Vegetarianism

[Osborn F Enready]

How do you get your essential amino acids, and omega fatty acids without meat or fish?

Please show me, or provide a link to some information if you have it.

[zippster18]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Soy protein has negative affects in males. Soy protein is GREAT for women, not good for men. Soy protein is better than NOTHING, but not even CLOSE to whey protein, and not nearly as digestable in the human system.

Um... no... soy works just fine for men too. And considering that my system won't allow for whey...that's not true either. The only thing I can digest is soy. But then there are the people who are allergic to soy too. It really depends on the personal system and not all humans globally.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary Well yah, given the choice between human meat and a carrot, i'd choose the carrot. Although I don't think it's quite as prevalent as you say.

In the far past anthropoligists have stated it may have been quite common as our ancestors ate opportunistically. That we don`t do it now says nothing about it not being natural for humans to eat humans, just that our values have changed -- which can change again to even widen other beings under those that we do not target for consumption -- out of a concious decision based on those new values.

[zippster18]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready How do you get your essential amino acids, and omega fatty acids without meat or fish? Please show me, or provide a link to some information if you have it.

For the Amino Acids Protein in the Vegan Diet -- The Vegetarian Resource Group

And for the Omega Fatty Acids Vegan Food Guide Go down to the essential parts. You can also add flax seed to this.
And don't forget, Fish also comes with the bad omega-6. The only Omega you need is 3.

Omega 3 Fatty Acids
Most people consume too much fat, but few people get enough of the healthy Omega-3 fatty acids. These essential fats can be found in walnuts, canola oil, and flax seeds. For maximum absorbtion, flax seeds should be ground up in a blender or coffee grinder, then added to smoothies or sprinkled on top of other foods. Flax seeds are also rich in protein, potassium, magnesium, boron, and lignans, which may help prevent cancer. Vegan Food Pyramid | ChooseVeg.com

[Osborn F Enready]

zippster said: Um... no... soy works just fine for men too.

Study, you'll find I am right.

Soy protein is not beneficial to mens testosterone levels, which is why it is great for women, but only "satisfactory" at best, for men.

Zippster said: And considering that my system won't allow for whey...that's not true either.

You are unique, or "rarer" than the norm. I also have one aunt who is allergic to dairy products, as well as one allergic to nuts.

The "AVERAGE" person finds whey protein more digestable, easier to breakdown, and for the body to utilize.

Zippster said: The only thing I can digest is soy. But then there are the people who are allergic to soy too. It really depends on the personal system and not all humans globally.

I am talking about AVERAGE people, the average person, with no eating disorders.

I in no way mean people with disorders are "weird", but I am saying that because of our diverse diet, and our ability to farm and raise so many varieties of livestock and crops, our people suffer less from diet related disorders, as well as being able to produce some of the most human friendly food in the world.

[Osborn F Enready]

zippster said: (from your link) So, in the United States it appears that vegan diets are commonly lower in protein than standard American diets.

Not just in the U.S., it is a natural fact that it is harder to obtain protein in beneficial amounts by eating only plant matter, especially if one doesn't have a taste for beans.

zippster said: (your link) Remember, though, with protein, more (than the RDA) is not necessarily better. There do not appear to be health advantages to consuming a high protein diet. Diets that are high in protein may even increase the risk of osteoporosis 4 and kidney disease 5.

This quote alone makes me want to discredit the whole website.

This is not true, and misleading.

There are huge advantages to having a higher protein diet, and it increases exponentially as you go up the scale of calories burned per hour.

I also didn't see any daily numbers for Amino acids and Omega fats.

[zippster18]

Ok... a - I don't have a Disorder.

Then i'll ask you this question about your "average and norm" Where are they. I run into many people, in the work place, at colleges, etc. that can't eat something for some reason. Those who can just eat anything are really in the minority. And your average person probably hasn't tried changing their diet to include soy anything.

