Vegetarianism seen through the skeptical eye

Is there any scientific evidence that meat (or certain types of meat) is harmful for human beings?

Beyond the obvious disease infested meat (Mad Cow comes to mind) or bacterial infected meat (salmonella) I was never really presented with any hard data to support that claim in the 7 years I was a vegetarian. There was some data in regards to hormones and atibiotics used on livestock having some negative impact on humans.


Is there any evidence of this old claim that supposedly, the stress that the animal goes through when he is killed somehow remains in its flesh which we eat and thus, harms us?

I've heard this as well. My usual response is: wild game, which is supposed to be better for us than livestock, must go through more stress during the hunt than the unsuspecting cow or chicken.

As with most vegetarians I've met, most of the harm from eating meat is a direct result of the physical or mental abuse inflicted by our vegetarian girlfriends.
 
Last edited:
So no studies have been done to show that the additional cholesterol added to the system from the consumption of red meat is unhealthy? It's just a myth?
Seems like a simple google search would reveal them
 
Look at it this way: If YOU had just had an angioplasty done who would you believe: your doctor and a dietician who tell you to avoid red meat for the rest of your life
OR
some skeptic who says its just fine to go down to Mickey Dees with him and have a double cheesburger
 
But I am so torn about eggs, the perfect food - except for the cholesterol.

I assume you mean your cholesterol and not the cholesterol in eggs, since it is a trivial amount. I don't think any food has a significant amount of cholesterol. Eggs do contain a moderate amount of saturated fat.
 
I assume you mean your cholesterol and not the cholesterol in eggs, since it is a trivial amount. I don't think any food has a significant amount of cholesterol. Eggs do contain a moderate amount of saturated fat.

Trivial by what standard? Compared to what my body is making? Please explain.
It states on the carton that I get 71% of my daily cholesterol from one egg. I have been eating 2. So my solution is simple: I just eat one egg now instead of two
Unless, like you say, the amount is trivial anyway. Then eating no eggs would not help
 
Strange...
I just got back from tending my neighbor's sheep while he is away.
One of the pregnant ewes had a prolapsed uterus; a lovely site; huge mass of innerds hanging out. We sucessfully shoved it all back in, but it didn't work for long. Bullet in the head. Young ram needs to be castrated. I don't want to do it.

Feeling my inner vegetarian today.
 
Strange...
I just got back from tending my neighbor's sheep while he is away.
One of the pregnant ewes had a prolapsed uterus; a lovely site; huge mass of innerds hanging out. We sucessfully shoved it all back in, but it didn't work for long. Bullet in the head. Young ram needs to be castrated. I don't want to do it.

Feeling my inner vegetarian today.

So I guess you don't covet your neighbours ass either today.:)
 
Last edited:
Well, to be fair, you're arguing against what you think I said rather than what I actually said. :) I said being a vegetarian makes it difficult to eat fast food, meaning it's hard to find a meatless meal on a fast food menu.

Acknowledged. Sorry for my strawman.:)


As for your friend being a vegetarian who eats seafood, well, that's cheating, frankly.

You said it. That's the word that it comes down to: Cheating.
She did say she's taking this new vegetarian diet step by step, though.
 
Last edited:
Trivial by what standard? Compared to what my body is making? Please explain.

Gram for gram, eating cholesterol has much less effect on your blood cholesterol than eating saturated fat. A jumbo egg contains about 275mg of cholesterol and 2g of saturated fat. Unless I am mistaken, no food contains an amount of cholesterol that would be of concern. Also, dietary cholesterol may be helpful overall, because it increases HDL. Even if that is true, it might not be useful, because as far as I know there aren't any foods with a high ratio of cholesterol to saturated fat.

I do see that in a lot of places they recommend limiting cholesterol to 300mg a day or something like that, but there is never any explanation of the reason for it. It might help you by limiting the saturated fat that is associated with it, but that seems like a silly reason, since it could steer you to less healthy sources of saturated fat (assuming the cholesterol is an overall positive).

It states on the carton that I get 71% of my daily cholesterol from one egg.
Nutrition labels in the US are fairly ambiguous. They don't state whether the amounts are minimums, maximums, or what. They just say "% Daily Value". According to the label, a glass of orange juice contains 207% of my daily vitamin C, but I am not worried that drinking a whole glass every day will do me harm.
 
