Fuck Vegan BS!

[Laurens]

All those cows that were selectively bred to produce vast quantities of milk would be fucked if we suddenly stopped milking them... Walking along with their udders dragging on the ground, moaning and groaning...

 

[lrkun]

Funny thought:

Make blood the source of nourishment. Drain cows, but not to death.

 

[MRaverz]

All those cows that were selectively bred to produce vast quantities of milk would be fucked if we suddenly stopped milking them... Walking along with their udders dragging on the ground, moaning and groaning...

And if we didn't breed them, not so many would be alive.

 

[Giliell]

Raw food-ists are the worst.

[imaginary post on a Raw Foods forum]

"I feel really tired and ill, I keep needing the toilet constantly, I have lost loads of weight though. Is this normal?"

Reply:

"Yes You're doing great. Feeling ill is just a sign that the diet really works"

Oh, no, there's one worse: frutarians
If you really feel like it, search for the anti-vax thread and read what paradigm wrote.

 

[Squawk]

Sounds like "miracle cure" sites in general: "Am I supposed to be throwing up and going to the toilet every five minutes?"

"Why of course! It's a sign that your body is being purged of toxins." (Yeah it's purging the bloody toxins you just made the poor bastard ingest you idiot.)

Made me lol

Though on a more serious note there are so many myths out there concerning diet, exercise and nutrition that most people don't know what to believe. Even generally fit people don't really know.

Want to lose weight? No probs, do cardio... Err, no, fuck that shit. Where are all the fatties? On the treadmill and the cross trainer, same place they have always been. Where are all the fit healthy people. In the weight room lifting the heavy weights. And on that subject, how the hell did people get it into their heads that 50 reps with a light weight will "tone"? NO!!! It might give you rsi, but it'll do fuck all else.

 

[Independent Vision]

Vegans come in all shapes and sizes. Bodybuilders, moral bitches, computer geeks, overweight, underweight, healthy weight, toned, atheists, pagans, Buddhists, Hindus, Christians.
Assuming that all vegans are like the ones who scream the loudest is like assuming all atheists are like Brett Keane.

 

[Your Funny Uncle]

Want to lose weight? No probs, do cardio... Err, no, fuck that shit. Where are all the fatties? On the treadmill and the cross trainer, same place they have always been. Where are all the fit healthy people. In the weight room lifting the heavy weights. And on that subject, how the hell did people get it into their heads that 50 reps with a light weight will "tone"? NO!!! It might give you rsi, but it'll do fuck all else.

Surely it's just a question of how many calories you burn vs how many you ingest. Obviously lifting heavy weights is going to burn more calories than a gentle run on a treadmill but that doesn't mean that cardio work is of no use at all. It just depends how much of it you do and how much effort you put into it.

Pro cyclists are some of the fittest people in the world, and they barely go near the gym. They may do some minor core strength work in the off-season but the vast majority of what they do is on a bike. They take in around twice the recommended calorie intake for a normal person and burn it all during a race...

All that said, I'm a lazy fat bastard so probably not the best qualified to argue this point.

 

[Koko]

I felt compelled to create this account and write my first post after reading this thread. I'm only going to comment on what the girl said, not on the morality of encouraging the girl to say these things which I find somewhat objectionable.

From my notes taken whilst watching the video, the girl said:

You need to eat fruit, veg, nuts, seeds, grains, drink water and avoid meat. She made no mention of dairy here. This statement is largely correct. One big piece of research was carried out by Dr Colin Campbell in his book "The China Study". He saw that China was an excellent place to study the effect of diet on human health since diet varied so much across the country. They lived with Chinese families and recorded everything they ate. They also surveyed the local markets to see what food was available in the local area. They took detailed measures of the peoples health. They found that the ideal diet was (page 243 of his book)

Fruits, Vegetables, Whole grains (brown bread, brown rice, wholemeal pasta)
Minimise: refined carbohydrates (white bread, refined pasta, white rice etc), fish, vegetable oils
Avoid: meat, poultry, diary, eggs

Essentially a vegan diet with the exception of the fish.

