-
Re: Is a vegan diet more healthy? Evidence please.
Do you need to persuade him that a vegan diet is healthier, or just that it's as healthy? The latter would probably be easier.
Stephen Walsh's "Plant-Based Nutrition and Health" is quite a good source of health data (backed up with a bibliography of peer-reviewed studies in mainstream scientific journals) but the epidemiological data it contains suggest, I think, that vegans aren't any healthier than those who eat a small amount of meat. He does argue that they'd be healthier with some adjustments to the "typical" vegan diet IIRC.
-
Re: Is a vegan diet more healthy? Evidence please.
more help, articles needed, please....
CC????
-
Re: Is a vegan diet more healthy? Evidence please.
My mom went dietary vegan for a week and she lost 10 pounds and her blood pressure dropped from 170/x to 130/x. I'm so pumped for her - she was on Atkins and although she supported my veg*ism, she felt she couldn't do it because of her blood sugar. I'm so happy that she's seeing that it can be good for her.
THe key is in selecting whole gains.
-
Re: Is a vegan diet more healthy? Evidence please.
PCRM has good reading on the Vegan diet: http://www.pcrm.org/health/veginfo/v...ian_foods.html
It describes the positive effect that the vegan diet has on heart disease, diabetes, gall stones, etc.
-
Re: The Healthiest Diet of All
Only just read this, what a brilliant article. I'm going to pass it on to my friend whos worried about going vegan for 'health reasons.':rolleyes:
-
Want to help the planet? Eat a salad.
I searched to see if this has been posted and couldn't find it.
http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/060511/veggie.shtml
By Steve Koppes
News Office
Gidon Eshel (left) and Pamela Martin, both Assistant Professors in Geophysical Sciences and the College, have studied food production to measure how much food production processes burn fossil fuel that creates greenhouse gas emissions. They looked at production for five different diets, finding that a vegan diet is the healthiest for the planet. Together they prepare a salad for lunch in their lab.
The food that people eat is just as important as what kind of cars they drive when it comes to creating the greenhouse-gas emissions that many scientists have linked to global warming, according to a report published in the April issue of the journal Earth Interactions.
Both the burning of fossil fuels during food production and non-carbon dioxide emissions associated with livestock and animal waste contribute to the problem, the University’s Gidon Eshel and Pamela Martin wrote in the report.
The average American diet requires the production of an extra ton and a half of carbon dioxide-equivalent, in the form of actual carbon dioxide as well as methane and other greenhouse gases compared to a strictly vegetarian diet, according to Eshel and Martin. Cutting down on just a few eggs or hamburgers each week is an easy way to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, they said.
“We neither make a value judgment, nor do we make a categorical statement,” said Eshel, an Assistant Professor in Geophysical Sciences and the College. “We say that however close you can be to a vegan diet and further from the mean American diet, the better you are for the planet. It doesn’t have to be all the way to the extreme end of vegan. If you simply cut down from two burgers a week to one, you’ve already made a substantial difference.”
The average American drives 8,322 miles by car annually, emitting 1.9 to 4.7 tons of carbon dioxide, depending on the vehicle model and fuel efficiency. Meanwhile, Americans also consume an average of 3,774 calories of food each day.
In 2002, energy used for food production accounted for 17 percent of all fossil fuel used in the United States. And the burning of these fossil fuels emitted three-quarters of a ton of carbon dioxide per person. That alone amounts to approximately one-third the average greenhouse-gas emissions of personal transportation. But livestock production and associated animal waste also emit greenhouse gases not associated with fossil-fuel combustion, primarily methane and nitrous oxide.
“An example would be manure lagoons that are associated with large-scale pork production,” Eshel said. “Those emit a lot of nitrous oxide into the atmosphere.”
While methane and nitrous oxide are relatively rare compared with carbon dioxide, they are—molecule for molecule—far more powerful greenhouse gases than carbon dioxide. A single pound of methane, for example, has the same greenhouse effect as approximately 25 pounds of carbon dioxide.
In their study, Eshel and Martin compared the energy consumption and greenhouse-gas emissions that underlie five diets: red meat, fish, poultry, vegetarian (including eggs and dairy) and the average American diet, which consists of a little bit of everything, all equaling 3,774 calories per day. Some of the food containing these calories is discarded rather than eaten.
The strict vegetarian diet turned out to be the most energy-efficient, followed by poultry and the average American diet. Fish and red meat virtually tied as the least efficient.
The impact of producing fish came as the study’s biggest surprise to Martin, an Assistant Professor in Geophysical Sciences and the College. “Fish can be from one extreme to the other,” Martin said. Sardines and anchovies flourish near coastal areas and can be harvested with minimal energy expenditure. But swordfish and other large predatory species require energy-intensive long-distance voyages.
Martin and Eshel’s research indicated that plant-based diets are healthier for people as well as for the planet.
“The adverse effects of dietary animal fat intake on cardiovascular diseases is by now well established. Similar effects are also seen when meat, rather than fat, intake is considered,” Martin and Eshel wrote. “To our knowledge, there is currently no credible evidence that plant-based diets actually undermine health; the balance of available evidence suggests that plant-based diets are at the very least just as safe as mixed ones, and most likely safer.”
In their next phase of research, Eshel and Martin will examine the energy expenditures associated with small organic farms, to see if they offer a healthier planetary alternative to large agribusiness companies. Such farms typically provide the vegetables sufficient to support 200 to 300 families on plots of five to 10 acres.
“We’re starting to investigate whether you can downscale food production and be efficient that way,” Martin said.
-
Study: Vegan diets healthier for planet, people than meat diets
From The University of Chicago:
Quote:
The food that people eat is just as important as what kind of cars they drive when it comes to creating the greenhouse-gas emissions that many scientists have linked to global warming, according to a report accepted for publication in the April issue of the journal Earth Interactions.
Both the burning of fossil fuels during food production and non-carbon dioxide emissions associated with livestock and animal waste contribute to the problem, the University of Chicago’s Gidon Eshel and Pamela Martin wrote in the report.
The average American diet requires the production of an extra ton and a half of carbon dioxide-equivalent, in the form of actual carbon dioxide as well as methane and other greenhouse gases compared to a strictly vegetarian diet, according to Eshel and Martin. And with Earth Day approaching on April 22, cutting down on just a few eggs or hamburgers each week is an easy way to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, they said.
“We neither make a value judgment nor do we make a categorical statement,” said Eshel, an Assistant Professor in Geophysical Sciences. “We say that however close you can be to a vegan diet and further from the mean American diet, the better you are for the planet. It doesn’t have to be all the way to the extreme end of vegan. If you simply cut down from two burgers a week to one, you’ve already made a substantial difference.”
The average American drives 8,322 miles by car annually, emitting 1.9 to 4.7 tons of carbon dioxide, depending on the vehicle model and fuel efficiency. Meanwhile, Americans also consume an average of 3,774 calories of food each day.
In 2002, energy used for food production accounted for 17 percent of all fossil fuel use in the United States. And the burning of these fossil fuels emitted three-quarters of a ton of carbon dioxide per person.
That alone amounts to approximately one-third the average greenhouse-gas emissions of personal transportation. But livestock production and associated animal waste also emit greenhouse gases not associated with fossil-fuel combustion, primarily methane and nitrous oxide.
“An example would be manure lagoons that are associated with large-scale pork production,” Eshel said. “Those emit a lot of nitrous oxide into the atmosphere.”
While methane and nitrous oxide are relatively rare compared with carbon dioxide, they are — molecule for molecule — far more powerful greenhouse gases than carbon dioxide. A single pound of methane, for example, has the same greenhouse effect as approximately 50 pounds of carbon dioxide.
In their study, Eshel and Martin compared the energy consumption and greenhouse-gas emissions that underlie five diets: average American, red meat, fish, poultry and vegetarian (including eggs and dairy), all equaling 3,774 calories per day.
The vegetarian diet turned out to be the most energy-efficient, followed by poultry and the average American diet. Fish and red meat virtually tied as the least efficient.