My reading seems to indicate that most of your cholesterol is made in your own liver.

So Vegan or not, we all have adequate cholesterol.

I've got to credit my brother with giving me a deeper understanding of vegetarianism. He said that since their decision is not based on science, it is a matter of faith- it's a religious choice. My own beliefs tend towards the FSM and rare meat.

And having also looked into the statin/cholesterol/longevity thing, I also believe that heart disease is more a matter of inflammation than fats.

My cholesterol level is down to normal after quitting the wheat and going low carb. After three angioplasties with seven stents. Angina went away within a week of quitting the wheat. Lost 50 pounds too, eating became optional rather than my reason to be. Almost one year of wheatlessness, lets see if I can make more than two years before needing another heart procedure.
 
I became vegan because I examined diet sceptically.

First, I stopped asking why vegetarians were vegetarian and instead turned the question on myself. The real sceptical question seemed to be "Why did I eat meat?"

I found I couldn't really answer that question, as I had never given my dietary choices any serious thought. They were as ingrained, and as unquestioned, as my earlier, lazy theism was. I had simply never sat down and weighed up the relative benefits of each possible dietary choice, starting from a neutral position. I don't think many people have.

So, that's what I did. I started to list the reasons why I should choose meat eating over vegetarianism. I couldn't think of a single one, other than "Meat tastes good", and that wasn't enough. I'll guide you through my thought process:

1) Health. Is vegetarianism / veganism "healthier" than an omnivourous one? Even if it isn't, it's at least as healthy, according to the ADA. There are lots of studies pointing out the relative health risks of red meat, processed meat and all the rest, but dietary studies are notoriously unreliable, so let's leave that aside and assume that the ADA is right and cutting animal products out of your life is at least not harmful. Of course, you need to eat a balanced diet, but even omnivores don't always achieve this.

2) Environment. "Livestock are responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse-gas emissions as measured in carbon dioxide equivalent, reports the FAO. This includes 9 percent of all CO2 emissions, 37 percent of methane, and 65 percent of nitrous oxide. Altogether, that's more than the emissions caused by transportation." and "70% of all grains grown in the US are fed directly to farm animals, unnecessarily adding enormous levels of pesticides, herbicides, and petrochemical fertilizers to the Earth year after year, and consuming more fresh water than any other human endeavor." (Source). It seems to me that meat consumption is more harmful to the environment than the alternative, plant-based diet. There are plenty of other ways this is borne out, particularly when you consider how wasteful it is to grow food to feed to cows to then eat! See also: over-fishing.

3) Animal suffering. I am not dogmatic or evangelical about this, and I do not believe that a) it is always wrong to kill animals, b) that animals and humans are equivalent or c) that killing animals for food is metaphysically, or morally, wrong. Nevertheless, I believe it is undoubtedly the case that animals do suffer in the production of food. Cows, pigs and chickens all feel pain. I wouldn't kill a cat or a dog or a horse for food, and so I believe that if avoiding animal suffering for other species is possible, it should be pursued wherever possible. This seems to be at least a generally tenable position given laws on animal cruelty etc. If I can live as healthily as I can on a meat based diet, but eliminate unnecessary suffering, then why shouldn't I? In this sense (and in many others), veganism just seems a sensible extension of my broader ethical stance.

4) Convenience. As I said, I am not dogmatic about my veganism, and I am certain that in some cases, having a small-holding and being self-sufficient is a "better" choice. Nevertheless, I buy my food at stores. I do not hunt, or grow my own vegetables. If the soy milk and the regular milk are right next to each other on the shelf, why should I pick the animal milk, given points 1, 2 and 3 above? If the dairy free and the real mayonnaise are right next to each other on the shelf and pretty much indistinguishable from each other, why pick the animal product given 1, 2 and 3 above?

Now, don't get me wrong - I love the taste of meat. It's just that, having considered the relative merits of both diets, I can't justify eating it. I also love driving my car really fast, but I don't because my personal preferences aren't always sufficient to justify potentially harmful behaviour. And in any case, I'm not starving or denying myself anything at all. There are vegan alternative and analogues to pretty much everything these days.