The comment about cancer is backed up too. More specifically, animal protein in the form of milk is especially bad at causing cancer. Excessive protein, more than about 12% of calorific intake promotes cancer development in rats. The China study backs up this claim in humans too. The areas of China that consume more animal products have much higher rates of cancer. The more protein people eat, the higher the rate of cancer. Cancer is almost unknown in some parts of China and rampant in the wealthier urban areas where people ate more protein rich diets. In addition, plant sources of protein are radically different in their bio chemical makeup to animal protein, and appear to avoid the cancer causing side effects, protein from soy did not promote cancer growth in rats, unlike protein from casein (milk) which did. Therefore her claim about being vegan stops you getting cancer has a basis in scientific research.

fuck
those
parents

The poor kid is sadly totally brainwashed.
"if you eat plants you don't get cancer"

She says that milk is mean't for the cows babies, which is of course true, I don't see how anyone can object to this statement. As rationalists and atheists on this forum, it should be clear that mammals (inc cows and humans) lactate only for a short time after birth, thats how mammals have evolved so why on earth do you think humans drinking milk into adulthood from a different species could possibly make sense? I'd like to see an answer. The part about cows being tortured and having their babies taken away is largely true, see "Vegan: the new ethics of eating" by Eric Marcus and also this video that demonstrates what the cows go through quite clearly, and it all supports what the girl said http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAElWuUbMOE the cows are kept almost constantly pregnant to keep a supply of milk flowing. The video also shows the fate of the "baby cows" typically slaughtered for veal.

Yes, cows milk is full of pus and blood, there is even a mandated level setting out how much pus can be in the milk. "The omnivores dilemma" by Michael Pollan also says that milk is full of hormones and animal antibiotics given to the cows.

I won't go into the ethical issues right now, but as rationalists you must accept that at least some scientific evidence points to plant based diets being the healthiest, and pretty much everything the girl said does have a scientific basis as I just illustrated.

One thing which really made me angry was this comment:

I have yet to meet a truly healthy vegan. I know dozens, and all of them are thin, pale, and consume supplements to stay healthy. The simple fact of the matter is that we are omnivores. Just as an all meat diet is unhealthy for us, so too is an all plant diet

I've heard this exact statement once before. I've seen nothing to back it up. It is purely anecdotal, and the idea that an all plant diet is unhealthy is demonstrably wrong. I've been vegan for some 6 years now, yes I am slim but not thin, at university I was boxing 3 times a week and was amazingly healthy, lean and muscular. I only get pale if I stay inside all day and don't get any sun, otherwise my complexion is the same as anyone else. I simply don't believe you assertions about "the dozen vegans you know" here are some vegans I know:

Carl Lewis (holds 10 olympic medals, 9 of which are gold, hardly seems weak to me, and he's black, not pale) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOTETXwfIaY
Alicia Silverstone http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lA2CWnJ8j-k&feature=fvst
Bill Clinton (reversed his advanced heart disease) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3ied_AD4iE

I won't go into the implications for heart disease, the ethical issues and the moral debate.

This is my first post here, I look forward to your replies

 

[Memeticemetic]

Welcome aboard, Koko. Get ready for the shitstorm. I've noticed that the rationalists on this site, myself included, have some kind of weird block when it comes to vegetarian/vegan dietary choices. I honestly think it's simply attributable to how bloody much we love meat, with no real rational basis. That's how it is for me anyway. Anyhoo, welcome again, and try not to take it too personally if people get all belligerent at you on this issue. Really, we're not assholes in general.

 

[Koko]

Thank you Memeticemetic, I do see a huge mismatch between some of the views expressed on this thread and the ideals of the rationalist, atheist philosophy. Demonstrably false assertions with no sources and what sounds to me like an out and out lie from kenandkids, (quoted in my first post). It's like a Christian arguing that Jesus is real because I was walking down the street one day and he appeared before me. Thats what kenandkids statement sounds like to me, completely anecdotal, cannot be verified and doesn't make any sense. I'm not saying he's a liar but I simply don't believe him. It feels so good to call him out on it too.

