Yes but you forget that vegetarians are long-haired, sandal wearing, tree-hugging liberals while meat eaters are gun-toting, bambi hunting, born-again rednecks.

I think that pretty much sums up this thread. I feel sorry for the original poster.

quote:<HR>Originally posted by reboot:
Indeed, vegetarians frequently give "health reasons" as their reason for their selecting vegetarianism as a lifestyle.

A Google search in order to present verifiable facts is far better than the alternative. You should try it.

<HR>

I'd skip the Google search. Anyone can throw up a website that sounds like a good argument either for or against.

A better place to look is something like PubMed:

http://www.pubmed.com/[/URL" target="_blank">

If you take the time to learn how to search (i.e. using "vegan ti" instead of just "vegan") you can find tons of studies.

I've found there are literally dozens and dozens of studies that support the notion that a more plant and fruit based diet is healthful. However, nowhere do I see evidence that this means meat must be eliminated. Indeed, the studies that show negative effects typically relate to nutrients like iron and B12 that are deficient in those diets without supplementation. Ironically, even if someone does ascribe to the notion that beef causes horrible health issues, I'm sure anyone could agree that one steak is not going to do it, it would have to be loads of meat day in and day out. Yet, one piece of steak provides enough B12 to supply the body for several years.

So my philosophy has always been, why not practice the principle of eating a lot of plants and fruits because every day some new study shows how the nutrients found in plants and fruits can reduce the risk of this, that, and the other, and then eat lean proteins in moderation.

I agree that obsessing over something like fat content isn't looking in the right place. The issues with high cholesterol and health risk typically stem from the correlation with the diet and obesity. In other words, you can get high cholesterol overeating carbohydrates because the body can convert carbs to saturated fats and then manufacture cholesterol from those saturated fats. Someone who is maintaining weight or leaning down is more likely to burn that fat for fuel than have it contribute to some ghastly ill health condition.

I think we need more studies on the impact of nutrition on health, exercising individuals instead of the stuides on the general sedentary, overweight population because then the results are skewed and confused with the conditions related to be overweight and not exericsing.

Jeremy

The reply wasn't an attack on you but a clarification for the rest ... I think we are fairly much in agreement on the topic, I wasn't debating with your response only responding to it with caveats.

-J

I'm sorry, but I was the one that posted the roasted chickpea recipe, and I just wanted to clarify it, as it seems to have been taken out of context.

First, I am NOT vegetarian. I eat meat, and enjoy it.

Second, my diet (I follow the GI diet) is based on regulating sugar levels through protein and fibre intake, which take longer to digest and so don't mess with your blood sugar as much as foods low in fibre and protein or high in sugars. I don't claim to be a nutritional expert but my diet was designed by the president of the Canadian Heart and Stroke Foundation, and I believe it to be healthy. The fat contained in this snack is mainly good fat, which actually helps raise good cholesterol levels. And I know for certain that this diet is excellent for weight loss, although snack such as these are unlimited.

It's important to remember that there are umpteen million opinions on what is "healthy" and what isn't, and that nobody really knows for sure. There are also benefits and problems with ANY diet, "healthy" or not..

So if we forgo any ethical considerations and simply look at literally millions of years of evolution, we can be darned certain that the human body has evolved to be an omnivore.

That being said, in the last 10,000 years our world has changed as we learned to corral animals and cultivate various grains.

So LESS grains and LESS meat than the average American diet is certainly better for our bodies. To totally abstain from meat is illogical UNLESS it is for ethical reasons. If that is your reason, then have at it. However, if optimal health is your reason, then vegan-ism (not sure if that is a word) is a fool's endeavor. I'm fairly certain my ancestors from 10,000 years ago were not running around the forests of Europe making sure they combined one of these and one of those to get a complete protein...

quote:<HR>Originally posted by Craig Zurcher:
To totally abstain from meat is illogical UNLESS it is for ethical reasons. If that is your reason, then have at it. However, if optimal health is your reason, then vegan-ism (not sure if that is a word) is a fool's endeavor. I'm fairly certain my ancestors from 10,000 years ago were not running around the forests of Europe making sure they combined one of these and one of those to get a complete protein...<HR>

The myth that you need to combine multiple foods to get a complete protein was disproven a long time ago.

To totally abstain from meat unless is not illogical for health reasons - considering it is almost impossible to find a good assortment of organic meats unless you either raise your own (which most of us don't) or live next door to Whole Foods (again, which most of us don't). To go non-organic, you are eating a variety of pesticides / antibiotics / etc. that you have no way of tracking or knowing about. If you would like to remove those potentially dangerous and certainly unneeded toxins from your body, basically the only way to do that effectively is to not eat meat, at least until the organic market catches up with meat to where it is with vegetables.

I was really hoping this thread was dead. I find it pretty ridiculous that people who don't even know if veganism is a word or not (you're not the only one, another poster thought he invented the word) try to convince people who are versed on the topic (and there are certainly people who are more versed than I am on this board) that it's silly to not eat meat.

quote:<HR>Originally posted by Craig Zurcher:
they combined one of these and one of those to get a complete protein...<HR>

Yes but if meat wasn't present, they didn't have to. Like the outdated concept of "simple vs. complex carbs" (i.e. the misconception that all simple carbs are fast digesting and all complex carbs are slow digesting), the "complete protein" belief is also a misconception.

It was thought you had to combine for a complete protein at every meal but now we know that's not the case.

Your body has a "bank" for amino acids known as the "amino acid pool" and keeps it at a relatively constant level for a supply of what it needs. When you consume a protein, you make a deposit that the body can withdraw from. It turns out eating beans in the morning and rice in the evening is just as effective as combining them in the same meal.

Eating a variety of foods almost guarantees a complete amino acid profile.

I do agree that some meat is necessary however ... there is no "natural" way to get Vitamin B12 (people debate over bacteria and unwashed vegetables, etc) and I still don't hear good arguments for having canine teeth, etc.

So I agree we are omnivores. And I don't really share the idea that red meat is linked to disease. If you really do some digging, it may be an abundance of saturated fats that is the culprit and most red meats tend to have a surplus. I'd be interested to see what the risk factors are for someone who consumes lots of red meats but keeps them lean and trims visible fats or eats plenty of wild game meats that are naturally leaner in fat and contain more healthy unsaturated fatty acids than the marbled fats that have been bred into our livestock.

Jeremy

if somebody tells me i have to give up meat to be healthy, i quit. shoot me now. but first, pass me some prime rib and chicken wings.

as for the original question, i would say, based on the nutritional info posted, there is very little significant difference between the two. i try to avoid sodium more than a little extra fat, so i would probably choose turkey, i think it had lower sodium. people do obsess on fat content.

i love each and every one of you, even you crackpot hippie vegans.