People always ask me why I'm vegan. I always turn it round and ask them why they eat meat, because when I asked myself that question I never had the answer. It's just about thinking about the way you live your life, and why you hold the beliefs you do. In my humble opinion, non-dogmatic veganism is the logical and rational dietary choice; though if anyone can make the case as to why I should eat meat, please do.
 
Last edited:
I've got to credit my brother with giving me a deeper understanding of vegetarianism. He said that since their decision is not based on science, it is a matter of faith- it's a religious choice. My own beliefs tend towards the FSM and rare meat.
Yes. In much the same way, my not stealing from people, and not murdering people to further my gains, are also religious choices. Can you not see that some people feel that killing an animal, which they believe to be capable of suffering, for their own pleasure is not something they are comfortable with morally?

I am not a vegetarian.
 
Re: diet, weightloss, mortality, etc:

Heres a bit I copy & pasted from Wiki: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Obesity :

Mortality

" Two studies report decrease in mortality from bariatric surgery.[37][38] In the Swedish randomized controlled trial, patients with a body mass index of 34 or more for men and 38 or more for women underwent various types of bariatric surgery and were followed for a mean of 11 years. Surgery patients had 5.0% mortality while control patients had 6.3% mortality. This means 75 patients must be treated to avoid one death after 11 years (number needed to treat is 77).[37] In a Utah retrospective cohort study that followed patients for a mean of 7 years after various types of gastric bypass, surgery patients had 0.4% mortality while control patients had 0.6% mortality.[38] "

I use the gastric surgery angle because it is the only proven way to lose weight. And there seem to be studies, with controls of fatties who didn't lose weight. Anyhow, even the fantastic life change involved in losing about 100 pounds barely extends a patient's life. 77 patients for 11 years, that's 847 patient years to gain ONE year of patient life extension. So, compare that to any supposed benefit of any vegetarian diet, and you've got to be waisting you effort by skipping that rack of spare ribs.
 
I'm sure there's a moral issue involved. I avoid its details by being vegetarian. If the day comes that it's the rabbiit or me, the rabbit gets it, but that's not this day. It's a nasty business, and I want no part of it.

My thoughts entirely.

As a vegan, people do tend to enjoy throwing all these weird hypotheticals at me as if to point out my hypocrisy or something: "If you were in a plane crash in the jungle and all there was to eat was monkey, would you eat the monkey?".

Yes, I'd eat the monkey, but it's entirely irrelevant to the way I buy and consume my food on a day-to-day basis.
 
Strange...
I just got back from tending my neighbor's sheep while he is away.
One of the pregnant ewes had a prolapsed uterus; a lovely site; huge mass of innerds hanging out. We sucessfully shoved it all back in, but it didn't work for long. Bullet in the head. Young ram needs to be castrated. I don't want to do it.

Feeling my inner vegetarian today.

Ron Tomkins sees no difference between those sheep and two cabbages torn from the ground. For the record : I do see a difference, and I'm sure you do too.
 
...and why should he? He'd relish an environment where he could kill his own.

Don't we all?!!!

Seriously, a large portion of my meat is killed and processed by me or people I personally know. This doesn't mean that I don't occassionally eat out at restaurants or other places where I most probably am consuming "factory" meat, but for me it isn't as much a moral issue as a health issue. I really feel that there are additives and toxins in these processes, which while not a serious issue in small occassional doses, are not something I'd be comfortable subjecting myself or my family to over a period of decades. I'm a firm believer that we are what we eat. (and btw, a bit of those "fear"/stress homones in prey does seem to make them taste better, or so it seems to me, but overdone, as in an animal that has lived its entire life under extreme stress is actually distasteful,...but this may all be in my perceptions rather than objective reality) :)
 
My thoughts entirely.

As a vegan, people do tend to enjoy throwing all these weird hypotheticals at me as if to point out my hypocrisy or something: "If you were in a plane crash in the jungle and all there was to eat was monkey, would you eat the monkey?".

Yes, I'd eat the monkey, but it's entirely irrelevant to the way I buy and consume my food on a day-to-day basis.

Weird hypotheticals hack me off, wherever they occur. If I survived a plane-crash hign in the Andes, would I eat the dead once the complementary peanuts had run out? Damn' right I would. I'd actually advocate stretching out the peanuts by eating the dead, thus balancing the diet. After all, we could be there for some time.

My life is a bit too staid to allow much chance of that.
 

Back
Top Bottom