What is the argument against Veganism?

As a vegan, I am not unbiased. I hold a strong belief that veganism is the only way to go, both for ethical and nutritional reasons. However, I do find it important to discuss the argument against Veganism because to understand the opponent is to overcome the opposition.

Continuing on with the series, Cordain’s argument against veganism is that there are no evolutionary reasons as to why humans should require a low, and not a high protein diet. Humans have been hunting as well as gathering for multiple centuries, so why would eating meat be bad?

Also, Cordain argues that Campbell’s statement that a diet of around ten percent protein intake is proper, as opposed to the fifteen to seventeen percent that Cordain supports, is based only on nitrogen management in the body, and not the protein that is required for the body to function properly in other ways.

A huge point that Campbell pursues in both The China Study and “The Protein Debate” is that consuming animal protein provides an ideal environment for tumor growth and mutation. He consistently demonstrates this correlation in both studies based on animal reactions as well as the cross examination of the American meat based diet to the rural Chinese plant based diet. The argument Cordain makes against this is that correlation does not necessarily equal causation. This is a potentially valid point.

Finally, Cordain exerts that the study Campbell completed with rats showing the effect casein (milk protein) has on tumor growth is not valid in this argument because Campbell did not specifically test meat based proteins such as actin and myosin.

What do you think? How will Campbell drive home is point that veganism is better in his rebuttal against Cordain?

Stay tuned. Bean out.

What does Campbell have to say?

Continuing from my last post, here are Professor Campbell’s main points about why vegan is better than paleo. Firstly, it is important to note that Campbell is the author of The China Study, the most comprehensive nutritional study ever conducted. Its formulation involved twenty years of research and supplication from other nutritional studies conducted before it. I highly recommend renting it from the library or purchasing it for your own collection. It’s a tough read, but it’s fantastic.

Moving on; here are some main points from Campbell’s argument. The first thing he asserts is, of course, that a vegan diet leads to better health. Campbell states that ingesting animal products such as meat and dairy have been shown to lead to steroid and growth hormone imbalances in the human body. As a matter of fact, both Campbell and Cordain agree that consuming dairy products in unnatural and unhealthy for humans. Thinking about it logically, the only animals to consume dairy after infancy are humans, and other animals certainly don’t drink the milk of other species. It’s kind of bizarre and disturbing, when you think about it.

Another point Campbell scores for the vegans relates to the actual method of experimentation and research each debater subscribes to. Cordain supports the reductionist approach, studying each nutrient individually, whereas Campbell takes a holistic approach, studying how all of the nutrients work and react together. Need I say more?

The final major point Campbell makes is that the consumption of animal protein has been positively correlated with higher rates of cancer such as breast, prostate, kidney, colon, and ovarian cancer. It has also been correlated in the same manner with cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, hypertension, osteoporosis, multiple sclerosis, and kidney stones.

Next time, I will post Cordain’s rebuttal to Campbell’s points.

Bean out.

What is the “Paleo” argument?

As I mentioned in my last post, Professor Loren Cordain is the man responsible for the nutritional theory known as “The Paleo Diet.” The Paleo Diet recommends that people eat like our evolutionary ancestors did: a non-processed balance of meats, vegetables, and few whole grains.

In “The Protein Debate,” Cordain reports benefits such as reduced gut size and metabolic activity, as well as an expansion in brain size for those who eat as he recommends. He also reports that the Paleo Diet allows for a better blood lipid profile, lower blood pressure, insulin sensitivity and glycemic control.

Another mainstay of Cordain’s argument is that meats have more of everything (different proteins and nutrients) packed into them whereas a vegetarian diet requires many different foods to provide the same nutritional content as one piece of meat.

Another interesting tidbit to consider about Cordain’s Paleo Diet is that Cordain supports the reductionist approach to studying diet. This means he supports the method of dietary study where the scientist studies one nutrient at a time as opposed to studying diet holistically and observing how everything works together an affects the human system.

So what is Campbell’s argument? And why do I subscribe to the vegan approach, even though Cordain makes some interesting points? Read on this week to find out more.

Bean out.

For your own research purposes, check out the full debate: http://www.catalystathletics.com/articles/downloads/proteinDebate.pdf

Analyzing “The Protein Debate”

Protein. Calcium. Evolution. These are buzz words of nutrition. One needs protein for energy and muscle growth. One needs calcium for bone and cartilage strength. Evolution dictates diet. In a way, all of these statements are true. But they are oversimplified statements, and they need to be studied and expounded upon to produce any beneficial and reliable knowledge. For that purpose I will turn the spotlight over to Professors Cordain and Campbell.

These two men have very different approaches to nutrition. Professor Loren Cordain champions the “paleo diet”: a way of eating that promotes the study evolutionary biology in order to deduce the proper nutrition requirements from the history told in the chemistry of fossils. Campbell subscribes to the vegan approach: an all-natural, all-plant diet that he has been studying and advocating for well over two decades.

“The Protein Debate” http://www.catalystathletics.com/articles/downloads/proteinDebate.pdf is a compilation of their arguments and rebuttals to each other’s views on diet and nutrition.

This marks the beginning of my week long blog report on the two very different and well supported arguments concerning diet and the reasons as to why you should subscribe to the vegan approach.

Bean’ healthy.