Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So you agree with me: there are no nutrients that only land meat can give you, which you would not be healthy without.
Sure, there might be nutrients that only land meat can provide - but there is no evidence that any of those nutrients are essential for human life. All of the nutrients that are essential for human life, can be found in foods that do not fall into the category "land meat."
Anon, you wear me out with your neverending quest to be right. I was not arguing for or against meat--simply pointing out that there is much we still don't know about many of the nutrients in our food and that meat and dairy (grassfed) are the foods highest in CLA, which is a nutrient that many people have never even heard of.
I actually take a pretty balanced view of vegetarianism but I think the stricter you get, the more careful you need to be to get your nutrients. Also, just b/c there is no evidence that we need a nutrient does not mean we don't need that nutrient--20 years ago there was no evidence that we need phytochemicals either, but the studies are rolling in and it looks to be a good bet that we do need them. My grandma didn't need a study though--she knew that veggies out of the garden, milk fresh from the cow, and beef roast are good for you. She probably didn't stop to think that a vegetarian diet could be good for you too and I doubt she knew where to buy mushrooms 50 years ago.
Anon, you wear me out with your neverending quest to be right. I was not arguing for or against meat--simply pointing out that there is much we still don't know about many of the nutrients in our food and that meat and dairy (grassfed) are the foods highest in CLA, which is a nutrient that many people have never even heard of.
I actually take a pretty balanced view of vegetarianism but I think the stricter you get, the more careful you need to be to get your nutrients. Also, just b/c there is no evidence that we need a nutrient does not mean we don't need that nutrient--20 years ago there was no evidence that we need phytochemicals either, but the studies are rolling in and it looks to be a good bet that we do need them. My grandma didn't need a study though--she knew that veggies out of the garden, milk fresh from the cow, and beef roast are good for you. She probably didn't stop to think that a vegetarian diet could be good for you too and I doubt she knew where to buy mushrooms 50 years ago.
But that has nothing - at all - to do with the thread topic. Start another one about the types of nutrients found in meat, or about CLA in particular if it interests you. THIS topic (since you obviously missed it the last few times it was pointed out to you) is:
What nutrients can only land meat give you, and can you be healthy without it?
But that has nothing - at all - to do with the thread topic. Start another one about the types of nutrients found in meat, or about CLA in particular if it interests you. THIS topic (since you obviously missed it the last few times it was pointed out to you) is:
What nutrients can only land meat give you, and can you be healthy without it?
Anon. While I did not answer the original question, I was adding information that was pertinent to the topic. Last I checked, the forum rules were not so stringent that my type of input would not be allowed, but if you beg to differ you may take it up with the mods. I am not going to be intimidated by your rudeness, and you are not going to tell me what I may or may not post on here.
Given the information that we know for sure now, you're right. My point to anon was that there is so much we don't know yet and that's why I told her about the mushrooms and celery being thought at one time to have no nutrition. Now, of course, we know better.
I'm not aware of any period where they thought that mushrooms and celery had no nutritional value.
I'm not going to throw random facts out there or quote any doctors or nutritionists.......I'll just speak from personal experience. I was a vegan for 10 years. From age 24 - 34, I ate absolutely NO animal products.......None. During that time, I worked as a concrete carpenter 10 - 12 (or more hours a day) of beating my body to hell. Sun, rain, snow mud, we worked in every condition imaginable, moving thousands of pounds of equipment a day for mostly 6 days a week. It was one of the most grueling jobs you can possibly imagine. Yet at 6' 180 lbs. I was in the greatest shape of my life. A living example of vegan health, the exact opposite of those "pasty hippies" that most people think of when they think of vegetarians and vegans. The only supplements I took was a good multi vitamin and mineral, some vitamin C and a vitamin B complex. Anyone who says that you can't be healthy without animal or fish nutrients is full of crap
Vitamin C enhances absorption - so eating extra citrus fruit while also consuming more iron-rich non-meat foods will boost the absorption of the non-heme iron.
