Though your discussion of soil erosion was interesting, it wasn’t what I was thinking of. I was referring to the fact that organic farming simply has a lower yield than modern production methods. A lower yield means that you need more land to produce the same quantity of crop. And if you don’t have any free space on which to build your farm, what do you do? Why, you chop down the adjacent forest and make some room.
I’m trying to find some hard data on this (it’s been so long since I read about it, I don’t even know where to start looking), but this is all I can come up with:
Just a passing reference, I know, and some figures would be nice, but I seem to recall that the output of modern farms are several times that of organic farms of the same size. I’ll continue to dig for info, and hopefully I’ll find something.
Jeff
I hate to break it to you, but on the whole, vegans are MUCH more knowledgable than your average omnivore about what they put in their bodies. Vegans have chosen a lifestyle based on excluding certain elements from their diet, myself included. Therefore every time I eat, I’m very conscious of the food I’m putting into my body. Every time I eat a meal, I know EXACTLY what I’m eating, exactly what nutrients it provides, exactly how it was grown and harvested, and how that particular meal fits into my “nutritional landscape” of that particular day, as well as that particular week. Sounds like a lot of work? Not at all. It’s fun.
Sure, there are going to be idiot fanatics (as there are with any group or belief) who starve their baby to death by only feeding it rice milk. But you can’t judge a whole group from one or two bad examples. Surely you know that.
If you looked at vegans, as a group, and compared their general health to omnivores, as a group, do you really doubt that the vegans will be ridiculously healthier than the omnivores? It is very difficult for vegans to get overweight. Vegans, generally, eat massive amounts of vegetables, whole grains, fruits, nuts, and much more well-rounded meals than meat eaters.
We vegans really appreciate your effort, in trying to educate us about the lifestyle we’ve chose. But, personally, I think you would be much better off preaching to omnivores, because they’re the ones who need the help.
Any diet, ideally, should be carefully planned out. Omnivore diets are just as risky, as far as developing problems that are “often-too-late-to corrected-by-the-time-they-are-detected.” Vegan children are not the only groups of cildren that have deficiencies in their diet, obviously.
And, of course there’s obese children. Nothing bums me out like seeing a big fat kid, walking in the mall next to his big fat parents. You want to edjumicate someone? Talk to them. They’re the criminals. On the whole, vegans know what they’re doing. Ask a random omnivore a question about nutrition, and he’ll point to the RDA bar on the side of whatever he’s munching on. Ask a vegan, and you’ll get an hour-long lecture.
Also, you asked “will the children eat it?” in regards to a vegan diet. Kids only eat things because their parents feed it to them. A big part of what flavors we find enjoyable and what flavors we think tastes like dookie is how exposed we were to them as children.
Think about it. Put a child in a crib with a bunny and a carrot. I’ll buy you a car if the child eats the rabbit and plays with the carrot.
Oh, for fuck’s sake. I am NOT going to get in a pissing contest with you about whether “moderate” and “carefull [sic]” are contradictory words. As I thought, you’ve got no evidence, and are trying to cover that up by playing ridiculous word games. I stand by my original post.
Interesting. I hadn’t heard that, but I can see its being true. However, it might not be the best way to look at organic farming vs. conventional farming, as it doesn’t include energy efficiency (small-scale organic farming generally requires far less fossil fuel and therefore produces more calories per calorie expended than does conventional farming) or long-term viability (small-scale organic farming doesn’t deplete topsoil as rapdily as conventional farming, meaning that a single piece of land can be farmed for longer).
The last point hasn’t really been an issue in the US: our bread-basket states often have tens of feet of topsoil, and so if you erode as much as an inch or two per year, it’ll still take decades and decades before you see a drop in crop production. But topsoil is formed at the rate of an inch every several centuries; once it’s gone, it’s very difficult to replace. And other areas of the wrold with less topsoil have definitely seen erosion problems rise from conventional agriculture.
But yeah – I wouldn’t be surprised if, in an acre for acre comparison, conventional methods yielded more calories than small-scale organic methods.
I will agree that Vegetarians are more knowledgeable about nutrition that the general public. I don’t know about Vegans being more knowledgeable than OLvegetarians, though.
And certainly, there are health risks associated with the “see-food” diet. But not many of them are with deficiencies. Obesity, high cholesterol, and such- yes, definatly. However the Media is always talking about these dangers- so the Omnivore public has plenty of chances to be informed… although I’ll agree they too often ignore it.
But yes- I DO “doubt that the vegans will be ridiculously healthier than the Omnivores”- the healthiest diet is one that eats a well balanced diet that includes nutrition from all sources.
