• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

People say they're moving to Canada because of Obamacare

Didn't claim to any credentials. Just know that all the fat folks walking around don't have medical conditions. They just plain old eat fatty foods. The way to cure that "problem" is to stop eating fatty foods. I guess that is confusing because it is such a simple solution. But there are times when simplicity is really the way to go.
Simplicity in this case is merely a sign of unwillingness to face up to the complexity of the issue.
 
It's a long overdue reform of a crippled and increasingly dysfunctional system, a reform that includes new taxes, new tax credits, and new subsidies, but which is a priori deficit-neutral, thereby not adding to net taxes or to the net need for taxes.



You had me at TAXES.
 
One useful thing about the obesity crisis: It provides a handy dandy, simple explanation for the soaring cost of health care and gives a great excuse to simply say, "Hey, just eat less!" and then go on our way doing nothing about the core issues. It even fits neatly on a bumper sticker: "Eat less". It's a lot like the "just say no" campaign, simple, easy to understand, and totally ineffective.

But, it makes us feel good. There. I've offered a solution to the problem, so it's now solved.
 
So even with a luxury of time that most people simply don't have available, you are able to prepare perhaps 5% (?) of the sometimes fattening anyway foods that you eat from scratch using all these wholesome natural ingredients? That's all well and good, but it doesn't really get you off the train.


Hmmm. Avoidance by some of self-criticism implied under reality-based thinking, then.

My point was that junk food is easier than healhy food. preparing a salad takes more time than nuking a burrito. the veggies in the salad also can go bad if you don't eat them in a timely fashion, wheras the burrito is happy to remain in your freezer for an indefinite period of time. It isn't so much a problem with access to healthy food but with ease of junk food.

Not sure what that bit about avoidance was, perhaps you misunderstood me. I was merely pointing out that blaming the victim is/was/will always be used I was not advocating the tactic
 
Take a look around. This recently invented obesity meme is a fraud. The whole world is getting fatter, and a principal reason for that is the spread of the "western diet", characterized as it is by the highly refined, nutrient-hollow, oversalted, fat- and calorie-laden foodstuffs produced and promoted by a giant, for-profit, agribusiness industry. Consumers can only buy what is available on the shelves, and that ain't what it used to be.

As for drugs, the ones that do by far the most damage are the ones mis-prescribed and mal-administered by an out of control, for-profit health care system. Drugs of choice -- including anabolic steroids, by the way -- do no harm at all in comparison.

Part of the job of the propagandists hired by the people who make all the profits from these profit-driven systems is to come up with phony reasons to blame the people being hurt by them for their own injuries. Rapists used to try that sort of blame-the-victim thing back in the day, but we don't let them get way with that anymore. Some people need to make the same kind of progress in a few other areas.

Somebody else here already said the healthy foods are on the shelves, and they are right. There is actually more healthy food available than in the past, not less like you claim. But people crave fat and sugar so that's what they eat. Nobody wants to feel like they are 'deprived.' Like self-control is deprivation.

You are right about the western diet. But who wants to educate himself on what's healthy and what isn't? Most people don't care enough to do that, so they get fatter, by choice, and their kids have poor role models in the diet area, so the cycle continues.

Anyway, people who eat unhealthy food and too much of it are not victims. Lots of people who were brought up on the meat-based diet have learned healthier ways to eat, and chose to go in a different direction. The information is out there for anybody who cares to read it.
 
My point was that junk food is easier than healhy food. preparing a salad takes more time than nuking a burrito.
Actually, I can purchase salads in plastic tubs and bags that zip open and are ready to eat in far less time than it takes to nuke a frozen burrito, but I'm not sure why this would make a difference either way. What we are talking about is an effect that cuts across populations. Virtually all of them. Obesity as presently defined and measured is increasing everywhere. The problem isn't that Bob eats burritos and is a fat slob. There have always been fat slobs. The actual problem is global and systemic -- not local and individual.

