A 2023 study suggests that following a healthy vegan diet may improve cardiometabolic risk factors (such as LDL cholesterol and weight) more than eating even a healthy omnivorous diet. The research hypothesis assumed that biochemical changes in the body contribute to the health benefits of vegetarians. A review of 12 studies found that vegetarians have better diet quality results than omnivores, and among vegetarians, vegans had better health markers compared to omnivores.
A joint analysis of five prospective studies including 76,172 individuals showed a lower CHD mortality in vegetarians than in omnivores, with 34 less in lacto-ovo diets. Participants with a vegan diet had significantly lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, insulin, and body weight, all of which are associated with improved cardiovascular health.
Polish vegetarians exhibit similar health statuses and tend towards better health than omnivores due to their adequate body composition. Omnivores are less likely to be deficient in total calories, Vitamin B12, iron, and zinc than their vegetarian counterparts. A new report found that those who ate a healthy vegan diet had better health markers compared to those who ate an omnivorous diet.
In general, vegan and vegetarian diets tend to be healthier simply because there is a regular intake of fruits and vegetables. However, vegans must be careful to get enough protein with enough variety of amino acids. Twins who ate a vegan diet for two months had better cardiometabolic health than their identical siblings who ate an omnivorous diet.
In conclusion, vegetarian diets have been shown to have health benefits, including a lower risk of death from ischemic heart disease, coronary heart disease, and other diseases.
📹 Are Vegetarians Healthier than Omnivores? A Soho Forum Debate
Reason is the planet’s leading source of news, politics, and culture from a libertarian perspective. Go to reason.com for a point of …
Is Arnold Schwarzenegger vegan?
Arnold Schwarzenegger adheres to an 80-vegetarian diet, which has been demonstrated to reduce his cholesterol levels. His diet primarily consists of eggs, salmon, chicken, veggie burgers, and protein shakes, which provide him with the necessary protein. In terms of occasional indulgences, he partakes in steak, hamburgers, and Austrian wiener schnitzel. By registering, you indicate your consent to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, which you may withdraw at any time.
Which is healthier carnivore or vegetarian?
Vegans and meat eaters have no significant differences in total cardiovascular disease, but there may be a lower risk of ischaemic heart disease and possibly a higher risk of stroke in vegans. There is no evidence of a difference in life expectancy. Well-chosen vegan diets provide adequate nutrition, and long-term health is broadly similar to that of comparable people who eat moderate amounts of meat and follow nutritional guidelines for good health.
The strongest evidence is for processed meat, with the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) concluding that it has a causal effect on the risk for colorectal cancer. The main study used by IARC showed an increase in risk for colorectal cancer of 18 for every 50 gram portion of processed meat eaten daily. This suggests that average lifetime risk for colorectal cancer in the UK would rise from about 1 in 17 for people with a low intake of processed meat to about 1 in 14 for people with a 50 gram per day higher intake – about two rashers of bacon.
Will I be healthier as a vegetarian?
Vegetarian diets are gaining popularity due to health benefits such as reducing heart disease, diabetes, and some cancers. However, some diets may be too heavy on processed foods with high calories, sugar, fat, and salt, and may not include enough fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and nutrient-rich foods. A vegetarian diet can meet the needs of people of all ages, pregnant or breastfeeding, and requires awareness of nutritional needs to plan a suitable diet.
Do vegans live longer than carnivores?
Vegan diets have been linked to a reduction in the risk of chronic health conditions such as heart disease, type 2 diabetes, certain types of cancer, and obesity. This suggests that vegans may live longer due to their potential disease prevention benefits. However, more research is needed to definitively conclude that vegans live longer than non-vegans. A study from the JAMA Internal Medicine Journal found that vegans have a 9 lower risk of death from all causes compared to omnivores, with another suggesting up to 12.
However, a study from the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that while veganism can lower rates of certain chronic diseases, it was inconclusive as to whether this translated to an impact on mortality.
Is Leo DiCaprio A vegan?
Leonardo DiCaprio, an early investor in Beyond Meat, has been encouraging his millions of followers to switch to plant-based alternatives and cell-cultivated leather. However, it remains unclear whether he personally adheres to a vegan lifestyle. His plant-based investments demonstrate his support for veganism for its environmental benefits. DiCaprio has invested in numerous documentaries and vegan companies, demonstrating his commitment to environmental conservation. Despite not confirming his vegan status, his efforts demonstrate his support for the environment.
Is a vegetarian diet healthier than omnivores?
A study found that vegan diets significantly lower LDL cholesterol levels, insulin levels, and lost an average of 4. 2 pounds compared to omnivore diets after eight weeks. This supports previous studies showing that plant-based diets improve heart health. Harvard Health Publishing provides access to archived content, but should never replace direct medical advice from a doctor or other qualified clinician. The study emphasizes the importance of maintaining a healthy lifestyle to maintain overall health.
Are vegetarians really healthier than meat-eaters?
Vegetarian diets are known for their low calorie content, lower saturated fat and cholesterol levels, and higher levels of fiber, potassium, and vitamin C. They are also associated with lower cancer rates, lower risk of heart disease, and lower LDL cholesterol levels. However, it is unclear whether these health
benefits are due to plant-based eating or the healthy lifestyle of most vegetarians. Vegetarians are generally more physically active and have healthier habits than non-vegetarians, and they typically have a higher socioeconomic status.
To understand the effects of diet, large, controlled studies are needed, such as one at Loma Linda University in California, where Cardiologist Dr. Gary Fraser is leading an NIH-funded team to analyze data on 96, 000 Seventh-day Adventists.
Are meat eaters happier than vegetarians?
A recent study indicates a correlation between meat-free diets and poorer mental health, with meat eaters reporting lower rates of depression and anxiety compared to vegans and vegetarians. However, this doesn’t imply that abstaining from meat causes depression or anxiety. To access personalized feeds, sign up and accept Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Are vegans happier than omnivores?
A study by Tracking Happiness found that vegans are happier and more accepted than meat-eaters. The survey surveyed 11, 537 people from the United States, grouped into four categories: vegan, vegetarian, pescatarian, and meat-eater. The average happiness rating was 6. 9, with vegans scoring 7% higher. The study also found that happier individuals are more likely to adopt a plant-based diet in the future. Of the nearly 9, 000 meat-eaters surveyed, those with higher happiness ratings were more likely to adopt a plant-based diet.
Additionally, vegans are more likely to stay happy. The study also explored the attitudes towards and acceptance of veganism and the motives for going vegan. Less than 15% of meat-eaters had a negative opinion of vegans, and the average meat-eater thought positively of vegans (3. 44 on a scale of 1 to 5).
