sacha, you'll want to skip this one.
Steersman wrote:Good questions to which I don’t know that I have many answers. And I probably can stand corrected as far as the “animal proteins†comment is concerned – proteins are protein regardless of where they come from, but the question is what else comes along with them. Which is sort of what I had in mind and on which point you might take a look at
this document. Maybe a little bit biased but seems like some credible information. For instance there’s a table at the bottom that lists the protein contents for various meats and grains with soybeans being at the top followed by pork. But what is particularly interesting are the relative amounts of cholesterol, various minerals, fats, fibrer and energy.
Soystache.com?! :D
Take a look at their list - it may be because each listing is a 100 gm serving, & some of those foods maybe you wouldn't typically eat that much at once, but the meats are not the highest in saturated fat. The 3 foods highest in saturated fat (per 100 gm serving) according to that list are peanuts, pumpkin & squash seeds, and soy!
(Again, it's probably only because they're comparing # of grams, not 1 serving of each food. But it's pretty funny!)
Steersman wrote:There are also some additional links in the document, some of which are dead (new ones below), but several of them are from various medical organizations touting the benefits of vegetarian diets:
The Protein Myth; Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine:
The average American diet contains meat and dairy products. As a result, it is often too high in protein. This can lead to a number of serious health problems:
â– Kidney Disease: When people eat too much protein, they take in more nitrogen than they need. This places a strain on the kidneys, which must expel the extra nitrogen through urine. People with kidney disease are encouraged to eat low-protein diets. Such a diet reduces the excess levels of nitrogen and can also help prevent kidney disease.
â– Cancer: Although fat is the dietary substance most often singled out for increasing cancer risk, protein also plays a role. Populations who eat meat regularly are at increased risk for colon cancer, and researchers believe that the fat, protein, natural carcinogens, and absence of fiber in meat all play roles. The 1997 report of the World Cancer Research Fund and American Institute for Cancer Research, Food, Nutrition, and the Prevention of Cancer, noted that meaty, high-protein diets were linked with some types of cancer.
â– Osteoporosis and Kidney Stones: Diets that are rich in animal protein cause people to excrete more calcium than normal through their kidneys and increase the risk of osteoporosis. Countries with lower-protein diets have lower rates of osteoporosis and hip fractures.
Certainly, it's far easier to consume lots of protein from animal sources than from plant sources, and most people in developed countries suffer no shortage of protein intake, in fact may get more than is ideal.
I knew about the others listed above but hadn't heard the suggestion before that
protein intake might be associated with cancer risk. High fat intake, low fiber intake, and certain additives or ways of preparing food have been associated and there are mechanisms suggested. Not sure why protein would be; I may look into that a bit, see what the mechanism is thought to be.
Steersman wrote:And the
American Heart Association has this to say on vegetarian diets in general:
Most vegetarian diets are low in or devoid of animal products. They’re also usually lower than nonvegetarian diets in total fat, saturated fat and cholesterol. Many studies have shown that vegetarians seem to have a lower risk of obesity, coronary heart disease (which causes heart attack), high blood pressure, diabetes mellitus and some forms of cancer.
But you’re probably right about the vitamin B12 – I didn’t see that listed in the Wikipedia articles for soybeans and peanuts, foods that seem to have most of the other essential vitamins. I gather that a vegetarian diet does need to be a little more circumspect about eating various types to ensure the full complement is obtained.
Problem with determining health benefit of vegetarianism is that people who choose to be vegetarian or vegan may also have, or have already had, healthier lifestyles. I poked around briefly, found a couple studies that found or didn't find differences. FWIW, here's the abstract for a 2006 review from the UK that comments on a number of the factors we've mentioned:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16441942. You can probably find other reviews that conclude there is a difference in health outcomes. Anyway, this one also points out that calcium is also harder to get from a plant-based diet; I'd forgotten to include that one.
...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.
