Re: Red Meat NO GOOD, Veggies no protection.... NOW WHAT?
From: pearl (tea_at_signguestbook.ie)
Date: 01/14/05
- Next message: Dutch: "Re: Red Meat NO GOOD, Veggies no protection.... NOW WHAT?"
- Previous message: usual suspect: "Re: Red Meat NO GOOD, Veggies no protection.... NOW WHAT?"
- In reply to: Juhana Harju: "Re: Red Meat NO GOOD, Veggies no protection.... NOW WHAT?"
- Next in thread: Rene: "Re: Red Meat NO GOOD, Veggies no protection.... NOW WHAT?"
- Reply: Rene: "Re: Red Meat NO GOOD, Veggies no protection.... NOW WHAT?"
- Reply: Juhana Harju: "Re: Red Meat NO GOOD, Veggies no protection.... NOW WHAT?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 23:13:20 -0000
"Juhana Harju" <shantigiri@despammed.com> wrote in message news:34q7ikF4fneqmU1@individual.net...
> pearl wrote:
> > "Juhana Harju" <shantigiri@despammed.com> wrote in message
> > news:34pv2rF4dfuu8U1@individual.net...
> >> pearl wrote:
> > <..>
> >>> *Multivariate analyses
> >>> showed significant associations between beef consumption and fatal
> >>> ischemic heart disease (IHD) in men [relative risk (RR) = 2.31 for
> >>> subjects who ate beef > or =3 times/wk compared with vegetarians]*,
> >>> [...]
> >>> Thus, among Seventh-day Adventists, vegetarians are
> >>> healthier than nonvegetarians but this cannot be ascribed only to
> >>> the absence of meat.
> >>> [...] '.. disease rates were significantly associated within a
> >>> range of dietary plant food composition that suggested an absence
> >>> of a
> >>> disease prevention threshold. That is, the closer a diet is to an
> >>> all-plant foods diet, the greater will be the reduction in the rates
> >>> of these diseases.'
> >>> http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Nov98/thermogenesis_paper.html
> >>>
> >>> On the basis of these results, it was predicted
> >>> that the incidence of ischemic heart disease might be 24% lower in
> >>> lifelong vegetarians and 57% lower in lifelong vegans than in meat
> >>> eaters.
> >>> ....
> >>> The most striking results from the analysis were the strong positive
> >>> associations between increasing consumption of animal fats and
> >>> ischemic heart disease mortality [...]
> >>> http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/70/3/525S
> >>
> >> Pearl, you are absolutely right about the health benefits of
> >> vegetarian diets.
> >
> > Thank you.
> >
> >> However, there are some unanswered questions also. Vegetarian
> >> diet is not good at reducing the indicidence of breast cancer
> >> (actually no known diet is).
> >
> > You missed this?..
> >
> > 'Meat, saturated fats and protein & Breast Cancer
> >
> > Some of the largest studies on breast cancer in medical history have been
> > conducted by Dr Takeshi Hirayama, at the National Cancer Research Institute
> > in Tokyo. Monitoring over 122,000 women over decades, Dr Hirayama
> > discovered that women who eat meat daily have four times the risk of
> > developing breast cancer than those women who eat little or no meat (5).
>
> You can always find some sporadic studies to support vegetarian diets in
> preventing breast cancer. But there is actually very little that you can
> do by diet to prevent breast cancer as you can see from this review
> article.
>
> http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=468678
"Some of the largest studies on breast cancer .. Monitoring
over 122,000 women over decades", is hardly 'sporadic'.
> >> There are also some other defects in unsupplemented
> >> vegetarian diets.
> >
> > Not only vegetarian..
> >
> > 'Mineral content: This may be the most important nutritional difference
> > between organic and regular produce
>
> I am aware of this difference.
>
> >> Vegetarian diets are not good at preventing stroke --
> >
> > ' Too much salt (sodium) and saturated fats (found in animal fats such
> > as red meat, cheese and butter) increases the risk of stroke, while a
> > diet rich in fruit and vegetables (which contain anti-oxidants to help
> > protect the blood vessels against atherosclerosis) unsaturated fats
> > (found in nuts, seeds and oily fish) and fibre can help lower the risk.
> > In fact it's been estimated that consuming one to two servings more of
> > fruit and vegetables a day can reduce the risk of stroke by 40 per cent.'
> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/conditions/stroke/prevention_index1.shtml
> >
> >> perhaps due to the high homocysteine levels of unsupplemented vitamin
> >> B12.
> >
> > Enteric bacteria resident in the ileum produce B12 when cobalt is
> > ingested (see above), but a supplement ensures adequate amounts.
> > Kelp will provide trace minerals, and eating organic is preferable.
> >
> > Eating meat does not prevent vitamin B12 deficiency..
>
> No, but globally vegetarians have higher serum homocysteine levels
> because lack of vitamin B12, which is not healthy of cource. (This does
> not apply to vegetarians in US because of the wide supplementation.)
>
> >> Nor do vegetarian diets provide enough vitamin D for most of
> >> people.
>
> > 3. It is nearly impossible to get adequate amounts of vitamin D from your diet.
> > Sunlight exposure is the only reliable way to generate vitamin D in your own
> > body.
>
> I know this. However, not eating any fish, which is practically the only
> dietary source to provide substantial amounts ov vitamin D adds to this
> deficiency *if* you don't supplement.
Supplement, if needed.
> > *Vegans, who eat more seeds and nuts, have twice the
> > Omega 3 fat level of the average American.* '
> > http://www.uea.ac.uk/~x514/HEAL/THEFATSOFLIFE.pdf
> > * mine
>
> The omega-3 fatty acid status of vegetarians is far from being ideal.
It can be..
> Please, look at the following study (full text available):
>
> Brenda C Davis and Penny M Kris-Etherton, Achieving optimal essential
> fatty acid status in vegetarians: current knowledge and practical
> implications. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 78, No. 3,
> 640S-646S, September 2003
>
>
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/78/3/640S?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&author1=+Kris-Etherton+&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1105715807657_5250&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=1&journalcode=ajcn
' Given the rate of conversion of ALA to EPA and DHA, it has been suggested
that a safe and adequate ratio for the vegetarian and vegan populations would be
in the range of 2:1-4:1 (22). This can best be achieved by increasing ALA in the
diet and decreasing LA, if indicated (see below).
..
.. it is important to ensure that there are sufficient amounts of ALA, which is
necessary for the production of EPA and DHA. Most healthy vegetarians
would be well advised to double their intake of ALA, providing 1% of
energy from n-3 fatty acids or 1.1 g/1000 cal. For those with increased needs
or decreased capacity to convert, an intake of 2% of energy or 2.2 g/1000 cal
may be necessary. The primary sources of ALA are selected seeds, nuts, and
legumes (flaxseed, hempseed, canola, walnuts, and soy) and the green leaves
of plants, including phytoplankton and algae.
..
Practical guidelines for achieving optimal EFA intake in vegetarians are as
follows. 1) Make a wide variety of whole plant foods the foundation of the diet.
2) Get most fat from whole foods-nuts, seeds, olives, avocados, and soy foods.
3) If using concentrated fats and oils, select those rich in monounsaturated fats,
such as olive, canola, or nut oils. n-3-Rich oils can also be used but should not
be heated. Moderate use of n-6-rich oils is recommended. 4) Limit intake of
processed foods and deep-fried foods rich in trans and n-6 fatty acids.
5) Reduce intake of foods rich in saturated fat and cholesterol. 6) Include
foods rich in n-3 fatty acids in the daily diet. Aim for 2-4 g ALA/d.
7) Consider using a direct source of DHA. Aim for 100-300 mg/d. '
> >> and lack of B12.
> >
> > See above.
> >
> >> So, I would say that good vegetarian diets are close being optimal
> >> but they are not perfect. Adding some fish oils or fatty fish and
> >
> > OR seeds and nuts.
