Going Vegan

[AirTupac]

I just knew there would some a couple fights when I entered this thread.

[Goon Time]

I think its a solid analogy. When you consider how much humans have advanced technologically in the past few thousand years, from the perspective of a cow or a pig, humans might as well be aliens.

[Dresta]

You don't have to look that far back in history to see that as food and diet have deteriorated the increase of diabetes and cancer has increased. (Surely that's a very strong indication) Considering the West has some of the best medicine and treatment in the world why is disease such an epidemic?

You also mentioned environment has some contributing factors, that's exactly how some of our food is being compromised. Fruits and vegetables were organic for millions of years before we started messing around with it.

It's estimated that 70% of diseases can be avoided by lifestyle choice.

Estimated how exactly? In a way that has no validity, no doubt. I've really had enough of this childish simplicity when it comes to very complicated topics. People have to die somehow: if they avoid one disease, they will eventually succumb to another - thus saying '70% of diseases can be avoided by lifestyle choice' cannot possibly be accurate, because if this 70% were 'avoided' then there would be a bunch of new illnesses down the line. It's just a statistic that couldn't possibly be accurate. It's like reading those idiotic news reports that go 'heart disease down - success! But cancer up - noooo, how do we explain this!?!?' - this is childish because if people aren't dying of heart-disease then they are at risk of dying of something else.

There are many, many unhealthy differences between the contemporary lifestyle and that of a few centuries ago. People die, people get ill; it isn't an 'epidemic' - most are still living longer than ever despite declining health. There are many possible explanations for the rise in diabetes (rise in asthma too) that have nothing to do with fruit or vegetables or pesticides. I know a lot of cancer biologists, and i honestly don't think a single one of them believes in this kind of explanatory power of diet alone. Cancer is still not that well understood, but we do know that its existence is a necessary consequence of the evolutionary process.

edit: are you also making the argument that food was safer before the establishment of the FDA?

[step_back]

Estimated how exactly? In a way that has no validity, no doubt. I've really had enough of this childish simplicity when it comes to very complicated topics. People have to die somehow: if they avoid one disease, they will eventually succumb to another - thus saying '70% of diseases can be avoided by lifestyle choice' cannot possibly be accurate, because if this 70% were 'avoided' then there would be a bunch of new illnesses down the line. It's just a statistic that couldn't possibly be accurate. It's like reading those idiotic news reports that go 'heart disease down - success! But cancer up - noooo, how do we explain this!?!?' - this is childish because if people aren't dying of heart-disease then they are at risk of dying of something else.

There are many, many unhealthy differences between the contemporary lifestyle and that of a few centuries ago. People die, people get ill; it isn't an 'epidemic' - most are still living longer than ever despite declining health. There are many possible explanations for the rise in diabetes (rise in asthma too) that have nothing to do with fruit or vegetables or pesticides. I know a lot of cancer biologists, and i honestly don't think a single one of them believes in this kind of explanatory power of diet alone. Cancer is still not that well understood, but we do know that its existence is a necessary consequence of the evolutionary process.

edit: are you also making the argument that food was safer before the establishment of the FDA?

How is it remotely childish or simplistic to think that diet and lifestyle plays a major role in diseases? Doctors like Max Gerson cured patients of serious diseases like melanoma through nutrition. There is also evidence that diseases are brought on through malnutrition and vitamin and mineral deficiencies. Which is actually very much a problem in western eating habits.

Obesity and cancer has also been described many times as an epidemic.

[dunksby]

I just knew there would some a couple fights when I entered this thread.

That's a given on OTC and ISH generally, the challenge is to guess who is involved in said fighting in what threads. Dresta, LOLCATS, sweggeh, alenleo, 9er, imdaman, LEFT4DEAD and Chewing are safe bets right now.

[shlver]

Colorectal cancer is mainly a cancer of the western world. Around 63% of cases which happen to share very similar diets. It's also the third most popular cancer in the United states. By looking at that graph you'll also notice there are 9 other cancers which are more common in western cultures.

Meat consumption is not what it used to be. It used to be locally sourced from farms and be raised on food that the land produced. Unless you pay a premium you're eating poor quality meat.

Diet has everything to do with cancer.

This post is such a mess. No colon cancer is not a cancer of the western world. WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN?

Age over 50: colon cancer is more likely to occur as people get older. More than 90 percent of people with this disease are diagnosed after age 50. The average age at diagnosis is 72.

colon polyps: Polyps are growths on the inner wall of the colon or rectum. They are common in people over age 50. Most polyps are benign (not cancer), but some polyps (adenomas) can become cancer. Finding and removing polyps may reduce the risk of colon cancer.

Family history of colon cancer: Close relatives (parents, brothers, sisters, or children) of a person with a history of colon cancer are somewhat more likely to develop this disease themselves, especially if the relative had the cancer at a young age. If many close relatives have a history of colon cancer, the risk is even greater.

Genetic alterations: Changes in certain genes increase the risk of colon cancer.

Hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer (HNPCC) is the most common type of inherited (genetic) colon cancer. It accounts for about two percent of all colon cancer cases. It is caused by changes in an HNPCC gene. Most people with an altered HNPCC gene develop colon cancer, and the average age at diagnosis of colon cancer is 44.

Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is a rare, inherited condition in which hundreds of polyps form in the colon and rectum. It is caused by a change in a specific gene called APC. Unless FAP is treated, it usually leads to colon cancer by age 40. FAP accounts for less than one percent of all colon cancer cases.

Family members of people who have HNPCC or FAP can have genetic testing to check for specific genetic changes. For those who have changes in their genes, health care providers may suggest ways to try to reduce the risk of colon cancer, or to improve the detection of this disease. For adults with FAP, the doctor may recommend an operation to remove all or part of the colon and rectum.

Personal history of cancer: A person who has already had colon cancer may develop colon cancer a second time. Also, women with a history of cancer of the ovary, uterus (endometrium), or breast are at a somewhat higher risk of developing colon cancer.

Ulcerative colitis or Crohn's disease: A person who has had a condition that causes inflammation of the colon (such as ulcerative colitis or Crohn's disease) for many years is at increased risk of developing colon cancer.

Diet and Lifestyle: Studies suggest that diets high in red meat and fat (especially animal fat) and low in calcium, folate, and fiber may increase the risk of colon cancer. Also, some studies suggest that people who eat a diet very low in fruits and vegetables may have a higher risk of colon cancer. However, results from diet studies do not always agree, and more research is needed to better understand how diet affects the risk of colon cancer.

Inactivity and obesity have also been linked to higher risk of colon cancer. Studies have shown that daily physical activity can decrease colon cancer risk by as much as 50 percent.

Cigarette smoking: A person who smokes cigarettes may be at increased risk of developing polyps and colon cancer.

Because people who have colon cancer may develop colon cancer a second time, it is important to have checkups. If you have colon cancer, you also may be concerned that your family members may develop the disease. People who think they may be at risk should talk to their doctor.

So the PEOPLE(not the western world) who are consuming a diet of unhealthy amounts of red meat and not getting other necessary nutrients would have a HIGHER RISK of colon cancer. But look at all the other RISK FACTORS.

So armed with this information that was a google search away, do you really believe cancer is all about diet?
Of course not. That's an idiotic idea. Research cancer and you will find that age is the strongest correlate to all cancers. I don't find cancer rates going up very surprising when we have millions of baby boomers aging past 50.

[shlver]

I think its a solid analogy. When you consider how much humans have advanced technologically in the past few thousand years, from the perspective of a cow or a pig, humans might as well be aliens.

I definitely agree that going straight to a vegan diet seems really difficult, and I need to find a way to ease myself into it. My entire life I have been cooking with animal products and I dont really have any idea where to begin if meat, eggs, cheese, milk, butter, etc are all off the table.

Humans have been exploiting cattle since the stone age. Were those humans technologically advanced? I think it's a poor analogy as well.

Your caveat in the op seems to be "industrial scale." I guess what you're saying is we can exploit them if we're more well accommodating about the exploitation?

[~primetime~]

Rank Country Age-Standardised Rate per 100,000 (World)
1 Korea, Republic of 45.0
2 Slovakia 42.7
3 Hungary 42.3
4 Denmark 40.5
5 The Netherlands 40.2
6 Czech Republic 38.9
6 Norway 38.9
8 Australia 38.4
9 New Zealand 37.3
10 Slovenia 37.0
11 Belgium 36.7
12 Israel 35.9
13 Canada 35.2
14 Ireland 34.9
15 Italy 33.9
16 Singapore 33.7
17 Spain 33.1
18 Croatia 32.9
19 Serbia 32.6
20 Japan 32.2

http://www.wcrf.org/int/cancer-facts...cer-statistics


^^^ top-20 countries with the highest rate of colon cancer

[step_back]

This post is such a mess. No colon cancer is not a cancer of the western world. WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN?



So the PEOPLE(not the western world) who are consuming a diet of unhealthy amounts of red meat and not getting other necessary nutrients would have a HIGHER RISK of colon cancer. But look at all the other RISK FACTORS.

So armed with this information that was a google search away, do you really believe cancer is all about diet?
Of course not. That's an idiotic idea. Research cancer and you will find that age is the strongest correlate to all cancers. I don't find cancer rates going up very surprising when we have millions of baby boomers aging past 50.

Diet and lifestyle plays a major role is what I said!

Did I say it's all diet. No I didn't. For **** sake, I hate you people.

[shlver]

Diet and lifestyle plays a major role is what I said!

Did I say it's all diet. No I didn't. For **** sake, I hate you people.

Originally Posted by step_back
Colorectal cancer is mainly a cancer of the western world. Around 63% of cases which happen to share very similar diets. It's also the third most popular cancer in the United states. By looking at that graph you'll also notice there are 9 other cancers which are more common in western cultures.

Meat consumption is not what it used to be. It used to be locally sourced from farms and be raised on food that the land produced. Unless you pay a premium you're eating poor quality meat.

Diet has everything to do with cancer.

???

[dunksby]

Nanners, since you got pissed off when I compared you to vegans in the other thread, I'm guessing you gave up on this quest of yours.

[Nanners]

Nanners, since you got pissed off when I compared you to vegans in the other thread, I'm guessing you gave up on this quest of yours.

What thread are you referring to?

You guessed 100% correctly, I only lasted about a month as a vegan.

Despite not being vegan, I have managed to cut my intake of factory farmed meat down to nearly zero... and those factory farms are really what my gripe was about in the first place.

[Nanners]

Humans have been exploiting cattle since the stone age. Were those humans technologically advanced? I think it's a poor analogy as well.

Your caveat in the op seems to be "industrial scale." I guess what you're saying is we can exploit them if we're more well accommodating about the exploitation?

Since my post was too confusing for you, maybe some pictures can clear it up

I am okay with eating this



but I dont want to eat this

[Im so nba'd out]

I eat much cleaner than i did in 2015 but i dont see me ever going vegan unless i have to kill the meat myself.


I even gave up salt and sugar recently(not counting natural salt in meats and sugar in fruits).

Just to do it...but going vegan, not a ****ing chance will i ever eat lettuce(ect) for the rest of my life.


Then thinking about all the salt you have to use to flavor the shitty food makes me want to throw up

[Meticode]

Just go Flexitarian. You eat mostly veterinarian diet, but you choose to eat whatever meat when you want. Could do something like a 90%/10% portion.