disintegrated. Add water if soup needs thinning. Stir in cumin and lemon juice and adjust seasoning (Leila's note - this really needs salt and lemon in generous quantity). Let people help themselves to a trickle of olive oil.
Serves 6

variation
Baghdadi Jews of India: add 1 teaspoon turmeric, and 2 dried chopped chilies or a good pinch of cayenne pepper.

I, too, am a lacto-ovo, but once in a while, especially while travelling, I get tired of salads, salads, salads, so I will eat some fish (but that, depending on where it comes from, is a crap shoot too). I just don't like eating meat, and hated the smell of blood in the frying pan. That's it.

vegetarian dishes. I am finding for my tastes, the North African and Mideast vegetarian dishes are quite superior. The Chickpea is addictive.

I love legumes of all kinds. Hey, how long do you think it will be before the old bumper stickers "Eat Beans~ America Needs the Gas" come back??:hippie:

the development of the Mideast.

The liver of legumes. It is a fabulous bean.

Of course, I like it with garlic and tomatoes, and served next to some lamb. But I see your point.

probably the crop that provided the nutrition package that helped Mideast societies to thrive.

From Wikipedia:

Chickpeas are a good source of zinc, folate and protein. They are also very high in dietary fiber and thus are a healthy food source, especially as a source of carbohydrates for persons with insulin sensitivity or diabetes. They are low in fat, and most of the fat content is polyunsaturated.

One hundred grams of mature boiled chickpeas contains 164 calories, 2.6 grams of fat (of which only 0.27 gram is saturated), 7.6 grams of dietary fiber, and 8.9 grams of protein.

Chickpeas are also a significant source of calcium (190 mg/100 g). Some sources quote it as equal to yogurt and close to milk. According to the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, on an average, chickpea seed contains:

23% protein
64% total carbohydrates (of which: * 47% starch * 6% soluble sugar)
5% fat
6% crude fiber
3% ash
They also report high mineral content:
phosphorus (340 mg/100 g)
calcium (190 mg/100 g)
magnesium (140 mg/100g)
iron (7 mg/100 g)
zinc (3 mg/100 g)

a staple in their diet.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19325854.300-brainy-chickpeas-conquered-the-world.html

That reason, says Kerem, is the amino acid tryptophan - a precursor of the neurotransmitter serotonin. Increased amounts in the diet may improve performance when under stress. Tryptophan also promotes ovulation, an advantage during a time of human expansion. Cultivated chickpeas had over 3 times as much tryptophan as their wild cousins (Journal of Archaeological Science, in press).

Kerem speculates that prehistoric people knew chickpeas were nutritious. "It probably made them feel good," he says. Not everyone is convinced that chickpeas kick-started human empires. "There is no clear indication of when selection for increased brain effects occurred - was it 10,000 years ago or 5000?" says Bruce Smith of the Smithsonian Institution in Washington DC.

To begin with a lot of couples lose their child during the first 3 months of pregnancy, this is not uncommon in fact many couple choose to wait till the 4th month before they notify anyone about their pregnancy just so they don't have to report later that they lost their baby.

Second you don't have to eat meat for vitamin B12, it's a pretty common vitamin in beer, if you are worried about your vitamin B12 intake just have a beer with dinner and you are fine.

Third you can receive Omega-3 from Olive Oil, most vegetarians and vegans I know use olive oil as a replacement for butter so they are getting plenty of Omega-3.

I could go on but whats the point, this is clearly a hit piece written by someone who has an agenda. And I would say the same thing about those who post the dangers of meat or the dangers of dairy.

I'm a teetotaler. :)

Is it just to flame up the VegHeads (of which I am one)?
I don't care if others are vegetarians or not, as a matter of fact, my husband is not (although he is at supper time as I am the one who cooks that meal) so I have no axe to grind. But here is one for the 'factoid' list here...
As a kid I raised a calf for 4-H, and I remember distinctly that as a part of the project, I had to calculate how much grain it took to put on one pound of meat from that calf, and it was, as I recall, about 7 1/2 pounds of corn. Now come on, don't tell me that I can't feed more folks with that 7 1/2 pounds of corn than one pound of beef... no matter HOW watery you make the stew!