The impact of producing fish came as the study’s biggest surprise to Martin, an Assistant Professor in Geophysical Sciences. “Fish can be from one extreme to the other,” Martin said. Sardines and anchovies flourish near coastal areas and can be harvested with minimal energy expenditure. But swordfish and other large predatory species required energy-intensive long-distance voyages.
Martin and Eshel’s research indicated that plant-based diets are healthier for people as well as for the planet.
“The adverse effects of dietary animal fat intake on cardiovascular diseases is by now well established. Similar effects are also seen when meat, rather than fat, intake is considered,” Martin and Eshel wrote. “To our knowledge, there is currently no credible evidence that plant-based diets actually undermine health; the balance of available evidence suggests that plant-based diets are at the very least just as safe as mixed ones, and most likely safer.”
In their next phase of research, Eshel and Martin will examine the energy expenditures associated with small organic farms, to see if they offer a healthier planetary alternative to large agribusiness companies. Such farms typically provide the vegetables sufficient to support 200 to 300 families on plots of five to 10 acres.
“We’re starting to investigate whether you can downscale food production and be efficient that way,” Martin said.
-
plant diets - Solid referenced benefits for Health, Envi. and Animals
hello :)
i've been vegan for 10 years (and organic non-gmo vegan for several years). Spreading an understanding of the animals is one of my main purposes in this life.
I made a page (no ads, no selling) to present some of the solid benefits of moving towards a plant based diet. The benefits for Health, our Environment, and the Animals.
the page is peaceful and easy to read. all the benefits are referenced to .edu or .gov sources with links. I've received a lot of compliments on the page, so please do see it, and see if it's worth sharing at other sites.. A few people said they are exploring vegetarianism after seeing the site :)
http://www.helpusall.com/foodsummary.html
The site is focused on people who are just learning about plant food diets, but the quality of the information makes the site useful to anyone wanting to know about more solid benefits, and have a site to give others to help enlighten them.
Jon
-
Re: plant diets - Solid referenced benefits for Health, Envi. and Animals
I'm also a long-term vegan, and I checked out your website - the only comment I'd make is that eating less meat is not my scene. Why not eat NO meat? To me, one of the best places to send anyone is to
http://www.thechinastudy.com/about.html
which is Dr T Colin Campbell's website for his China Study book. It is the very best book available, and was researched for many years. The China Study cuts through the haze of misinformation and delivers an insightful message to everyone, if they follow a plant-based diet. :)
-
Study: Vegan diets healthier for planet, people than meat diets
Not sure if this has been posted yet, but a quick search couldn't find anything.
I came across this study that shows what we all knew anyway ;):
Vegan diets healthier for planet, people
I can't believe that the average daily calorie intake of Americans is 3774!
The study compares the energy consumption required to produce 3774 calories of food for various diets, and guess which one came out to be most efficient :D
-
Re: Study: Vegan diets healthier for planet, people than meat diets
3774 calories per day!! :eek: When you think about it, if you're eating a take-out meal such as McDonalds or similar, each day, then it's probably not hard to achieve 3774 cals per day.
Thanks for posting that Yoggy! There's some interesting info in there like this:
Quote:
While methane and nitrous oxide are relatively rare compared with carbon dioxide, they are — molecule for molecule — far more powerful greenhouse gases than carbon dioxide. A single pound of methane, for example, has the same greenhouse effect as approximately 50 pounds of carbon dioxide.
A single pound of methane, for example, has the same greenhouse effect as approximately 50 pounds of carbon dioxide.
This is devestating.
-
Re: Study: Vegan diets healthier for planet, people than meat diets
-
Re: Is a vegan diet more healthy? Evidence please.
There's actually a lot of articles documenting effects of eating meat and dairy products - and also a number of studies comparing vegans with others. I think we'll see more and more of these since more and more people go vegan.
Here's a one I just came across:
Study Finds Vegan Diet Reverses Diabetes Symptoms
-
Re: Is a vegan diet more healthy? Evidence please.
i agree with pilaf. "the china study" is really good, and the guy who's written it, can back up all of his claims.
-
Re: Is a vegan diet more healthy? Evidence please.
Have your friend read The China Study, Diet for a New America and The Food Revolution.
-
What are the health benefits to being a vegan?
Hello.
I am very new to veganism, to show an example of this I will share with you that I decided to become one yesterday.:D I was reading the post/replys on this website and looked at other information, this helped me greatly to see that I wanted and should become vegan.
But thats off topic.
Anyway I was talking to my mother earlier today, and told her of my new found diet. She was as supportive of it but expressed concern
about my portein and iron needs. She also was wondering if it made your weight fluctucate or decrease. I asumed it would decrease...please correct me if I am wrong.
She also asked me what real health benefits there were with being vegan.
I did not know how to reply to this.
If you know of any could you please tell me, to help her and myself understand more about it?
-
Re: What are the health benefits to being a vegan?
Well, first: your weight is likely to decrease, but it still depends on what you eat and how efficiently your burn the calories. The things you eat are likely to be more digestible; I find after a big meal, I can expect to feel "normal" again a lot sooner than when I used to eat meat and animal products.
There are polls here about whether people feel they have more energy since adopting a vegan diet--I do. Since most people eat too much protein, it really isn't hard to get enough protein from vegetable sources. As for iron, I take an iron supplement; some people need to, some people don't.
Welcome and good luck!
-
Re: What are the health benefits to being a vegan?
By avoiding dairy, eggs and meat and eating a healthy vegan diet you will be reducing your risk of heart disease, cancer, type 2 diabetes, stroke, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, Parkinsons, Alzheimers and obesity.
If you eat plenty of fruit and veg and don't eat junk food you'll get plenty of iron, calcium and vitamins. I was pretty health conscious as a veggie but since going vegan I have felt so much healthier.
Have a look here for some more info on diet, and read John Robbins 'The Food Revolution' and Dr Campbell's 'The China Study' for some more in-depth discussion of the health risks of an omni diet not to mention the cruelty and ecological devastation involved.
-
Re: What are the health benefits to being a vegan?
I never worry about iron, and I always seem to get enough. I know this because I've had the levels checked. (They always check it for you when you donate blood too.) If you're really worried and want to make sure you're eating high iron foods, eat things with sesame seeds, like tahini. Very high in iron. There are other threads on here about foods high in iron.
But the main health benefits of a vegan diet are reduced risk of heart disease and reduced risk of various cancers. General increased immune system due to all the plant foods. Also, lower cholesterol levels!
And then you are also free of all the dangers that come with eating animal products... food borne illnesses like salmonella, mad cow, undercooked foods, tapeworms.
-
Re: What are the health benefits to being a vegan?
Hopefully you are feeling excellent having read the previous posts!
I have also noticed that my skin and hair are really healthy since becoming vegan.
-
Re: What are the health benefits to being a vegan?
What they said - you are consuming a diet with no cholesterol just great food (as long as you avoid junk like crisps).
People are totally obsessed with protein - why I do not know, it's not like we are all entering olympic weight lifting. I just can't understand this protein obsession, I am more concerned about trace minerals, iron and vitamin C than protein!!!!!!! Most of which are severly lacking in the omni diet!
Pulses amongst other things will give you all the protein you need.
I find my nutrient chart invaluable and make sure I eat something out of each vegan food group each day - it is on the wall in my kitchen:
http://www.lizcookcharts.co.uk/nutri...479e4217ee1480
-
Vegetables & Fruits Double Breast Cancer Survival Rates
Another beneficial statement for fruit and vegetables.
I've also read recently that male instances of breast cancer - are increasing.
It would be nice to see some research work done in this area.
Vegetables and Fruits Double Breast Cancer Survival Rates
Two new reports from the Women’s Healthy Eating and Living (WHEL) study show that diets including at least five fruit and vegetable servings a day reduce mortality by nearly 50 percent in women previously diagnosed with breast cancer.
A June report in the Journal of Clinical Oncology showed that women who followed the five-a-day recommendation and remained physically active had a nearly 50 percent reduction in mortality risk during the seven-year study period (1). A report in the July 18, 2007 edition of Journal of the American Medical Association shows that recommendations for even greater fruit and vegetable intake did not extend benefits beyond those achieved by the five-a-day group (2). The WHEL study included more than 3,000 women.
Prior reports from the WHEL study have shown that diet changes alter the hormones that influence cancer growth. In a substudy of 291 participants, increases in fiber and reductions in dietary fat were associated with reduced serum concentrations of estradiol, bioavailable estradiol, estrone, and estrone sulfate (3).
Previous studies have shown that low-fat, high-fiber diets improve cancer survival. The Women’s Healthy Eating and Living (WINS) study showed that reducing dietary fat and boosting fiber cut the risk of cancer recurrence by 24 percent (4).
1. Pierce JP, Stefanick ML, Flatt SW, et al. Greater survival after breast cancer in physically active women with high vegetable-fruit intake regardless of obesity. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:2345-51.
2. Pierce JP, Natarajan L, Caan BJ, et al. Influence of a diet very high in vegetables, fruit, and fiber and low in fat on prognosis following treatment for breast cancer: The Women’s Healthy Eating and Living (WHEL) randomized trial. JAMA 2007;298:289-98.
3. Rock CL, Flatt SW, Thomson CA, et al. Effects of a high-fiber, low-fat diet intervention on serum concentrations of reproductive steroid hormones in women with a history of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004;12:2379-2387.
4. Chlebowski RT, Blackburn GL, Thomson CA, et al. Dietary fat reduction and breast cancer outcome: interim efficacy results from the Women's Intervention Nutrition Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:1767-76.
For information about nutrition and health, please visit www.pcrm.org/.
Breaking Medical News is a service of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, 5100 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W., Suite 400, Washington, DC 20016.
-
Re: Vegetables & Fruits Double Breast Cancer Survival Rates
thanks frank! :) i know someone who is very sick with breast cancer right now. its very sad.
-
Re: Vegetables & Fruits Double Breast Cancer Survival Rates
me also.
shes been fighting for years and years...:(
i offered her the china study and she gave it back one day later and said she didnt want to read it...:confused:
so ive stopped trying to help. i give her support, but i guess she thinks that it couldnt possibly be her diet that is giving her recurring breastcancer....:(
-
Re: Vegetables & Fruits Double Breast Cancer Survival Rates
Thanks Frank for the info - I thought I read that male instances of breast cancer were increasing because guys were gaining weight and developing breast tissue like a woman?
I used to work for a hospice charity and I heard the view expressed often that if people are ill they should be able to do what gives them pleasure eg: smoke, eat junk food, drink alcohol (which I can sympathise with)
Its strange though that a diet rich in fruits and veggies can be seen as a deprivation/ punishment?
-
Re: Vegetables & Fruits Double Breast Cancer Survival Rates
I heard on the (radio) news a couple of days ago that there's been a 'disapppointing' new study to show that a high intake of fruit and veg doesn't make any difference to Cancer sufferers! :eek:.
-
Re: Vegetables & Fruits Double Breast Cancer Survival Rates
Quote:
Aphrodite
Its strange though that a diet rich in fruits and veggies can be seen as a deprivation/ punishment?
Yes that's very bizarre, we feel deprived if we run out of those things!!!
-
Re: Vegetables & Fruits Double Breast Cancer Survival Rates
Bit of commentary here which explains the report cobweb read.
http://www.reuters.com/article/healt...77699720070717
Some well dodgy research methodology in there, plus some misreporting I'd say.
-
Re: Vegetables & Fruits Double Breast Cancer Survival Rates
thanks, Harpy, will have a read.
-
Scientific health studies including vegans
In response to a question in the topic about Veganism and mental health, I thought I would dig out some serious scientific studies including veganism.
May be there is some place or way to get the originals and upload them to the forum/site?Health effects of vegetarian and vegan diets
Key TJ, Appleby PN, Rosell MS. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 2006; 65(1):35-41.