Obesity in children is a problem, I’ll agree- and it seems more common in “Omnivore” families. However, the cite that Daniel links us to also states that “eating disorders” are more common in vegan children. Hmm, if I had a choice for my kid between Anoxexia & Obesity, I don’t know which I’d choose. Neither is healthy.
“Kids eat what their parents feed them”? You haven’t raised any, have you? Kids are notorious for either eating everything in sight, or eating nothing but PB&J sandwichs for a year. During certain periods they are notoriously picky. And if they decide to go off on some tangent where they would only eat 4 things for a year or so- cutting that list in half can’t be healthy.:dubious:
Sure- if the bunny was live. But served in a nice stew?
No it doesn’t. The only time the word “disorder” appears on that page is in the following paragraph:
Eating disorders aren’t more common amongst vegans (at least, the web site doesn’t claim they are); vegetarian diets are more common amongst kids with eating disorders. You’ve got it backwards. And your implication, that a vegan diet might lead to an eating disorder, is explicitly denied (except that they say vegetarian rather than vegan – and again, “vegan” doesn’t appear in that paragraph one way or the other).
If you’re looking at a different page on that web site, please let us know which one you’re looking at.
I made no such implication that a vegan diets LEADS to an eating disorder. Nor that a “omnivore” diets LEADS to “obesity”. Obesity is more common amoung Omnivore kids than amoung vegetarian kids- anorexia is more common amoung vegetarian kids.
If “vegetarian diets are more common amoung adolesents with eating disorders” then it follows that “eating disorders are more common amoung vegetarians”. Unless somehow, the whole does not include the whole. The same sentance can have the same meaning with “adolesent children with eating disorders are more commonly vegetarians”.
It’s your cite, dude. I am sorry if you disagree with them.
Because these boards already have enough of a problem with people denying that they said what they very clearly said, and the mods don’t want it to be any worse.
I had a big long response to your post, but the meltdown yesterday ate the response, so I’ll shorten it here.
First, you’re right that “If ‘vegetarian diets are more common amoung adolesents with eating disorders’ then it follows that ‘eating disorders are more common amoung vegetarians’.” My apologies for my lack of math skills; I had to try some examples before I believed that this was true. Nevertheless, the article makes it very clear that, while there’s a disproportionate number of vegetarians with eating disorders, vegetarianism isn’t responsible for these eating disorders. And let’s look at what you did with that correlation:
Explain to me how this paragraph makes sense, if you’re not suggesting that choosing a vegan diet for a kid might result in choosing anorexia for the kid.
Good thing they don’t allow you to go back and edit your posts, eh?
You’re playing fast and loose with the facts, engaging in snide insinuations about vegetarianism, and trying to use the article to support a stance that it very explicitly denies – even at the same time as you suggest that you might “correct” the article’s writers. You’ve given no evidence whatsoever for saying, “I strongly recommend that no child be put on or allowed a ‘vegan’ diet”: unless you’re making this recommendation on nonnutritional grounds (e.g., the First Church of Carnivores’ precepts), you’d do well to admit that the nation’s foremost society of dietitians sees no exceptional barriers to creating a nutritional vegan diet for infants.
Sure, you gotta make sure the vegan kid eats a healthful diet. Guess what? You gotta make sure of the same thing for meat-eating infants as well.
From Daniel’s site way above: "Vegetarian diets are somewhat more common among adolescents with eating disorders than in the general adolescent population; therefore, dietetics professionals should be aware of young clients who greatly limit food choices and who exhibit symptoms of eating disorders (38). However, recent data suggest that adopting a vegetarian diet does not lead to eating disorders (39). With guidance in meal planning, vegetarian diets are appropriate and healthful choices for adolescents."
To flesh this out a bit: when I was 17, I had decided to become a vegetarian, with no proper guidance. I was trying the best I could, but was a little too hardass in focus. I knew nothing about whole grains, veg protein, etc. I waned down to 90 pounds, and had, by definition, an eating disorder. For me, it was an ethical decision, but I really had no clue about a healthy vegetarian diet, and it showed down to my rib bones.
Luckily, I spent my college years in an area that had a great awareness of proper vegetarian diet. I learned quickly, and with that knowledge, have been able to be a healthy veg for decades. Keep that in mind when viewing the statistics. What may be viewed as an eating disorder might well be a young person trying to find their way with a diet that suits them. As in so many endeavors, available education, example, and support are key to a successful outcome.
If one assumes that an “omnivore” diet LEADS to obesity- then one would make the assumption that I was saying a vegan diet LEADS to anorexia. I made no such correlation, although I agree that assumption could be made.
