A vegan diet is generally healthy, low in cholesterol and protective of heart disease, but its followers must take vitamin B12 supplements or risk a condition that causes permanent numbness in their hands and feet, experts say.I am somewhat sympathetic to vegetarians who do so in the interests of minimising animal suffering; but vegans, you're going too far.
Most people get their vitamin B12 from milk, but the plant-based substitutes do not have high enough levels to protect adults and children from peripheral neuropathy, which is irreversible.
Young festival-goers on a vegan diet may be at particular risk. “Kids these days inhale laughing gas,” said Tom Sanders, professor emeritus of nutrition and dietetics at King’s College London. “That can actively cause vitamin D deficiency. There is a danger of young people going vegan, not having B12 and it could tip the balance to them getting a serious neuropathy.”
It could easily be remedied by the manufacturers of plant-based milks, he said. “Levels should be higher in plant milks than they are at the moment. If they were three times higher, there wouldn’t be a problem.”
Internet claims that vegans do not need extra B12 were not evidence-based, he said. “I’m concerned that many people think it is a myth,” said Sanders. Gorillas eat a vegan diet, but B12 is produced in the colon and “they probably don’t wash their hands”, he said, so end up ingesting it. The Jains in India eat a vegan diet, but, he said, “all the Jain doctors I know have B12 injections”.
Thursday, December 19, 2019
Just drink milk
Look, there needs to be a real push back against veganism by vegetarians, I reckon:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
"I am somewhat sympathetic to vegetarians who do so in the interests of minimising animal suffering; but vegans, you're going too far. "
Indeed. Bravo.
"A vegan diet is generally healthy, low in cholesterol and protective of heart disease..." Lies. Junk science. These people cannot get anything right.
That link about lowering heart attack risk but increasing stroke risk - many studies have found the same. The demonisation of saturated fat might the issue here because studies in Japan where saturated fat intake is low also find higher risks of stroke.
Ya cannot win,no matter what you do there is a downside. Unfortunately there are people out there who think they know the golden rules to avoid all pathology. Dreamers, stupid little dreamers.
The only reason Vegetarians do a bit better than unrestricted meat eaters is its comparing a group of people mostly eating whole foods with a group of people mostly eating processed foods. So its a false negative for meat. Its just bad science. Eat a lot of meat without eating processed foods and there are no heart issues.
Cholesterol is the most important substance to be eating. Its a big percentage of the dry weight of our liver brains and nerves. Its a precursor to vitamin D and all the hormones. And its needed anywhere where repairs are needed. The entirety of the anti-cholesterol movement was junk science. Saturated fats as a class are the best fats because they don't oxidise as readily. The talk against saturated fats is also purely junk science. Nothing to it.
The only reason Vegetarians do a bit better
20% risk reduction is not "a bit".
The amount of cholesterol required for hormone production is minuscule.
The best fats ... such a nonsense statement, different fats for different purposes.
No matter, you obviously consider yourself to vastly superior to everyone else, the great unheralded genius of GMB, so there is no point ever bothering to challenge your views because you think you are better than all the mathematicians, physicists, biologists, geologists, climate scientists rolled into one.
"The best fats ... such a nonsense statement, different fats for different purposes." Fair cop. Good comment. But once we disaggregate thats deeply specialist knowledge. Yes the generalisation doesn't cut it. But in the face of the complete and idiotic damnation of saturated fats I thought it could fly. But you picked me up nicely on this matter.
"The amount of cholesterol required for hormone production is minuscule."
Only if you are shooting for a minuscule amount of hormone, vitamin D, brain power, nerves and liver function ......... and wound repair. The reason why I suspect you might be underplaying the need for cholesterol is that our body itself sees to it that blood cholesterol levels will be pushed sky high should you have a hormone deficiency. Or many other problems. High cholesterol is a RESPONSE to some deficiency or other.
"20% risk reduction is not "a bit"."
Its fuck all in the face of the issue of processed versus non-processed. I just got out of 22 years of food processing. Believe me this is no small issue. Its just poisoning people. Almost nothing we put into that vat had much food value in it, and the amount of poisonous junk we were pushing down the throats of the kids was stunning.
People who go vegetarian are always going to feel better just on the basis that they deep-six most of the processed gear. You cannot differentiate any study to say that this isn't where the gains are, rather than the lack of rightly brought up meat.
With animals if they don't excrete poisons they wind up in their fat. So its a live issue how the animal is brought up. If the animal is brought up right its fats will be awesome. If its brought up in wicked ways its fats will be toxic. The data is not there to make the case for vegetarianism as opposed to meat rightly raised.
Post a Comment