And as far as the men and soy protein read this The power of soy: this valuable plant food packs a muscle-building wallop while protecting you from disease - Nutrition Science Men's Fitness - Find Articles

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: Kamehameha34 What you drew from those conclusions is subjective.

Take away the exploitation of animals and those objective facts caused by man`s hand would cease to exist.

Look, I am not attacking vegetarianism, nor am I trying to discourage any movement. I am just saying that whether or not an individual eats meat should be dependent on their own subjective value of animals.

And if someone values animals subjectively merely for givng them pleasure should that be so? Pleasure of the pallate? What about someone who derives pleasure from torturing an animal? In your paradigme of "subjectivity" it would be subjective to say that the pleasure of the pallate is more important to pleasure a person may get from enjoying inflicting pain on an animal. After all, meat is not necessary to survive, so all that is left is pleasure of the pallate. Why is pleasure of the pallate more important than pleasure from enjoying taking the life of something?

But, as it is in society now, the will of the people through legislation agrees with the status quo as it is now. However, if the value of people change in the future and the will of the people decide to legislate protections for animals that would protect them from exploitation, then no matter what some people may get pleasure for the pallate from flesh -- it will be prohibited -- and justly so if society decides to legislate against its consumption just as cocain`s consumption is legislated against by the will of the people -- despite the pleasure a segment of the population derives from it.

[Osborn F Enready]

zippster said: Ok... a - I don't have a Disorder.

No offense intended. I thought you were implying you had reactions to certain foods, that are considered safe foods to eat, and beneficial food to eat.
As I said, no offense, just trying to be accurate.

zippster said: Where are they. I run into many people, in the work place, at colleges, etc. that can't eat something for some reason.

I understand what you are saying, but I am talking about national average. Yes, we all have prefrences, and some things make us gassier or talk back more after eating than others, but that is far too individual to map out unless you do a complete survey.

I am simply saying that, whey protein, is far more digestable naturally, than soy protein, in the larger average of people.

Hell, in my immdiate family alone we have a variety of dietary issues, but I think most people don't start getting them until later in life as a rule, IF they have always had a well rounded diet. (not average at all, especially in this nation of fast-food, snacks and processed crap)

zippster said: Those who can just eat anything are really in the minority. And your average person probably hasn't tried changing their diet to include soy anything.

I think its too general to comment on.

I won't try to specualte what "I think" the average person does, only what they admit to. The average person in the U.S. that experiences regular after-meal heartburn is also increasing, but is it diet, or stress, or both?

Lots of information, and lots of people, with lots of tastes and prefrences.

[Osborn F Enready]

zippster said: (from your link on soy protein) Same, yes, but not necessarily equal, Philip Goglia, C.N., founder of Performance Fitness Concepts Inc. and author of Turn Up the Heat: Unlock the Fat-Burning Power of Your Metabolism. Whereas a thick slab of beef, lamb or pork contains nothing more than protein, fat and the occasional bone, the protein in soy comes with a helping of carbohydrates, which can throw a monkey wrench in your metabolic works. "When you take a bean like soy, your body will always try to use that bean as a starch first, and then convert what's left over to usable proteins," says Goglia. "In meats, there are no carbohydrates that your body has to deal with and break down. Meat proteins are always more efficiently utilized than vegetable proteins." In the end, experts suggest that meat eaters replace only some of their daily meat intake with soy, especially if they're concerned with both health and muscle growth.

That says it all.

[zippster18]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Not just in the U.S., it is a natural fact that it is harder to obtain protein in beneficial amounts by eating only plant matter, especially if one doesn't have a taste for beans.

No it's not i've been doing it for years. And you grow accustomed to eating various things you wouldn't normally.

Quote by: Osborn F Enready There are huge advantages to having a higher protein diet, and it increases exponentially as you go up the scale of calories burned per hour.

You must've been a supporter of the atkin's diet. And having more protein and burning that much means you must be a nice and fit athlete, but the average person isn't.

Quote by: Osborn F Enready I also didn't see any daily numbers for Amino acids and Omega fats.

Do you have daily numbers for your diet now? It's the same need of intake, just in a different form.
Essential Fatty Acids

Some sources of nutrients and such http://www.vegansociety.com/html/foo...sNutrition.php

And information about a vegan diet
Nutrition

[zippster18]

Point blank. A vegetarian diet and a vegan diet are an accepted form of eating. And it's not really a diet it's more of a life style. You become aware of so much, including nutrition, effects on the planet, animals, etc. It's all healthy and you have to have a mind-set to be one. Whether it's 'cause you love animals, you don't want to eat meat or dairy or a combination there of, or because you can't.

If you're really worried about it, talk to a nutritionist about it or your doctor, or both. Mine said that it would be fine and that he supports me 100% and that it was completely healthy.

[Osborn F Enready]

zippster said: No it's not i've been doing it for years. And you grow accustomed to eating various things you wouldn't normally.

How much do you weigh, and what is the percentage of muscle mass vs fat on your body? Do you lift weights? Do you have a labor job, desk job, any job? What is your hobby?(is it physically demanding?)

I have tried many diets, inlcuding one mainly of vegetables and fruit, and found it VERY HARD to maintain weight and muscle of any value for effort put on vs effect obtained.

As far as "getting used" to things you don't like, some people can, some can't. I have learned to look past the taste in some things, for the value of their substance. My father on the other hand, can't do that.

I still REFUSE to eat beans, because I have never, EVER had beans I THOUGHT tasted worth a shit.

zippster said: You must've been a supporter of the atkin's diet. And having more protein and burning that much means you must be a nice and fit athlete, but the average person isn't.

Wrong, wrong and wrong. Want to stop "assuming" now?

I support a well balanced diet, proportionate to average daily output and necessity.

I have always been "heavy" since age 9 or 10. I never had a great diet until I made a conscious effort to change, and I took several years of my life experimenting with diet and workout routines to push the limits of my body to its edges on both extremes. I know quite a bit about diet, exercise and metabolism, and would enjoy a point by point debate on this if you feel up to it.

I am in no way average, nor an athelete, but I know what works best for my body, as well as staying up to date on what is going on nationally.

zippster said: Do you have daily numbers for your diet now? It's the same need of intake, just in a different form.

I was trying to draw out for you how to see the "calorie" difference, as well as the carbohydrate difference in obtaining them meat vs vegetarian, and how UNbeneficial it becomes for someone who is "heavy" due to slower metabolism, as well as other special needs diets.

A person can eat lettuce from sun-up to sun-down, and never gain an ounce, in the long run, since it takes more energy for your body to burn it then it provides.

[Osborn F Enready]

zippster said: Point blank. A vegetarian diet and a vegan diet are an accepted form of eating. And it's not really a diet it's more of a life style. You become aware of so much, including nutrition, effects on the planet, animals, etc. It's all healthy and you have to have a mind-set to be one. Whether it's 'cause you love animals, you don't want to eat meat or dairy or a combination there of, or because you can't. If you're really worried about it, talk to a nutritionist about it or your doctor, or both. Mine said that it would be fine and that he supports me 100% and that it was completely healthy.

Hey, thats great, and I support your choice to eat however, whatever you like as long as it ain't me or my loved ones, or my property.

I am just trying to point out it is VERY HARD for many people to eat as a vegetarian, and still do what they want to do.

Diet is very complex, and different for everyone. The more physically demanding your output, the more physically demanding it is on input.

More choices are always better, which is why I don't support any animal rights movements, when they interject into food and farming.

I am all for stopping abuse, and making killing of animals humane when it must happen, but I refuse to accept some notion that animals have "equal" rights.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: Kamehameha34 ... neither of us has any right to legislate our beliefs. You don't force vegetarianism on me, and I won't come at you with a steak and some A1.

The deomocratic process is open to all of us, and grassroots campaigns when they reach a critical tipping point results in legislation, for the will of the general public then deem it valuable that a new law comes into affect. What don`t you understand about this? What do you think democracy and the legislative process is for if not for legislating?

My argument is this: Since governments are in place to protect the people, and since your value of animals is subjective, the government has neither the responsibility nor the constitutional ability to legislate the abolition of meat eating.

In a democracy, the governed are masters of the government. The government is the tool of the people -- not the reverse. If the will of the people is such as they come to value something new that has not been enshrined in their laws, then through their voting powers by voting in representatives that represent their views and values, it only follows that those representatives will vote for whatever those persons in those districts sent them to the legislature to do.

The people can expand the role of the government to protect whatever they feel is important for protecting. In fact, the representatives of the people in every state have over the decades slowly been voting for more and more protections of animals. The evolution of state statutes and national laws are proof of that. And those laws are not only concerned with protection of property, but many on the books are concerned for the animal for the animal`s sake -- hence even owners can be prosecuted for ill treatment of their animal because the animal has a claim that out-trumps the owner`s right to property. Duly voted representatives of the government created these laws of protection not for man but for the animals. And those laws are continuing to evolve.

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin We ARists are in great company with other respected persons throughout history who have felt it wrong to exploit animals.

Good for you. Just stop trying to objectify this "there's patterns in history, man!" crap to mean "meat eating is murder!"

Have I said, "Meat is murder?" Please point it out. What I will say is exploitation is exploitation, pain is pain, murder is murder, suffering is suffering -- and all those are morally bankrupt when they are caused when alternatives exist that do not cause them.

The patterns of racism and sexism employ the same reasoning as speciesism in denying consideration of interests and rights:

• they are not like us
• they are not part of our group
• they weaker than us
• we can do what we want because we can
• we benefit from their exploitation and inferior status

Provide me some links that prove, objectively that our government's responsibility is to enforce "equal consideration of rights."

I have never said it presently was, did I? I have said that when values change in the future that widen the circle of compassion and interests for animals, then legislation will reflect that. Are you confusing what is written again? This is like the 5th time your confusion of terms and what is written has been pointed out to you. In the case where you are inferring that I said something, this could be avoided if you quoted directly. That is one of the reasons why the "quote" command exists -- for accuracy. Please note that and try to utilize it at such times when you want to infer I have stated something.

[zippster18]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Hey, thats great, and I support your choice to eat however, whatever you like as long as it ain't me or my loved ones, or my property. I am just trying to point out it is VERY HARD for many people to eat as a vegetarian, and still do what they want to do. Diet is very complex, and different for everyone. The more physically demanding your output, the more physically demanding it is on input. More choices are always better, which is why I don't support any animal rights movements, when they interject into food and farming. I am all for stopping abuse, and making killing of animals humane when it must happen, but I refuse to accept some notion that animals have "equal" rights.

You're within your right to have choices. And as long as you don't support the abuse in animals I don't care what you eat or don't eat.

Sometimes what vegetarians want and need are two separate things. Like I want a plate of ribs, but i know the consiquence will be me in the bathroom for hours and a stomache that hates me. And I need to eat soy and tofu (but i actually learned to like it and even crave it....)

Diets are indeed different for everyone. My mother, father and i are all vegan, but each one of us for a different reason, but the end result is that we all feel better. But none of us like it when people come up to us and go "well what do you eat" "are you healthy" "that can't be good for you" "I could never give up ___". We don't mind real questions, but to us it's just common sense.

I still don't think it's right that they have to do artificial insemination to turkeys 'cause they've breed them with breasts too large to get the job done naturally, but that's another topic for another day...

[Osborn F Enready]

SHW said: In a democracy, the governed are masters of the government.

ROFLMAO.....

Where did YOU read about democracy, and could you point one out please?

The U.S. isn't, never was, and never will be (while I am alive) a democracy.