Of course, the wording is “recent data SUGGEST that adopting a vegetarian diet does not lead to eating disorders”- which is far different than “a vegetarian diet is PROVEN to not lead to…”. I think there MIGHT be such a “cause an effect”, just like I’d agree there MIGHT also be a cause and effect between the choice of an omnivore diet and obesity. However, it SOUNDS like the it is more of an “effect and cause”- that is some dudes who don’t care about getting fat choose an omnivore diet- and conversely- some who are already on the road to anorexia will thus choose the more restrictive diet of veganism. Here is an area where more studies & info could be helpful to all.
There are no “snide insinuations” about vegetarianism. I just pointed out that your cite should not be taken out of context. In the context of the entire website, they also talk about the dangers of low level deficiecies, and the warning signs of such. These dangers are severe enough for me to make my warning about no children on a vegan diet until they are old enough to make an fully informed & moral choice on their own- that until then, an Ovo-Lacto Vegetarian diet is safer for Vegan families. Once a child reachs his majority, then let him make his own choice.
True- your cite does not raise any “EXCEPTIONAL” barriers to creating a vegan diet for infants. But the entire website clearly shows normal, everday, run of the mill type “barriers”- that is a parent must take more than normal care. It is hard enough these days to get a parent to take “normal” care what with two-earner families, latchkey kids, and such. Yes- with above normal care & education- a vegan diet is safe. How many parents are 'above normal"? IMHO- not enough.
It is true that there are also dangers in letting any child select their own diet. But other diets do not pose the same deficiecy dangers as a Vegan diet. If a child is becoming obese- it is rather obvious. If he just isn’t getting enough calcium- then it isn’t so obvious, and the danger is more severe. Now- one nice thing is that most of these dangers of a child on a vegan diet can be solved by making sure the kid gets a good vitamin/mineral supplement- and my “making sure” I mean watching the child swallow it, not just palm it off on the dog or the trash or something. Just putting on the kids breakfast tray doesn’t cut it. If that is done, and the parent takes the time to read the ENTIRE ADA website, and takes the care outlined on those other sections - then fine. You have a parent taking “above normal” care. Basicly- I am saying- “read the entire wesite, damnit”- have an objection to that, Danny-my-boy?
But you know- most parents likely DO think they are “better than average parents”- just like most drivers think they are “better than average drivers”. But the facts say otherwise.
Of course, I must admit that I am against Parents forcing their kids into any extreme moral choices that the parent had made for themselves. I make the same arguement about forcing a kid into the more radical faiths, also. This may colour my debate on this subject.
Rabbit fur is far better for making clothing than onion skin. But fresh peeled rabbit stew is nothing without fresh peeled onions, and vice-versa. I guess I’m just an omnivore at heart. What are vegans? Ungulates?
Whether or not it’s a interesting point, it’s a irrelevant one. DrDeth, the fact remains that you’re reading things into the cite that simply aren’t there. You’ve not explained what you meant by
Given that you’ve denied a cause and effect between veganism and anorexia, and that you’ve offered no other meaning for this, I’ll assume it was simply more grasping at straws for a point that simply doesn’t exist.
He criticised the validity of a link without denying it. Then he goes on to explain his meaning with a book-length post.
Anorexia is an eating disorder. Obesity is a physical condition.
He pointed out that healthy Veganism in modern society requires a conscious effort; obesity results from lack of effort, or more likely, lack of supervision.
I would argue that obesity is just as much an eating disorder as anorexia, and in its extreme form just as deadly.
But the fact remains we live in society where on many levels it’s far easier to be omnivore than vegetarian, much less vegan.
Go into a restaurant and order just about anything it comes with meat. Even salads frequently come with meat, and about half the time they don’t there’s cheese on them. I’ve gotten strange looks for going into a cafeteria and ordering just vegees for lunch “But dear - don’t you want some chicken or fish? You have hardly anything to eat!” No - just about a pound of various vegees. I’ve had wait staff get insulted because all I ordered was “rabbit food” and they interpreted it as somehow insulting I wouldn’t order an entree.
The fact that I do eat meat only seems to make it worse - as if being an omnivore meant I had to eat dead critters at every meal and snack.
But when I try to cook vegees on my own? Ever notice that there are certain “basic” vegees available everywhere in this country - carrots, potatoes, onions, tomatoes - but others less so? No wonder so many people think vegetarian diets must be boring! And lots of vegetarians fall into the same trap - one of my pet peeves are folks who have the idea that if there’s no meat it has to be tomato based. Folks, for most of history most people didn’t know tomatoes existed - there’s lots of other stuff to eat. You shouldn’t eat anything to excess, including selected vegetables.
And if you want something really exotic - sea vegetables, for instance - that might take some doing. I have a choice of going to Asian stores where I can’t read the labels and have little clue what I’m buying (and the proprietors almost always steer me out of the aisle of ingrediants to the pre-packaged over-salted prepared meals made for the round-eyes who don’t know better) or drive 30-40 miles for them. But variety is absolutely essential to eating a healthy diet of any sort. That’s part of what makes a vegetarian or vegan diet more difficult - the social support system is lacking in vast parts of the country. Basically, if you’re outside of a large metropolitan area and don’t have an immigrant community nearby you’re buying your food mail order. What a pain.
(By the way - finally got my hands on some kombu yesterday and made a pretty decent dashi on the first try.)
On the other hand, the social support system for obesity is in full swing. There’s been plenty of media attention to the “supersize” phenomena. Somehow, I never quite got on the band wagon. It’s gotten to the point that lunch for me is an appetizer at many restaurants and sometimes I can’t even finish those. If I’m at work doggie bags aren’t a great option - my facilities for storage and reheating are minimal and taking it home is a bad idea outside of the depths of winter because I have a long enough commute that a lot of things would go bad before I got home. And no, I’m not going to start carrying a cooler around for the purpose, I’ve got enough crap to carry as it is.
Just try to order a small order of fries at a fast food restaurant (if they even have small anymore - usually they call their small a “medium”) and watch the hard-sell machine crank up. If you’re in a hurry are you going to take the large or argue for five minutes “Yes, goddammit I want just the small!” At sit-down restaurants I’ll sometimes tell them just don’t bring the soup and rolls. “But it comes with the meal” Well that’s just dandy but I don’t want it, won’t eat it, and I find wasting food offensive - so don’t bring it. “But it comes with the meal! Just try it.”’ No. I can’t eat a “normal” sized restaurant meal. I have to eliminate something. I often have some left on the entree plate, and I can’t count the number of times some matronly waitress has pushed and pushed me to “clean my plate” or asked if I was sick because I couldn’t consume 1200 calories at one sitting.
Yes, obesity in many cases IS an eating disorder, one in which people allow social pressure to abuse their bodies. Very few people know what “one serving” is any more. When I was a kid soda came in 7 or 12 ounce sizes - at the local movie theater “small” is now 20 ounces. No wonder so many people are so fat!
They even do it to the vegetarians - have you seen the size of some the burritoes being sold these days? And there’s the attitude that if you’re not eating meat you need extra cheese and sour cream. :rolleyes: No, you don’t.
Agree with Broomstick that the eating pattern(s) that results in obesity is a disorder.
Having worked in the fashion industry, I know that models are often both vegetarians and cigarette smokers – obviously for weight-control, rather than health reasons.
Don’t eating disorders occur only in societies where food of all kinds is plentiful? And where physical appearance is given a higher value than other personal assets (intelligence, kindness, etc.)? And why do they occur more often in the United States than in other countries where food is plentiful and physical beauty appreciated? I’m thinking particularly of France and Italy, which I visit often.
No, obesity itself is only a symptom of something else, sometimes an eating disorder, sometimes not. And it is not limited to meat-oriented diets. Summerbreeze actually had it right, although the difference is subtle. Point taken about the unhealthiness of extremes.
However, obesity diagnosis based on aesthetics is not a valid diagnosis; a size 12 woman would be considered the ultimate in beauty in far more cultures than not. Most men in the world don’t find the body of a twelve-year-old overly attractive.
So, you’re essentially just saying that parents need to be more careful when raising their children. That’s very true. There’s really no reason to restrict this argument to vegetarians and vegans, though.
Also, raising a child as an vegan is going to have psychological and social effects on a child, as well. You seem to be overlooking that. A child’s diet is going to have profound impact on his or her life, especially by the time they are “old enough to make an fully informed & moral choice on their own.” A vegan’s morality and worldview is going to be, more than likely, very different than an omnivore. This is a major reason that vegan and vegetarian raise their children the same way.
Do omnivore parents generally sit down with their children, and offer them a choice whether or not to give up eating meat? Doubtful.
But, again, all I get from this last post of yours is that parents should try to better educate themselves, especially in regards to nutrition. I couldn’t agree more. (New “McDonalds and Coke in public school lunchrooms” thread, anyone?)
Kids are notorious for either eating everything in sight, or eating nothing but PB&J sandwichs for a year. 
During certain periods they are notoriously picky. And if they decide to go off on some tangent where they would only eat 4 things for a year or so- cutting that list in half can’t be healthy.:dubious: