...New Study on Vegetarian`s...Not as Healthy as Some may Think... (page 3)

Satanus

Snoozy

Ya gotta eat your meat live, like the meerkats do. That avoids most of the additives.

S

rebel8

There was "practically no difference" between the bones of meat-eaters and ovolactovegetarians, who excluded meat and seafood but ate eggs and dairy products, he said.

Which may mean 'no statistically significant difference', or 'no proof there's any difference at all'.

And they have one third the risk of colon cancer as their meat-eating peers.

Are there any studies showing vegetarians who ate properly were plagued with more illnesses than meat-eaters who ate properly?

Anecdotes are nice but they're not proof.

OUTLAW

I`m not a Vegetarian.....But..I eat Animals that are Vegeterians!..

..............................LOL!!...OUTLAW

Black Sheep

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In the Oxford Vegetarian Study, participants were recruited

throughout the United Kingdom between 1980 and 1984 (Thorogood

et al, 1994). Vegetarian participants were recruited through

advertisements, the news media and word of mouth, and nonvegetarian

participants were recruited as friends and relatives of

the vegetarian participants. A semi-quantitative food frequency

questionnaire was completed at the time of recruitment, and

information was collected on smoking and exercise habits, alcohol

drinking, social class, weight and height and reproductive factors

in women. In total, 11 140 participants were recruited.

This was not a random sample.

The vegetarians nominated both the vegetarian and the non-vegetarian participants.

The study was doomed to produce a result tilted in favour of the vegetarians before they recruited the first individual.

What a waste of a golden opportunity to produce some research of real value.

Cheers

Chris

They said they did a questionnaire to evalute other attributes that would have an affect on health, but they didn't mention (in the quote you posted) that they used that info to accept/reject subjects or match them to the vegetarian participants with the same attributes. If they did, I'm guessing the fact that they know vegetarians probably didn't impact the results much, because other factors were controlled for.

slimboyfat

Unless I am missing something this is a very poor story.

A vegetarian diet helps prevent heart disease, cancers and other illnesses, generally lengthening your life and improving quality of life... yet there may also be a small increase in bone depletion? Oh well pile on the burgers in that case.

rebel8

There is also some evidence that eating too much protein depletes bone mass.

To convince me one diet is superior to the other in regards to bone mass, I would want to see a longitudinal study of vegetarians and nonvegetarians who eat the right amount of protein and all other dietary nutrients, with other health factors controlled for.

I've found I'm able to keep on track just by being conscious of what I eat and how I feel, without specifically counting or measuring intake. Once in a while I enter my day's diet into mypyramidtracker.gov and find I am getting the correct amount of everything on my own.

slimboyfat

I am taking medication to combat weak bones, which in turn was caused by another medication I take for another ailment.

I gather that many cases of osteoporosis are the result of other illnesses and necessary medications. In such cases a vegetarian or non-vegetarian diet is unlikely to make the difference for your bones either way since much more potent factors are involved.

For regular people the best thing to keep bones healthy is probably just to avoid fizzy drinks and walk regularly. Drink milk if you can - just because it tastes good. I used to love milk and I can't drink it at all any more because it makes me really ill these days.

A lot of red meat is best avoided on the basis of more serious considerations than its long term marginal effect on bone density.

Finally-Free

I gather that many cases of osteoporosis are the result of other illnesses and necessary medications.

Yes, my mother had it as a side effect of chemotherapy. I think she was prescribed calcium supplements to help with it.

W

PrimateDave

One of the major factors in bone loss, besides normal aging, is simply inactivity due to a sedentary lifestyle. Astronauts who spend a significant amount of time in low gravity environments suffer rapid decreases in bone density.

There is anecdotal evidence to suggest that eating and drinking large amounts of low pH foods and drinks (like Coke and Pepsi) cause the body to deplete its calcium reserves to maintain proper internal pH balance. Perhaps the soft drink industry would like to fund a study on that?

Protein deficiency is a non-issue. You literally have to be starving yourself to experience protein deficiency. Protein quality, with a few notable exceptions, is a non-issue. Food combining is not necessary for vegans to get adequate protein. The food combining myth was disproven decades ago. There is no basis for the notion that animal proteins are better absorbed by the body. Certain animal proteins, like casein, have been linked to disease in humans.

Studies like the one cited by Outlaw irritate me because I have attempted to make healthy lifestyle changes many, many times over the past decade or so. It takes a lot of will power to overcome long time eating habits. On top of that, I love the taste of foods that are supposed to be unhealthy. So, in the past I would start trying out a new diet and exercise routine. Then I would come across some "study" that suggested I was wasting my time. Finally, I would relapse into old habits, thinking that all the foods I loved weren't so bad after all.

It appears to me that for every bit of good research out there that challenges the dominant, well funded food industry, there's a lot of public relations and marketing designed to minimize or circumvent that research. Large studies cost a lot of money to implement, and researchers have to pay their bills just like everyone else. So, I have to wonder when I read the results of a study that appears to confirm the dominant paradigm, where did the funding for that research come from? Instead of focusing on general measures of health and well-being, why does that research narrow its focus to a single factor? Did the study in question actually deal with osteoporosis, or was mention of that disability added by a public relations team? Why?

Of course, it's not just this study. There seems to be a push to market omega-3 fatty acids and the fish that contain them. Why is that? Eating a lot of oily fish won't overcome the effects of bad lifestyle choices, just like popping vitamin pills won't make someone who eats a lot of junk food healthy.

Dave

...New Study on Vegetarian`s...Not as Healthy as Some may Think...

Share this