Heart Healthy Choices?

Well we don't "need" sex to run marathons and have "nice biceps". But damned if I'm giving it up. With meat it's a matter of "don't absolutely need to survive" vs "won't hurt you much in moderation".

And here's a take from someone that was a vegetarian for 20 years, and ultimately decided that it didn't work for her.

Some of her reasons will surprise some folks here. Her perspectives fascinate me. It's like getting into the mind of an alien species.

I respectfully disagree.

There are studies all over the map on this. And results of followup studies often are inconclusive or even refute the original. The apparent overlooked logically fallacy seems to be the assumption that the same diet works for everyone. And clearly this is not true. You can look at how individuals have various levels of tolerance for even common foods like wheat and dairy.

Certainly, folks should try a vegetarian diet if they are so inclined. They might certainly thrive on it. But, their metabolism might just require meat for optimal health and it would be a shame if this possibility is never considered.

Steve,

You're propagating a myth. You say studies are all over the map on this, so cite me a study or two that says what you're claiming: that someone's metabolism requires meat for optimal health. Ridiculous claim. Show me some study that says switching to a vegetarian diet reduces somenone's health. (of course, we'll exclude a straight up junk candy diet that some teenagers and such may attempt). The fact is, humans don't need meat in their diet, and while it does provide nutrients, of course, the same nutrients can be obtained from a plant-based diet.

Hey. You are the one making a universal assertion, not me!

My main point is that different people probably have different nutritional requirements. So, folks should find a diet that works for them. Accepting a one size fits all diet is not acceptable.

It is common knowledge that tolerance of and affinity to diets including wheat, dairy, alcohol, and seafood vary across populations. Why wouldn't tolerance and affinity to beef, poultry, and pork also vary across populations. Have you looked any nutritional studies that control for different ethnic groups?

In America it's even more complicated because of the melting pot nature of our country. What effects does this have on the affinity to and tolerance of various foods? What about me, Scots-Irish/German/Native American/who-knows-what? What's the diet I'm perfectly adapted to?

Isn't it a little arrogant to assert that you have the perfect diet figured out for everybody? Especially given the huge amount of genetic variation?

Like I said, the biggest flaw in nutrition science is the Holy-Grail like search for the perfect diet for everyone. Most the government programs and science start with that assumption and go from there. I think it is seriously misguided.

I'm glad you found a diet that works for you and your family, who likely share a very similar genome. Perhaps you shouldn't be too quick to generalize that success to a universal truth.

Steve,
No. Maybe you should go back and read what you wrote. The only reason I jumped into this is because of your statement that "we need meat." I didn't make that assertion. But I feel a need to correct a factually incorrect statement like that.

Then you went on to make more wild assertions, such as "There are studies all over the map on this. And results of followup studies often are inconclusive or even refute the original. "

You couldn't come up with a single study. If they're all over the map, find one (or better yet several). I provided a link with dozens of peer-reviewed journal articles showing a reversal of heart disease. You provided a link to one lady's opinion. (that doesn't count as a study).

Sure, people can have allergies. Not everyone is exactly the same. But we're all human animals. We are all the same species, and our basic nutritional needs are the same.

I'm not trying to tell you what to eat or what not to eat. Most things in moderation will be fine. But the fact remains that we don't need to eat meat. It is a proven scientific fact for the human species. Believe what you want. I really, honestly, do not care.

Steve,
No. Maybe you should go back and read what you wrote. The only reason I jumped into this is because of your statement that "we need meat.",

I never said that.

Then you went on to make more wild assertions, such as "There are studies all over the map on this. And results of followup studies often are inconclusive or even refute the original.

You couldn't come up with a single study. If they're all over the map, find one (or better yet several). I provided a link with dozens of peer-reviewed journal articles showing a reversal of heart disease. "

Are eggs good or bad now? Is margarine better or worse than butter now? Once unassailable science is refuted all the time, especially nutritional studies.

Though I don't subscribe to any one size fits all philosophy, Robert Adkins might have something to say about Dean Ornish's program.

Or you could just look at USDA nutritional recommendations, and their evolution over the years.

You provided a link to one lady's opinion. (that doesn't count as a study).

I just added that link because I thought it was interesting. Here's a person who is extremely motivated and still couldn't make a vegetarian diet work for her. And some of her reasons are... unexpected.

Sure, people can have allergies. Not everyone is exactly the same. But we're all human animals. We are all the same species, and our basic nutritional needs are the same.

It goes beyond allergies. It's not clear to me that everyone has the same nutritional requirements. Is Cron's Disease an allergy? Is lactose intolerance an allergy?

Some folks can metabolize certain foods and others can't. So, how can there be a single "universal" diet, good for everyone?

I'm not trying to tell you what to eat or what not to eat. Most things in moderation will be fine. But the fact remains that we don't need to eat meat. It is a proven scientific fact for the human species. Believe what you want. I really, honestly, do not care.

I guess it depends on who you mean by "we". I'm sure there are those who don't need meat. I don't think that's a universal truth though.

Don't worry though, I will eat what I want.

And I would encourage any of those interested to try Dr. Ornish's program. It might just be the perfect thing for them.

It's only the claim of universality that I question.

Trisha I too have a long history of heart disease in my family ( 13 aunts and uncles having died from heart attacks and a brother that has has 2, quadruple by-pass surgeries. None of these were due to obesity. ) when I started to get pains in my arm I decided to get serious about my health. I watched 2 different documentaries. The first was They Were Dying To Know and the second was Forks Over Knives. Both have cardiovascular surgeons weighing in on the animal protein free diet. I was convinced. I recommend you at least view the info then make up your own mind. Me, personally, I can easily give up meat if it just gives me one more year to share with my daughter. You must make your own evaluations.

As a post note, I read the article Steve H posted by the former vegetarian and found it very interesting. It, however, did not address the health issue of a meat free diet, only the social and emotional aspect. I, myself, don't carry an emotional burden about eating meat. I can look at a cute waggley duck and envision it in orange sauce IN A SPLIT SECOND. ("Here ducky ducky. Stand on this platter for Carla and see how it fits.") On the other hand, (shrugging) I rarely miss meat now. Consider just dropping your meat intake by half if you simply can't give it up entirely. And don't get me started about th dairy industry and how the need for dairy in our diet is nothing more than marketing hype. Jeez!

As a post note, I read the article Steve H posted by the former vegetarian and found it very interesting. It, however, did not address the health issue of a meat free diet, only the social and emotional aspect.

I don't know if you noticed or not, but that was just a book excerpt. Consider reading her whole book.

Update: For what's it's worth, I don't think she does a good job with the science aspects. I find it interesting more as personal experience and testimony.

I, myself, don't carry an emotional burden about eating meat. I can look at a cute waggley duck and envision it in orange sauce IN A SPLIT SECOND. ("Here ducky ducky. Stand on this platter for Carla and see how it fits.")

I just barely got my coffee swallowed on that one Carla. Hilarious!

I have similar issues with cows and pigs.

Here's one critical review of Forks Over Knives that points out what the author sees as some serious flaws in the science. I don't know enough to be able to discern whether she's right or not, but her arguments seemed well reasoned and well supported.

“Forks Over Knives”: Is the Science Legit? (A Review and Critique)

As a post note, I read the article Steve H posted by the former vegetarian and found it very interesting. It, however, did not address the health issue of a meat free diet, only the social and emotional aspect.

I don't know if you noticed or not, but that was just a book excerpt. Consider reading her whole book.

Update: For what's it's worth, I don't think she does a good job with the science aspects. I find it interesting more as personal experience and testimony.

I, myself, don't carry an emotional burden about eating meat. I can look at a cute waggley duck and envision it in orange sauce IN A SPLIT SECOND. ("Here ducky ducky. Stand on this platter for Carla and see how it fits.")

I just barely got my coffee swallowed on that one Carla. Hilarious!

I have similar issues with cows and pigs.

I have yet to get those da** cows to stand on a patter for me. Or even lay down on a grill. Unreasonable creatures.

Here's one critical review of Forks Over Knives that points out what the author sees as some serious flaws in the science. I don't know enough to be able to discern whether she's right or not, but her arguments seemed well reasoned and well supported.

“Forks Over Knives”: Is the Science Legit? (A Review and Critique)

Ok, I admit, I only read about 1/3 of the aforementioned article. At that point (and that was roughly 30 minutes of reading) I still had not seen any real, qualified arguments regarding FOK stance. Only a few exceptions to the rule which I don't think invalidates the entire message of FOK. My concern was this... Who is this person and who paid for this ridiculously long post? Considering the time and energy given t the article I wondered how they were compensated. Her blog shows no educational background in nutrition or medicine (and she goes all the way back to her elementary school history. Goodness the girl loves to write about herself!) so frankly, I find her research suspect. She might be very bright but I wonder if she is qualified. She does love to write and write and write.....

I couldn't even make it that far. What I did read, though, was long on snark and short on actual evidence. I did a search on the author and the best I could come up with was that she's 25 years old and has an English degree. In a medical issues debate between a long-time heart surgeon and a 25-year-old English major, I'd go with the surgeon. If they were debating grammar and sentence structure I might lean the other way.
One thing that did stick out near the beginning was her point about how the FOK documentary avoided the use of the word vegan in favor of plant-based, as if that was evidence of something suspect. According to my doctor, the distinction relates to the avoidance of added oils.
Personally, I can only comment on the effect that FOK has had on my own health. Weight from 325 to 250, A1C from 7.5 to 6.1, BP from 160/110 to 130/89. That's after 7 months. I wouldn't mind a 16-ounce strip steak every now and then, but I've got a family to take care of.

I couldn't even make it that far. What I did read, though, was long on snark and short on actual evidence. I did a search on the author and the best I could come up with was that she's 25 years old and has an English degree. In a medical issues debate between a long-time heart surgeon and a 25-year-old English major, I'd go with the surgeon. If they were debating grammar and sentence structure I might lean the other way.of.

That's what I was thinking!
BTW Richard your results are awesome! And, after all is said and done , when the issue is health, it is the results that count.

[Robin Garr]

And, after all is said and done , when the issue is health, it is the results that count.

This. And also, I can't help wondering why some people get worked up over other people's food choices. Is it like getting worked up over other people's choices about whom to marry?

And, after all is said and done , when the issue is health, it is the results that count.

This. And also, I can't help wondering why some people get worked up over other people's food choices. Is it like getting worked up over other people's choices about whom to marry?

agree. nothing worse than a militant vegetarian. Or a miltant carnivore, i guess, if they exist.

Who cares what somebody else is eating?

As long as they don't come after me with their big vegetarian biceps.

and for the record, Nimbus, I wasn't implying that you were militant. I respect your lifestyle choice. I have been trying to eat less red meat myself. I feel pretty healthy, but you can't argue with moderation.