I think the block your talking about with regards to vegetarianism applies to everyone, not just the rationalists. Habits die hard but I feel like the rationalist person is the most liable to hear these ideas and really consider them. This is because rationalists understand the nature of evidence better than most, hence my surprise at kenandkids absurd statement. We understand paths to truth and the scientific method and how society can often be moulded into obviously irrational believes, American Christians far out number American atheists, I see a parallel to the vegetarian/meat eating populations too. I'm disappointed to read the mockery of the ethical points. Objecting to the use of "baby cow" as opposed to "calves" what's the relevancy? Atheists are generally more moral than Christians and obviously have to form their own moral code. I challenge anyone to read one of the books i cited without having to skip large chunks where they describe the life and death of farm animals. I literally couldn't do it, it was to distressing to me.

Anyway, i look forward to your feedback.

 

[australopithecus]

m disappointed to read the mockery of the ethical points. Objecting to the use of "baby cow" as opposed to "calves" what's the relevancy?

It's an appeal to emotion by using very evocative language. There's no need to include the word 'baby' at all.

Anyhoo, here's how I rationalise eating meat. I'm an omnivore, evolved and bred. Yes the meat industry isn't great but I will happily chase down a cow and suffocate it by biting its windpipe like a lion if it makes anyone feel easier. I don't mind at all.

 

[Unwardil]

I like to look at eating, at least from the utilitarian side of things, as a necessary evil. Everything you eat is bad for you, in degrees. It's simply less bad for you than not eating anything which will ultimately result in a drastically reduced lifespan. It's just like drugs. Medicinal drugs are never 'good' for you, they're a treatment to a condition that is worse than not doing anything.

I'll say it again, everything you eat is bad for you. Even the water you drink... Especially the water actually.

And I'm not talking about the old 'Well too much of anything is bad for you' I'm talking about any amount of anything is bad for you.

It's simple to see why too, you need to metabolize energy and there is no perfect system of energy transmission between food and body cells. You get waste. That waste builds up and makes problems. That's entropy for you. Eating is unhealthy, but then, being alive is unhealthy. There is no magical cure to eating healthier. You have to eat appropriately to your life style.

Peanuts, for instance, very healthy for your average person, but they'd be death to me because I'm allergic to them. People with heart conditions, or at risk of developing heart conditions should probably not eat a lot of red meat. Fat people shouldn't eat as much stuff as they do, doesn't matter what, there is no magical fattening/thinning food and all food is bad for you. If you want to eat healthily, eat appropriate foods in reasonable amounts for your life style.

And while you're at it, might as well be food you enjoy eating at least once and a while, cause it's all gonna kill you eventually.

 

[kenandkids]

Essentially a vegan diet with the exception of the fish.

Then it isn't fucking vegan, is it?

I don't care if you call me out, facts are facts. The fact is that you are not designed to operate without animal products. A funny thing about your examples is that they push numerous supplements and "shakes," protein and otherwise. And btw, Clinton is not a vegan, he's vegetarian, and Carl Lewis is a known doper.

...he's black, not pale...

hardy hardy durr durr.

 

[Your Funny Uncle]

I've not read the book so I don't feel qualified to comment, but there's an interesting critique of Campbell's conclusions here.

 

[kenandkids]

I've not read the book so I don't feel qualified to comment, but there's an interesting critique of Campbell's conclusions here.

Wanna see some red flags blossom in your mind? Watch this:

Campbell actually raises a number of points I wholeheartedly agree with,particularly in the "Why Haven't You Heard This?" section of his book, where he exposes the reality behind Big Pharma and the science industry at large. I admire Campbell's philosophy towards nutritional research and echo his sentiments about the dangers of scientific reductionism.

from your link

 

[Independent Vision]

I have yet to meet a truly healthy vegan. I know dozens, and all of them are thin, pale, and consume supplements to stay healthy. The simple fact of the matter is that we are omnivores. Just as an all meat diet is unhealthy for us, so too is an all plant diet.