Who is healthier, vegetarian or nonvegetarian?
Vegetarian and non-vegetarian diets have been a topic of debate for years, with some arguing that meat products are high in saturated fats, increasing the risk of heart diseases. Non-vegetarian diets, on the other hand, have been linked to shorter lifespans, increased vulnerability to chronic diseases, and a higher risk of developing diabetes, heart diseases, and hypertension. However, both diets offer opportunities for healthy living. Vegetarian diets focus on a variety of plant-based foods, milk, and dairy, while avoiding meat and animal products.
This diet also provides a healthier lifestyle, as it is a more balanced approach to nutrition. The debate surrounding the benefits and cons of both diets is ongoing, but it is important to consider both factors when deciding on a diet.
Is veganism actually healthy?
Vegan diets can fulfill all the nutritional requirements needed for good health, including vitamin B12 and omega-3 fatty acids. However, vegans must ensure they consume adequate portions of these foods and avoid restricting their diets to foods grown on low selenium levels. Vegan diets can be adequate for all human beings, including children, as long as they are high in energy density, easy to digest, and not excessive in fiber.
Well-planned vegan diets may be healthier than other diets, but no studies exist where omnivores share similar genetic profiles, lifestyle patterns, and social and environmental factors with a significant number of vegans. A meta-analysis of seven prospective cohort studies found that all-cause mortality was 9 lower among vegetarians.
Evidence suggests that people who consume large quantities of fruits and vegetables, which are more prominent in vegan diets, live longer than those who do not do so. A Finnish study of 2, 641 men aged between 42 and 60 found that those within the highest fifth for intake of fruits (including berries) and vegetables had a relative risk for all-cause death that was 34 lower than that of those in the lowest fifth.
Several other studies found a positive association between diets that are relatively high in the consumption of fruits and vegetables, such as the traditional Mediterranean diet of people living in Pioppi (Italy) up to about four decades ago, and a reduction in mortality.
As diets that include a large proportion of fruits and vegetables have been shown to be healthier than diets that include relatively few of these foods, it has been estimated that a large number of premature deaths could be prevented amongst populations that consume large quantities of animal products by increasing the consumption of plant foods.
📹 The Biggest Lie About Veganism
Are vegans less healthy than meat eaters? And is veganism really that much better for the environment and planet? More on our …
The best way to decide the winner, is to try both diets.. I eat fatty meat, i feel good, strong and full. I eat vegetables (Specifically green) and fruit, i feel bloating pain, cramps, I’m hungry have to eat all the time. Based on my own experience, Nina made me better, Kartz made me fart.. Nina won!!!
His oxygen comparison for the anti nutrient question is absolutely ridiculous. We have NO OTHER CHOICE but to breathe oxygen to survive. We DO have other choices than eating nothing but plants foods for nutrients 🤦♀️ very basic stuff. How did this dude even get a doctors degree? He literally ended off the answer with “who gives a damn?!” What the hell kind of answer is that?!
If eating meat/dairy is so bad, then why, after switching from whole grain fresh veg and no processed food, to low carb high fat ketogenic diet, did my health improve? 58 y/o female…allergies-gone. Arthritis-gone. Non alcoholic fatty liver disease-gone. Type II diabetes-gone. Sleep better. Energy better. Running 6 miles a day. So, I wasn’t eating crap before the switch and the changes occurred after.
When you show up to a public debate, you have already agreed to the proposition. To stand up there and whine about it is like the undergraduate who didn’t read the syllabus, then tries to wheedle extra points on the exam because she ‘tried really hard’. Katz is defending the affirmative position that science shows veganism/vegetarianism to be a superior diet. His bullshit statement that Teicholz has to ‘prove there is no evidence’ is shifting the burden of proof. She has already put forward the statements from major dietary guideline committees, whose members are known to be veggie-friendly but who could find no high quality scientific data comparable to traditional meaty diets. Katz loses the debate automatically if he can’t show quality evidence. This is a debate on the science, not on which diet makes Katz happy. And, he’s an asshole, which makes him a loser as a human as well as a scientific fraud.
IMO, when Katz in his conclusion raised the environmental impact argument, which he agreed to not bring up as part of this debate, he should have been disqualified. Not allowing Teicholz any opportunity to respond to that claim was unfair, and raising arguments they’d agreed to leave out indicates Katz’s dishonesty as I see it.
Love Nina ! she was a vegetarian for twenty years before studying the science behind the food we eat. Watch her other articles on red meat, vegetable oils and the history of why we have the standard American diet pushed on us. I’m enjoying my ribeye while she crushes that little insignificant vegan twerp.
David Katz is sleazy as hell. His answer to the anti-nutrients question was so absurd, as was his response to his conflicts of interests and so many others. I found this debate disappointing. Teicholz seems earnest and interested in the science, whereas Katz is interested in pushing his agenda. I’d like to see Teicholz debate a person with integrity. Also, I guess I had Mark Bittman all wrong. I used to really like him until perusal this.
Bravo to Nina Teichholz for showing the flaws in nutritional science, and how selective use of unreliable data to generate guidelines has caused enormous harm. It seemed to me that David Katz did not even try to refute Ms. Teichholz. Despite his enormous arrogance and self-importance, he seemed defeated. His presentation was lazy and unconvincing. I think he is seeing how his whole life’s work is being dismantled by the tenacity of people like Ms. Teichholz who are showing that entire careers have been based on biases, wishful thinking, and industry funding.
The Golestan Dairy Food Intake Study was reported in 2017 in the J. of Epidemiology. It followed more than 42,000 people in Iran for 11 years eating dairy. Was funded by The National Cancer Institute, the NIH, several universities, including Harvard and an international cancer research org. Result was that people eating dairy, including full fat dairy, had a significantly lower all cause mortality, and a 28% reduction in cardiovascular disease mortality. Cheese and yogurt eaters had significant reductions in all cause mortality. People in the highest quintile had the most benefits! There was no increase in cancer.
We are sicker now than at anytime in our history. In the early 1900s heart disease was so rare, it’s our biggest killer now. Back then our consumption of fats and proteins were much higher. Since then carbs and seed oils have massively increased. All carbs turn into sugar. Fact. Humans do not need any carbs. Fats and proteins are not the issue. Its plants that are the reason we are so sick
This gentleman is very good at debating and defending lies and mis-Information. He talks in circles. He lost me when Nina quoted the HORRIBLE things he said about her….how is that called for in the professional field ?? Oh, it is not. When people are wrong they attack….he showed his true colors and his zero tolerance for professionalism before opening his mouth. His constant whining about not getting a fair shake at the debate was incredibly childish.
