How much would vegetarianism benefit humanity?

[icerat]

Those targeted at vegans are all from algae-sources. Silk is the major producer of soy milk in the US, and they use only algal DHA, as does the manufacturer of the supplements I take.

But if someone were worried about DHA and couldn't find an alternative, they'd certainly have a better-than-usual argument for consuming at least some fish oil. There is such a thing as diminishing marginal utility in a vegan diet.

Yup, and the point with regard the OP is that at present it's simply not currently possible for a society as a whole to get enough DHA from a vegetarian (incl vegan) diet. I've never checked, but I'm pretty certain there's not even enough to cover just current vegetarians.

Actually there's some pretty good evidence that vegan's as a whole have lower IQ's than average, and I suspect it's due to a chronic lack of DHA. Vegetarians have similar problem's, but it seems to be mitigated by (a) the fact that people who become vegetarians may have higher IQs in the first place and (b) most meat eaters don't get enough either.

 

[mumblethrax]

Yup, and the point with regard the OP is that at present it's simply not currently possible for a society as a whole to get enough DHA from a vegetarian (incl vegan) diet. I've never checked, but I'm pretty certain there's not even enough to cover just current vegetarians.

The fact that we'd have to adapt to being a vegetarian society is hardly damning of the argument for becoming a vegetarian society. It only means that we'd...have to adapt?

Since there's absolutely no way that we'd all go vegetarian or vegan overnight, it's not really worth mentioning.

Actually there's some pretty good evidence that vegan's as a whole have lower IQ's than average [...]

No, there isn't.

 

[Lonewulf]

Societies change over time?

Naw, not possible.

I'd like to see this evidence of lower IQ, please.

 

[icerat]

The fact that we'd have to adapt to being a vegetarian society is hardly damning of the argument for becoming a vegetarian society. It only means that we'd...have to adapt?

Well I for one am not damning the idea, I'm fully supportive of it. It's just IMO it's not currently feasible for many people to do so and be optimally healthy. Note that as I mentioned before vegetarians tend to be healthier than meat eaters, but that doesn't mean they're optimally healthy.

Since there's absolutely no way that we'd all go vegetarian or vegan overnight, it's not really worth mentioning.

That's a bit lacking in foresight. Given it's a fairly predictable problem, I think it's worth mentioning and working towards a solution, rather than just pretending it doesn't exist.

I'd like to see this evidence of lower IQ, please.

Here's one study I think some of her discussion is off-track, but that doesn't negate the findings.

 

[Lonewulf]

EDIT: Wait, what?

The study you linked to says nothing about lower IQ in vegans. Its only conclusion was:

Conclusion Higher scores for IQ in childhood are associated with an increased likelihood of being a vegetarian as an adult.

It compared with "non-vegetarians", but I take that to mean "those that eat meat", not "vegans".

 

[Prometheus]

Why do you think you get intense pleasure from killing?

I would guess that it's probably an evolutionary adaptation. Hunter/gatherer societies would value members who do not require starvation in order to be motivated to go and hunt, and bring back more than they need for themselves personally. I'd be very surpised if this adaptation is not widespread in the human population, even if socialization and obsolescence has buried it.

Hmm... maybe I wasn't clear enough, because that's not what I meant. I was trying to say I think it's strange that here, on these forums, some posters who seem superbly adequate in critical thinking in various other subjects seem to lack that skill when it comes to discussing their diet. And that here, on these forums, it seems to be only the 'meat-defenders' who are behaving this way. Of course, if there were more vegetarian or vegan posters, it might well be we'd see the same kind of conduct from some of them. In the real world I know fanatics on both sides. It's only these forums I'm wondering about. Does this clear my POW?

Also, I think 'enjoyment as part of a rational assessment of the value of certain choices' (regarding diet or anything else) doesn't necessarily mean an incapability to rationally think and discuss the topic from other points of view than that of your own enjoyment. Do you agree?

Thank you for the clarification. I had misunderstood you. We are in agreement.

 

[mumblethrax]

Well I for one am not damning the idea, I'm fully supportive of it. It's just IMO it's not currently feasible for many people to do so and be optimally healthy. Note that as I mentioned before vegetarians tend to be healthier than meat eaters, but that doesn't mean they're optimally healthy.