I, personally, did not take dietary supplements when I was a vegan, nor was I thin or pale or unhealthy, and I did some heavy muscle building too. Oh, wait. I did have soy protein shakes every once in a while when I didn't have time to cook in between school, gym and the walk home... so that mightn't count, although I didn't consume anywhere near the amounts of supplements my workout friends who also ate meat did, I just had some more vegan gravy and roasted sunflower seeds. :lol: Although that is anecdotal... but then again so is the claim that you have never met a truly healthy vegan.

There's a pretty cool vegan bodybuilding scene... though some of them do use nutritional supplements for the same reason non-vegan bodybuilders do. It's hard to get the nutrition enough to maintain and fuel that amount of muscle even on a meat diet.

I'm not very well versed in Derek Tresize's nutrition philosophy, since there are as many nutrition philosophies in vegan diets as there is in an omnivore diet, but his physique is not very thin or pale at all: http://bodyspace.bodybuilding.com/photos/view-user-photo/6819522
http://www.veganbodybuilding.com/?page=bio_tresize

(I heaven't read why he's a vegan, just that he is. I get distracted by his pecs and biceps, what can I say, I'm a lecherous person, he might be a tool as far as I'm concerned, but thin and pale he ain't)

An all plant diet isn't unhealthy if done correctly. An all meat diet on the other hand will lack in vitamins and eventually you'll get scurvy. Unless you eat raw whale blubber and raw organs, which could cause other issues.

Sure, there are unhealthy vegans as well. Like the overweight ones who only eat junk food, a'la vegan. Or the underweight and unhealthy ones who'll eat salads and supplements and leave it at that. Just like there are unhealthy and underweight omnivores, and unhealthy and overweight omnivores.

Food is more than just sticking things in your mouth and hope for the best, even if it is vegan or if it contains animal products. *shrugs*

 

[Squawk]

Want to lose weight? No probs, do cardio... Err, no, fuck that shit. Where are all the fatties? On the treadmill and the cross trainer, same place they have always been. Where are all the fit healthy people. In the weight room lifting the heavy weights. And on that subject, how the hell did people get it into their heads that 50 reps with a light weight will "tone"? NO!!! It might give you rsi, but it'll do fuck all else.

Surely it's just a question of how many calories you burn vs how many you ingest. Obviously lifting heavy weights is going to burn more calories than a gentle run on a treadmill but that doesn't mean that cardio work is of no use at all. It just depends how much of it you do and how much effort you put into it.

Pro cyclists are some of the fittest people in the world, and they barely go near the gym. They may do some minor core strength work in the off-season but the vast majority of what they do is on a bike. They take in around twice the recommended calorie intake for a normal person and burn it all during a race...

All that said, I'm a lazy fat bastard so probably not the best qualified to argue this point.

Well it's a bit of a thread derail, but I'm gonna go on about it anyway.

Calories in vs calories out is misleading. Calorie deficit and you will lose weight, calorie surplus and you will gain. The question, though, is how. Lets assume, for the sake of argument, that we take two clones, both overweight, and give them both identical nutrition. One, we put on a cardio program. The other, a resistance program (heavy weights). Both have small calorie deficit.

The body spends time each day in both anabolic and catabolic states. With a calorie deficit it's predominantly catabolic. Bear that in mind, and also bear in mind that our body adapts to the strains we put on it.

So, one of our guys is lifting weights. He is causing intentional (and beneficial) damage to his muscles, but also to the rest of his lean mass. His bones, ligaments and tendons are all being put under strain. None of these tissues benefit during the exercise. The benefit occurs during recovery. The body has to fix the damage, and in the process also adds a little bit extra to cope with future demand. Essentially the body adapts to the type of training you are doing. To build up this lean mass it has only two sources of energy. Food, or fat. If you're in a calorie deficit, it is forced to burn fat and use the energy to rebuild the lean mass.

Now consider someone doing a shit load of cardio. From where are they getting their energy? First, glycogen stored in the muscles, but also from their fat stores. At the end of the run or whatever it is they are doing the glycogen is replaced from food. But what about the fat? The body has just learned that you are going to put it through exercise which it can fuel using fat. It also knows that all the heavy lean mass (muscle, bone, ligaments and tendons) were pretty much dead weight while running, it doesn't need them. So, it'll atrophy the lean mass and shunt it all to your fat stores.

Will you lose fat doing cardio? With a calorie deficit, yes, you will, but you will lose all your lean mass at least as fast. Just look at the physique of any marathon runner and tell me how much lean mass they have.

You mentioned tour de france cyclists. It's not uncommon for them to turn up overweight to events despite the sheer number of miles they put in. They are never going to be huge simply due to the calories in vs calories out aspect of things, but if they are overweight, it will always be fat, never muscle.

Losing weight and being healthy should not be about losing fat. It should be about minimising lean mass loss while reducing fat levels (you can't realistically gain, but you can't prevent loss in a catabolic state), and by far the best way to do that is through lifting heavy weights, or engaging in some form of HIIT, sprint training etc, that puts strain on your lean mass.

I looked into this loads a couple of years back, I can dig up some studies if you want. The gist of it is that for an overweight individual the first factor that must be corrected is diet. After that, lift weights. Cardio to lose weight is a waste of time. I still do it, because I like it, but it's useless as a tool for weight loss.

Oh, and when I say lift weights, I mean really lift, not pissing about doing loads of reps. Three sets of 10 and the last one means your head explodes type stuff, big compounds like dead lifts and squats.

 

[Your Funny Uncle]

Interesting stuff, Squawk. I'm not too well versed in these things, but if you are intentionally going as fast as you can on a bike, are you not putting your leg muscles under stress? Will that not have a similar effect to lifting weights at least on your leg muscles? I guess then it doesn't count as pure cardio work. (Again sorry for the thread derail.)

Edit: Corrected a typo.

 

[Independent Vision]

To build up this lean mass it has only two sources of energy. Food, or fat. If you're in a calorie deficit, it is forced to burn fat and use the energy to rebuild the lean mass.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that's a bit of a a simplification there in an otherwise great post, at least according to my somewhat limited knowledge.

Fat that has been stored gets converted to energy with a calorie deficit, yes. But it can't be turned into the building blocks you need in quite that way, can it? Can the body take the fat stores, process them and turn them into the protein and carbohydrates that helps repair the muscle?
So while the energy you're burning helps with your current bodily function and rebuilding, the building blocks are proteins and carbohydrates that you ingest.
The added fat-loss with muscle is because you have more lean mass requiring fuel in a resting mode. Or am I wrong? Cause I could be... :lol:

 

[Demojen]

They found that the ideal diet was (page 243 of his book)

Fruits, Vegetables, Whole grains (brown bread, brown rice, wholemeal pasta)
Minimise: refined carbohydrates (white bread, refined pasta, white rice etc), fish, vegetable oils
Avoid: meat, poultry, diary, eggs

Essentially a vegan diet with the exception of the fish.

Do you have any evidence what so ever that this research is not the propaganda of a vegan siphoning details out of research to imply it means anything else? I have a hard time believing that this individual found enough vegans in china to substantiate the claim that this diet is in any way "ideal".

In fact, it is more likely then not he took an amalgamation of diets and compared them, with very little consideration for the role meat played in their diets and assumed the absence of meat in any one diet was the defining characteristic of "positive" results.

I want to see the data, not the claims. I suspect he's studying families that eat meat and missing a lot of critical data, while splitting hairs on minor details to substantiate a bias in favor of vegan diets.

I'll look for the book in the library to read, but I have a sneaking suspicion that it's laced with propaganda.

It would be just as easy to write a smear campaign against eating vegetables that can hurt you and sweep broad strokes against the practice to imply it too is killing us.