4 ms·

Ahem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthy_user_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthy_user_bias There are some studies that are coming out that undermine

Ahem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthy_user_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthy_user_bias There are some studies that are coming out that undermine your idea that vegans are inherently healthier, such as the notice that vegetarians appear to have higher rates of cavities than the population at large. If you ask an anthropologist you'll know this is a big deal, because dental health is a great indicator of overall health. I think all the arguments about the vegetarianism saving the world are bunk, and a convenient reason for us all to not talk about the real issue: oil. My meat comes from animals that graze on grass, as has been the case for millenia. The millions of buffalo that ran around north America a few centuries ago didn't warm the planet with their farts, so why should properly managed grass fed cows do the same? On the other hand, what is new is large scale industrial monoculture agriculture. I am dubious to the concept that we can transition the world over to plant based without planting a lot of soy, something that I think is bad. Side note: we have been managing cattle poorly for years. The proper way is to pen them into relatively tight (but not cramped) portions of the grazing land, and then rotate them from section to section regularly. This mimics the way that herding animals react to predators (cluster up), and gives the grasses time to recover and sequester carbon. It's also far more land efficient than other methods, which is nice. Edit: it looks like 84% of world wide calories come from plants already. Doesn’t seem to be doing anything to stop global warming to me. Maybe it’s the fact that we’re still using fossil fuels instead?

DennisP 8y ago
So that was not the case for my brother; his numbers were significantly worse and he was on medication, before he switched to veganism and greatly improved. In the study I posted, the meat-eaters were in the study too so I don't think that bias exactly applies, though in general dietary studies are always difficult. I think I've read the same books as you, and agree with much of what you say. I would love to see us switch all our cattle over to Allan Savory's methods, and if lab-grown meat works out, maybe some ranchers will survive by providing premium grass-fed. I've also read a stack of the better-known low-carb/paleo books. It just didn't work out for me, my results were horrific. It does seem to work for some people. Regarding cavities, perhaps there are tradeoffs to every diet. In any case, as I said above I don't think vegetarianism is a way to save the world. Lab-grown meat is what will help save the world. Getting off oil will also be a huge help.
- village-idiot 8y ago
  The bias absolutely applies. Vegans care about their health, so they’re likely to do a lot of behaviors that are unambiguously healthy. If someone believes that meat is bad for them and continues to eat it, then they are obviously valuing something else over their health, and are more likely to do other unhealthy things like smoke, drink too much, etc. I’d be far more interested in comparing vegans to people who believe that meat is good for them and are very health aware. Paleo or Keto individuals would be a good cohort to pick. That would measure technique and not intention, because both paleos and vegans are intending to be healthy. I’m curious what your results were on low carb. I work out with a cohort of low carb eaters, and we lost an avg of 30lbs when we switched. I personally lost 40, most of it fat (thanks Dexa scan!). I’d also be curious about what your brother cut out from his food supply that helped. Obviously we’re deep into anecdote land at this point though. I’m dubious about lab grown meat. As previously mentioned in an edit, 84% of the worlds calories are just straight up plants, and it doesn’t seem to be helping much. But if it provides cheaper meat to the masses, I might be persuaded. I am however very conservative when it comes to introducing new ingredients into the human food supply. I think we’ve done a lot of harm in the past 30 years by adding a lot of seed (sorry, “vegetable”) oils into our food supply. Just because something isn’t acutely toxic doesn’t mean you should be eating it all the time, and I will personally take the exact same approach to lab grown meat. I’ll probably be the last person to switch over, if I ever do. Edit: it turns out the original study claiming that meat was producing half of the greenhouse gasses was flawed, and the authors had to revise it. The actual number is 3.9% of US emissions, with the rest of agriculture representing 5.1% of US emissions. Source: https://www.eco-business.com/opinion/yes-eating-meat-affects-the-environment-but-cows-are-not-killing-the-climate/ https://www.eco-business.com/opinion/yes-eating-meat-affects...

DennisP 8y ago

So that was not the case for my brother; his numbers were significantly worse and he was on medication, before he switched to veganism and greatly improved. In the study I posted, the meat-eaters were in the study too so I don't think that bias exactly applies, though in general dietary studies are always difficult. I think I've read the same books as you, and agree with much of what you say. I would love to see us switch all our cattle over to Allan Savory's methods, and if lab-grown meat works out, maybe some ranchers will survive by providing premium grass-fed. I've also read a stack of the better-known low-carb/paleo books. It just didn't work out for me, my results were horrific. It does seem to work for some people. Regarding cavities, perhaps there are tradeoffs to every diet. In any case, as I said above I don't think vegetarianism is a way to save the world. Lab-grown meat is what will help save the world. Getting off oil will also be a huge help.

village-idiot 8y ago
The bias absolutely applies. Vegans care about their health, so they’re likely to do a lot of behaviors that are unambiguously healthy. If someone believes that meat is bad for them and continues to eat it, then they are obviously valuing something else over their health, and are more likely to do other unhealthy things like smoke, drink too much, etc. I’d be far more interested in comparing vegans to people who believe that meat is good for them and are very health aware. Paleo or Keto individuals would be a good cohort to pick. That would measure technique and not intention, because both paleos and vegans are intending to be healthy. I’m curious what your results were on low carb. I work out with a cohort of low carb eaters, and we lost an avg of 30lbs when we switched. I personally lost 40, most of it fat (thanks Dexa scan!). I’d also be curious about what your brother cut out from his food supply that helped. Obviously we’re deep into anecdote land at this point though. I’m dubious about lab grown meat. As previously mentioned in an edit, 84% of the worlds calories are just straight up plants, and it doesn’t seem to be helping much. But if it provides cheaper meat to the masses, I might be persuaded. I am however very conservative when it comes to introducing new ingredients into the human food supply. I think we’ve done a lot of harm in the past 30 years by adding a lot of seed (sorry, “vegetable”) oils into our food supply. Just because something isn’t acutely toxic doesn’t mean you should be eating it all the time, and I will personally take the exact same approach to lab grown meat. I’ll probably be the last person to switch over, if I ever do. Edit: it turns out the original study claiming that meat was producing half of the greenhouse gasses was flawed, and the authors had to revise it. The actual number is 3.9% of US emissions, with the rest of agriculture representing 5.1% of US emissions. Source: https://www.eco-business.com/opinion/yes-eating-meat-affects-the-environment-but-cows-are-not-killing-the-climate/ https://www.eco-business.com/opinion/yes-eating-meat-affects...