I guess that sounds a lot like letting the perfect (or the optimal) be the enemy of the good to me. If we can do this while improving the health of the great bulk of people, why is it relevant that not all of them will be optimally healthy?

That's a bit lacking in foresight. Given it's a fairly predictable problem, I think it's worth mentioning and working towards a solution, rather than just pretending it doesn't exist.

I don't think it is. I think food producers are more than capable of scaling up production in response to anticipated growth in demand without me telling them to. That's a predictable response to a predictable problem, so I don't see the relevance to the argument in favor of a vegetarian society. I mean, we probably don't have enough plant protein graded for human consumption at the moment, either, but I'm quite sure that would scale up, too.

Here's one study I think some of her discussion is off-track, but that doesn't negate the findings.

What does negate any conclusion with regard to veganism is that there were only nine vegans in the sample--not enough to make a reliable statement about the IQ of vegans in general. The authors caution against doing just that, but unfortunately that proviso didn't survive subsequent reportage when the findings were announced.

 

[icerat]

EDIT: Wait, what?

The study you linked to says nothing about lower IQ in vegans. Its only conclusion was:

Sometimes you have to read more than just the abstract

On average, vegans had a childhood IQ score that was nearly 10 points lower than other vegetarians: mean (SD) IQ score 95.1 (14.8) in vegans compared with 104.8 (14.1) in other vegetarians (P = 0.04),

Reading the whole thing again (it's been a while) I'll retract the "pretty good" adjective I used with "evidence" though. A very small sample of vegans in the cohort (9). There's also of course the causality issue. I have read some other studies but damned if I can find them now

In any case, the influence of DHA on cognitive functioning is well established and there's little doubt that significant amounts of DHA are difficult to obtain in a vegan diet or even wholly vegetarian diet. It's also interesting to note that in the study I cited more than a third of the self-reported vegetarians admitted to occasionally eating fish and chicken.

 

[icerat]

I guess that sounds a lot like letting the perfect (or the optimal) be the enemy of the good to me. If we can do this while improving the health of the great bulk of people, why is it relevant that not all of them will be optimally healthy?

You're over analysing what I said. My partner and son are vegetarian. I'm (mostly) vegetarian. I eat meat or haem-iron supplements occasionally because of iron problems, as well as fish oil supplements.

All I stated was that an optimal diet (non-supplemented) is virtually impossible to obtain without animal sources, primarily fish. That's just a reality.

I don't think it is. I think food producers are more than capable of scaling up production in response to anticipated growth in demand without me telling them to.

From what I understand it's a little more complicated than that, requiring some technical advancements in order to be able to scale up. I've little doubt they can be solved eventually, nevertheless that's the current situation.

That's a predictable response to a predictable problem, so I don't see the relevance to the argument in favor of a vegetarian society. I mean, we probably don't have enough plant protein graded for human consumption at the moment, either, but I'm quite sure that would scale up, too.

I'm not aware of any technical roadblocks in regard vegetarian protein sources. I'm sure the Quorn folk would love the demand . Again, the DHA issue is not an argument for or against a vegetarian society, it's simply an issue that needs addressing.

What does negate any conclusion with regard to veganism is that there were only nine vegans in the sample--not enough to make a reliable statement about the IQ of vegans in general. The authors caution against doing just that, but unfortunately that proviso didn't survive subsequent reportage when the findings were announced.

Yup, as I mentioned above, writing at the same time as you. Still, the fact remains it's difficult to get sufficient DHA on a vegan or truly vegetarian diet.

 

[Lonewulf]

I remain unconvinced, if that's all you really have.

 

[mumblethrax]

You're over analysing what I said. My partner and son are vegetarian. I'm (mostly) vegetarian. I eat meat or haem-iron supplements occasionally because of iron problems, as well as fish oil supplements.

All I stated was that an optimal diet (non-supplemented) is virtually impossible to obtain without animal sources, primarily fish. That's just a reality.