Not sure what that bit about avoidance was, perhaps you misunderstood me. I was merely pointing out that blaming the victim is/was/will always be used I was not advocating the tactic
Yes, I think I understood that. I was pointing out the frequent use of "blame-the-victim" as an excusification by those who simply don't want to face up to the consequences of their own responsibilities. They'd rather just blame Bob.
 
Last edited:
Actually, I can purchase salads in plastic tubs and bags that zip open and are ready to eat in far less time than it takes to nuke a frozen burrito, but I'm not sure why this would make a difference either way. What we are talking about is an effect that cuts across populations. Virtually all of them. Obesity as presently defined and measured is increasing everywhere. The problem isn't that Bob eats burritos and is a fat slob. There have always been fat slobs. The actual problem is global and systemic -- not local and individual.



Yes, I think I understood that. I was pointing out the frequent use of "blame-the-victim" as an excusification by those who simply don't want to face up to the consequences of their own responsibilities. They'd rather just blame Bob.

1. You stated that there was less healthy foods avaiable to people, I was merely pointing out it isn't access but ease of use the main problem. There is far far more choice in fresh produce than there was 20-30 years ago and most produce is now available year round as opposed to just being seasonal as before.
I use those salads as well and a 1 minute for a burrito is just as fast as a premade salad salad, But the burrito will remain pretty much forever in the freezer the salad has to be consumed shortly after purchase. Same is true for pretty much all fruits/veggies if you buy fresh. If you are only 1-2 people eating unless you want squash for 3-4 days straight chances are you won't buy one often and it will take longer to cook than the burrito. same with the salads, they are good for 4 people usually or 2people 2 nights in a row. As most people shop 1X/week it is easier to avoid them or have them 2x a weeek only. BTW I'm not much of a salad guy except for certain ones my wife makes. Premade soup which tends to be high in salt is also way way more convient/consumed than homeade stuff again the ease of use seems to be the main factor here. There is also occasionally a cost factor. although fresh veggies will usually be pound for pound much cheaper than frozen premade crap some things like coke is cheaper than milk.
All this to repeat it isn't access to good food that is the problem, it is the ease of junk food and our cultural habits that are killing us.


2. Ok but I really didn't get that as your response to me.
 
Somebody else here already said the healthy foods are on the shelves, and they are right. There is actually more healthy food available than in the past, not less like you claim.
When was "the past" that you refer to?

But people crave fat and sugar so that's what they eat. Nobody wants to feel like they are 'deprived.' Like self-control is deprivation.
The preference for calorie-dense fat and sugar is a genetic legacy left over from our days of living in continuing peril of literally starving to death. Most of us don't face such environmental pressures anymore, but we are stuck with the legacy nonetheless and manufacturers of foodstuffs take every advantage of that. I'm sure you feel that your "self control" somehow makes you a superior person, but it does nothing to resolve the problem. You weren't obese to start out with and you still aren't. Others were obese to start out with and they still are. Actually addressing the problem will require more than your simply preaching to people that they should be more like you.

You are right about the western diet. But who wants to educate himself on what's healthy and what isn't? Most people don't care enough to do that, so they get fatter, by choice, and their kids have poor role models in the diet area, so the cycle continues.
You think it's education? Which foods do you suspect there are widespread misunderstandings and misconceptions over that could be cleared up simply through better education?

Anyway, people who eat unhealthy food and too much of it are not victims. Lots of people who were brought up on the meat-based diet have learned healthier ways to eat, and chose to go in a different direction. The information is out there for anybody who cares to read it.
What's wrong with meat-based diets? Do you believe that eating meat is the cause of obesity? Do you realize that many of the most successful WEIGHT LOSS regimens are based on high-protein/low-carbohydrate diets that include tons of meat?
 
When was "the past" that you refer to?

Was referring to your time line:

Consumers can only buy what is available on the shelves, and that ain't what it used to be.