Vegetarian diets do not contain meat, poultry or fish; vegan diets further exclude dairy products and eggs. Vegetarian and vegan diets can vary widely, but the empirical evidence largely relates to the nutritional content and health effects of the average diet of well-educated vegetarians living in Western countries, together with some information on vegetarians in non-Western countries.
In general, vegetarian diets provide relatively large amounts of cereals, pulses, nuts, fruits and vegetables. In terms of nutrients, vegetarian diets are usually rich in carbohydrates, n-6 fatty acids, dietary fibre, carotenoids, folic acid, vitamin C, vitamin E and Mg, and relatively low in protein, saturated fat, long-chain n-3 fatty acids, retinol, vitamin B(12) and Zn; vegans may have particularly low intakes of vitamin B(12) and low intakes of Ca. Cross-sectional studies of vegetarians and vegans have shown that on average they have a relatively low BMI and a low plasma cholesterol concentration; recent studies have also shown higher plasma homocysteine concentrations than in non-vegetarians.
Cohort studies of vegetarians have shown a moderate reduction in mortality from IHD but little difference in other major causes of death or all-cause mortality in comparison with health-conscious non-vegetarians from the same population. Studies of cancer have not shown clear differences in cancer rates between vegetarians and non-vegetarians. More data are needed, particularly on the health of vegans and on the possible impacts on health of low intakes of long-chain n-3 fatty acids and vitamin B(12). Overall, the data suggest that the health of Western vegetarians is good and similar to that of comparable non-vegetarians
-
Re: Scientific health studies including vegans
Fracture risk in vegetarians and nonvegetarians
Appleby P, Roddam A, Allen N, Key T. Comparative fracture risk in vegetarians and nonvegetarians in EPIC-Oxford. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2007; 61(12):1400-1406.
Objective: To compare fracture rates in four diet groups (meat eaters, fish eaters, vegetarians and vegans) in the Oxford cohort of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC-Oxford).
Design: Prospective cohort study of self-reported fracture risk at follow-up.
Setting: The United Kingdom.
Subjects: A total of 7947 men and 26 749 women aged 20-89 years, including 19 249 meat eaters, 4901 fish eaters, 9420 vegetarians and 1126 vegans, recruited by postal methods and through general practice surgeries.
Methods: Cox regression.
Results: Over an average of 5.2 years of follow-up, 343 men and 1555 women reported one or more fractures. Compared with meat eaters, fracture incidence rate ratios in men and women combined adjusted for sex, age and non-dietary factors were 1.01 (95% CI 0.88-1.17) for fish eaters, 1.00 (0.89-1.13) for vegetarians and 1.30 (1.02-1.66) for vegans. After further adjustment for dietary energy and calcium intake the incidence rate ratio among vegans compared with meat eaters was 1.15 (0.89-1.49). Among subjects consuming at least 525 mg/day calcium the corresponding incidence rate ratios were 1.05 (0.90-1.21) for fish eaters, 1.02 (0.90-1.15) for vegetarians and 1.00 (0.69-1.44) for vegans.
Conclusions: In this population, fracture risk was similar for meat eaters, fish eaters and vegetarians. The higher fracture risk in the vegans appeared to be a consequence of their considerably lower mean calcium intake. An adequate calcium intake is essential for bone health, irrespective of dietary preferences.
Sponsorship:The EPIC-Oxford study is supported by The Medical Research Council and Cancer Research UK. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition advance online publication, 7 February 2007; doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602659
-
Re: Scientific health studies including vegans
Weight gain by diet group
Rosell M, Appleby P, Spencer E, Key T. Weight gain over 5 years in 21 966 meat-eating, fish-eating, vegetarian, and vegan men and women in EPIC-Oxford. Int J Obes (Lond). 2006; 30(9):1389-1396.
Background: Cross-sectional studies have shown that vegetarians and vegans are leaner than omnivores. Longitudinal data on weight gain in these groups are sparse.
Objective: We investigated changes in weight and body mass index (BMI) over a 5-year period in meat-eating, fish-eating, vegetarian, and vegan men and women in the UK.
Design: Self-reported anthropometric, dietary and lifestyle data were collected at baseline in 1994-1999 and at follow-up in 2000-2003; the median duration of follow-up was 5.3 years.
Subjects: A total of 21 966 men and women participating in Oxford arm of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition aged 20-69 years at baseline.
Results: The mean annual weight gain was 389 (SD 884) g in men and 398 (SD 892) g in women. The differences between meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans in age-adjusted mean BMI at follow-up were similar to those seen at baseline. Multivariable-adjusted mean weight gain was somewhat smaller in vegans (284 g in men and 303 g in women, P<0.05 for both sexes) and fish-eaters (338 g, women only, P<0.001) compared with meat-eaters. Men and women who changed their diet in one or several steps in the direction meat-eater --> fish-eater —> vegetarian —> vegan showed the smallest mean annual weight gain of 242 (95% CI 133-351) and 301 (95% CI 238-365) g, respectively.
Conclusion: During 5 years follow-up, the mean annual weight gain in a health-conscious cohort in the UK was approximately 400 g. Small differences in weight gain were observed between meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans. Lowest weight gain was seen among those who, during follow-up, had changed to a diet containing fewer animal food.International Journal of Obesity (2006) 30, 1389-1396. doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803305; published online 14 March 2006
-
Re: Scientific health studies including vegans
n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids by diet group
Rosell MS, Lloyd-Wright Z, Appleby PN, Sanders TA, Allen NE, Key TJ. Long-chain n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids in plasma in British meat-eating, vegetarian, and vegan men. Am J Clin Nutr. 2005; 82(2):327-334.
BACKGROUND: Plasma concentrations of long-chain n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids are lower in vegetarians and in vegans than in omnivores. No data are available on whether these concentrations differ between long- and short-term vegetarians and vegans.
OBJECTIVES: We compared plasma fatty acid composition in meat-eaters, vegetarians, and vegans and examined whether the proportions of eicosapentaenoic acid (20:5n-3; EPA), docosapentaenoic acid (22:5n-3; DPA), and docosahexaenoic acid (22:6n-3; DHA) were related to the subjects’ duration of adherence to their diets or to the proportions of plasma linoleic acid (18:2n-6; LA) and alpha-linolenic acid (18:3n-3; ALA).
DESIGN: The present cross-sectional study included 196 meat-eating, 231 vegetarian, and 232 vegan men in the United Kingdom. Information on anthropometry, diet, and smoking habits was obtained through a questionnaire. Total fatty acid composition in plasma was measured.
RESULTS: The proportions of plasma EPA and DHA were lower in the vegetarians and in the vegans than in the meat-eaters, whereas only small differences were seen for DPA. Plasma EPA, DPA, and DHA proportions were not significantly associated with the duration of time since the subjects became vegetarian or vegan, which ranged from <1 y to >20 y. In the vegetarians and the vegans, plasma DHA was inversely correlated with plasma LA.
CONCLUSIONS: The proportions of plasma long-chain n-3 fatty acids were not significantly affected by the duration of adherence to a vegetarian or vegan diet. This finding suggests that when animal foods are wholly excluded from the diet, the endogenous production of EPA and DHA results in low but stable plasma concentrations of these fatty acids
-
Re: Scientific health studies including vegans
Key TJ, Fraser GE, Thorogood M, Appleby PN, Beral V, Reeves G, Burr ML, Chang-Claude J, Frentzel-Beyme R, Kuzma JW, Mann J, McPherson K.
Mortality in vegetarians and nonvegetarians: detailed findings from a collaborative analysis of 5 prospective studies. Am J Clin Nutr. 1999 Sep;70(3 Suppl):516S-524S.
"There were no statistically significant differences (SS) between the vegans and the regular meat-eaters for any cause of death.
The overall mortality rate, or death rate for "all causes," was 1.00 (after adjusting for age, gender, study group, and smoking status). That means the death rate for the vegans did not differ at all from the regular meat-eaters."
Disease Vegan Deaths
Heart disease 17
Stroke 4
Lung cancer 2
Stomach cancer 2
Colorectal cancer 1
Breast cancer 0
Prostate cancer 0
Other causes 42
Total 68
-
Re: Scientific health studies including vegans
Copyright on scientific papers is usually held by the person who wrote the paper and the journal which published it, so I doubt it would be legal to publish whole studies on vegan forum.
If you were interested, you could obtain copies of the papers by writing to the corresponding author, and summarise the findings here.
-
Re: Scientific health studies including vegans
Or anyone at a University could access them via JSTOR or similar.
I am sure that abstract and conclusion if fully accredited would be acceptable to the copyright holders (400 words etc).
-
Re: Scientific health studies including vegans
Probably. If the Kornator is ok with it.
-
Link: "Plant-Based Diet Helps Reduce Premature Aging and Disease Risk"
Plant-Based Diet Helps Reduce Premature Aging and Disease Risk
Quote:
Plant-Based Diet Helps Reduce Premature Aging and Disease Risk
posted 9/16/08
In a study released today by The Lancet Oncology, Dean Ornish, M.D., and colleagues found that comprehensive lifestyle changes, including a low-fat vegan diet, increase the body’s ability to fight premature aging, cancer, heart disease, and other chronic diseases. Twenty-four men participating in a prostate cancer study switched to a plant-based diet and added daily exercise and relaxation techniques. Among other beneficial effects that were previously reported, the intervention led to increased levels of telomerase, an enzyme that protects and repairs DNA. Blood levels of telomerase increased by an average of 29 percent during the study.
Ornish D, Lin J, Daubenmier J, et al. Increased telomerase activity and comprehensive lifestyle changes: a pilot study. Lancet Oncol [advance online publication]. September 16, 2008; DOI 10.1016/S1470-2045(08)70234-1.
Subscribe to PCRM's Breaking Medical News.
-
Re: Study: Vegan diets healthier for planet, people than meat diets
-
Plant consumption: reduced disease risks
There are many studies that confirm links between the consumption of animal products and serious health problems (diabetes, cancer, heart disease). The conclusion is often that "animal product X" increases the likelihood that people will suffer from "disease Y". We have several threads about this on our forum, eg. these two about cancer risk and consumption of animal products:
Cancer, adaptation and the vegan diet
High B12 levels associated with an up to 3-fold increased prostate cancer risk
Another cancer study
Cancer and animal products
Red meat and cold cuts linked to colorectal cancer
But there's another side of this which isn't discussed very often, namely the fact that more and more links are found between consumption of certain plant foods and the decrease of certain health risks/problems. The two are of course related, and it's of course hard to find out if a diseased meat eaters is ill because he has been eating too much animal products or because he has had a too low consumption of plant foods.
Anyway - the idea behind this thread is to collect links showing a link (protective or healing) between plants and *not* getting diseases, getting them later than others, or having a greater chance to get well again. Some of us already have posted such links as separate threads, and while it's good idea to have a separate thread for each case, this thread can also be used as an index of other threads about this topic.
It seems that a main health problem with consuming animal products is that non-vegans necessarily consume less plants, because for every slice of bread with something animal derived on it, you'll most likely eat less vegan food that day, simple because the animal stuff you had made you a little more full than you were before you are it, which means that you'll be less hungry and therefore eat less of something else - and that this 'something' else would be a plant based product for a vegan, but maybe some other animal products for a non-vegan.
---
When I eat bread, I usually eat rye bread. Here's something I found today when googling rye:
Rye, lignans and human health
A short excerpt:
Quote:
Experimental evidence suggests that increased fibre intake, with a high intake of whole grains, is related to increased insulin sensitivity. Furthermore, intake of wholegrain products was associated with a decreased risk of diabetes in women in two prospective studies. Thus, the outcome of epidemiological and experimental studies suggests that substitution of refined-grain products with wholegrain products may decrease the risk of, or alternatively delay, the onset of diabetes. It is also reasonable to assume that the protective effect is associated with some factor(s) in the dietary fibre complex.
http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=1315848
Quote:
Factors in rye bran and soy protein may inhibit prostate cancer growth. The effect is more apparent for rye than for soy. Further studies are needed to identify the effective substances and to explore the mechanism of action.