4 ms·

Interesting. But is obsessively eating healthy really tied to political leanings? As far as I can tell it seems to be mostly a upper middle class thing (perhaps

by morsch 13y ago

Interesting. But is obsessively eating healthy really tied to political leanings? As far as I can tell it seems to be mostly a upper middle class thing (perhaps coincidentally the class mostly everyone believes they're in). That said, I suppose I could make the same argument that many people with a certain political leaning do engage in self-mandated food purity by eating vegetarian or vegan. Which sound reasons and very little magical thinking in terms of the economics of food.

pron 13y ago
sound reasons and very little magical thinking in terms of the economics of food First, there isn't much logical thinking involved in veganism or vegetarianism. At their best, they're about ethics (which I certainly respect). At their worst, they make some very dubious claims about te economics of food and the environment. But either way, note that people make significant and probably burdensome changes to their lives when it comes to upholding morals pertaining to food. I think that more (liberal) people would go a longer way making actual life changes when it comes to food than just about anything else. They might explain that the things you actually put into your body are the things you should care about most. Only there's little evidence to suggest that's the case. It is much more probable that national policies like increasing minimum wage or reforming education would have a bigger (though indirect) effect on your personal well being than optimizing your diet (as long as it's more or less "normal"). All religions, in this case the healthy diet religion, must not rely on facts in order to gain followers; they must rely on gut feelings, because gut feelings are much more powerful than proof when it comes to motivating life changes. And we just naturally feel that ingested food has to have a major effect on our health and general well being. It just makes sense, right? But, at least in the current state of scientific knowledge on the subject, that intuition is just superstition. After decades of research there's little consensus even on what makes us fat, let alone more subtle or indirect effects diet may have on our health. In fact, it's very probable that even if one day we do know exactly what's healthy to eat and what isn't, and at what quantities, the actual effect-size on our health will be quite small. It's quite possible that within some sane bounds, what food we eat simply does not determine our health to any large degree.
- subsection1h 13y ago
  First, there isn't much logical thinking involved in veganism or vegetarianism. I strongly dislike the flavor and aroma of meat, so it's logical that I follow a vegetarian diet. (There are few things as useless as discussions about nutrition at Hacker News.)
  - mpyne 13y ago
    But you would maybe eat meat if the flavor/aroma were OK, no? I realize this is getting into a 'duck typing' sort of question but I don't think "I just don't like the taste of meat" is really what most people think of by vegan/vegetarian. I don't eat mashed potatoes, but it's not because of some reverence for the humble potato or concern about industrialization of farming, it's just because I don't like the taste.
  - evan_ 13y ago
    That is actually NOT logical though. You have conditioned yourself to dislike the taste and smell of meat. You might as well say that a dog salivating when it hears a bell is logical. Of course it's ok, and in a lot of cases, preferable, to not behave logically.
- matthewaustin 13y ago
  I disagree with your claim that veganism and vegetarianism can't be backed by logical thinking. Producing meat requires significantly more natural resources (land area, water) and produces significantly more pollution (methane, ground contamination) than producing fruits and vegetables. Here is an example comparing the amount of water needed to irrigate various crops compared to the amount needed to raise beef. US Corn Production: 9 gallons water / lb corn US Wheat Production: 14 gallons water / lb wheat US Barley Production: 26 gallons water / lb barley US Alfalfa Production: 31 gallons water / lb alfalfa US Beef Production: 441 gallons water / lb beef http://www.journalofanimalscience.org/content/71/4/818.full.pdf http://www.journalofanimalscience.org/content/71/4/818.full.... Global Spinach Production: 2 gallons water / lb spinach Global Potato Production: 4 gallons water / lb potatos Global Banana Production: 13 gallons water / lb bananas Global Apple Production: 18 gallons water / lb apples Global Lentil Production: 64 gallons water / lb lentils Global Cashew Production: 121 gallons water / lb cashews Global Almond Production: 252 gallons water / lb almonds http://www.waterfootprint.org/Reports/Mekonnen-Hoekstra-2011-WaterFootprintCrops.pdf http://www.waterfootprint.org/Reports/Mekonnen-Hoekstra-2011... I could look for more examples, but this took me about half an hour already, and I think it pains a rather compelling picture by itself. The difference would be less extreme when looking at pork and poultry, but there is still a stark contrast.

by morsch 13y ago

pron 13y ago

sound reasons and very little magical thinking in terms of the economics of food First, there isn't much logical thinking involved in veganism or vegetarianism. At their best, they're about ethics (which I certainly respect). At their worst, they make some very dubious claims about te economics of food and the environment. But either way, note that people make significant and probably burdensome changes to their lives when it comes to upholding morals pertaining to food. I think that more (liberal) people would go a longer way making actual life changes when it comes to food than just about anything else. They might explain that the things you actually put into your body are the things you should care about most. Only there's little evidence to suggest that's the case. It is much more probable that national policies like increasing minimum wage or reforming education would have a bigger (though indirect) effect on your personal well being than optimizing your diet (as long as it's more or less "normal"). All religions, in this case the healthy diet religion, must not rely on facts in order to gain followers; they must rely on gut feelings, because gut feelings are much more powerful than proof when it comes to motivating life changes. And we just naturally feel that ingested food has to have a major effect on our health and general well being. It just makes sense, right? But, at least in the current state of scientific knowledge on the subject, that intuition is just superstition. After decades of research there's little consensus even on what makes us fat, let alone more subtle or indirect effects diet may have on our health. In fact, it's very probable that even if one day we do know exactly what's healthy to eat and what isn't, and at what quantities, the actual effect-size on our health will be quite small. It's quite possible that within some sane bounds, what food we eat simply does not determine our health to any large degree.

subsection1h 13y ago
First, there isn't much logical thinking involved in veganism or vegetarianism. I strongly dislike the flavor and aroma of meat, so it's logical that I follow a vegetarian diet. (There are few things as useless as discussions about nutrition at Hacker News.)
- mpyne 13y ago
  But you would maybe eat meat if the flavor/aroma were OK, no? I realize this is getting into a 'duck typing' sort of question but I don't think "I just don't like the taste of meat" is really what most people think of by vegan/vegetarian. I don't eat mashed potatoes, but it's not because of some reverence for the humble potato or concern about industrialization of farming, it's just because I don't like the taste.
- evan_ 13y ago
  That is actually NOT logical though. You have conditioned yourself to dislike the taste and smell of meat. You might as well say that a dog salivating when it hears a bell is logical. Of course it's ok, and in a lot of cases, preferable, to not behave logically.
matthewaustin 13y ago
I disagree with your claim that veganism and vegetarianism can't be backed by logical thinking. Producing meat requires significantly more natural resources (land area, water) and produces significantly more pollution (methane, ground contamination) than producing fruits and vegetables. Here is an example comparing the amount of water needed to irrigate various crops compared to the amount needed to raise beef. US Corn Production: 9 gallons water / lb corn US Wheat Production: 14 gallons water / lb wheat US Barley Production: 26 gallons water / lb barley US Alfalfa Production: 31 gallons water / lb alfalfa US Beef Production: 441 gallons water / lb beef http://www.journalofanimalscience.org/content/71/4/818.full.pdf http://www.journalofanimalscience.org/content/71/4/818.full.... Global Spinach Production: 2 gallons water / lb spinach Global Potato Production: 4 gallons water / lb potatos Global Banana Production: 13 gallons water / lb bananas Global Apple Production: 18 gallons water / lb apples Global Lentil Production: 64 gallons water / lb lentils Global Cashew Production: 121 gallons water / lb cashews Global Almond Production: 252 gallons water / lb almonds http://www.waterfootprint.org/Reports/Mekonnen-Hoekstra-2011-WaterFootprintCrops.pdf http://www.waterfootprint.org/Reports/Mekonnen-Hoekstra-2011... I could look for more examples, but this took me about half an hour already, and I think it pains a rather compelling picture by itself. The difference would be less extreme when looking at pork and poultry, but there is still a stark contrast.