From: nkraft@bkhouse.cts.com (Norman Kraft)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: the single vegetarian
Date: 5 Apr 92 20:51:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: bkhouse.nkraft.02ze
Organization: Argus Computing
X-NewsSoftware: Amiga GRn V1.28 2/25/92 (Beta) by Mike Schwartz

In article <1992Apr4.142311.15922@ssd.kodak.com> young@sasquatch.serum.kodak.com (Rich Young (x37176)) writes:
>nkraft@bkhouse.cts.com (Norman Kraft) writes:
>
>>young@sasquatch.serum.kodak.com (Rich Young (x37176)) writes:
>
>>The Japan data is from studies that can be skewed considerably by which part
>>of Japan one studies. 

...

>>The traditional Japanese diet does indeed include fish, but in small
>>quantities (by American standards), and of less frequent intake. It is not
>>dissimilar to the Chinese traditional diet, which has been studied 
>>extensively. Recently, the results of the largest study yet on the link 
>>between health and diet in China clearly indicated that the higher the
>>percentage of vegetarianism in an area, the longer the lifespan and the
>>lower the incidence of health problems. 
>
>   The point here was not to try to show that the "standard" Western diet is
>   healthy...it clearly is not.  But the implication in Tim's question is that
>   ANY amount of animal product consumption will affect health negatively, an
>   assumption which has no basis.  As far as the skewed nature of the data,
>   you're probably right, but in this context it doesn't matter: the study
>   in question was held up as evidence that a vegan diet was the healthiest
>   for humans...a conclusion which is patently unjustifiable since few if
>   any of the participants were truly vegan.  You've essentially supported
>   my point in your posting: the Chinese and Japanese cannot be used as
>   evidence to support a strict vegan diet, since their diets are not strictly
>   vegan (although they ARE far less animal product intensive that the
>   "standard" Western diet).

Actually, I think you've missed part of my point. In such studies as those
quoted above, and others of smaller groups, the data has shown that as
meat consumption decreases, so do health troubles of the cardiovascular
and typically western "excess" variety. While no large scale studies have 
been done on truly vegan populations (if there are any), the conclusion 
certainly leads to the strong possibility that if meat products were 
completely removed from the diet, the observed trends would continue. 
This is not cold, hard support for using the China data to support a vegan 
diet, but the data certainly hints at a vegan conclusion. It most assuredly
leads me away from the "meat is good for you" argument.
 
>>>	I'm an omnivore, I don't have ANY of the above diseases/conditions,
>>>	and I'm quite happy, thank you.  The point being that consumption
>>>	of animal products is not an automatic sentence to constant battles
>>>	with disease and deterioration.
>>
>>Yet. The data overall hints that you might have a better chance of avoiding
>>these problems as you age if you are vegetarian. Of course, diet isn't the
>>whole game: excercise and stress level have a lot to do with it, too. It's 
>>all a matter of personal choices, but based on evidence I've seen, I try
>>to make what appear to be the healthier choices (although my vegetarianism
>>is not a purely health-oriented choice).
>
>   You will note that I said, "...consumption of animal products is not
>   an automatic sentence."  The "standard" Western diet clearly increases
>   the risk of many of the conditions mentioned, but the discussion of the
>   Chinese and Japanese diets above should make it clear that blaming such
>   things on the consumption of animal products in general is far too
>   simplistic.  Besides, without knowing exactly what my diet actually IS,
>   how can you be so sure that I'm destined to suffer ANY of the listed
>   conditions?

You really should read the conclusions made by those that ran the study
in China. Aside from that, however, consumption of meat products may
not be an "automatic sentence", but current data does lead to the 
following: As meat product consumption increases, the incidence of 
cardiovascular and other "excess" diseases rises also. If this is the
case, then it could be supposed that any meat product consumption puts
you at some risk for these diseases, proportional to the amount of
meat consumed and, of course, only to the degree that meat is directly
responsible for these conditions. In the case of cardiovascular disease,
the link between meat and cholesterol is pretty clear, as is the link
between cholesterol and heart disease. Though I do not know your specific
diet, you are the one who claimed to be an omnivore, and therefore, in
my reading of the data, you are at some measurably greater risk for the
above mention diseases as you age than a vegan would be.

It's not black and white, it's all a matter of tendencies and trends
observed, but I think the vegan position is a shade or two of grey in 
the healthier direction.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Norman R. Kraft 			   INET  : nkraft@bkhouse.cts.com
Senior Partner				   UUCP  : ucsd!crash!bkhouse!nkraft
Argus Computing 			   GENIE : N.KRAFT3
San Diego, CA				   PORTAL: nkraft@cup.portal.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------------