There's plenty of good fat like olive oil, Avocado, etc. I'll have to check out some of that long article, but that flaw stood out right away.

And none of you thought to tell me? :mad:

I thought you people were my friends! I suppose you wouldn't tell me if I had spinach in my teeth, either!


So, out of curiosity, what was it that finally did me in? The lower intestine? That lazy POS always had it in for me, you know.

(Okay, seriously, this article is hilariously bad.)

Seems he had AIDS and was advocating a naturopathic approach to treatment and went and died from a stroke due to complications from AIDS. So at least he was sincere in his beliefs.

That much I knew. But, wow, how could he have come to some of those conclusions?

(BTW, I just noticed that you're from NH. Most of my family lives there! I'm happy to 'meet' you!)

Except the family up the road who seem to have been here since 17xx.

Although if he's been a quack for any length of time, I'm sure there's a trail of bodies, usually people who are told not to trust doctors, "Big Pharma" or the "Medical Mafia".

They seem to forget quacks are in it for the money too.

Oh please. OB/GYNs know very little about the causes of miscarriage, but one thing they most certainly note is that 1 in 3 pregnancies will end in miscarriage (used to be 1 in 4, but increasingly sophisticated technologies have allowed women to detect pregnancy earlier, thus increasing the possibility of learning of a chemical pregnancy). This includes the vegans, the veggies and the meat-eaters alike. Even after comprehensive lab work, most women will never know the reason for their miscarriage or infertility. How irresponsible for this doctor to give the flippant "It's your diet, hun" response.

Weakened uterus?

What is this guy on about?

Signed,
A woman that has had miscarriages as both a vegetarian and a meat-eater

Believed that the cigarette smoke filled office I worked in probably played as large or larger part than anything I could have eaten.

I don't know how anyone could make the conclusions that person did.

I know that diet is, of course, exceedingly important in pregnancy. But in the 2nd month of gestation, when miscarriages will happen most frequently, I don't know how anyone could speak so assuredly about the cause.

Cigarette smoke might very well be a possibility. Diet might very well be a possibility. But, sadly, I think we are many years away from more definitive answers.

What an asswipe to say something like that. Typical of a guy with something to sell and never having had a m/c himself.

This post must have really hit home for me. I really felt angry after reading it. I'm by no means a fertility expert, but am a person that experienced fertility issues. Had someone said something of this nature to me right after I had a miscarriage, I don't know that I would have been able to control my emotions.

It seems a misinformed and highly insensitive way of promoting your product.

I know women who have the worst, worst nutrition, who have carried babies. And others who take wonderful care of themselves who are having a hell of a time having a baby. I'm sure nutrition plays a part, but there are clearly other factors. His words are the height of arrogance - and probably simply because he wanted to sell, sell, sell.

You're welcome. It hit home for me, too - my sister-in-law has had three babies and three m/cs, my wife 2 babies and 1 m/c, my sister three babies and 2 m/cs. My wife is a complete horse; she is so physically strong and, along with being a yogahead and otherwise preternaturally healthy, puts more thought into nutrition than I do into anything. And she had a m/c! It happens.

Peace.

Shit you could eat candy all day long and be a vegetarian. I am an omnivore and I call bullshit on the article. She might have lost the baby due to a bad diet, but not because it was vegetarian, but rather because she was uneducated and had no clue about nutrition.

I'm a carnivore but even I think it's bunk that a vegetarian can't be safely pregnant.

It's all about a well-balanced diet that includes fats and oils -- they just don't need to be of animal origin.

It's possible to get the fats you need from vegetables (if a bit cumbersome); the problem is people eat hydrogenated canola and corn oil rather than palm, coconut, etc.

Hydrogenated canola oil is probably the worst possible kind of fat you can eat. The funny thing is how everybody shudders and acts disgusted if you mention lard, but then will happily eat something cooked with crisco, as if canola were somehow healthier than lard. Power of the media, I guess...

coconut oil? egad, that's supposed to be one of the worst! Liquid canola oil isn't hydrogenated.

