As an amateur in most areas, it does not prevent me stirring the pot a bit; Man is an opportunism and when as a race did not have choices as we do now would eat most anything available. Meat contains the most nutrients and is desired as it is today. Being a vegetarian is a choice in the western world, not a necessity.
With, that said, I’m going to slip on my bulletproof vest and hunker down.
Just so’s you know, it is customary to include a link to the column in question, like this.
Do you have any authoritative cites to offer, or is personal speculation the extent of your contribution?
I can provide some evidence to back up jabbas’s statement:
From Cecil himself: Traditionally Eskimos ate only meat and fish. Why didn’t they get scurvy?
(most of the vitamins are found in organ meat; the liver of some animals can have so much vitamin A that it is toxic; most of the meat eaten today is muscle meat, which is poor in vitamins, including Vitamin C, but still has vitamins like B12, which only comes from animal sources)
Of course, the natural human diet, going by what hunter-gathers ate, included a lot of fruits and vegetables (some claim that it is grains that are bad since humans didn’t eat them until more recently). Also, while there are claims that eating meat causes heart disease and all that, Cecil’s link says that the Inuit didn’t have such problems until they moved to a more Western diet/lifestyle - possibly including more processed meat.
(to avoid these meats, make sure there is nothing like sodium nitrate/nitrite and/or preservatives listed on the package; e.g. “100% beef, no additives/fillers”; also, most meat that doesn’t need to be frozen has this stuff)
Even the trans fat that naturally occurs in beef and dairy has been found to be beneficial, unlike the fake kind made from vegetable oil (some want the labeling to reflect the differences).
So, all of this suggests that humans can digest meat just fine without any problems and require nutrients that are not available from plants or in insufficient amounts, therefore it is a natural part of their diet, although human anatomy also shows that vegetable matter is also part of the diet (when compared to pure herbivores or pure carnivores).
To do what? There are vegan MMA fighters.
Such as Vitamin B12, which I already mentioned (and note that this quote comes from a vegan site):
According to that, humans can’t absorb it from intestinal bacteria, unlike herbivores. Sure, a lot of vegan food is now fortified, but supplementation is cheating since it isn’t naturally present.
Also, while plants contain a form of omega-3 (ALA), it needs to be converted to be effective, and our bodies are very inefficient at doing that so you would have to consume a lot more; by contrast, fish already has it in the correct form (EPA/DHA):
So maybe they appear healthy on the outside but still may have some deficiency, or take supplements, which as I said would not be needed if they ate a proper diet (although there are cases where supplements are useful; for example, taking mercury-free fish oil instead of eating fish, without worries over mercury).
I brought up the fact that they compete professionally to demonstrate that peak physical performance is not dependant on the consumption of meat (here’s an example). I’d be interested to know the specifics of the particular deficiencies they’d be suffering. I think most people that compete professionally take supplements regardless of whether they are vegan or not.
The ideal diet is hardly a concern as the majority of Americans do not consume a “proper diet”, whether vegetarian or not: roughly 68% are overweight or obese. Since very few individuals classify themselves as vegan, a large sample size is required to determine whether they’re less likely to become overweight or obese and there is tentative evidence to suggest that this is the case. Of course, the correlation may indicate that those concerned with their diet are more likely to be vegetarian, or that being a vegetarian causes one to pay more attention to one’s diet rather than that eating meat causes weight gain.
The primary concern with not consuming enough B12 (once the threshold for nervous system damage is passed) is increased risk of heart disease according to your link, but obesity is probably a larger factor. In fact, that may explain the results found in this study.
As far as obesity goes, I think it is largely due to modern lifestyles, with excessive consumption of foods, especially those with minimal nutrients and artificial additives, a major factor, but secondary to lifestyle; a sedentary office worker needs far fewer calories than a construction worker. As an example of how many more calories could be burned if a office worker simply made some changes to his routine, not including any workouts:
For comparison, the recommended caloric intake seen on nutrition labels is 2,000, so 500-1,000 extra calories makes a big difference, and as it states earlier, people used to be even more active, using as much as 2,400 calories more than average for today. I also recall a study that linked excessive sitting - even if you later worked out - to increased risk of disease (obesity and/or heart disease).
Anyway, as far as being vegan or not is concerned, whether it is religious, ethical or they just don’t like meat, although on the ethical side I would rather eat meat that was from free-range animals and not factory farms and fed food crops, which takes 10 times or more calories to get the same meat calories, I don’t mind what other people do, as long as they don’t try to force their beliefs onto me (not that you did), and with all of the enriched food today there is probably no risk of serious deficiency unless you only eat a few foods, or are a “raw foodist” who only eats plant foods. Just noting that such a diet was not what people would naturally eat, as the OP presumed.
Oh, Cecil did a column on a similar sort of phenomenon.
It’d be interesting to find out which of a sustainable diet featuring meat and a sustainable diet featuring fortified foods required more energy to produce. Trophic levels vs. synthesis… I doubt it’d change many minds either way, but some facts would be appreciated for future debate (if Cecil is reading, that’s my opinion anyway).