The preference for calorie-dense fat and sugar is a genetic legacy left over from our days of living in continuing peril of literally starving to death. Most of us don't face such environmental pressures anymore, but we are stuck with the legacy nonetheless and manufacturers of foodstuffs take every advantage of that. I'm sure you feel that your "self control" somehow makes you a superior person, but it does nothing to resolve the problem. You weren't obese to start out with and you still aren't. Others were obese to start out with and they still are. Actually addressing the problem will require more than your simply preaching to people that they should be more like you.

What the hell are you talking about? I was raised on the meat/entree based diet, or typical western diet, that we've been talking about. I gain weight very easily. But, I educated myself on what's healthy and what isn't, and I avoid weight gain by avoiding meat/dairy/chicken for the most part.



You think it's education? Which foods do you suspect there are widespread misunderstandings and misconceptions over that could be cleared up simply through better education?


What's wrong with meat-based diets? Do you believe that eating meat is the cause of obesity? Do you realize that many of the most successful WEIGHT LOSS regimens are based on high-protein/low-carbohydrate diets that include tons of meat?

We can start with your education. Some of those diets you refer to work by causing ketosis, an illness. Do you know that? Do you think that's a good solution for a weight problem?

Also, meat/dairy, etc is not required in the diet at all for a person to be healthy. You do know that, right?
 
1. You stated that there was less healthy foods avaiable to people, I was merely pointing out it isn't access but ease of use the main problem. There is far far more choice in fresh produce than there was 20-30 years ago and most produce is now available year round as opposed to just being seasonal as before.
Well, they haven't really invented any new fruits or vegetables over the past 20-30 years. It's pretty much the same choices as always. Marketing of them has changed to a degree as the local/home-grown/all-natural niche has come into being, but produce in general is still more than merely dominated by commodity-grade crops. As to availability, the home practice of "putting up" fresh fruits and veggies in season so as to have them available out of season goes back a very long way, and the year-round availability of quality frozen foods goes back to days when freezer compartments first became common in refrigerators. And of course the produce aisle accounts for just one section of a typical supermarket and of a typical American diet. Whatever good can be said about it, the quality of a cucumber has not increased sufficiently to offset the changes noted earlier in the sorts of industrial food that line the shelves of all those other aisles and make up the bulk of people's diets. Then there is the matter of meals away from home. Have those been increasing or decreasing and why, and of what are they typically comprised?

I use those salads as well and a 1 minute for a burrito is just as fast as a premade salad salad, But the burrito will remain pretty much forever in the freezer the salad has to be consumed shortly after purchase. Same is true for pretty much all fruits/veggies if you buy fresh. If you are only 1-2 people eating unless you want squash for 3-4 days straight chances are you won't buy one often and it will take longer to cook than the burrito. same with the salads, they are good for 4 people usually or 2people 2 nights in a row. As most people shop 1X/week it is easier to avoid them or have them 2x a weeek only.
You're simply generalizing from your particular personal habits and experiences, things that aren't material to the systemic, population-level situation with obesity at all. In my home for instance, there aren't any burritos, and those salads are one meal for one person. And they last at least a week in the fridge. And when we want some, we have no problem at all in finding summer or winter squash suitable for one meal for 1-2 persons. But all these granular detail simply vanish when you are talking about North or South Americans as a whole, or Europeans, or Asians, or Africans, or Oceanians, and that's the level that this particular blame-the-victim diversionary discussion arises at.

All this to repeat it isn't access to good food that is the problem, it is the ease of junk food and our cultural habits that are killing us.
Easy on the hyperbole. Even if you simply accept that a six-foot male is overweight at 184 pounds and obese at 221, being either overweight or obese in current terms is not associated with significant increases in health risks, certainly nothing that would approach a "we are killing ourselves" level, and just as certainly not a level that would make them relevant in any discussion of the necessity for health care reform. These problems are associated with the severely obese (258-294 pounds) and particularly the morbidly obese (295 pounds and up), as those names might suggest. Don't confuse the data for one group with the people in quite a different group and certainly not with people in general no matter where they live.
 