Saying that if you take the SAD you would be better off adding more plants than more meats is a nonsense argument. The whole point is to RESTRICT harmful foods first and then ask which is more beneficial plant or animal. Katz is trying to pull a sleight of hand using the SAD as his control group rather than a predominantly animal based diet. That’s why he keeps going back to defining and parsing the resolution. He doesn’t want to debate against an animal based diet; he only wants to pull apart the SAD. weak.
after 17 years of vegetarianism(of course i adopted no fat or the lowest amount possible), i conclude that suffering is no longer an option.First of all I was never satisfied than IBS,allergies,constant sugar cravings, chocolate dependency, snaking or i would call it CONSTANT EATING,were part of my daily routine.As soon I introduced fat everything changed,all of the above disappear,( I always intended to have 2 or 3 meals but was not possible because of the carbs)AND I CAN HAVE AN INTERMITTENT FAST BETWEEN 14-20 HOURS………so easy to achieve that! I really have major questions regarding doctors and the so called science of nutrition…………………………… so much bs……………………….just follow the money
How many vegan Hunter-gatherers exist in the know history of the world? Not a single one, being omnivore/eating whatever you got access to seems to be working fine for millions of years. Veganism is only possible due to globalisation and only possible for the wealthy, if you think the poorer countries get to choose what they eat, you’re out of your mind. It’s hilarious how people pass veganism as a lifechoice, it’s more of a luxury some choose. Other major flaw with veganism: some people just can’t handle such a diet, that diet will kill a lot of people (very slowly)
As a vegan my adult daughter’s hair fell out and experienced depression and anxiety problems. She is healthy now eating no carbs!!! As a meat and green veggie eater I was extremely healthy and fit, once I bought into the low fat, high carb, veggie and fruit diet and ate that way for years, I became overweight with extreme cardiovascular issues. I am IF and back to eating grass fed meats, seafood and green leafy veggies and I am almost off all my meds and losing weight!
What Katz doesn’t understand or won’t acknowledge is… there is no evidence that lowering cholesterol reduces heart disease or the risk of atherosclerosis. That’s because the diet-heart hypothesis is not only unproven, but actually a myth, a medical myth like salt causing high blood pressure. General comment: Katz is a clown and buffoon. His glibness and juvenile attempts at humor belies a form of pyschopathy that is everything to do with controlling and manipulating people and nothing to do with scientific rigor or understanding of data. If anyone doubts these observations, go to the end of the article, Katz’s final comments. He uses exactly the same tactics Donald Trump does. Says he’s not going to talk about something, then mentions specifically what he’s not going to talk about. This is what psychopaths do. And they get a laugh out of it. Glib manipulation of people. Deception, dishonesty, doing the opposite of what you’ve just said.
Our family went vegetarian for 2 years when we all started getting sickly and worn out. We decided to eat meat only on Sundays. But everyone felt so satisfied on Sundays that we cooked extra so we could have meat on Mondays as well. Then on Tuesdays…. and that was the end of that nonsense. Years later some of the kids came to the Keto diet and informed the rest. Now every one of us is Keto/carni and we are all super healthy and have plenty of energy.
I was diagnosed T2D just about 6 months ago. Before that, and being native Nordic I ate mainly based on Nordic Diet. After my diagnosis I figured out, if my diet was to blame, then I just switch off my previous one and try some new but not medicines. Soon I learned more about LCHF, and since then my HgA1c dropped from 7.9% to 5.5% and my weight from 88kg to 81 kg… don’t feel hungry, my energy level is good, and more importantly I don’t fight with my wife anymore…😂
Actually i think we would be better off if there wus nothing on the shelf in the farmacy…giving we avoid all the processed junk!!! I got to the edge of dementia following a plant based (fruits and vegetables and wholegrains) low fat diet for 6 years, trying to reverse my diabetis… switched to low carb high natural animal fats, got better, now on carnivor and am the healthiest at 43 years than i ever was.
As a scientist myself, I have to say that Dr Katz seems to have a habit of taking shortcuts in his reasoning. It is hard to watch him mascarade heuristics and intuitions as scientific evidence… Nina, on the other hand, presented information in a scientifically rigorous way without trying to manipulate the audience.
This guy finally admits that US consumption of plant foods is up, and consumption of animal foods is down. He was dishonest about that fact at first. Of course, the question then becomes, “if we are eating more plants and less animal foods, then why is heart disease, cancer, diabetes and almost very other disease going up up up?”
If you remove the highly processed polyunsaturated seed oils and refined carbs from sugar and flours, and other junk food ingredients, so that both a plant based or omnivore diet are essentially old fashioned whole food diets, then either diet will be significantly better for your health than a standard American diet. These guys really have a lot more in common than it would seem. Where I side with Nina is that humans and other animals will over eat if the proportion of protein is too low in their diet (obesity); and that you can’t get your recommended nutrients within your calorie budget from a plant based diet. From an environmental standpoint I think both vegetable and animal farming should be subsided for sustainable or regenerative farming principles as opposed to subsidies for large scale commercial enterprises that grow maize, wheat, soy, sugar beets etc which get turned into the refined carbohydrate foods that are bad for us. This kind of farming is also detrimental to biodiversity.
My son and his wife went vegan for a few months. They were constantly hungry, and they passed gas all the time, too. They broke their veganism at a steak house where they ordered the biggest steak they could get. They LOVED it. LOL BTW, the way Katz blew through all those “studies” without talking about any of the factors that might have influenced the results was pretty pathetic. Sorry, but I can’t imagine prehistoric man who ate mostly animals and few vegetables and even fewer fruits for millions of years would have died out on that diet. We are here. That proves enough for me. Plus, vegan diets are always full of seed oils, which are hideous for our health.
He told me to look up the Lyon heart diet study so I did (I’m an actual researcher). It is about a Mediterranean diet and not about meat or dairy consumption at all. (Abstract from the study follows) The Lyon Diet Heart Study is a randomized secondary prevention trial aimed at testing whether a Mediterranean-type diet may reduce the rate of recurrence after a first myocardial infarction. An intermediate analysis showed a striking protective effect after 27 months of follow-up. This report presents results of an extended follow-up (with a mean of 46 months per patient) and deals with the relationships of dietary patterns and traditional risk factors with recurrence.