Actually crisco probably isn't even "canola" anymore except through the miracles of creative FDA-approved labeling.

eom

I think people tend to forget the sheer number of vegetarians worldwide.

please delete message.

okay, NOW I'm laughing. Dr. Brynes was a known member and supporter of that house of quackery.

What utter bullshit.

What's truly pathetic, is that this person was actually a nutritionist. I guess it's true...you can be an expert in a field, but an idiot in practice.

I know some people who like him are really out there, but Price himself just talked about dental health (not surprising, since he was a dentist) and the importance of fats for dental development. As far as I know nobody ever disagreed with that. Now, in interest of disclosure, I do like unpasteurized milk, so you'll probably think I'm a wacko too, but I'm not even a foodie, I just can see very plainly that it's safer and tastes better than industrial milk.

Scary.

I have very thick hair, and no one seemed to notice, but it was disconcerting all the same. Other people I've talked to have said that the same thing happened to them.


I've gone back to meat.

Figures.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

and a lot of meat-eaters who haven't. I'd have to see some statistics from a reliable source before I'd believe that not eating meat makes you more likely to miscarry.

with the notion that the analyses and conclusions in this piece are flawed?

... that literally *billions* of people eat meat and are perfectly healthy. I'm one of them - I eat quite profound amounts of meat, and have literally *never* been sick (hangovers don't count).

You're not that Japanese competitive hot dog eater guy, are you?

I'm not questioning your choices or your health.

This article is a bad hit piece regarding my choices and my health, and it's full of inaccuracies. So, yeah, I feel pretty justified in saying so.

Meat eating and mortality correlate. About as profound an observation as your alleged perfect health while gnawing away at burnt dead cows.

Billions of vegans have died too. Eating ice cream can correlate. Eating certain veggies can correlate. Correlation is not causation.
I don't believe vegans have significantly longer lifespans than meat eaters. Unless you some peer reviewed data on that, you shouldn't make such sweeping statements.

This thread is not even about meat eaters. It was an obnoxious flame about the alleged perils of a vegetarian diet. Some poster noting that he or she has been eating meat in 'profound' quantities and has never been sick (allegedly) is about as interesting as my intentionally inane post regarding the correlation of meat eating and (egads!) DEATH. Milk drinking, water indulgence, breathing, all have at least as good a correlation with mortality.

Had you read carefully you might have noted that I actually made no statements about the superiority of any diet. I simply stated some facts and let you misinterpret them.

..Simple because I do not like the cruelty involved with meat.

However, I live with a conervore, actually 4 of them since I include the Cats as part of the family. Anyway, I not only limit my meat comsumption to Chicken and Turkey I also do not eat any read meat and the meat I do eat is about 3 times a weak and in small portions. As with everything else, some people are just not going to beable to adjust physically..I think if I had some red meat I would go into something like Toxic Shock, its been sometime since I have had any red meat.

I try hard to eat a little meat as possible, but my partner incist that I eat some meat.

Should this article cause concern or even get a vegatarian to chenge their diets because of it? I would not count on it. I feel better since meat is not longer a major part of my diet, more often then not I do not eat meat.

After I posted this, I went to bed and then realized that I'd posted an entire article. I appreciate your editing this for me. :)

To the person who called this "flamebait"--what's "flamebait" about posting an article that gets people talking about an issue? Now, if I'd posted something flaming meat eaters or vegetarians, THAT is flame bait.

I simply found this to be an interesting article, and wanted to share. Don't get your knickers in a twist! :rofl:

You knew it was, and you ADMITTED it in the very first
sentence of your OP.

Now, little over a day later, you suddenly don't understand
what's "flamebait" about it. :eyes:

How about this for unwanted diet advice: Whatever it is- meat, tofu--- it's not on the end of YOUR fork, don't fucking criticize it.

For a minute there, I was tempted to post
THIS response to the OP:



But I didn't, because that would have been WRONG. :evilgrin: