You didn't go vegan for health reasons. You *eat* vegan for health reasons :)

It seems that lots of people start living on a vegan diet nowadays. That's brilliant! Many have also registered here lately and written that they have become vegans for health reasons.

Just in case some of our new members are confused: :)

It's truly great that people/you eat vegan - for whatever reason - but 'vegan' is about more than what you eat, so you can't 'become' or 'go' vegan for health reasons. You can eat vegan for health reasons - but eating vegan food doesn't equal being a vegan.

Anyway - congratulations with your choice to change your diet!

Quote:

---

Korn

You can eat vegan for health reasons - but eating vegan food doesn't equal being a vegan.

---

As many have said, it's just the same as eating kosher food doesn't make a person jewish.

Leedsveg

*presses the 'like' button*

You speak the truth! Wikipedia doesn't agree though:

Quote:

---

Veganism is the practice of abstaining from the use of animal products. Ethical vegans reject the commodity status of animals and the use of animal products for any purpose, while dietary vegans or strict vegetarians eliminate them from their diet only.

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veganism

That text is probably entered into Wiki by one of those few who insist that there's such a thing as 'dietary' vs 'ethical' vegans. Wiki doesn't agree or disagreee in anything.

Quote:

---

Korn

That text is probably entered into Wiki by one of those few who insist that there's such a thing as 'dietary' vs 'ethical' vegans.

---

Yeah, don't even go there. They've cherry-picked sources to support the ridiculous notion of "dietary vegans" and manufacture this distinction between so-called ethical vegans and "dietary vegans".

Quote:

---

Wiki doesn't agree or disagreee in anything.

---

Just a manner of speaking.

Quote:

---

Korn

It seems that lots of people start living on a vegan diet nowadays. That's brilliant! Many have also registered here lately and written that they have become vegans for health reasons.

Just in case some of our new members are confused: :)

It's truly great that people/you eat vegan - for whatever reason - but 'vegan' is about more than what you eat, so you can't 'become' or 'go' vegan for health reasons. You can eat vegan for health reasons - but eating vegan food doesn't equal being a vegan.

Anyway - congratulations with your choice to change your diet!

---

Regardless of the reason, the effect is the same. If everyone in America decided to adopt a vegan diet for health reasons it would be a fantastic start in the right direction and make transitioning people to make the ethical changes that much easier.

I think we should encourage as much dietary veganism as we can.

Quote:

---

hamster

Regardless of the reason, the effect is the same. If everyone in America decided to adopt a vegan diet for health reasons it would be a fantastic start in the right direction and make transitioning people to make the ethical changes that much easier.

I think we should encourage as much dietary veganism as we can.

---

All though I agree, these people would still be using animal products outside of their diet. If everyone adopted a strict vegetarian diet, there would still be the wool/leather/fur industries. They would also be more willing to go back to eating animal products if they later find out that things eventually get healthier or whatever.

If you adopt a vegan lifestyle because you wish to not harm animals, you wouldn't think that an occasional piece of cheese or meat would be ok, yet a strict vegetarian who follows the diet for health reasons might think it's ok. Health is more like an added bonus when you go vegan, at least if you adopt a healthy vegan diet.

Quote:

---

hamster

Regardless of the reason, the effect is the same.

---

No... people would still go hunting, accept that animals were treated badly in circuses, they'd wear fur and leather etc.

Quote:

---

I think we should encourage as much dietary veganism as we can.

---

Veganism is a principle based on ethics, so there can't be such a thing as 'dietary veganism', which is why we can't encourage it. But there are people who would like veganism to be something not based on ethics - and instead just represent something 'dietary', just like there are "vegetarians who eat fish and chicken".

Because there's a little group of people who rather want to change veganism into something which suits them better than change their own lifestyle, one of our board rules says "12) Don't use our forum to try to change veganism to something else than it is."

The topic isn't even up for discussion: if someone wants to use this forum for promoting the idea there's a variation of veganism which is only about diet, their accounts will be deactivated, just like 'vegetarians who eat fish' would have been banned if this was a forum for vegetarians...

I couldn't agree more, Korn! :thumbsup:

Health may be one of several motivations for going vegan, but without the ethical dimension there is no such thing as veganism. And "ethical dimension" I believe could mean everything from animal rights to ahimsa to animal welfare (taken to its logical conclusion) to simply just empathy for other creatures than humans.

There is no question, people who adopt a vegan-like diet for health reasons aren't true vegans. We should also encourage people who are interested to fully adopt all the tenets of veganism and become advocates for animals.

I for one am certainly not trying to re-define what it means to be a vegan. However, I'm also not one to look a gift horse in the mouth. To borrow a non-vegan phrase "you catch more flies with honey..."

The act of converting the "diet" folks to true veganism is the low-hanging fruit of activism. Someone who has given up all animal products from their diet should be MUCH easier to convince to give up all remaining animal products in their life than the average carnivore.

I don't think I'm trying to change the definition of veganism. I'm saying we can take advantage of this new health trend to help more people see the light. If that opinion is something that I should be banned over, then so be it. It has been a pleasure reading and participating in the forum and I wish everyone the best of luck.

Quote:

---

Korn

No... people would still go hunting, accept that animals were treated badly in circuses, they'd wear fur and leather etc.


Veganism is a principle based on ethics, so there can't be such a thing as 'dietary veganism', which is why we can't encourage it. But there are people who would like veganism to be something not based on ethics - and instead just represent something 'dietary', just like there are "vegetarians who eat fish and chicken".

Because there's a little group of people who rather want to change veganism into something which suits them better than change their own lifestyle, one of our board rules says "12) Don't use our forum to try to change veganism to something else than it is."

The topic isn't even up for discussion: if someone wants to use this forum for promoting the idea there's a variation of veganism which is only about diet, their accounts will be deactivated, just like 'vegetarians who eat fish' would have been banned if this was a forum for vegetarians...

---

Hi,
The term 'dietary vegan' suggests that there are two variations of vegan: the dietary type, and the ethical type. But since 'vegan', as such, is a term for people who avoid all animal products as much as possible and practical, the term 'vegan' can't be used about someone who doesn't do that; eg. one who only eats vegan food (for whatever reason), but who is a hunter, use fur an all that. If someone would register here and say eg. hunter who eat only vegan food also is a vegan, (a 'dietary' one), that would both be wrong and an example of altering the very meaning of 'vegan'.

To say that "Max is a dietary vegan, but he isn't a vegan" makes as little sense as saying "Max is a friendly dog, but he isn't a dog". The very expression 'dietary vegan' is, by it's very existence, an alteration of the meaning of vegan, because it's implies that there are ethical and non-ethical vegans, or that some vegans avoid animal products as much as possible, while other vegans (the "dietary vegans") only avoid animal products as much as possible in their diet.

Quote:

---

I'm saying we can take advantage of this new health trend to help more people see the light. If that opinion is something that I should be banned over, then so be it. It has been a pleasure reading and participating in the forum and I wish everyone the best of luck.

---

Of course nobody will be banned for insisting that "we can take advantage of this new health trend to help more people see the light". :-)

Quote:

---

I think we should encourage as much dietary veganism as we can.

---

Why not just call it vegetarianism (but not, of course lacto- or lacto/ovo-vegetarianism). Vegetarians who eat only plant based food sometimes call themselves 'total vegetarians' - or 'strict vegetarians', but personally, I don't like that term. What you describe as 'dietary veganism' is a kind of vegetarianism, not a kind of veganism.

There simply no need to use 'dietary veganism' - that term only contributes the spreading a myth the veganism may or may not be an ethical choice. The sad thing is that there's a fraction i the good old Vegan Society who want to change VS to be an organization which only is about food and skip the ethical part and become only about food. I'm convinced that it's one of these people who have sneaked the term 'dietary vegan' into the Vegan Society's site. It's would be brilliant to have a good, large organization focusing on vegan food only - one which could embrace all those who are interested in eating vegan but who aren't vegans. It's just too bad that some people want to hijack the original vegan society.

Quote:

---

Korn

There simply no need to use 'dietary veganism' - that term only contributes the spreading a myth the veganism may or may not be an ethical choice. The sad thing is that there's a fraction i the good old Vegan Society who want to change VS to be an organization which only is about food and skip the ethical part and become only about food. I'm convinced that it's one of these people who have sneaked the term 'dietary vegan' into the Vegan Society's site. It's would be brilliant to have a good, large organization focusing on vegan food only - one which could embrace all those who are interested in eating vegan but who aren't vegans. It's just too bad that some people want to hijack the original vegan society.

---

For the record, I wasn't the one who introduced the term into the thread. It was introduced by the poster talking about the Wikipedia article. And arguments about Taxonomy aside, I think we all know what is being talked about there.

If you are worried that the forum will be flooded with non-octo/lacto vegetarian hunters, if someone says a kind word towards the "health" folks, then I'd say don't worry about it. The odds of that happening are negligible. None of the hunters I've ever met healthy or not would ever join an "animal rights" forum such as this.

Again, it doesn't matter what we call these people in reality they are just unenlightened folks who have made an admirable first step towards our ideal. I'd say rather than rejecting them outright we should encourage them to see the error of their ways and to become advocates for the cause themselves.

Furthermore. While it is true that some health people may still continue to hunt or wear leather etc... I'd rather have a wave of health-based vegetarianism sweep the nation than to reject such a movement on principle. Remember the step from a plant-based diet to a vegan lifestyle is a very incremental one. A much smaller span to bridge than trying to convert the meat eating masses with propaganda posters.

A little 'bump' here ..

The difference between dietary veganism and full lifestyle veganism is limited solely to the use/non-use of animal by-products?

If so then every single dietary vegan, by abstaining from primary animals products, inherently reduces the quantity of animal by-products entering the chain?

If so, and given that if/when availabilty of animal by products falls below 'critical mass' they become commercialy unviable, then this follows:

Sufficient numbers of people becoming dietary vegans would cause animal by-products to become commercialy unviable and would thus kinda automaticaly bring full lifestyle veganism about.


Wittingly, or unwittingly, dietary vegans should therefore, imho, be seen not as the lifestyle vegans 'enemy' but as the lifestyles vegans freind.

Most certainly, wittingly or unwittingly, dietary veganism is a very usefull 'tool'?

Quote:

---

Cupid Stunt

Wittingly, or unwittingly, dietary vegans should therefore, imho, be seen not as the lifestyle vegans 'enemy' but as the lifestyles vegans freind.

---

Except that there's no such thing as a dietary vegan, I agree. People who eat only vegan food are certainly making a difference - even if they keep using fur, leather products etc. If there would be both 'dietary' and 'ethical vegans', we would start hearing parallels to those "I'm a vegetarian, but I eat fish, so I guess that makes me a pesco-vegetarian" statements: "I'm a vegan, but I use fur....".



But since veganism, as such, "denotes a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude – as far as is possible and practical – all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose", being a vegan is always an ethical choice. A 'dietary vegan' who lives on a plant based diet but has not problems with hunting simply isn't a vegan, and I have a hard time finding out why he would want to define himself as a vegan - since he doesn't agree with veganism anyway.

A person who only eats vegan food but doesn't agree in veganism, and who goes hunting in the weekends is a vegetarian (but obviously not a lacto-vegetarian, lacto-ovo-vegetarian etc), and not a vegan. Since he is not a vegan, he shouldn't call himself a vegan, but a vegetarian - so I disagree with using the term 'dietary vegan' about this group of people, because when using the term 'dietary vegan' you kind of say that there are different kinds of vegans, some which are OK with non-dietary animal abuse, and others who are 'ethical vegans'. Just by using the 'dietary vegan' term, you kind of acknowledge the false assumption that there are 'ethical' and non-ethical vegans, which would be a major step towards diluting the meaning of 'vegan'. If the word vegan would lose it's meaning, someone would have to create a new term, but at some point, whatever that new word was, someone would want to use that new term about themselves, even if they don't really agree in it's meaning, and things would keep going in circles. The only way to break that circle is to avoid the term 'dietary vegan' altogether.

Quote:

---

The difference between dietary veganism and full lifestyle veganism is limited solely to the use/non-use of animal by-products?

---

Why would fur and leather be a byproduct, while meat would not be a byproduct? It's not only about the use of such products anyway - it's about an ethical choice, which influences more than what you personally use.

The Vegan Forum and diluted veganism

It was my understanding that people who eat vegan but don't follow the ethical reasons for being vegan, would be strict vegetarians instead. Or is that incorrect?

I get where you're coming from.

I find it kind of annoying when people who are vegans for health reasons say dairy and meat are 'gross' because they are full of chemicals and won't eat it.
Personally I find animal products sad, rather than gross. I see suffering rather than how unhealthy it is.

And I am have more concern for animals being pumped full of chemicals, and how they are feeling. I don't really care how it affects people, they have a choice whether to eat it or not. Animals have no say in it at all.

As you say, being a vegan is more than just not eating animal products. It's not using anything that is produced from animal suffering.

I don't think eating only vegan food would give you any real health benefit anyway. Eating loads of animal products might be bad for you but eating them occasionally is probably fine, health wise.

Quote:

---

Korn

Except that there's no such thing as a dietary vegan, I agree.

---

What do you like to call people who adhere strictly to a vegan diet without taking veganism so strictly non-dietarily, Korn?

Quote:

---

Why would fur and leather be a byproduct, while meat would not be a byproduct?

---

It's purely a matter of accurate definition here ..

Quote:

---

by·prod·uct or by-prod·uct (bhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/imacr.gifhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/prime.gifprhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/obreve.gifdhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/lprime.gifhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/schwa.gifkt)n.1. Something produced in the making of something else.
2. A secondary result; a side effect.

---

In the case of animals slaughtered primarily for their skins then the carcass, and everything that is not fur, is(are) by definition by-product(s).

In the case of animals slaughtered primarily for their meat then the skin, and everything that is not meat, is(are) by definition by-product(s).

Quote:

---

It's not only about the use of such products anyway ..

---

It is, ultimately, all about the use of primary-products though?

Quote:

---

misosoup

Personally I find animal products sad, rather than gross. I see suffering rather than how unhealthy it is.

---

I see animal products as sad and gross - gross in the meaning of "they repulse me".

Quote:

---

Cupid Stunt

What do you like to call people who adhere strictly to a vegan diet without taking veganism so strictly non-dietarily, Korn?

---

That's where typically "Strict vegetarian" or "Pure vegetarian" comes in denoting somebody who does not consume animal products (but might use them).

Best regards,
Andy

It seems to me that the whole idea of a "dietary vegan" arises from the misconception that there even is a "Vegan Diet." This is coming up more recently since Bill Clinton, Michele Pfeifer, and other celebs have adopted a "vegan diet" for health reasons. My diet is a "by-product" of my Veganism. I'm not a Vegan because of what i eat.

So, on the one hand it's good that more attention is being shown to vegetarianism as a healthful dietary choice for people and the planet, but on the other, the term "Vegan" is being muddled up with fad diets, healthy heart and weight-loss schemes.
Perhaps having 'veg' in it throws people off course... maybe we need a new term.. now that the media is redefining 'vegan' as a diet.

Quote:

---

Cupid Stunt

What do you like to call people who adhere strictly to a vegan diet without taking veganism so strictly non-dietarily, Korn?

---

Don't know, what about 'vegetarians' (as opposed to lacto-vegetarians, lacto-ovo vegetarians etc)? Some people use the term 'total vegetarians'. Plant eaters/herbivores will probably also do. 'Vegan eaters' doesn't sound good; it sounds like they eat vegans. Some people who eat raw food call themselves raw fooders, but does 'vegan fooders' sound good?

I started to do a little reserch in to diets and health issues with modern food,
as such you have the tesco horse meat sacandel, albeit wider spread than tesco,
plus in the past you have had BSE/Mad cows diesese,
then you have god knows additives, preservatives,chemicles etc in food of today
and the amount of hidden sugars esp in the health food ranges,

and in my reserch i quickly found veganism and saw it was a good and clean food source to fuel my body with out
worry of any ill efects of eating meat or all manner of chemicles,

then soon after changing my diet, i kept on discovering more reasons to be vegan
like the fact it is actualy helthyer on the planet and i have always been concernd with recycling and
being as wast free as possible

and i also discoverd how bad animal cruilty actualy is in the meat industry
from organic trhough to factory farming like eggs and chickens are a good example here

and so from my journy to become vegan orginaly for health reasons it waent long befor the ethicle reasons cropped up
and now i even check the food labeled vegan to be sure it is true to veganism (as in it no palm oil etc is containd in the food) and not just dietry terms


so i agree
veganism is a life style chioce and is more than a diet
veganism is a choice that is
against animal cruelity and use of animal products for clothing and entertainment, testing, and food.
it is all for living in harmony with the planet
all as one package life style choice and it cant be broken apart