You Can't Trust Science!

The Queer Vegans

The vegans claim that I am attacking humanity by denying the humanity of the animals. We HUMANS--the rulers of the world--EAT MEAT. Oh my. I have just one question: What humanity are we talking about when lions eat meat? Yet, we cannot kill lions because it destroys the "eco balance"? Please give me a break. Vegans are so foolish to destroy themselves and condem the world to soy. Obvisouly, intelligent people will not fall for such stupidity.

As Prof. Carl Cohen lectured, Why Animals Do Not Have Rights. I think every veganite and those leaning in this direction needs to hear this lecture.

Animals (that is, non-human animals, the ordinary sense of that word) lack this capacity for free moral judgment. They are not beings of a kind capable of exercising or responding to moral claims. Animals therefore have no rights, and they can have none. This is the core of the argument about the alleged rights of animals. The holders of rights must have the capacity to comprehend rules of duty, governing all including themselves. In applying such rules, the holders of rights must recognize possible conflicts between what is in their own interest and what is just. Only in a community of beings capable of self-restricting moral judgments can the concept of a right be correctly invoked.

Or read this short essay by Russell Madden. Here's a quote.

If a gazelle has a right to its life, does the lion then not have a right to its life since it needs to kill the gazelle or some other such animal to survive? It is also true that humans are animals. If a lion somehow does not violate the rights of a gazelle when it hurts it or kills it, how can a human do so? (And does a lion violate a human's rights if it kills and eats a person?)

...People who advocate the myth of "animal rights" are at best ignorant of what rights truly are. At worst, they are anti-human, preferring that a humanity "infecting" the planet and disturbing "Nature" or "Gaia" be obliterated. Their anti-rational actions serve only to dilute and destroy the very concept of "rights." Promoting the moral position of animals over people -- the mantra that a rat is a pig is a human -- undercuts the distinctive and unique quality of free will that makes us who we are.

Nuf said.

Videos of note:

The Cholesterol Myth


Exposing the Cholesterol Myth


Why Soy Is NOT a Health Food

Differentiation of ALA (plant sources) from DHA + EPA (marine sources) as Dietary Omega-3 Fatty Acids for Human Health

It is truly annoying and mind boggling to keep hearing the vegans claim you get enough Omega 3 from non-meat sources. They refer to flax, walnuts, canola oil, etc. as sufficient sources. In their foolish quest to rid the world of meat eating they fail to realize that this Omega 3 is ALA (a-linolenic acid) not the superstars DHA (docosahexaenoic acid) and EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid). All of the research showing the myriad benefits of Omega 3 oils is based on DHA/EPA not ALA!

Omega-3 fatty acids (n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids)…Certain plant sources (and derived vegetable oils) such as flaxseed, canola oil, walnuts, etc. contain significant amounts of the plant-based omega-3 fatty acid known as a-linolenic acid (ALA, 18:3n-3). …Flaxseed and other plant-derived oils are totally lacking in DHA/EPA combined whereas DHA/EPA are found in fish/fish oils which contain very minor amounts of ALA. ….

…A recent study seeing flaxseed oil rich in ALA has confirmed a moderate rise in circulating plasma lipid levels of EPA plus DPA (but not DHA); the authors suggest that this rise, although moderate, in EPA plus DPA might possibly mediate any beneficial effects towards cardiovascular health derived by the consumption of flaxseed oil. It should be noted herein that the published literature using deuterated ALA suggests conversion efficiencies of dietary ALA to EPA plus DHA (combined) ranging from 5-15% overall….

While the claim is made that ALA supplementation does seem to improve cardiovascular outcomes I find the claim rather dubious. A 5% -15% conversion rate? And what about DHA which is essential for the development of the brain?

Furthermore:

Several factors inhibit conversion of ALA to it's long-cchain Metabolites (EPA and DHA)

• A diet high in LA (common in US) can inhibit conversion by as much as 40%
• A high maternal intake of linoleic acid (Omega 5 from corn, safflower oil, etc.) inhibits conversion to EPA and DHA reduces n-3 availability to the developing fetus
• increasing the ratio of n-3 to n-6 fatty acids in the diet with ALA may not enhance neuronal DHA levels in infants
• Saturated and trans fatty acids inhibit ALA desaturation and elongation
• Ethanol inhibits conversion of ALA to EPA and DHA
• a deficiency of any of the vitamins and mineral co-factors (vitamin B3, B6, C, Zinc and Magnesium) required by elongase and Delta-6 desaturase may inhibit conversion of EPA and DHA
• Loss of Delta-6 desaturates activity that occurs during norman aging
• Certain health conditions such as diabetes and drugs, inhibits Delta - 6 saturase activity and prevents conversion of EPA and DHA
• Certain populations, such as North American natives, Inuit, Orientals, Norwegians, and Welsh-Irish may not effectively convert ALA to EPA in the body

I think I have heard enough about how wonderful ALA is as an Omega 3 source. Have you?

Eat your meats!

How our vegan diet made us ill

Just another article pointing out the hazards of the pure vegan diet.

There were other oddities: "I remember going to the supermarket and buying butter for my older children. Lizzie, who had never had butter in her life, would grab the packet and gnaw into it," says Paige. "It was really disconcerting. I would be thinking, 'What is going on? Here is this purely fed child – why would she need to do this?' I was so brainwashed into thinking dairy products are bad for you."

Vegan Diets are deficient

Vegan subjects and, to a lesser degree, subjects in the LV-LOV [lactovegetarians or lactoovovegetarians] group had metabolic features indicating vitamin B-12 deficiency that led to a substantial increase in total homocysteine concentrations. Vitamin B-12 status should be monitored in vegetarians. Health aspects of vegetarianism should be considered in the light of possible damaging effects arising from vitamin B-12 deficiency and hyperhomocysteinemia.

The full report is linked in the title. Please know that high homocysteine levels are a marker for heart disease. A vegan diet increases these levels the most.

You should also read the abstracts here (scroll down to Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences)that also discuss the unhealthy aspects of low carnosine levels in vegan/vegetarian diets. Carnosine is only found in animal flesh.

Anthony Colpo and the elusive metabolic advantage (a calorie is not a calorie)*

(*metabolic advantage—the idea that more weight is lost calorie for calorie compared with diets higher in carbohydrates. You can eat more calories on a low-carb diet as compared to a semi-starvation diet and still loose weight.)

I believe Anthony Colpo’s website the omnivore helped save my life with his many articles about low-carb diets and exercise a few years back. I had followed the Atkins diet and was having trouble staying on it, not because it didn’t work but because I was a “carbaholic” and thought I could go back to my regular SAD diet once I lost the weight. Mr. Colpo’s scientifically grounded arguments convinced me of the logic of low-carb for health in addition to a better way to lose weight. His book, The Great Cholesterol Con, was a masterpiece and his Their All Mad, was an excellent treatise against the metabolic advantage theory of low-carb. But I think it’s time for Mr. Colpo to relax his attacks on the low-carb gurus for pushing the low-carb diet simply because of their fallacious claims about a metabolic advantage. I do not believe their arguments to be completely without merit, just scientifically untenable. Thanks to Anthony, I can see that.

Of course Mr. Colpo is correct that there are no clinically controlled studies or reliable studies of any kind that show a metabolic advantage to low-carb diets—rat studies not withstanding. But I think he can’t see the forest for the trees.

Let’s come out of the scientific world and the world of low-carb fanatics—me the latter—and enter the real world. To use Dr. Robert Atkins as an example, lets take out all his theories of why low-carb works. To hell with insulin resistance, ketones and hormone deficiencies, whatever. The average pot bellied Joe does not give a damn about these things. Their only question is: “What do I eat?” and “Does it work? This is all the average person is after. When they have lost the weight they want they then go back to their old ways. Everyone seems to skip the parts about maintenance. Dr. Atkins’ only mistake in my view is in not emphasizing that it was not a diet but a permanent lifestyle change in eating habits. I read the first version—my mother’s copy-–so I know I missed that point. (The need for pasture raised organic meats and organic vegetables is another point never mentioned.)

Most people are not interested in the how or the why, they simply want results. The low-carb gurus deliver. There are those, like myself, that want to know the how and the why and can live with a shitty scientific explanation—as long as it works. Of course Mr. Colpo made me rethink but since I am still 35 pounds lighter and lowered my triglycerides to normal it really did not matter that Dr. Atkins was wrong on the science. When you combine the information in Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution along with Life Without Bread and The Great Cholesterol Con you have a win win situation.

I am certainly not a scientist or a research writer but I will venture to say that satiety levels and appetite suppression are a vital function of metabolism—how can they not be? In my simple mind I am unable to see the law of energy conservation/thermodynamics (a calorie is a calorie) in a vacuum. I cannot re-tool this concept to apply it to human metabolism as if it were a closed system; we do after all have a mouth and an anus. I simply cannot remove satiety and appetite from this equation. And let’s not forget the role of insulin in this diet conundrum.

I firmly believe that satiety and appetite are an intricate function of our metabolism; therefore, if a low-carb diet leaves you less hungry or does not induce hunger and protein and fats keep you full longer then that is a metabolic advantage because humans can STAY on the diet indefinitely. Our hunger is suppressed and we lower our calorie intake without even trying. Taking myself as an unscientific example; twenty years ago I had no problem eating a gallon of ice cream in one day and then ordering a pizza pie for a late dinner. Now I can hardly finish two small pork chops. If I choose to go off my diet and eat pizza or candy I get hungrier within two hours or less. On my low-carb/high-protein/fat diet I sometimes have to remember to eat. That is indeed an advantage for one who has struggled with obesity since his early twenties. I do not think my experience is unique. In fact, we all know full well it is not.

I love contrarians like Mr. Colpo but sometimes he should just step back and ask himself if he is contributing to the better good or just screwing with the establishement to satisfy his idiosyncratic stubborness.

If a low-carb high protein/fat diet (low and high based on establishment determinations) prevents hunger and induces satiety, is this not a metabolic advantage if hunger/appetite and satiety are an intricate part of metabolism?

As Gary Taubes asks in his excellently researched book, Good Calories Bad Calories, what is it about carbohydrates? Do excess carbs cause our metabolism to be thrown off kilter after decades of abuse? I believe that part of this answer has a great deal to do with age. Low-carb studies should be done with those over 35 years of age or perhaps even 40 to truly test this theory. After all, are we dealing with a broken system when we are talking about obesity and metabolism? Studies with genetically obese mice perhaps cannot be extrapolated to human beings (think arachidonic acid conversion in mice as compared to humans) but they do show us one thing; the law of thermodynamics can indeed be defied in a living system when it comes to fat!

So while I do love Anthony Colpo’s work and style of writing, I wish he would take a chill-pill when it comes to his castigation of the unproven metabolic advantage theory of low-carb diets.