>
> Trying to provide omega-3 fatty acids from vegetarian sources only
> increases the risk of prostate cancer. Also the elongation of enough EPA
> and DHA is efficient only in young and healthy people. So
> alpha-linolenic acid is not ideal source to provide enough EPA and DHA.
'For those with increased needs for EPA and DHA (eg, pregnant and
lactating women) or at greater risk for poor conversion (persons with
diabetes, those with neurological disorders, premature infants, the elderly),
it may be prudent to ensure that there is a direct source of EPA and DHA.'
While they are the original sources of EPA and DHA (fish do not produce
long-chain n-3 fatty acids), most are not concentrated sources because of
their extremely low total fat content. An important exception is a DHA-rich
microalgae that provides 10-40% DHA by dry weight and is currently
available in supplement form. When supplementing with a direct DHA
source, 100-300 mg/d is recommended. Blue-green algae (spirulina and
Aphanizomenon flos-aquae) are low in long-chain n-3 fatty acids. Spirulina
is rich in -linolenic acid (GLA, n-6), while A. flos-aquae is more
concentrated in ALA. Though blue-green algae is not a significant source
of EPA or DHA, some research indicates that it has a very high conversion
rate in comparison to other plants (R Kushak et al, unpublished observations,
1999). Macroalgae, otherwise known as seaweed, is even lower in fat than
most vegetables (< 1-14% of calories from fat), although it does contain
small amounts of long-chain fatty acids. A 100-g serving provides, on
average, 100 mg EPA but little DHA. Seaweeds do not contribute
significantly to EPA intakes in the Western world but are important sources
where people use large quantities of seaweed on a daily basis (eg, Japan
and other parts of Asia). Thus, while vegetarians can rely on eggs and/or
microalgae supplements for DHA, most consume little if any EPA.
However, < 10-11% of DHA is retroconverted to EPA; thus, if sufficient
ALA and DHA are consumed, total EPA production would be expected
to be adequate (61). '
> >> supplementing with vitamins B12 and (in northern latitudes) vitamin
> >> D is needed.
> >
> > 'Analyses of data from the China studies by his collaborators
> > and others, Campbell told the epidemiology symposium, is leading
> > to policy recommendations. He mentioned three:
> >
> > * The greater the variety of plant-based foods in the diet, the greater
> > the benefit. Variety insures broader coverage of known and unknown
> > nutrient needs.
> >
> > * Provided there is plant food variety, quality and quantity, a
> > healthful and nutritionally complete diet can be attained without
> > animal-based food.
> >
> > * The closer the food is to its native state - with minimal heating, salting
> > and processing - the greater will be the benefit.
> >
> > http://www.sdearthtimes.com/et1101/et1101s18.html
>
> I am also interested in that study. I ordered the new book.
Yes. I plan to as well.
> http://www.thechinastudy.com/about.html
>
>
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1932100385/qid=1105713771/sr=8-3/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i3_xgl14/102-0087450-4752979?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
>
> >
> > + sunlight.
>
> I agree with the importance of sunlight, but I live 60 degrees North and
> II don't get much. So I have to think about supplements and the optimal
> level, which I think would be around 20-25 µg/ day (800-1000 IU).
Ok.
> I mostly agree with you, but I think we would do better by adding some
> fish oils and/or fatty fish like the Cretans and Okinawan centenarians.
Please see; http://www.vegetarian.org.uk/fish/reporttext.htm
> Plus taking some supplements.
Or.
- Next message: Dutch: "Re: Red Meat NO GOOD, Veggies no protection.... NOW WHAT?"
- Previous message: usual suspect: "Re: Red Meat NO GOOD, Veggies no protection.... NOW WHAT?"
- In reply to: Juhana Harju: "Re: Red Meat NO GOOD, Veggies no protection.... NOW WHAT?"
- Next in thread: Rene: "Re: Red Meat NO GOOD, Veggies no protection.... NOW WHAT?"
- Reply: Rene: "Re: Red Meat NO GOOD, Veggies no protection.... NOW WHAT?"
- Reply: Juhana Harju: "Re: Red Meat NO GOOD, Veggies no protection.... NOW WHAT?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]