The Grapevine (OFF TOPIC CHAT) Part II

Thelonious Monk

Ah I know, I guess I'm just glad to see articles explaining meat isn't the be all and end all in order to be healthy, and in an Irish publication too

jh79

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Ah I know, I guess I'm just glad to see articles explaining meat isn't the be all and end all in order to be healthy, and in an Irish publication too

As a meat eater, I take comfort in the fact that even taking this study into account once my BMI is in range I can eat as much red meat as I like. In theory, that should translate to 70g a day.

I know studies on nutrition are popular on this forum but the reality is these studies should be viewed with caution. Too many variables to make any real meaningful conclusions.


I think it was the head of the Irish Cancer Society that said that the only real indicators of health outcomes are BMI and wealth. I genuinely don't think anybody, whether vegan or meat eater, should worry about their diet beyond BMI. The human body is quite resilient. Extra nutrition is just wasted.

New Home

jh79 wrote: »

As a meat eater, I take comfort in the fact that even taking this study into account once my BMI is in range I can eat as much red meat as I like. In theory, that should translate to 70g a day.

I know studies on nutrition are popular on this forum but the reality is these studies should be viewed with caution. Too many variables to make any real meaningful conclusions.


I think it was the head of the Irish Cancer Society that said that the only real indicators of health outcomes are BMI and wealth. I genuinely don't think anybody, whether vegan or meat eater, should worry about their diet beyond BMI. The human body is quite resilient. Extra nutrition is just wasted.

You could maintain a perfect BMI eating only sugar provided it's in the right amount, but you'd get no other nutrients and your health would most definitely be affected.

Tar.Aldarion

There are a lot of factors beyond BMI and wealth, the longest living peoples have often been really poor. Muscular people have a high BMI.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bmi-is-a-terrible-measure-of-health/

These are a good place to start, commonalities between each of the places where people lived longest:

Family – put ahead of other concerns
Less smoking
Semi-vegetarianism – the majority of food consumed is derived from plants
Constant moderate physical activity – an inseparable part of life
Social engagement – people of all ages are socially active and integrated into their communities
Legumes – commonly consumed

...


Moderate, regular physical activity.
Life purpose.
Stress reduction.
Moderate caloric intake.
Plant-based diet.
Moderate alcohol intake, especially wine.
Engagement in spirituality or religion.
Engagement in family life.
Engagement in social life.

Thelonious Monk

I remember seeing something on BBC showing the people who live the longest in the world all seem to have a diet based around pulses in common. Sardinia and parts of Japan were 2 of them.

New Home

Fish, more so than pulses (unfortunately for the fish. ).

Thelonious Monk

No not fish according to this

Cracking the secret of a longer life

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-42791876

They eat mainly beans, with vegetables, fruit and whole grains

New Home

Ah, ok.

It was fish on other documentaries I'd seen (and stuff I'd read, e.g. this one) a while back - they were saying the fish oils might have had something to do with it.

Edit: Sorry, maybe it's staring at me in the face but I can't see it, where do they mention pulses in that article?

igCorcaigh

New Home wrote: »

Ah, ok.

It was fish on other documentaries I'd seen (and stuff I'd read, e.g. this one) a while back - they were saying the fish oils might have had something to do with it.

Edit: Sorry, maybe it's staring at me in the face but I can't see it, where do they mention pulses in that article?

Beans are mentioned in the list of bullet points.

Interesting too how they mention eating to 80% full.

gozunda

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/eating-meat-linked-to-wide-range-of-illnesses-study-1.4499364

Thank god for lentils

The lead author behind that study is
Keren Papier.

Keren Papier is a Nutritional Epidemiologist whose research examines the burden and major modifiable risk factors (diet, lifestyle) of malnutrition and non-communicable diseases in different populations. She has a particular interest in cardio-metabolic diseases and in assessing risk factors that affect vulnerable population groups. Her international research settings include: Thailand, Philippines, Australia, and the UK

Interestingly she has also written on the subject of vegan diets

Is a vegan diet healthier? Five reasons why we can't tell for sure

While some research has shown that vegan diets have positive health effects, such as lower risks of heart disease, diabetes and diverticular disease, our recent study also showed that vegans may have a higher risk of fractures, and vegans and vegetarians combined may have a higher risk of haemorrhagic stroke.

https://theconversation.com/amp/is-a-vegan-diet-healthier-five-reasons-why-we-cant-tell-for-sure-152131?__twitter_impression=true

That said from an academic pov - I'd have some reservations about who is funding the current body of research which appears to be largely funded by the Welcome Trust

At the Cancer Epidemiology Unit (CEU), Keren's work forms part of the Wellcome Trust funded LEAP Project (Livestock, Environment and People). For this work, she examines the relationship between animal sourced foods (particularly meat and dairy) and health outcomes

The study is part of an £127m initiative by the Wellcome Trust funding 23 different projects. Of note - the Welcome Trust funded the now largely discredited EAT-Lancet Report.

Part of that is the Wellcome Trust funding another £5 million vegan diet study with research bodies in Norfolk who have joined forces for a £5 million  initiative probing the health benefits of a purely plant-based diet.

https://www.businessweekly.co.uk/news/academia-research/wellcome-trust-funds-%C2%A35-million-vegan-diet-study

Thelonious Monk

igCorcaigh wrote: »

Beans are mentioned in the list of bullet points.

Interesting too how they mention eating to 80% full.

I suppose your interpretation of full may be different to others! If I ate till I no longer could eat every day I'd be obese in no time.

Tar.Aldarion

igCorcaigh wrote: »

Beans are mentioned in the list of bullet points.

Interesting too how they mention eating to 80% full.

Calorific restriction is thought to be good for longevity. Seems so is limiting as much as possible certain amino acids like methionine (lower in veggie sources of protein). A lot of things. "Don't eat too much, mostly plants". have a stress free lifestyle insofar that you can, do moderate exercise and hav a good social/family life.

jh79

New Home wrote: »

You could maintain a perfect BMI eating only sugar provided it's in the right amount, but you'd get no other nutrients and your health would most definitely be affected.

I didn't mean it in such an extreme way.

Basic Irish diet of meat and two veg versus a vegan diet that targets certain foods such as nuts, BMI the same, the outcomes are the same.

I just thing people shouldn't obsess over their diet if their BMI is ok and they are having a bit of everything. Eating lots of kale or nuts or legumes is not going to give you any advantage over the simple meat and two veg approach.

jh79

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

There are a lot of factors beyond BMI and wealth, the longest living peoples have often been really poor. Muscular people have a high BMI.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bmi-is-a-terrible-measure-of-health/

These are a good place to start, commonalities between each of the places where people lived longest:

I did say that BMI was the best not that it was perfect. In large scale public health studies BMI is fine. For individuals at the extremes such as low BMI but big belly then not so much but public health research is population based.

All these studies have tons of variables making causation impossible. The correlation between BMI and health outcomes is stronger than a specific diet vs health outcomes.

Tar.Aldarion

jh79 wrote: »

I did say that BMI was the best not that it was perfect. In large scale public health studies BMI is fine. For individuals at the extremes such as low BMI but big belly then not so much but public health research is population based.

All these studies have tons of variables making causation impossible. The correlation between BMI and health outcomes is stronger than a specific diet vs health outcomes.

It's ok, I think BF percentage (can be hard to get very accurate) and waist:hip ratio are much better. None of them are perfect but they are a small bit in a picture I guess. The real danger is fat in certain places / being overweight in general yeah.
I believe diet can impact outcomes more than you may be ascribing (even between two non processed diets as above), but what that diet is is a very hard thing to nail down, because health is such a complex topic, not to mention it is massively lobbied.

New Home

This was in CVPL. Really, though, I thought of all the ones that get eaten, "It's not like they're sentient beings".

gozunda

I'm fairly certain the majority do understand that land animals and sea creatures are indeed sentient - that is they are able to perceive or feel things.

The above study deals with the subject of Cephalopod intelligence

There's a fairly good body of existing research on cepleopod intelligence within the wider field of Teuthology.

Cephalopod intelligence is a measure of the cognitive ability of the cephalopod class of molluscs.

Cephalopods are widely regarded as the most intelligent of the invertebrates, and have well developed senses and large brains (larger than those of gastropods).The nervous system of cephalopods is the most complex of the invertebrates and their brain-to-body-mass ratio falls between that of endothermic and ectothermic vertebrates. Captive cephalopods have also been known to climb out of their aquaria, maneuver a distance of the lab floor, enter another aquarium to feed on the crabs, and return to their own aquarium.

Some interesting links on this and legislative protection in the Wikipedia article

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cephalopod_intelligence

Thelonious Monk

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/09/chinas-appetite-for-meat-fades-as-vegan-revolution-takes-hold

Fake meat market growing in China, good to hear. I see it's also government policy for them to reduce meat consumption by 50% in future -

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/20/chinas-meat-consumption-climate-change

Good to know such a large part of the global population are at least doing something, I think there would be murder if any politician mentioned eating less meat in Ireland.

gozunda

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/09/chinas-appetite-for-meat-fades-as-vegan-revolution-takes-hold

Fake meat market growing in China, good to hear. I see it's also government policy for them to reduce meat consumption by 50% in future -

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/20/chinas-meat-consumption-climate-change

Good to know such a large part of the global population are at least doing something, I think there would be murder if any politician mentioned eating less meat in Ireland.

Not a huge fan of the Guardian personally due to the practice of funding articles by interest groups.

That aside - the second link (which is approx 4 years old) - appears to be using incorrect data for greenhouse emissions for the year 2016

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/20/chinas-meat-consumption-climate-change

The above article makes the following claim that "planet warming emissions" from animal based agriculture are greater than emissions from the transport sector viz.

Globally, 14.5% of planet-warming emissions emanate from the keeping and eating of cows, chickens, pigs and other animals – more than the emissions from the entire transport sector. ....

That is incorrect and misleading.

Checking those figures for 2016 - greengouse gas emissions from Transport clearly exceeds all forms of agriculture - including animal, horticultural and arable

In 2016 agriculture (that is all types of agriculture including livestock and crop cultivation etc) accounted for 11.8% of all global emissions - with emission from cows and other livestock contributing about half (5.8%) of the 11.8% total.

In 2016 Transport accounted for a total of 15.9% of total global emissions

A separate category from other forms of land use, land-use change and forestry including afforestation and deforestation - contributed 6.5% of greenhouse gas emissions. This landuse change included all forms of landuse change including burning, cropland and forestry.


Souce:
https://www.wri.org/resources/data-visualizations/world-greenhouse-gas-emissions-2016

Perhaps not surprisingly energy consumption remains by far the biggest source of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. The energy sector includes transportation, electricity and heat, buildings, manufacturing and construction, fugitive emissions and other fuel combustion. These sectors accounted for some 73% of global greenhouse gas emissions in 2016 and an estimated 77% in 2020.

Tilikum17

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/travel/2021/02/the-eight-best-cities-for-vegans/amp

Dublin #4 on the list of best cities for Vegans.

Thelonious Monk

https://www.tipperarylive.ie/news/farming/615901/anger-and-disgust-in-tipp-as-15-carves-are-dumped-in-drains.html

Calves are really getting a raw deal these days with the exports and this carry on

Tilikum17

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

https://www.tipperarylive.ie/news/farming/615901/anger-and-disgust-in-tipp-as-15-carves-are-dumped-in-drains.html

Calves are really getting a raw deal these days with the exports and this carry on

“Irish farmers love their animals”

The rubbish you have to read on here. It’s nothing new.

https://www.farmersjournal.ie/dead-calves-dumped-in-roscommon-bog-585260

PainInTheArse

Here is some more

https://www.farmersjournal.ie/seven-dead-lambs-dumped-in-kerry-pearl-mussel-river-608042

Mac Taylor

Tilikum17 wrote: »

“Irish farmers love their animals”

The rubbish you have to read on here. It’s nothing new.

https://www.farmersjournal.ie/dead-calves-dumped-in-roscommon-bog-585260

Wow.....generalisation at its best. Tarnish every farmer because of the actions of a tiny tiny minority. A person that dumps their stock like that has to have many issues unfortunately. I could trawl the internet for cases of neglect relating to vegans and apply that to all vegans but I’m not hot wired that way. Anyway keep believing what you want.

Tilikum17

Mac Taylor wrote: »

Wow.....generalisation at its best. Tarnish every farmer because of the actions of a tiny tiny minority. A person that dumps their stock like that has to have many issues unfortunately. I could trawl the internet for cases of neglect relating to vegans and apply that to all vegans but I’m not hot wired that way. Anyway keep believing what you want.

When someone posts a video on this forum where animals are being treated badly, farmers will come on here saying “but but but that doesn’t happen in Ireland”. The links above show what types of farmers there is in this country no matter how small the minority.....they clearly exist. I’m not saying every farmers does it. God good.

Next time our resident stalker comes on here posting about how well animals are treated on farms in this country, I’ll reply with the links above.

Nekarsulm

If you have proof those dead animals were treated badly, by all means pist it.
As you may or may not know, all bovines are DNA tested after birth.
So the Dept. Ag. database will pinpoint the dams of those dumped carcass's and the fools who dumped them will be severely dealt with.

Bigbooty

Well they're dead and thrown in a ditch like trash. I don't know what other proof you'd need for maltreatment. You must have a very unusual definition of bad treatment.. oh wait.

Nekarsulm

Bigbooty wrote: »

Well they're dead and thrown in a ditch like trash. I don't know what other proof you'd need for maltreatment. You must have a very unusual definition of bad treatment.. oh wait.

Being dead is not evidence of maltreatment, everything dies.
If you know why they died, please enlighten us.
If they died from abuse or neglect, by all means publish your proof.

And you carefully ignored the second part of my post, I see.

Bigbooty

Why would I need proof to say that someone doesn't care about their animals because they just dumped them in a ditch? I have never discarded any of the animals in my care like that because I had respect for them. It's an opinion and I can freely state that. I'm not singling out a specific person and slandering them.

Nekarsulm

Bigbooty wrote: »

Why would I need proof to say that someone doesn't care about their animals because they just dumped them in a ditch? I have never discarded any of the animals in my care like that because I had respect for them. It's an opinion and I can freely state that. I'm not singling out a specific person and slandering them.

Because you have no proof how they treat their animals whilst they are alive, when they are dead they end up in a can of Whiskers anyway.
It's your opinion, and so be it.
It's my opinion that tarring all livestock keepers by the actions of the few is blinkered reasoning.
The individuals involved in dumping animal carcasses have no regard for the dead animals, their neighbours, nor the environment.
They will be tracked down by DNA sampling and possibly face Court proceedings, and definately face severe financial penalties.