I might be misreading you, and if I am then I apologize. But I don't see that there's much of a distinction in principle between a supplemented and a non-supplemented diet, yet I frequently see the distinction made in these discussions as if it weighed against a vegan or vegetarian diet. Some people supplement with fish, I supplement with algae. So what?

From what I understand it's a little more complicated than that, requiring some technical advancements in order to be able to scale up. I've little doubt they can be solved eventually, nevertheless that's the current situation.

I'll take your word for it. In any case, it seems we both agree that this is a hurdle that is likely to be overcome.

Yup, as I mentioned above, writing at the same time as you. Still, the fact remains it's difficult to get sufficient DHA on a vegan or truly vegetarian diet.

If we modify that to say that it's something we need to be aware of, rather than a difficulty, I'm on board. My reason for responding here is that I just don't see it as difficult to schlep down to the corner market to buy some fortified soy milk to pour over my cornflakes in the morning, or to remember to take a pill at lunch. I don't disagree that it's easier not to be vegan, I just don't think that hard (certainly not 'virtually impossible'), and it becomes a lot easier as society adapts to a significant population of vegetarians and vegans. For example, we can see that producers have fortified exactly those foods we are most likely to eat with exactly those nutrients we are most likely to miss out on.

 

[icerat]

If we modify that to say that it's something we need to be aware of, rather than a difficulty, I'm on board. My reason for responding here is that I just don't see it as difficult to schlep down to the corner market to buy some fortified soy milk to pour over my cornflakes in the morning, or to remember to take a pill at lunch. I don't disagree that it's easier not to be vegan, I just don't think that hard (certainly not 'virtually impossible'), and it becomes a lot easier as society adapts to a significant population of vegetarians and vegans. For example, we can see that producers have fortified exactly those foods we are most likely to eat with exactly those nutrients we are most likely to miss out on.

I think the difference is (a) I'm looking beyond just the individual and (b) when I'm talking about diet I'm talking about without supplements.

 

[icerat]

I remain unconvinced, if that's all you really have.

ahhh ... but that's cause your deficient in DHA and can't understand what I'm saying!

Seriously though, for any given individual they're dumber without DHA than with DHA. The rest follows logically.

 

[Lonewulf]

ahhh ... but that's cause your deficient in DHA and can't understand what I'm saying!

I'm not vegan.

I've also encountered this kind of argument before, but in seriousness and without a smiley, based on age.

Seriously though, for any given individual they're dumber without DHA than with DHA. The rest follows logically.

Fine. Yet all you have to show that vegans are lacking in DHA is faulty statistics already debunked.

You also seem to ignore that it is possible to have algae-derived DHA, thus ignoring that there are DHA supplements available.

Sorry, but fail. Come back when you have something.

 

[Herzblut]

Seriously though, for any given individual they're dumber without DHA than with DHA. The rest follows logically.

Does that relate somehow to being a breast-fed child, or not? Is breast-feeding compliant to vegetarian/vegan ideologies at all?

 

[Lonewulf]

I don't see why breast feeding wouldn't be. If vegans didn't like the idea of breast feeding because of their ideology, I think that there might have been a low IQ before the DHA thing.

 

[Herzblut]

I don't see why breast feeding wouldn't be. If vegans didn't like the idea of breast feeding because of their ideology, I think that there might have been a low IQ before the DHA thing.

OK. But milk isn't actually "vegan" by all standards, is it?

 

[Lonewulf]

Mother's milk != cow's milk. The reasons for refusing to drink cow's milk (or milk produced by any other animal) does not apply to drinking mother's milk.

 

[Herzblut]

Mother's milk != cow's milk. The reasons for refusing to drink cow's milk (or milk produced by any other animal) does not apply to drinking mother's milk.

OK. And the mother should be following vegetarian/vegan diats while breast feeding?

 

[leftysergeant]

OK. But milk isn't actually "vegan" by all standards, is it?

It is the way that nature designed us. Cow's milk is not really all that good for humans, really. Too high in fat for one thing.

The ethical concern of veganism is not to enslave or kill an animal for the benefit of humans. A lactating woman is not going to be very comfortable if she is not breast feeding her baby. I have heard that it is really quite pleasurable, in fact. Breast feeding longer than the American standard may even be better, developmentally, for the child.