Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 53

Thread: Vegan "Transformations"--Simply from Cutting The Junk...or?... page 5

  1. #41
    jojohaligo's Avatar
    jojohaligo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Wet Coast of Canada
    Posts
    758
    Quote Originally Posted by KathyH View Post
    Is mercury laden tuna good nutrition or bad nutrition? Is an apple coated with 7 different pesticides good nutrition or bad nutrition? Is a wild boar hunted in Bohemia loaded with radioactive isotopes good nutrition or bad nutrition?
    I would say that if nutrition is the process of nourishing (to provide with food or other substances necessary for life and growth) or being nourished, especially the process by which a living organism assimilates food and uses it for growth and for replacement of tissues, that by definition there is no such thing as bad nutrition.

    The mercury laden tuna provides a certain level of nutrients that nourish the human body. It just so happens that it also provides a dose of mercury (although some people might crave it like that), which makes it "not" as nourishing to the body as an nice piece of seared tuna that has no mercury.

    By definition something is either nutritious or it is not, or less or more nourishing. It's not a case of good or bad.
    Female, age 51, 5' 9"
    SW - 183 (Jan 22, 2012), CW - 159, GW - healthy.

    Met my 2012 goals by losing 24 pounds.
    2013 goals are to get fit and strong!

  2. #42
    Timthetaco's Avatar
    Timthetaco Guest
    Kathy sure did start a really big argument just because she doesn't believe protein and fat are the most satiating macronutrients.

    Damn.

  3. #43
    zoebird's Avatar
    zoebird is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    8,089
    Actually, KathyH, your argument qualifies as a slippery slope/continuum fallacy -- not a valid argument.

    we can define what "good nutrition" is, drawing clear lines along the way in the continuum.

    I haven't read anything particularly contentious here. Human bodies like fat, carbohydrate, and protein. It seems from the science on which this diet is based (as well as the WAPF's science) that the body prefers to run on fat over carbohydrate, and as such, people whose diets are largely carbohydrate may not feel satiated in general.

    I cannot say that the diet that Silverstone asserts is "unhealthy." I think it is quite healthy overall -- a macrobiotic vegan diet can work well for some people in the long term. It works for a lot of people in the short term because it often clears their diets of all kinds of chemicals in processed foods, white sugar, and related. It's a whole foods diet based on what is seasonal.

    Once people have cleared their diets of processed foods, things perk right up. The same was true of me, and my diet wasn't that bad to start out with (growing up). But, now it is considerably better, because we eat seasonal, local (as possible), whole foods. It happens to include meat and dairy and eggs (obviously not vegan), but that is part of the reason why this diet is accessible.

    I learned two things going vegan: 1. i have modest lactose intolerance, so it's good to avoid dairy (but I do have it on occasion) and 2. food can be very diverse and interesting (i learned to cook). I have learned two things since going paleo: 1. i am not that sensitive to gluten, but being off grains did make me leaner very quickly in ways that I didn't expect; and 2. local and seasonal food is really fun and where-it's-at for me.

    Just because I eat this way now doesn't mean i'm against what anyone else is doing. I consider veganism to be perfectly fine. I don't think it's a cure all for all people, or that it's going to work long term for everyone, but I think it is a perfectly fine way to eat if a person is able to sustain it and they are healthy. And how they understand their health is up to them, too. I don't need to get into debates about it per se.

  4. #44
    onalark's Avatar
    onalark is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    San Clemente, CA
    Posts
    1,660
    Quote Originally Posted by KathyH View Post
    I am sorry, you are right you were specifically talking about Silverstone's diet.
    But because you have read vegan cookbooks it doesn't mean all vegans eat that way or have the same cravings. I can give you many Italian cookbooks that do not represent Italian cooking. The books are far from what people eat in Italy. It is the authors' individual take on a given diet. So, yes you are creating false assumptions therefore generalizing based on vegan books you read but not based on what some vegans eat. I know many vegans and they all eat completely different things. I thought they all eat fake meat substitutions, tofu and vegan cupcakes, but I was wrong, that's not to say that some vegans don't eat that crap. Just like some Paleo people will eat industrially raised and processed meat. Vegan, Paleo and other diets are very diverse and oversimplifying types of diets gives them a bad rep. Instead of broadening our horizons about all nutrition and diet, one gets sucked into debates that seem to be favoring one diet over the other without much of a credence and that's my pet peeve. Again, there is no perfect diet, no Paleo, no vegan.

    The issue I have with that statement is that you say MOST of us feel fuller faster when we eat high amounts of protein, followed by high amounts of fat. Who is most of us? Paleo people?? Mankind in general? Or are you referring to a given culture? You sound authoritarian in making your assumptions.
    I sound like someone on a paleo forum, who has read books on nutrition, and Mark's articles:
    Curb Your Appetite with a High Fat Diet | Mark's Daily Apple
    Pass the Protein, Please! | Mark's Daily Apple
    What is Leptin? | Mark's Daily Apple

    My comments on veganism originally and specifically targeted Silverstone's plan (which is low in fat, low in protein, high in carbohydrates). If you want examples of other vegan diets that are low on fat and protein and high on carbohydrates, look to McDougall (McDougall Plan), Fuhrman (Eat to Live), Christina Pirello (Crazy Vegan Life), and Esselstyn (Engine 2).