Nina had more overall credibility in my opinion. Neither presenter seemed to mention that individual genetic variations in humans makes one diet for all basically irrelevant. There are some people who benefit more from vegan/vegetarian diet, and some individuals benefit more from an omnivore diet. Journalist vs MD. Journalist wins in my opinion.
Well … now I’m more confused than ever. We humans just want to eat a diet that improves our health, physically and mentally, and not do the opposite. I think we just need to focus on getting rid of all the processed foods & oils, processed fast food, and sugars. When I was young, 50’s & 60’, everyone ate animal products, vegetables with some occasional fruits, most people were active and fairly healthy. There wasn’t a very high percentage of overweight or obese people either. As I remember that all showed up with fast, processed and frozen foods. Most eating was in moderation.
He can’t even look her in the eye. Any body language experts passing through? The way he evaded all her direct challenges + his inability to look right at her = suspicious, even to layperson. Also, important to note is perhaps what he said halfway into the debate. If someone eats too little saturated fat they will benefit from adding saturated fat, and if someone eats too much saturated fat, they will be negatively impacted by adding saturated fat. Well, then blanket recommendations for “Americans” or “westerners” to reduce animal product intake is not precise enough to constitute sound dietary advice because this assumes that every individual in the population referred to eats an amount of saturated fat equivalent to the average person’s intake in that population. Regardless, the DIAAS of plant protein is less than half of animal protein, and the amino acid compsition of plants is insufficient to facilitate optimal tissue growth for children or avid exercisers. Vits like B6, B12, D3, and K2; minerals like iodine, zinc, and iron; amino acids and amino-like structures such as carnitine and taurine; and essential fatty acids such as DHA cannot be obtained or cannot be obtained in sufficient quantities from vegan or vegetarian diets. So while plant-only diets can be useful for specific temporary interventions, eventually the same individuals will have to add back animal products into their diet to prevent or undo other problems.
I was vegetarian for six years. Junk food veg but veg none the less. Terrible health. Switched to mostly carnivore with dairy and nuts and broccoli a week ago. Dr. Katz came in sounding like a victim, did not care for his arguments much after that. It sounded like he bullied her and then wants to be a victim. Not cool sir.
Disregarding the ” I’m a doctor so believe what I say” delivery, Dr. Katz contradicts himself at least twice. He says that there is no increase in consumption of fruits and vegs, and then he admits that there is when Nina corrects him. Also, the study about older people with higher LDL living longer- he says that illness lowers LDL, and that vegan diet lowers LDL like that’s a good thing. IF it’s lowered by illness, isn’t trying to live with low cholesterol like an illness? He didn’t convince me, but he did make me want to read every single piece of evidence that says meat is bad for me.
Anyone who understands the Randle Cycle knows a vegan diet will be healthier than a omnivore diet. But so is a carnivour diet. The difference is the carnivour diet does not promote diabeties or cardiovascular diesese, nor does it contain the carcinogens oxolets ect plants contain. Mixing fats and sugars is the elephant in the room most of these “clever” people are unaware of or choose to ignore.
At the 23:50 mark the doctor says that he doesn’t believe that an optimal vegan diet is demonstrably better than an optimal Mediterranean diet. So…what is this all about? I stopped the article to write this note so I haven’t listened to the arguments yet but the doctor seems to have already conceded but I assume (since I haven’t watched the article past the 23:50 mark) he then goes on to argue that veganism is healthier in spite of his opening statement therefore to some small extent he is arguing against himself.
I have eaten vegetarian-Mediterranean for 6 years, it has dramatically worsened my chronic pathology bringing me almost to disability, thanks to keto the inflammation has halved, the disease has regressed and under control and my cholesterol and all the parameters have returned perfectly, drastically lowering my cardiovascular risk. I came back to live.
What an interesting debate format…. the person that shifts opinion the most wins, not the fundamental acceptance or rejection of the motion. According to the moderator, Teicholz’s position was supported by a majority both before and after, and increased from about half to almost two thirds, whereas Katz could at best, after much debatemanship, only garner less than a third of the audience’s support. He is clearly the better debater in terms of technique – and he clearly thought about the details of the motion and applied his mind to it. But fancy debate techniques do not uncover the truth of a matter, they simply prove who’s more experienced at it. So Katz positioned himself cleverly in debating terms, and won on the basis of the rules of the game. Pity he’s just so smarmy with it. Teicholz’s position is far stronger in general, being founded on simpler and clearer arguments. And tackling the subject as she does, she seems to have a greater educational impact than Katz (who else is questioning the basis of epidemiology?). Of the two, she definitely seems to come at this with less conflict and baggage. And despite several attempts by Katz to needle her, she retained her composure really well.
Every month I see a study that finally, really, absolutely, irrefutably proves that diet X is superior to diet Y overturning all previous studies, until the next month when the preceding study is refuted with equal veracity. So I well and truly don’t know what diet is *healthier*. But I do know being an omnivore makes me much *happier*. When I was 19, I was a poor student and as a way to save money, I thought I could get much more food for my dollar if I essentially went vegan, save for the occasional glass of milk. Doing as much research as I could in the early internet days, I determined what my intake should be in terms of variety, calories and nutrients. As there was a market near, everything I bought and ate was fresh. Thus began an experiment in hell. For the months that followed, I had nearly constant headaches, weakness, irritability, insomnia and an over-all sense of malaise. I felt depressed and anxious until I couldn’t take it anymore. I broke down, walked to the nearest McDonalds and bought a couple cheese burgers. The sensation was as near to instant relief as possible. Over the next hour or two, I felt everything return to normal. I was sharper, friendlier, more alert, and most important of all; happier. I love salads, I love fruit smoothies, I love fresh strawberries and avocado and corn and all that good stuff. But my body doesn’t lie to me, and I would rather be happy with an imperfect diet, than miserable with a perfect one.
Here is a blatant example of the difference between someone who is genuinely searching for truth and someone who is only there to defend his own pocket. ‘let’s just stick to the motion’ as if anyone cared who wins a pedantic academic debate. Give me the truth any day but back it up with facts and science not just random observations and meaningless surveys… I entered the article open minded thinking vegans ‘may’ have the moral high ground and the best health card. By the end, I wanted to eat a steak!! Good job Nina
David Katz follow up to this debate: linkedin.com/pulse/science-power-tool-beware-its-misuse-david/ I won a debate this past week. I was pleased to win- despite a crowd mostly hostile to my position at the start, and frequent shifts by my opponent from both reason and the stipulated resolution to derisive innuendo and outright aspersions hurled at my character- because the ostensible topic, food and health, is of enormous importance. That topic is more than ample reason in its own right to weather the slings and arrows of iniquitous confrontation, and take one for the team. How we eat has implications for countless years in countless lives, countless life in countless years, and the fate of the planet.
I wonder if Dr. Katz realizes that he contradicts essentially his whole point about the RCTs that he had selected during his presentation. He rebutted Nina by saying RCTs are good evidence until we dont like who conducted the study. Then when asked a question about diet protocols for said studies, he said that the investigator can essentially dictate the outcome of a study by deciding on the diet protocols for each group. He said their is a shitwack of evidence, but a shitwack of shit is still shit.
Paleo and Keto people can still eat a plethora of veggies….but if its all about blood sugar. Fat and protein have minimal impact; but fruit and carbohydrates do indeed spike levels. Katz is paid by Hershey; Quaker Oats and Chobani which is all anyone needs to know. Trying to imagine Paleo man living off arugula salads and greek yogurt on corn flakes.
I think a lot of people are biased in these comments by what they want to be true. I love meat and I am biased towards seeing that it is healthy. However, frankly Dr. Katz provided much better evidence than Teicholz. He provided TONS of clinical trials showing plant based diets were healthier, and Teicholz’s only response was too basically say “well, maybe those aren’t good trials I’d have to look into them” which strikes me as a very weak response 1 and 2 hypocritical as she started the debate by citing those exact kind of studies as the ones she would trust. Further more, she insinuated that maybe he was misinterpreting their results with seems disingenuous to me given that he quoted directly from the studies, he did not ever summarize them. I am not saying he knocked her out of the park but the resolution simply called for him providing some rigorous evidence that plant based diets were healthier which he clearly did, and she had little to say about all of his evidence. I set my biases aside for this debate but most people in the comments section give me the impression that they went knowing they wanted one side to win and that’s how they interpreted the whole debate.
Amazing on the number of studies Dr Katz rattled off yet didn’t spend much (if any) time explaining methodologies of each of the numerous studies. Science is not about postulating your argument by drowning your counterpart in many studies without discussing them.. This is quite unproductive. Nina was well prepared for rebuttals, but Dr Katz did do a good job of reframing the topic to how many more studies prove his argument over Nina’s. Tough one. Still think Nina won.
1:15:00 Katz “we did a study and found no harm from eggs”…..so then avoiding eggs doesn’t make you healthier. And if eating eggs disqualifies you from being a vegetarian, then he proved Teicholz’s point. Katz references the Ornish study which had so many confounding factors. In the court of law, if you are caught in one falsehood, then you lose the case. 1:23:00 then Katz backtacks and says the Mediterrean Diet is healthier. I thought the title was “Are Vegetarians healthier than Omnivores” ? ?
Very good debate, but she did not convence me, because here I live in the Azores 50 years ago animal products was very limited, do to a regime government, people here eating from the gardens, no major health problems, 50 year later, less vegetables and more animal products available, every body is fat and sick.
Love this debate. With all do respect to Nina Telcholz, while I believe Nina is sincere but she is wrong on so many levels that I don’t even know where to begin. I will just focus on a few things she said that caught my attention. The two deaths from Dr. Ornish’s study, one died from overexerting during exercise and bringing his heart rate above that was recommended and the second died from returning to an animal based diet. I don’t know where she got the information that vegans need supplements beyond B12. Folate, vitamin C, vitamin E and iron are found in plant foods. The institute of medicine recommends that all people over 50 years of age vegan or omnivore take B12. B12 is made by bacteria! I’ve been a kidney doctor for 25 years and I have consistently delayed the progression of renal failure with a plant based diet. No I don’t have a randomized controlled study to prove it just a lot of happy patients that don’t have to go on dialysis.
The debate was “vegetarian vs omnivores”. Easy enough, right? But in that, Dr. Katz fails MISERABLY. He spouts stuff about other issues and his “inventions”, NOTHING about scientific data. He quotes studies without giving context. His self serving comment, “I’m a scientist, I’ve been doing this my whole life” is breathtakingly pompous. I don’t doubt he sees himself that way buy I certainly do not. And when he asks, “how many of you need evidence to know something is true” it’s just plain arrogant. This guy is a great TAP DANCER, a performer, an actor who reads his lines.
I do not have time to answer all the false data of Mr. Katz, but I leave at least these RCTs: 1. Low-Calorie Vegetarian Versus Mediterranean Diets for Reducing Body Weight and Improving Cardiovascular Risk Profile: CARDIVEG Study (Cardiovascular Prevention With Vegetarian Diet) Compare MD with LOW CALORIE vegetarian. There are NO significant differences in weight, body mass, fat mass. VD low cholesterol but MD LOW TRIGLYCERIDES! quality vs quantity pattern b! 2. Comparison of 4 diets of varying glycemic load on weight loss and cardiovascular risk reduction in overweight and obese young adults: a randomized controlled trial. ALL LOW FAT DIET 2 (KATZ) VS DIET 3 (CHO 45% PR 25%) WEIGHT LOSS%: -5,5 VS -6,2 WAIST: -5.3 VS 6.3 T CHOL: -0.18 VS +0.024 HDL: -0.21 VS + 0.02 TG: -0.05 VS -0.18 INSULIN: -13.3 VS -17,1 Mr Katz, please check the information or at least hide ALL the data with your blue posters!
Katz response to the antinutrient question was insanely disingenuous and contrived; it perfectly sums up his inherent bias. You can tell he’s wearing shoulder pads and multiple layers of clothing under his jacket to hide his malnutrition. You can see it in his face and generally shit demeanor. Great debate by Nina.
omg when he pulls out the “you can’t prove a negative” card — OMG it’s not even accurate. literally if you go to the wiki page on philosophical burdens of proof, it describes how to prove a negative -_- ermergerd. When someone asserts a negative, the burden is on the person asserting its corollary. IMO anyone who throws that catchy phrase around is being intellectually dishonest (either intentionally or subconsciously)
I know for me I am thinner and healthier on a diet of mostly vegetables and fruits. I have lots of energy and feel good and have no weight issues. Once I got married however my wife feeds me a diet high in meats with only small amounts of vegetables. I am fatter I feel bad all the time I have no energy and I think it is harmful to me. When we talk about it and I can get her to add more vegetables it never last for any amount of time.
at 30:21 the guy claims that the study “Comparison of 4 Diets of Varying Glycemic Load on Weight Loss and Cardiovascular Risk Reduction in Overweight and Obese Young Adults” has found evidence that the cardiovascular risk is lower in the groups with higher carbs. actually that is not true. they look at LDL as a factor for cardiovascular risk and as it turns out that this is completely bullshit. the best predictor for cardiovascular risk is the TG/HDL ratio that has to be low. so the triglycerides need to be low and HDL need to be high. when we look into the actual data HDL increased in all compared diets but not significant with no significant difference. so practically the same. the triglycerides however decreased a little bit more on the lower carb diets but also not significant. they claim in the study that the higher carb diet is better for cardiovaskular risk but they do not deliver the facts that it does. from the scientific perspective the TG/HDL ratio seems pretty the same on all diets with a slight but not significant advantage for the lower carb group with higher protein. but that can only be guesst by the changes of the mean values for TG and HDL but they did not record the TG/HDL ratio per person which for a correct analyses should have been done. the problem with this study is, that at that point in time they did not know that TG/HDL is the best blood marker for cardiovascular risk and LDL is crap regarding that. you can probably do that with all his cited studies to correct the false interpretation that sometimes is also included in the study.
I always tell myself to NOT read the comments before perusal a podcast. This time was doubly true. Nothing new here. What is frustrating about these “debates” is that we’re left with sound bites back and forth rather than reasoned content discussion. Something so foundational as diet isn’t something to debate in such a brief window. Problems: If Nina had her studies then she should have presented them instead of waiting for the moderator to ask her for evidence that directly supports her view. perusal her hem-and-haw her way through her response was rather shocking since she had to see that coming. I appreciate her bringing up David’s ad hominem attacks regarding her book, but it was irrelevant to the debate (unless she was looking for an apology). Her inclusion of his company’s financials was interesting though hardly surprising. Regarding David … he did what I expected by presenting studies from a variety of sources and levels of hierarchical rigor. What would have been nice (and perhaps more appropriate) would be to take his strongest studies and present them in a structured layman-friendly way. But, he structured his response within the confines of the debate. In the final analysis, staunch supporters on both sides are not going to be swayed by this type of forum. Clearly, some ‘middlers’ had their minds changed in favor of Dr. Katz (as he ‘won’ the debate) but, overall, I don’t see this as moving the needle much one way or the other. I’m uncertain as to what I think about David’s inclusion of the environmental impact of diet at the end.
All these randomized trials that he is showing as evidence doesn’t mean anything if we don’t know what they are actually eating. Eating a hamburger? Does that mean with the surgery bun or? What are the vegans eating compared to the vegetarian or omnivore diet? It’s seems skewed, especially when many vegans/vegetarians often eat that diet to better their health so they tend to avoid processed foods. Now, take someone who is strictly carnivore or low carb and they are also doing it for health and I think there is plenty of (anecdotal) evidence that shows they are in good health. These trials aren’t shit. This is not evidence!! Katz demonstration of gravity does not correlate evidence of these randomized nonsensical trials.. wtf?? What a shitwack!
It’s a nonissue. Those who prefer a vegan diet have plenty of nutritional choices available to them. Likewise, those who prefer a diet replete with animal protein can engage in their dietary preference. The use of coercion never enters into the equation unless a person forces another to pay for the consequences of their lifestyle choices.
What a douche bag move at the end from Katz, opening up a whole separate debate on the environmental effects of our dietary choices, knowing full well Nina has no opportunity to respond. When the data to support this way of thinking is investigated it has just as many holes as the notion that veganism is better for human health. Debates like this are pointless, nothing more than a pissing contest, often causing even more confusion.
To be fair, obesity rates are lower in vegans and vegetarians and in addition plant protein and meat proteins are fundamentally similar if your eating a balanced vegetarian diet. B12 is injected into most animals because they have low B12 levels. I’m not a vegetarian, but I’m a pesco-vegetarian. I was vegetarian for over a year though. And personally for me I think pesco-vegetarian diet is the best for my body. I eat fish and seafood occasionally mabye 1 time a week at most, but that’s my 50 cents on the subject. I think in reality all of our bodies are different and some diets work best for others. It’s not a one size fits all.
Let’s see, we had to evolve eating cooked meat. The only way to get the nutrition necessary. Therefore, we absolutely evolved eating meat. Could eating plants be better for us? Theoretically, but not with all the shortcomings of a vegan/vegetarian diet. And look what happens when people go on zero-carb/carnivore diet. Meat heals. And then there’s all cause mortality. VV’s fare no better. There is solid evidence that VV’s suffer more depression and are slower at mental gymnastics, quickly corrected by creatine. Not available in vegetables. Why would I want to eat not what we evolved to eat? And give up a perfect rib-eye? Go ahead soy boy with your tofu burgers. You need that estrogen……..
I would say that a low-fat vegan diet has one big advantage: significant weight loss. Some studies show that. This is due to the high amount of fiber and the low caloric density of plants. Meat is more likely to lead to weight gain. Obesity promotes many diseases. I think that’s a very important aspect considering that maybe 50% of the population is overweight – maybe the most important aspect of all.
All the studies are just pissing in the wind, a high quality vegan diet is fine, a high quality omnivore diet is fine, it’s even possible a high quality carnivore diet is fine. Hence why the studies always conflict with each other as no answer is correct. Junk food, alcohol, smoking, laziness is always the link to poor health. You also have to throw in the fact you can run the body off ketones/ fat and not carbohydrates and the path to the truth is near impossible the body is far more complex than this debate allows for.
Ok, if you know anything about natural farming, not commercial, veganism is no better than meat eaters. Farmers kill thousands of animals a year protecting the plants. Mostly by poisons, causing excruciating death to animals from deer to rabbits. So, plant farming also does more harm to the environment than animal farming. Mostly by dumping toxic pesticides into the air which washes into the drinking water. Lets not forget the fact that most soy products come from overseas. And if you don’t know, those transport ships produce about as much co2 as 20 trucks. And trucks also have to be used to ship veggies, but meat also, so that neutralizes itself. Lets not also forget that herbivores digestive systems are drastically different than omnivores and carnivores.
I could watch and listen to the intelligent and beautiful Nina Teicholz endlessly. I think she is earnest and effective, but I have no idea if she is right because the quality of nutrition research puts it on par with psychiatry. Katz wins the arrogance battle hands down. He evades the conflict of interest issue masterfully.
As a person who has reversed my type 2 diabetes and halved my blood pressure using a low-carb animal protein rich diet, I find it extremely difficult to sit through these vegan nonsense. This morning my fasting blood glucose was 67, my BP last night was 110+/60+. When I was eating a lot of carbs my BP got as high as 260+/120+. I actually went on short-term disability! Yep, I dodged a host of bullets thanks to people like Nina.
Is this a credible enough, peer-reviewed scientific conclusion (from Oxford University’s Martin School and published in the British National Academy of Sciences)? Quote verbatim below: “A global switch to diets that rely less on meat and more on fruit and vegetables could save up to 8 million lives by 2050, reduce greenhouse gas emissions by two thirds, and lead to healthcare-related savings.” National Academy of Sciences, published 22 Mar, 2016
Even if you have great health on a carnivore diet we all shouldn’t forget that the carnivore diet is unbelievably bad for our environment. animal farming produces so much Co2 every year that it’s even worse than the whole transport sector. You should also ask yourself if it’s moral to eat an other living being that has done nothing to you. Please try at least to eat less meat, dairy and eggs to help our environment and to not let future generations down.
This was one of the more interesting debates I’ve seen from the Soho Forum so far. Both sides made excellent points, avoided personal attacks, the questions asked were direct and on-point, there was no stand-up comedian, Gene made an effort to be impartial and fair, and overall I felt like I learned something interesting from both presenters. Sure, Dr Katz complained a bit too much about the resolution format, but I also think Ms Teicholz side-stepped some of the challenging counterarguments she was presented with too.
Teicholz was not prepared & did not even have one RCT or meta analysis that could prove eating animal based protein lowers total cholesterol, LDL, A1c, or blood pressure. Not a shred of evidence. Dr Katz won this debate hand down he proved it beyond reasonable doubt with a treasure trove of scientific data. Lost respect for Teicholz
I think Ms. Teicholz probably has read about the Okinowan studies, (pre1950 populations) the ongoing Loma Linda 7th day adventist studies,, the China study, and numerous others, which point to healthy, long lived populations who eat a primarily plant based, very low saturated fat diet. Why she considers these studies not relevant is puzzling. Considering all the evidence, I would err on the side of a plant based diet until there is clear evidence against it.
Untill last year I believed all the mainstream stuff about whole grains and fruits and vegetables. I’m 36 and have been overweight my whole adult life. Typically I was about 235lbs. Last year I read a couple books including Big fat surprise. I went on a mostly meat and dairy diet. Just a bit of fruit for vitamin c. I am now 170lbs with visible abs and have never felt better. Meat is good for you!
I think what matters is your intention to take care of yourself. Doesn’t matter what particular form that takes (as long as its not objectively bad for you, like eating motor oil), its the intention to show love and care to your body. That’s why we see successful health improvements in ppl who follow different diets. Its their intention to do something nurturing and loving for themselves AND the belief that what they’re doing is beneficial. The body is subject to what’s held in mind, that’s why the ppl who survived the Nazi concentration camps were those with a strong sense of meaning (see “mans search for meaning” by Victor Frankel). That’s why there’s so much conflict between the different diet camps. What’s being threatened is the strongly held beliefs by the ppl who follow the diets.
She spends the entire first few minutes talking about a personal issue she has had with the opposition and then goes on to talk about how “none of this has to do with the science” and talking about how important the science it. Then why are you talking about all this? I came here to see that, idc how hurt your feelings got. Hes absolutely right, you dont perform any of the studies, you didnt go to school for any of it. You read articles. Foh, you just want to pull a “woe is me” act so you can gain the audience with emotion vs the actual data. Unbelievable. Talk about unprofessional some more 😒
I think the B12 issue is simply the biggest reason why a plant based diet is not correct aside from all the other nutritional deficiencies and dietary irregularities associated with eating plants that our digestive system is no long set to handle. We simply don’t have the organism to live solely on plants. Perhaps we did at one time, but the brain size to gut issue compared to other animals is significant. We just cannot move the volume of food required to fuel our brain effectiently on plant based. I don’t know why no one can see that one of the biggest problems is simply refined carbohydrates such as wheat and sugar and all the other artificial additives from seed oils to preservatives that are killing us. That and the unhelpful dietary advice from the medical … ‘industry’. If we have to supplement a diet for it to work, even if it is only one, B12 and it is essential, then obviously that diet is not correct.
The comments below heartbreakingly show that these people can never see the truth, where purely scientifically and professionally Dr Katz is a light year ahead of the aggressive and ignorant, heavily biased arguments of Nina. I thought Americans had some intelligence left there. To see the light, you have to be enlightened. To see the truth, you have to be educated. PS: This is the comment of an omnivorous Biologist.
Geez is the guy kind of full of himself or what. I really get the feeling that he thinks he is smarter than everybody else so we should believe him. Problem is, I dont. Mark my words I am scared of what the new beyond burger means to the health of this country and the world. Natural foods are good for you, and meat is a natural food. Should we only eat probably not, but we probably should never eat processed carbohydrates.
What Nina is referring to with the study in India – men from southern states dying prematurely than men from northern- is not stating the whole truth. I am originally from south India and the diet comprises of a lot of oil, ghee, and also a lot of white rice, coconut oil, sugar, etc. it is by no means a healthy diet. North India also has a lot of obesity and chronic diseases because of their poor diet by the way
They’re both right. Am I the only one who sees the elephant in the room?!?!?! Meat eaters are healthy ONLY if they eat grass fed beef rather than GMO corn fed beef that are factory farmed and injected with a sh*tload of antibiotics. Vegetarians are healthy if they eat organic nuts, seeds and vegetables that are NOT GMO and NEVER eat GMO Wheat, Corn and Soy, etc. Both sides can eat eggs but here again not all eggs are the same. A free range chicken that eats worms and mice, yes they do eat mice, yield supreme nutrients compared to a factory farmed chicken that feed on GMO corn. The debate should be about Monsanto, Genetically Modified Food, Organic vs Food, both animal and plant, saturated in Glyphosphate poison, Factory farmed vs free range…….. Coco Cola, Cotton candy and the highly refined sh*t food diet is a diet unto itself. With that said, I do think Nina Teicholz won the debate hands down and I am a vegetarian. The Global Warming theory is BS and has no place in this debate so Katz lost a bit of my respect when bringing it up at the end along with his use of the word “sh*t whack amount” in place of actual numbers and facts.
Another prominent vegan in a long YouTube presentation said that vegans were dying a little bit faster or at the same rate as omnivores and that he couldn’t understand why until they researched it and found that vegans were missing a particular nutrient which I don’t remember it now. Katz is lying through his teeth about the significance of his randomised trials.
People died after eating the Atkins diet without taking the recommended food supplements promoted by the Atkins diet, from too much Protein. A Vegetarian diet which is rich in unprocessed complex carbs, and has few processed simple carbs provides everything any human being needs. Brown rice has significant amounts of vitamins A, D, C and B6, plus Iron, Calcium, Magnesium, and so on, while white rice has (barely any) Calcium, Magnesium, B6 and Iron.
1:05:29 Katz lauds this question but either completely misses its point or disingenuously claims that the American Diabetes Association diet and National Cholesterol Education diet were “high quality” omnivorous diets to be used for comparison to the low-fat whole-food vegan diets tested in the trials he cited. Both of these “high quality” omnivorous diets are not far removed from the USDA’s dietary guidelines, which are something in the neighborhood of 60% carbohydrate, 15-20% protein, and 20-25% fat, advocate low-fat dairy products, include copious amounts of high glycemic index grain-based foods that are nutritionally indistinguishable from processed snack foods, and advocate the inclusion of high amounts of omega-6 rich vegetable oils. So, while not a “McDonalds diet,” we can immediately we see several reasons why this would not be an ideal omnivorous diet for a dispassionate comparison to a low-fat whole-food vegan diet—it’s no surprise at all that a huge reduction in omega-6 rich vegetable oils, the substitution of high-glycemic grain-based foods with a carbohydrate load favoring legumes and starchy vegetables, and the omission of low-fat dairy products that are high in galactose and added sugars, would result in improved health and decreased disease risk markers for subjects on a low-fat whole-food vegan diet.
Katz is not a likable guy. And his tactics are not likable. But he still loses hands down on the strength of his argument. This debate wasn’t perfect, but it was refreshingly better than any I’ve seen to date. It shows that the better a debate is run, the worse the vegans do. So often, guys like Katz get to talk unchallenged by the voice of reason. Nina is the best example of that voice.
Um B12 supplements are literally given to ALL domestic animals so either way it’s in supplement form. It’s because modern cleaning techniques remove the bacteria that produce B12. ALSO, algae produces long chain omega 3s (that’s where fish get them!) I take a supplement because I don’t like eating seaweed lol
A scientist vs a journalist, where he is balanced and professional and she happens to be hurt in her feelings and unqualified for this debate (citing the OPINION of others about RCT-s) So, the result was no surprise. 1.5 hours of my life lost. I did not know either Katz or Teicholz before, and after hearing her lame accusations, I wouldn’t want her ever.
Well now, who is right? The truth cannot be proven or disproven, that is why it is the truth. 70,000,000,000 animals are slaughtered each year for what? If anyone can walk up to a cow in a field or any animal in their natural habitat and salvitate, debate over. But people do like to feel good about their bad habits. Prof Dennis Nicolle
I understand Nina’s intentions in this debate, but she actually came across by discouraging people to consume fruits and vegetables which is quite disappointing. I would encourage anybody who is frustrated from this debate to perform your own anecdotal evidence and try and eat more whole plant based foods (consume more cooked root vegetables and eat smaller quantities of beans at first) and consume less meat, eggs, and dairy and just see how you feel. Odds are your overall health will greatly improve.
Nina herself is used to be a vegetarian and she has personal experiences against the vegan diet. David hided behind the shield of eating “jelly bean” as a bad veggie diet. Comparing the attitude between the two, I believe in Nina’s arguments more; eat some meats and some fats; for, it will reduce your intake of the carbohydrates. Too much of carbohydrates is very bad for you; for, it will make you obese and develop into diabetes. On the other hand, there are people who eat too much of saturated fat and developing coronary artery disease (CAD). The Cleveland Clinic published a clinical paper in 2014 showing that plant based diet does improve the outcome of treating CAD.
Quoting this study, this study, this study, this study, this study, this meta-analyses is a poor way to make points. What size were the controls? Numbers of people in the study? Was the carbohydrate component significantly different between Vegan/vegetarians and the Omnivores? I find this very frustrating as it is just information overload jeprodising the quality of information. Very poor to see from an educator. The equivalent of saying I know the earth is flat because this guy said, this guy said, this guy said, this guy said.this guy said, this guy said, this guy said, this guy said, this group said. You aren’t given any indication of reliability. You then have to go out and read all of the quoted studies/ meta analyses to answer this question for yourself.
Her point on vitamin B12 is wrong, in the past meat was not the main supply of vitamin B12, eating plant contaminated by insect excrement, eating food contaminated by soil dirt, drinking water from river was. It is a big misunderstanding. Also best source of many nutriments are in in plants, Vitamin C, Vitamin E, Vitamin K1, Magnesium, potassium, Calcium, Iodine, Vitamin K2 best sources are vegetal not animal. Iron from animal is heme iron, it is best absorbed but is suspected to increase risk of cancer and too much iron is a killer. If you feed on carnivore diet you will need to take a even longer list of supplement than a vegan : vitamin C, Vitamin K1, Vitamin K2, Potassium, Calcium, Magnesium you will have protein in excess that will ruin your kidneys and too much heme iron that will ruin your health on the long term.
Is this a credible enough, peer-reviewed nutritional conclusion (from the largest professional body of nutritional science practitioners in the world)? Quote verbatim below: “It is the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that appropriately planned vegetarian, including vegan, diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. These diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, adolescence, older adulthood, and for athletes. Plant-based diets are more environmentally sustainable than diets rich in animal products because they use fewer natural resources and are associated with much less environmental damage. Vegetarians and vegans are at reduced risk of certain health conditions, including ischemic heart disease, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, certain types of cancer, and obesity. Low intake of saturated fat and high intakes of vegetables, fruits, whole grains, legumes, soy products, nuts, and seeds (all rich in fiber and phytochemicals) are characteristics of vegetarian and vegan diets that produce lower total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and better serum glucose control. These factors contribute to reduction of chronic disease. Vegans need reliable sources of vitamin B-12, such as fortified foods or supplements.” Copyright © 2016 Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.
“The Big Fat Surprise” — I thought she was talking about my fat neighbours who are afraid of fat, and eat a lot of vegetables to try and lose it!! Don’t we all NOT know by now that any one of these studies or conclusions have a lot to answer for if the activity level of the participants is not taken into account?? and not only that, but what TYPE OF exercise is done is also very crucial…. you can’t say of two different people that they are “active” if one walks half hour around the block and the other lifts weights of at least once his own body weight, three times a week, I doubt a vegan can do this.
They were both wrong, The Lyon diet study participants were from a french hospital but everything else he said was correct. She was wrong about the reduction in meat which was the criteria to go on a low sat fat plant based diet with some fish. No butter or cream. And yes they did add in a canola oil margarine.