As you say - there's no evidence that vegetarians are any more deficient than meat-eaters. They appear to BOTH include equal deficiency among the demographics.
And so, you can't point to meat as being the common denominator in "why" both vegetarians and non-vegatarians are equally deficient in iron.
Tiykul chooses not to believe the facts when presented to him/her. There's really nothing more you can say, or demonstrate, there exists no common sense or practical application or just flat out logic that you can show or tell, that will convince him/her. It's sort of like trying to convince a KKK member that Jesus, assuming he existed at all, could not possibly have been a white guy with blue eyes.
UMMMMM, wut????
I was ATTEMPTING to point-out mainly 2 things, that is all.....not trying to espouse some magical ideology:
1. Heme-iron is better utilized by the human body when compared to non-heme iron.
2. I treated MY iron-deficient anemia most effectively via consumption of foods rich in heme-iron.
I was ATTEMPTING to point-out mainly 2 things, that is all.....not trying to espouse some magical ideology:
1. Heme-iron is better utilized by the human body when compared to non-heme iron.
2. I treated MY iron-deficient anemia most effectively via consumption of foods rich in heme-iron.
I agree with you and I know you are passionate about the science that bolsters your beliefs. Of course when people speak of 'red meat' they simply think only muscle meat, if you talk about organs, bone marrow etc., then you start introducing way more. Saturated animal fats are healthy and important in protein assimilation and overall health. Some of the healthiest tribes on this planet (Zulu and Inuit) ate diets very high in saturated animal fats, whale blubber dipped in seal oil anyone? And the science shows they were very healthy until they adopted the western diet (same goes for many Native American tribes).
No one is saying you are going to be worse off if you do not eat animal meats. If you get defensive about your diet, then your diet is taking over your life. Find something new to do.
1. Heme-iron is better utilized by the human body when compared to non-heme iron.
2. I treated MY iron-deficient anemia most effectively via consumption of foods rich in heme-iron.
Nobody denies #1. The question is whether this means that heme-iron is an essential nutrient and the answer to this, based on numerous studies on vegetarians, is no. People are able to meet their iron needs by just consuming non-heme iron.
And, again, nobody denies that eating foods rich in heme-iron can improve one's iron status. The question, again, is whether this is the only way to do so? Unless you attempted other eating patterns your experience doesn't say anything beyond the obvious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ7
Some of the healthiest tribes on this planet (Zulu and Inuit) ate diets very high in saturated animal fats, whale blubber dipped in seal oil anyone? And the science shows they were very healthy until they adopted the western diet (same goes for many Native American tribes).
The Inuit suffered from a number of health problems and were, as a result, by no means the "healthiest" people on the planet. The traditional Zulu diet consists of grains, beer, vegetables and some meat....its not a diet rich in saturated fat. The Inuit diet is very rich in omega-3 which seems to protect them, on some level, from some forms of cardiovascular disease but not all. For example, they had high rates of stroke.
The longest lived populations on the planet have diets that are low in saturated fat.
The Inuit suffered from a number of health problems and were, as a result, by no means the "healthiest" people on the planet. The traditional Zulu diet consists of grains, beer, vegetables and some meat....its not a diet rich in saturated fat. The Inuit diet is very rich in omega-3 which seems to protect them, on some level, from some forms of cardiovascular disease but not all. For example, they had high rates of stroke.
The longest lived populations on the planet have diets that are low in saturated fat.
These paid researchers in the field would suggest otherwise:
The Inuit paradox has been known for a long time now.
The "Inuit paradox" is that the Inuit appeared to not have high rates of heart disease despite a high fat diet......not that the Inuit were one of the "healthiest people". This paradox has been explained by their high intake of omega-3 fatty acids which are known to be somewhat protective of heart disease.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ7
Link to evidence for your above comment?
Inuit had high rates of stroke and probably didn't have low rates of heart disease:
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was not arguing for or against meat--simply pointing out that there is much we still don't know about many of the nutrients in our food and that meat and dairy (grassfed) are the foods highest in CLA, which is a nutrient that many people have never even heard of. 