Was referring to your time line:
Interesting, but about when was it that you personally had in mind as being "the past" when claiming that There is actually more healthy food available than in the past? And since I'll be asking next in any case, what are these foods you believe are more healthy, and what leads you to believe that they are now more available?

What the hell are you talking about? I was raised on the meat/entree based diet, or typical western diet, that we've been talking about. I gain weight very easily. But, I educated myself on what's healthy and what isn't, and I avoid weight gain by avoiding meat/dairy/chicken for the most part.
If ALL you ate were meat, cheese, and chicken, you would not gain weight. Obviously, whatever works for you is fine for you, but this would be a tad out in left field as advice for others.

We can start with your education. Some of those diets you refer to work by causing ketosis, an illness. Do you know that? Do you think that's a good solution for a weight problem?
Yes, I am well aware of it, and ketosis is not an illness but a chemical state. Ketogenesis is the process of converting stored body fat to ketones that are then burned for energy rather than the carbohydrate-based glucose that would otherwise be available in the bloodstream if one were not on a low-carbohydrate diet. Short of liposuction, there simply is no better means of reducing stored body fat than ketogenesis, so yes, it is a very good solution to a weight problem.

Also, meat/dairy, etc is not required in the diet at all for a person to be healthy. You do know that, right?
Yes, I would guess that I am quite a bit more conversant on this topic than what you seem to think. You will of course not get the same quality of protein from a vegan or vegetarian diet, and to allow your body to build the bank of complete proteins that it requires to maintain health, you will need to eat a range of veggie protein sources throughout the day. Veggie diets typically do provide plenty of fiber, vitamin C, and unsaturated fats, but the more strict the vegetarian limits become, the more you will have to worry about getting sufficient calcium, vitamins D and B-12, omega-3's, iron, and zinc. Supplements to reinforce those are often a good idea, but given all that, there is certainly no requirement that one must "eat meat or die".
 
Last edited:
Well, they haven't really invented any new fruits or vegetables over the past 20-30 years. It's pretty much the same choices as always. Marketing of them has changed to a degree as the local/home-grown/all-natural niche has come into being, but produce in general is still more than merely dominated by commodity-grade crops. As to availability, the home practice of "putting up" fresh fruits and veggies in season so as to have them available out of season goes back a very long way, and the year-round availability of quality frozen foods goes back to days when freezer compartments first became common in refrigerators. And of course the produce aisle accounts for just one section of a typical supermarket and of a typical American diet. Whatever good can be said about it, the quality of a cucumber has not increased sufficiently to offset the changes noted earlier in the sorts of industrial food that line the shelves of all those other aisles and make up the bulk of people's diets. Then there is the matter of meals away from home. Have those been increasing or decreasing and why, and of what are they typically comprised?


You're simply generalizing from your particular personal habits and experiences, things that aren't material to the systemic, population-level situation with obesity at all. In my home for instance, there aren't any burritos, and those salads are one meal for one person. And they last at least a week in the fridge. And when we want some, we have no problem at all in finding summer or winter squash suitable for one meal for 1-2 persons. But all these granular detail simply vanish when you are talking about North or South Americans as a whole, or Europeans, or Asians, or Africans, or Oceanians, and that's the level that this particular blame-the-victim diversionary discussion arises at.


Easy on the hyperbole. Even if you simply accept that a six-foot male is overweight at 184 pounds and obese at 221, being either overweight or obese in current terms is not associated with significant increases in health risks, certainly nothing that would approach a "we are killing ourselves" level, and just as certainly not a level that would make them relevant in any discussion of the necessity for health care reform. These problems are associated with the severely obese (258-294 pounds) and particularly the morbidly obese (295 pounds and up), as those names might suggest. Don't confuse the data for one group with the people in quite a different group and certainly not with people in general no matter where they live.

No they haven't invented new fruits but they are importing ones that they never imported before and others are available year round when they were seasona.lThe choices have increased dramatically. I think you are missing the point, you said there was less available than before, when there is more. The freezing/pickling etc of fruits has been done for a long time but people seem to do it less now. Partially due to availability of produce year round, as opposed to seasonally and partially because it is less time consuming to just buy something than go through the trouble of pickling/canning freezing etc. Yes there is more much more premade foods available but that doesnt mean the other stuff is less available.

I don't have frozen burritos in my house either it was just an example. My point remains that to prepare a meal yourself takes more time than just nuking a premade one. That is true no matter how you look at it. Also the frozen stuff lasts longer than fresh produce in the fridge. Fact is our society HAS changed. you have more single parent families or families with both parents workign than before. Now parent gets hoem from work picks up kids than has 30 mins to get them out again to soccer or ballet or whatever. Yeah some could possibly premake stuff for supper but that frozen burrito really makes life easier. it is not trying to shift blame onto anyone. A frozen burrito is not gonna make people fat on occasion. Life has changed and we have changed our habits, for good or bad, When I was young there was no video games/internet etc. Again in themselves not bad, but can you deny that north americans get less exercise than before? the proliferation of gyms and home exercise kits are a good indication of this. People don't necessarily want ot be out of shape but our daily lives have less inherent physical activity (in general) than they used ot have.

Sorry for the hyperbole and I do not accept plain hight/weight charts for physical fitness, some world class atheletes would be on the wrong side of those charts. I myself am off those charts (though I could lose a few pounds now) when I was 18 I was bordering on obscenly obese and biking 3-6 hrs 4-6X a week playing soccer 3X a week and rugby 3X a week. My body fat was about as low as you are gonna find, I just happen to have an extremly stocky frame.
It all goes back to you extrapolating from my pointing out to you that junk food has not replaced nutritous food. It hasn't there is more nutritious food available than ever before, more variety and no longer seasonal. there also happens to be more junk food available as well. it is not the lack of available nutritous food that is the problem, that is just a red herring. The reasons for the "obescity epidemic" are myriad but the unavailability of nutritous food is not one of them.
 
Last edited:
No they haven't invented new fruits but they are importing ones that they never imported before and others are available year round when they were seasonal.
That's wonderful, but you are still focused on perhaps overstated claims about the availability and healthfulness of produce. The original post was not limited in this way and contemplated the entire range of increasingly hollow calories found in the rest of the grocery store as well as in the rest of the food chain. The "western diet" after all is made up of more than just what is sometimes called rabbit food.

I think you are missing the point, you said there was less available than before, when there is more.
What I said was this...The whole world is getting fatter, and a principal reason for that is the spread of the "western diet", characterized as it is by the highly refined, nutrient-hollow, oversalted, fat- and calorie-laden foodstuffs produced and promoted by a giant, for-profit, agribusiness industry. Consumers can only buy what is available on the shelves, and that ain't what it used to be. Some seem to have embroidered their own personal spin for that, one not attributable to the original author.
 
That's wonderful, but you are still focused on perhaps overstated claims about the availability and healthfulness of produce. The original post was not limited in this way and contemplated the entire range of increasingly hollow calories found in the rest of the grocery store as well as in the rest of the food chain. The "western diet" after all is made up of more than just what is sometimes called rabbit food.


What I said was this...The whole world is getting fatter, and a principal reason for that is the spread of the "western diet", characterized as it is by the highly refined, nutrient-hollow, oversalted, fat- and calorie-laden foodstuffs produced and promoted by a giant, for-profit, agribusiness industry. Consumers can only buy what is available on the shelves, and that ain't what it used to be. Some seem to have embroidered their own personal spin for that, one not attributable to the original author.

1. Fair enough, but you claimed there was less nutritious food. All this back and forth is based solely on my trying to point out there is more, not less.
2. Agree with you except bolded part. You are trying to make the lack of nutritous food argument again. Patently untrue there is more selection of both nutritous and junk fodo today than in the past. Stop trying to make this about access to nutritous food it has nothing to do with the problem.
 
Interesting, but about when was it that you personally had in mind as being "the past" when claiming that There is actually more healthy food available than in the past? And since I'll be asking next in any case, what are these foods you believe are more healthy, and what leads you to believe that they are now more available?


If ALL you ate were meat, cheese, and chicken, you would not gain weight. Obviously, whatever works for you is fine for you, but this would be a tad out in left field as advice for others.


Yes, I am well aware of it, and ketosis is not an illness but a chemical state. Ketogenesis is the process of converting stored body fat to ketones that are then burned for energy rather than the carbohydrate-based glucose that would otherwise be available in the bloodstream if one were not on a low-carbohydrate diet. Short of liposuction, there simply is no better means of reducing stored body fat than ketogenesis, so yes, it is a very good solution to a weight problem.


Yes, I would guess that I am quite a bit more conversant on this topic than what you seem to think. You will of course not get the same quality of protein from a vegan or vegetarian diet, and to allow your body to build the bank of complete proteins that it requires to maintain health, you will need to eat a range of veggie protein sources throughout the day. Veggie diets typically do provide plenty of fiber, vitamin C, and unsaturated fats, but the more strict the vegetarian limits become, the more you will have to worry about getting sufficient calcium, vitamins D and B-12, omega-3's, iron, and zinc. Supplements to reinforce those are often a good idea, but given all that, there is certainly no requirement that one must "eat meat or die".

Quag already answered most of this. I'll just respond to the last paragraph where you mention something about getting sufficient nutrients from a vegetarian diet. The odds are that an American today has about a 50/50 chance of dying of heart disease. I don't know of massive numbers of vegetarians dying due to the food they eat, or even becoming sick from it. Not only is it unnecessary to include meat/dairy/chicken/fish in the diet, but the average American would live longer and be a lot healthier without it.

One other thing, you're right about ketosis, its a condition, not really a disease. I think of it as an illness, though, because it occurs during starvation. Course, the Atkins people and others have managed to make a lot of money off of it, because they call it a diet.
 
Quag already answered most of this.
Quag is competent to post on Quag's behalf. Not yours. That would be your job, but in this case at least, you don't want it.

I'll just respond to the last paragraph where you mention something about getting sufficient nutrients from a vegetarian diet. The odds are that an American today has about a 50/50 chance of dying of heart disease. I don't know of massive numbers of vegetarians dying due to the food they eat, or even becoming sick from it.
I guess you can just ignore all those tainted spinach, lettuce, peanut, and salad bar scares. Otherwise, your 50-50 data are not so good. Cancers plus suicides took more lives than heart disease in 2010 with quite a lot of other causes left over. Eating more fruits and vegetables will indeed lower one's risk of developing heart disease regardless of what else one eats. It won't however reduce your chances of dying from other causes. Semi-vegetarians who eat fish and dairy products but meat less than once a week do not fare quite as well as fanatics, but signifcantly better than regular meat-eaters.

Not only is it unnecessary to include meat/dairy/chicken/fish in the diet, but the average American would live longer and be a lot healthier without it.
Spoken like a true fanatic.

One other thing, you're right about ketosis, its a condition, not really a disease. I think of it as an illness, though, because it occurs during starvation. Course, the Atkins people and others have managed to make a lot of money off of it, because they call it a diet.
Atkins is dead and most of his one-time empire with him. But his dietary plan relied on ketogenesis only during the initial weight loss period. On reaching a healthy target wieght, he advised adjustment to a maintenance diet something like what was later popularized as the Mediterranean Diet.
 
What would be evil about someone deciding to change citizenship? I don't understand what the raging is about? Hating everyone who isn't an American citizen?