    Veganism, as it is presented in the mainstream media, is largely fat phobic, and shrugs off the importance of protein; Esselstyn even goes so far as to villainize it, purporting that it's been given too much credit because it's "manly" to eat meat. And then there's the (in)famous Cordain/Campbell protein debate:

    Cordain/Campbell protein debate

    I'd argue there is a perfect diet. It's the one you stick to. If veganism works for you, superawesomeradical. I don't care. I think, as a lot of folks have mentioned here on this forum, that it's probably even better than the industrial crap people eat every day. But I don't think it's optimal.

    There are outliers for whom it works like a charm. I don't doubt they exist. But I believe evolution, and the lack of a pure vegan culture in history, proves that they're just that: outliers.
    Last edited by onalark; 06-16-2012 at 11:25 PM. Reason: Added the Cordain/Campbell protein debate.

  5. #45
    Omni's Avatar
    Omni is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    979
    Quote Originally Posted by JennaRose View Post
    When I was a veg-head, I came across Alicia Silverstone's blog. I still check it out every now and again for recommendations on beauty products or whatever. Regularly, she posts a testimonial from someone for the vegan diet. Of course, the people in the testimonials praise a vegan diet, that they have no more ailments, they have more energy, they feel amazing. They gave up dairy and their acne went away, blah blah etc! One woman attributes dairy to being the only cause of her female hormonal problems (pcos, etc.), as she had been a vegetarian for most of her life.

    Anyway, my point is, do you think these people benefit because they are cutting out low-quality meats/dairy/eggs and most processed food to become a vegan?(in the ''real'' sense of the vegan word--minimally processed foods) For example, this woman with the hormonal problems--do you think she would have had the same results if she had simply tried switching to raw, organic dairy? (Or, perhaps, it could be possible she just cannot tolerate dairy.)

    When I made the switch from junk fooder to vegan, I felt amazing. But, also, when I made the switch from vegan to primal, I felt amazing! It struck me as interesting to think about.

    Thoughts?
    Just to refresh the OP
    None of us would really know why individuals benefitted from their Vegan change without more information.
    I believe it would be highly credible that a drop in Dairy could be a contributer to some as it is well known that bulk of the world population does not consume dairy and is lactose intollerent, whether it is raw or processed. The other factor that comes into play is the change in lifestyle, it is rare that people have these diet changes without changing other factors in their lives. Exercise may play a part, but my suspicion is that it is more likely a social/mental effect, having a sense of belonging is a major health benefit in itself and if you have suddenly find yourself with like minded supportive people that does wonders for both your mind and body. This situation though often comes with a honeymoon period, 2 years is the general honeymoon period for relationships, at that point the feelgood hormones start to wear off and the hard work begins, so I imagine that is when the quality of the diet is truly tested, when the rest of your world starts going to shit. As I mentioned earlier I do feel the Vegan diet is at one fringe of nutritional balance & the Ketogenic (Inuit etc.) diet is at the other end, both can be done successfully, but you do need to get it right, the Inuit developed their diet over thousands of years, perfected the nutrient balance and passed it down through tradition, the modern Vegan diet has not had this benefit of thousands of years of trial and error, I have not done much reading on the origins of Veganism, whether it does or doesn't have some ancient origins.
    The other issue that all diets deal with in the Western world is the fact that foodstuffs today are nutritionally poor compared to the original foods, we have spent a good 1,000 years breeding out nutritional content inadvertantly because we selected for size, flavour, storage, transport, aesthetics etc. So hence even in a widely varied diet of meat, fruit, veg, seeds etc. we still have a challenge to gain adequate nutrition. The other factor was calorific intake, in most cases our ancestors had twice the intake requirement of the average individual today and this meant they took in twice as many micronutrients again with their food, so regarding micronutrients our ancestors probably took in 4-8 times as much as the average person today. This may help explain the often seen phenomena where a slightly overweight individual has less health issues than the slim calorie counting individual, they simply eat more, meaning more micronutrients in and any exercise they do is enhanced by the extra weight.

    As for the OP's own experience:
    Going from Junk to Vegan, felt amazing, then Vegan to Primal, felt amazing.
    More detail required, were any health issues involved?
    How long Vegan?
    Surely going primal would have taken you to Super Amazing if you were already starting off at the amazing position, did the vegan diet effect fade, was it merely a case of the placebo effect fading?

  6. #46
    js290's Avatar
    js290 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2,026
    Quote Originally Posted by JennaRose View Post
    When I was a veg-head, I came across Alicia Silverstone's blog. I still check it out every now and again for recommendations on beauty products or whatever. Regularly, she posts a testimonial from someone for the vegan diet. Of course, the people in the testimonials praise a vegan diet, that they have no more ailments, they have more energy, they feel amazing. They gave up dairy and their acne went away, blah blah etc! One woman attributes dairy to being the only cause of her female hormonal problems (pcos, etc.), as she had been a vegetarian for most of her life.

    Anyway, my point is, do you think these people benefit because they are cutting out low-quality meats/dairy/eggs and most processed food to become a vegan?(in the ''real'' sense of the vegan word--minimally processed foods) For example, this woman with the hormonal problems--do you think she would have had the same results if she had simply tried switching to raw, organic dairy? (Or, perhaps, it could be possible she just cannot tolerate dairy.)

    When I made the switch from junk fooder to vegan, I felt amazing. But, also, when I made the switch from vegan to primal, I felt amazing! It struck me as interesting to think about.

    Thoughts?
    Health is definitely more about what you're not eating.

    Ancestral Health Symposium Thoughts, Paleo Vegetarianism, and Other Fun Things Raw Food SOS
    Now let’s compare that “avoid” list with what Kurt Harris refers to as the three neolithic agents of disease—the modern nasties driving many of our health woes:

    • Excess fructose
    • Excess linoleic acid (typically from high-omega-6 oils like soybean oil)
    • Wheat or gluten


    Ancestral or “paleo” diets specifically eliminate all three. Incidentally, the near-vegan diets with a track record for fighting disease eliminate the first two. And in many cases, they inadvertently slash wheat intake by promoting a more diverse spectrum of grains, tubers, and legumes than the average person on an industrialized diet consumes (in which grain products are overwhelmingly wheat-based).

  7. #47
    KathyH's Avatar
    KathyH is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    252
    Quote Originally Posted by Heth View Post
    It's similar except that, the failure rate of raw veganism seems to be a lot higher, and that this forum seems to be open, not moderated by nazis who modify the posts of anybody who is having trouble on the diet/lifestyle. There is more openness to discussion about the truth of things not working here, than on somewhere like 30 Bananas a Day. Vegans tend to be more fanatical and have more agendas to defend, in my experience.
    I was talking about a diet not a forum.

  8. #48
    KathyH's Avatar
    KathyH is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    252
    Quote Originally Posted by jojohaligo View Post
    I would say that if nutrition is the process of nourishing (to provide with food or other substances necessary for life and growth) or being nourished, especially the process by which a living organism assimilates food and uses it for growth and for replacement of tissues, that by definition there is no such thing as bad nutrition.

    The mercury laden tuna provides a certain level of nutrients that nourish the human body. It just so happens that it also provides a dose of mercury (although some people might crave it like that), which makes it "not" as nourishing to the body as an nice piece of seared tuna that has no mercury.

    By definition something is either nutritious or it is not, or less or more nourishing. It's not a case of good or bad.
    In this case the GMO grains provide nutrition. We are discussing semantics here bad = less nourishment. If that's how you want to put it that's fine with me. I will stick to identify for myself GMO grains as bad nutrition.

  9. #49
    KathyH's Avatar
    KathyH is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    252
    Quote Originally Posted by Timthetaco View Post
    Kathy sure did start a really big argument just because she doesn't believe protein and fat are the most satiating macronutrients.

    Damn.
    I didn't say that. I was questioning generalizations stated.

  10. #50
    KathyH's Avatar
    KathyH is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    252
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Quote Originally Posted by zoebird View Post
    Actually, KathyH, your argument qualifies as a slippery slope/continuum fallacy -- not a valid argument.

    we can define what "good nutrition" is, drawing clear lines along the way in the continuum.

    I haven't read anything particularly contentious here. Human bodies like fat, carbohydrate, and protein. It seems from the science on which this diet is based (as well as the WAPF's science) that the body prefers to run on fat over carbohydrate, and as such, people whose diets are largely carbohydrate may not feel satiated in general.

    I cannot say that the diet that Silverstone asserts is "unhealthy." I think it is quite healthy overall -- a macrobiotic vegan diet can work well for some people in the long term. It works for a lot of people in the short term because it often clears their diets of all kinds of chemicals in processed foods, white sugar, and related. It's a whole foods diet based on what is seasonal.

    Once people have cleared their diets of processed foods, things perk right up. The same was true of me, and my diet wasn't that bad to start out with (growing up). But, now it is considerably better, because we eat seasonal, local (as possible), whole foods. It happens to include meat and dairy and eggs (obviously not vegan), but that is part of the reason why this diet is accessible.

    I learned two things going vegan: 1. i have modest lactose intolerance, so it's good to avoid dairy (but I do have it on occasion) and 2. food can be very diverse and interesting (i learned to cook). I have learned two things since going paleo: 1. i am not that sensitive to gluten, but being off grains did make me leaner very quickly in ways that I didn't expect; and 2. local and seasonal food is really fun and where-it's-at for me.

    Just because I eat this way now doesn't mean i'm against what anyone else is doing. I consider veganism to be perfectly fine. I don't think it's a cure all for all people, or that it's going to work long term for everyone, but I think it is a perfectly fine way to eat if a person is able to sustain it and they are healthy. And how they understand their health is up to them, too. I don't need to get into debates about it per se.
    You are basing your opinion on the science on which Paleo diet was based. What about the science that supports other diets?
    This is a never ending debate as there is no ultimate authority on nutrition. There are many perceptions what constitutes good nutrition and I am not defending any of them. But I see a lot of swooping generalizations that favor one diet over the other based on individual preferences.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •