4 ms·

Have you read the ''Adventist Health Study 2" ? It's the largest study on the subject to my knowledge and concludes an increased longevity for meat-free eating

Have you read the ''Adventist Health Study 2" ? It's the largest study on the subject to my knowledge and concludes an increased longevity for meat-free eating, as well as for fully plant based diets (vegans). This is the main reason why I don't see any reason to consume animal products when we know full well that it necessitates the exploitation and slaughter of sentient individuals.

loudtieblahblah 5y ago
I have heard of it and seen it cited often. I have a hard time with the Adventist studies due to their very well know and obvious bias. It's part of their religious faith that meat brings out "sinful" desires and impulses and they've been rabid activists for vegetarianism through most of the 20th century. They've influenced policy and their studies and products of companies ran by Adventists (like Kellogs) have helped us arrive at our current health predicament. This is a group of people who are ok with processed foods, seed-oils, high omega6s, as long as it verifies their faith's desire for vegetarianism. Adventist companies also used to parrot the faulty Ancnel Keys Seven Nations study because it demonized saturated fats as opposed to their precious carbs, and this has harmed us as a society, how we see nutrition, for decades and still continues to. I don't trust a thing they say, no matter how fleshed out their study is. They have an agenda,. They're not concerned about human health. Healthy eating is an exploitable byproduct to a larger end goal but the goal itself isn't health or longevity. and even without reading the study in full - the study will not account for societies with high numbers of centenarians who eat meat - Okinawa's diets are rich in pork. Spain is rich in chicken and fish. This throw a wrench in their gears no matter how large the study is. There's simply more to diet based health than adherence to cults with religious and political agendas and endless human tribalism. Additionally - if I'm not mistaken about the study itself, it is yet another observational study asking people to self-report their dietary habits. Observational studies are why nutritional science, IMHO, seems to insanely contradictory with one study seemingly stating one thing and another saying the opposite. It's why all the red and processed meat studies ended up getting thrown out. (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/30/health/red-meat-heart-cancer.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/30/health/red-meat-heart-can...)
yucky 5y ago
>I don't see any reason to consume animal products Humans are omnivores for a reason.
- loudtieblahblah 5y ago
  And Adventists encourage vegetarianism as a matter of religious faith.
- _9d3x 5y ago
  Humans are not naturally herbivores. This is true. We're also not naturally vaccinated. We also don't naturally wipe our ass with toilet paper and wash our hands with soap and clean water. What we are and what we should be are two very different things. We have decade-long studies showing that a plant-based diet is at least as healthy if not healthier than typical omnivorous diets. This makes killing billions of sentient creatures in monstruous factory-farming conditions with constant suffering all the more morally reprehensible. We're not torturing them because we need to. We're torturing them because they taste nice.
  - loudtieblahblah 5y ago
    i eat them bc i dont want to gave to take unregulated supplements to make up for nutrtional deficiencies you wouldnt have if you just ate meat. i belive in striking a balance between the fact that we want to minimize suffering and the reality that existing implies devouring and consumption. these last two things will not only induce suffering to animals but also to other humans. and its unaviodable. and im not giving myself further neuroticism and anxiety bc i put the weight of the globe and its myriad of problems onto my shoulders which already burden enough selfishly and empathetic ally. i eat for health. period. I have a family to take care of. My health isn't just necessary bc I want my own life but bc people depend on me. and the science isnt settled between vegetarianism and being an omnivore. not by a long shot. i will concede those in the west eat too much meat. so ill extend the olive branch and meet you half way. but i put my health above that of chickens, fish and the occassional cow. i feel for them but theyre not people. i barely am capable of processing the horrors that happen to people on this earth. i dont have room to consider everything that breathes. Your moral finger wagging, BTW, isn't a way to win hearts and minds. People will just double down as a rebellion against your moral superiority complex. Youre kicking the legs out of your own political cause with your self righteousness People who talk like this are why redneck "roll coal" as opposed to adopting hybrids and EVs.. Meet people half way. This was a discussion about health and lifespan and like clockwork here you people come.

loudtieblahblah 5y ago

I have heard of it and seen it cited often. I have a hard time with the Adventist studies due to their very well know and obvious bias. It's part of their religious faith that meat brings out "sinful" desires and impulses and they've been rabid activists for vegetarianism through most of the 20th century. They've influenced policy and their studies and products of companies ran by Adventists (like Kellogs) have helped us arrive at our current health predicament. This is a group of people who are ok with processed foods, seed-oils, high omega6s, as long as it verifies their faith's desire for vegetarianism. Adventist companies also used to parrot the faulty Ancnel Keys Seven Nations study because it demonized saturated fats as opposed to their precious carbs, and this has harmed us as a society, how we see nutrition, for decades and still continues to. I don't trust a thing they say, no matter how fleshed out their study is. They have an agenda,. They're not concerned about human health. Healthy eating is an exploitable byproduct to a larger end goal but the goal itself isn't health or longevity. and even without reading the study in full - the study will not account for societies with high numbers of centenarians who eat meat - Okinawa's diets are rich in pork. Spain is rich in chicken and fish. This throw a wrench in their gears no matter how large the study is. There's simply more to diet based health than adherence to cults with religious and political agendas and endless human tribalism. Additionally - if I'm not mistaken about the study itself, it is yet another observational study asking people to self-report their dietary habits. Observational studies are why nutritional science, IMHO, seems to insanely contradictory with one study seemingly stating one thing and another saying the opposite. It's why all the red and processed meat studies ended up getting thrown out. (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/30/health/red-meat-heart-cancer.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/30/health/red-meat-heart-can...)

yucky 5y ago

>I don't see any reason to consume animal products Humans are omnivores for a reason.

loudtieblahblah 5y ago
And Adventists encourage vegetarianism as a matter of religious faith.
_9d3x 5y ago
Humans are not naturally herbivores. This is true. We're also not naturally vaccinated. We also don't naturally wipe our ass with toilet paper and wash our hands with soap and clean water. What we are and what we should be are two very different things. We have decade-long studies showing that a plant-based diet is at least as healthy if not healthier than typical omnivorous diets. This makes killing billions of sentient creatures in monstruous factory-farming conditions with constant suffering all the more morally reprehensible. We're not torturing them because we need to. We're torturing them because they taste nice.
- loudtieblahblah 5y ago
  i eat them bc i dont want to gave to take unregulated supplements to make up for nutrtional deficiencies you wouldnt have if you just ate meat. i belive in striking a balance between the fact that we want to minimize suffering and the reality that existing implies devouring and consumption. these last two things will not only induce suffering to animals but also to other humans. and its unaviodable. and im not giving myself further neuroticism and anxiety bc i put the weight of the globe and its myriad of problems onto my shoulders which already burden enough selfishly and empathetic ally. i eat for health. period. I have a family to take care of. My health isn't just necessary bc I want my own life but bc people depend on me. and the science isnt settled between vegetarianism and being an omnivore. not by a long shot. i will concede those in the west eat too much meat. so ill extend the olive branch and meet you half way. but i put my health above that of chickens, fish and the occassional cow. i feel for them but theyre not people. i barely am capable of processing the horrors that happen to people on this earth. i dont have room to consider everything that breathes. Your moral finger wagging, BTW, isn't a way to win hearts and minds. People will just double down as a rebellion against your moral superiority complex. Youre kicking the legs out of your own political cause with your self righteousness People who talk like this are why redneck "roll coal" as opposed to adopting hybrids and EVs.. Meet people half way. This was a discussion about health and lifespan and like clockwork here you people come.