We are a CONSTITUTIONALLY LIMITED, Democratic REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC.

You seem to keep missing the "constitutionally limited" part, which is not uncommon in these times, but surely is the biggest contributor to the problem which you seek to repair, though you don't seem to see it yet.

SHW said: The government is the tool of the people -- not the reverse.

That is how it is supposed to work, and we are also supposed to have "INALIENABLE rights", something you seem to ignore being trampled everyday, and dismiss as "progress" because it suits "your" needs. Funny how you don't seem to value others rights as much as your own rights, and evidence that you don't is in the program you are trying to push.

SHW said: The people can expand the role of the government to protect whatever they feel is important for protecting.

Not if the laws infringe on the rights of the individuals. No state, or federal law can infringe directly on the rights of the individual, which your little agenda seems to be all about.

[brien]

Quote by: pahl Dont make stupid generalisations. Vegans are from my expirience no more prone to force their beliefs on other people then christians are. And i dont think bad of christianity because of the few people knocking on my door to "advertise" their beliefs. If you dont like the vegan protestors you see on television then just say so. Dont try to use it to call the opposing side "intolerant and oppressing". I've met a lot of meat eaters that would probly deny vegans their choice because they find it "silly". Its the person that is intolerant, not their diet.

You may want to examine my original statement. It began: "I have an idea"....

Also, I think you missed my point. All I was writing is that some people are willling to force their beliefs upon others by taking choice away. Some people are simply intolerant of other's lifestyle. This is true, and has been true, throughout history of mankind.


I never wrote I didn't like vegans, vegan protestors, or anything of the kind. I don't care if people "advertise" their beliefs concerning anything on this planet. I did write that I have an idea some people would be content to force their ideas upon others, and given the chance, would probably usurp their choice between being a carnivore or a vegan. If you don't thnk this true, just ask vegans this question: "Given the opportunity, if you could enact a law against eating meat, would you do it?" See what the response would be and come back and make some of your "stupid generalisations."

After you conduct your survey of vegans, ask the same question of carnivores, only asking them if they would enact a law to prohibit people from being vegans. I believe you will then understand my point.

[Kamehameha34]

Lol, I find it funny that whenever I ask you to reinforce your beliefs, or if I make a completely accurate inference, you start backpedaling.

Anyway:

If you want to base your argument around what people want, then people want to eat meat (as shown by the poll). You can speculate all you want about what you think people will want in 50 years, but that's not exactly relevant.

If you want to base your argument around intersubjectivity (a.k.a. invalid ad populum, in your case), then all meat eaters think you are wrong, because they think animals shouldn't have as many rights.

You can have your problems with our reasoning, but your problems are just that: yours. You are the only one to account for your opinions.

Opinions are not debateable. What, exactly, are you trying to accomplish by debating them? Let's establish that, before I go further, so you don't keep shifting the focus of your argument when you find your current one insufficient.

[Osborn F Enready]

zippster said: You're within your right to have choices. And as long as you don't support the abuse in animals I don't care what you eat or don't eat. Sometimes what vegetarians want and need are two separate things. Like I want a plate of ribs, but i know the consiquence will be me in the bathroom for hours and a stomache that hates me. And I need to eat soy and tofu (but i actually learned to like it and even crave it....) Diets are indeed different for everyone. My mother, father and i are all vegan, but each one of us for a different reason, but the end result is that we all feel better. But none of us like it when people come up to us and go "well what do you eat" "are you healthy" "that can't be good for you" "I could never give up ___". We don't mind real questions, but to us it's just common sense. I still don't think it's right that they have to do artificial insemination to turkeys 'cause they've breed them with breasts too large to get the job done naturally, but that's another topic for another day...

I understand your position.

I personally have nothing against natural food production, grown or livestock.
I do have problems with the methods of slaughter, the "caging" and living arrangements that farming has brought about, but these things can be rectified fairly easily to suit me. I don't support genetic altering of animals that are to be used as food.