If a person wants to change citizenship, it's no big deal. I don't see ANY reason that person should be treated an different than any other non-American.
 
Sometimes I don't know who is dumber... the average American or the average tree stump.



In other words, you're a white liberal Democrat.
 
Actually, he's not white...


If I remember correctly, he stated that he is of mixed racial ancestry which he claims includes some African-American ancestry.
 
What would be evil about someone deciding to change citizenship? I don't understand what the raging is about? Hating everyone who isn't an American citizen?

If a person wants to change citizenship, it's no big deal. I don't see ANY reason that person should be treated an different than any other non-American.

I agree if people want to leave it is their right as promised by the Constitution. But that is the logical part of the conversation. You cant deny that such an action has not only emotional but political results.
 
Quag is competent to post on Quag's behalf. Not yours. That would be your job, but in this case at least, you don't want it.


I guess you can just ignore all those tainted spinach, lettuce, peanut, and salad bar scares. Otherwise, your 50-50 data are not so good. Cancers plus suicides took more lives than heart disease in 2010 with quite a lot of other causes left over. Eating more fruits and vegetables will indeed lower one's risk of developing heart disease regardless of what else one eats. It won't however reduce your chances of dying from other causes. Semi-vegetarians who eat fish and dairy products but meat less than once a week do not fare quite as well as fanatics, but signifcantly better than regular meat-eaters.


Spoken like a true fanatic.


Atkins is dead and most of his one-time empire with him. But his dietary plan relied on ketogenesis only during the initial weight loss period. On reaching a healthy target wieght, he advised adjustment to a maintenance diet something like what was later popularized as the Mediterranean Diet.

Tainted salad? And spinach? You do know what those foods are tainted with, right? Animal stuff.

I can't be a proper fanatic on diet. I travel too much, am usually away from home six days a week. This makes it extremely hard for me to eat exactly like I want to. But the facts are the facts. A vegetarian diet is much healthier than the western diet. That's the simple truth.



My data on heart disease death is backed by this AHA article. I will believe their data over yours any day:

According to the CDC/NCHS, if all forms of major CVD were eliminated, life expectancy would rise by almost 7 years. If all forms of cancer were eliminated, the gain would be 3 years. According to the same study, the probability at birth of eventually dying from major CVD (I00–I78) is 47%, and the chance of dying from cancer is 22%. Additional probabilities are 3% for accidents, 2% for diabetes and 0.7% for HIV.

http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/113/6/e85.full
 
Tainted salad? And spinach? You do know what those foods are tainted with, right? Animal stuff.
Hmmm. E Coli and salmonella are bacteria, aflatoxin is a fungal product, and all of them make you pretty sick no matter how they have come to contaminate a bunch of veggies.

I can't be a proper fanatic on diet. I travel too much, am usually away from home six days a week. This makes it extremely hard for me to eat exactly like I want to. But the facts are the facts. A vegetarian diet is much healthier than the western diet. That's the simple truth.
I'm not at all trying to discourage vegetables or vegetarians in any degree. I do discourage some of the claims that come from those who have adopted vegetarianism as a religion, along of course with what certainly seems like all of the obesity-related nonsense that the right-wing has managed to manufacture of late in trying to gin up phony opposition to health care reform. In any case, I have people here who could rightfully claim to be close family members who are strict vegetarians. I might become one myself if scrapple, sausage, and meatballs are reclassified as vegetables. In the meantime, it would certainly be a good idea for most people to consciously include more fruits and vegetables (fresh or not) in their diets. It would also be a good idea to reduce and even eliminate such vegetable products as palm, coconut, and other tropical oils. Maybe cookies and bags full of corn and potato chips as well, but one step at a time, and don't expect miracles. Population-based data tend to focus on the small number of people (sometimes less than one in a hundred) who exhibit a particular effect. They tend to ignore the oftentimes much larger number of people who don't. If we accept both that the odds of dying from ischaemic heart disease are 47% and the separately reported notion that vegetarians reduce their risk of that by 24%, then about one in nine people will avoid dying from heart disease through diet, while the other eight either die from heart disease or don't just as they would have in any case. And who would want to gamble a lifetime of scrapple-eating on a 9-to-1 longshot?

My data on heart disease death is backed by this AHA article. I will believe their data over yours any day:
They weren't mine. They were the published CDC data for causes of death during 2010 that anyone could find online. According to their work, heart disease was the most common cause of death that year, but more people succumbed to the combination of cancer and suicide with many other causes still left on the shelf. Those are the facts. If there isn't a way for them to fit into your worldview, the problem isn't with the facts.
 
Hmmm. E Coli and salmonella are bacteria, aflatoxin is a fungal product, and all of them make you pretty sick no matter how they have come to contaminate a bunch of veggies.


I'm not at all trying to discourage vegetables or vegetarians in any degree. I do discourage some of the claims that come from those who have adopted vegetarianism as a religion, along of course with what certainly seems like all of the obesity-related nonsense that the right-wing has managed to manufacture of late in trying to gin up phony opposition to health care reform. In any case, I have people here who could rightfully claim to be close family members who are strict vegetarians. I might become one myself if scrapple, sausage, and meatballs are reclassified as vegetables. In the meantime, it would certainly be a good idea for most people to consciously include more fruits and vegetables (fresh or not) in their diets. It would also be a good idea to reduce and even eliminate such vegetable products as palm, coconut, and other tropical oils. Maybe cookies and bags full of corn and potato chips as well, but one step at a time, and don't expect miracles. Population-based data tend to focus on the small number of people (sometimes less than one in a hundred) who exhibit a particular effect. They tend to ignore the oftentimes much larger number of people who don't. If we accept both that the odds of dying from ischaemic heart disease are 47% and the separately reported notion that vegetarians reduce their risk of that by 24%, then about one in nine people will avoid dying from heart disease through diet, while the other eight either die from heart disease or don't just as they would have in any case. And who would want to gamble a lifetime of scrapple-eating on a 9-to-1 longshot?


They weren't mine. They were the published CDC data for causes of death during 2010 that anyone could find online. According to their work, heart disease was the most common cause of death that year, but more people succumbed to the combination of cancer and suicide with many other causes still left on the shelf. Those are the facts. If there isn't a way for them to fit into your worldview, the problem isn't with the facts.

You seem pretty well informed, so you must know that there are more benefits to a vegetarian diet than reduced heart disease:

The World Health Organization has determined that dietary factors account for at least 30 percent of all cancers in Western countries and up to 20 percent in developing countries. When cancer researchers started to search for links between diet and cancer, one of the most noticeable findings was that people who avoided meat were much less likely to develop the disease. Large studies in England and Germany showed that vegetarians were about 40 percent less likely to develop cancer compared to meat eaters.
 
You seem pretty well informed, so you must know that there are more benefits to a vegetarian diet than reduced heart disease:

The World Health Organization has determined that dietary factors account for at least 30 percent of all cancers in Western countries and up to 20 percent in developing countries. When cancer researchers started to search for links between diet and cancer, one of the most noticeable findings was that people who avoided meat were much less likely to develop the disease. Large studies in England and Germany showed that vegetarians were about 40 percent less likely to develop cancer compared to meat eaters.
Well, I'm well informed enough to know that this particular claim appears (in exact, word-for-word, "echo chamber"-like fashion) in devoted vegetarian and animal rights cookbooks, blogs, and websites all over the internet. Would you happen to have a link to an actual World Health Organization website where the claim is made?

This is not to say that along with genetic and environmental factors, poor dietary habits do not contribute to a variety of diseases that includes some forms of cancer. A combination diet and physical activity sufficient to maintain a healthy weight through adulthood and on into old age will serve almost everyone well.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom