Mitovi o vegetarijanstvu?!?

[Annar]

Poslao mi zabrinuti brat podugački tekst o vege mitovima tj. zašto je dobro jesti meso Pisao mrdrsci neki s hrpu radova... Ja sam uredno pročitala i prosljeđujem...da vas čujem, vegosi :D Tekst je prilično dugačak, ali nemam mogućnosti staviti ga nekam na net, a ne znam od kuda je izvorno pa ga eto tu.


MYTH #3: Our needs for vitamin D can be met by sunlight.

Though not really a vegetarian myth per se, it is widely believed that
one's vitamin D needs can be met simply by exposing one's skin to the
sun's rays for 15-20 minutes a few times a week. Concerns about vitamin
D deficiencies in vegetarians and vegans always exist as this nutrient,
in its full-complex form, is only found in animal fats (18) which vegans
do not consume and more moderate vegetarians only consume in limited
quantities due to their meatless diets.

It is true that a limited number of plant foods such as alfalfa,
sunflower seeds, and avocado, contain the plant form of vitamin D
(ergocalciferol, or vitamin D2). Although D2 can be used to prevent and
treat the vitamin D deficiency disease, rickets, in humans, it is
questionable, though, whether this form is as effective as
animal-derived vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol). Some studies have shown
that D2 is not utilized as well as D3 in animals (19) and clinicians
have reported disappointing results using vitamin D2 to treat vitamin
D-related conditions (20).

Although vitamin D can be created by our bodies by the action of
sunlight on our skin, it is very difficult to obtain an optimal amount
of vitamin D by a brief foray into the sun. There are three ultraviolet
bands of radiation that come from sunlight named A, B, and C. Only the
"B" form is capable of catalyzing the conversion of cholesterol to
vitamin D in our bodies (21) and UV-B rays are only present at certain
times of day, at certain latitudes, and at certain times of the year
(22). Furthermore, depending on one's skin color, obtaining 200-400 IUs
of vitamin D from the sun can take as long as two full hours of
continual sunning (23). A dark-skinned vegan, therefore, will find it
impossible to obtain optimal vitamin D intake by sunning himself for 20
minutes a few times a week, even if sunning occurs during those limited
times of the day and year when UV-B rays are available.
The current RDA for vitamin D is 400 IUs, but Dr. Weston Price's seminal
research into healthy native adult people's diets showed that their
daily intake of vitamin D (from animal foods) was about 10 times that
amount, or 4,000 IUs (24). Accordingly, Dr. Price placed a great
emphasis on vitamin D in the diet. Without vitamin D, for example, it is
impossible to utilize minerals like calcium, phosphorous, and magnesium.
Recent research has confirmed Dr. Price's higher recommendations for
vitamin D for adults (24).

Since rickets and/or low vitamin D levels has been well-documented in
many vegetarians and vegans (26), since animal fats are either lacking
or deficient in vegetarian diets (as well as those of the general
Western public who routinely try to cut their animal fat intake), since
sunlight is only a source of vitamin D at certain times and at certain
latitudes, and since current dietary recommendations for vitamin D are
too low, this emphasizes the need to have reliable and abundant sources
of this nutrient in our daily diets. Good sources include cod liver oil,
lard from pigs that were exposed to sunlight, shrimp, wild salmon,
sardines, butter, full-fat dairy products, and eggs from properly fed
chickens.

<MYTH #4: The body's needs for vitamin A can be entirely obtained from
plant foods.

True vitamin A, or retinol and its associated esters, is only found in
animal fats and organs like liver (27). Plants do contain beta-carotene,
a substance that the body can convert into vitamin A if certain
conditions are present (see below). Beta-carotene, however, is not
vitamin A. It is typical for vegans and vegetarians (as well as most
popular nutrition writers) to say that plant foods like carrots and
spinach contain vitamin A and that beta-carotene is just as good as
vitamin A. These things are not true even though beta-carotene is an
important nutritional factor for humans.

The conversion from carotene to vitamin A in the intestines can only
take place in the presence of bile salts. This means that fat must be
eaten with the carotenes to stimulate bile secretion. Additionally,
infants and people with hypothyroidism, gall bladder problems or
diabetes (altogether, a significant portion of the population) either
cannot make the conversion, or do so very poorly. Lastly, the body's
conversion from carotene to vitamin A is not very efficient: it takes
roughly 6 units of carotene to make one unit of vitamin A. What this
means is that a sweet potato (containing about 25,000 units of
beta-carotene) will only convert into about 4,000 units of vitamin A
(assuming you ate it with fat, are not diabetic, are not an infant, and
do not have a thyroid or gall bladder problem) [28].
Relying on plant sources for vitamin A, then, is not a very wise idea.
This provides yet another reason to include animal foods and fats in our
diets. Butter and full-fat dairy foods, especially from pastured cows,
are good vitamin A sources, as is cod liver oil. Vitamin A is
all-important in our diets, for it enables the body to use proteins and
minerals, insures proper vision, enhances the immune system, enables
reproduction, and fights infections (29). As with vitamin D, Dr. Price
found that the diets of healthy primitive peoples supplied substantial
amounts of vitamin A, again emphasizing the great need humans have for
this nutrient in maintaining optimal health now and for future
generations.

[Mamaitata]

A kaj da ti kazem....
Mi smo prije nasih bebana tezili vegetarijanstvu (kazem tezili jer su se riba i picek ipak provlacili kroz meni). Kada su se klinci rodili i malo odrasli, krenuli smo s mesom i gledajuci njih kako ga papaju, vratili smo se i mi na normalnu prehranu. Njih necemo forsirati glede ishrane i jest ce ono sto im pase (Nika je luda za mesom) a uz dvoje malih kikica nemamo volje posebno kuhati za nas.
Jednoga dana mozda opet krenemo u te vode jer smo se puno bolje osjecali uz leso trave nego uz mesinu

[Annar]

MYTH #5: Meat-eating causes osteoporosis, kidney disease, heart disease,
and cancer.

Oftentimes, vegans and vegetarians will try to scare people into avoiding animal foods and fats by claiming that vegetarian diets offer protection from certain chronic diseases like the ones listed above. Such claims, however, are hard to reconcile with historical and anthropological facts. All of the diseases mentioned are primarily 20th century occurrences, yet people have been eating meat and animal fat for many thousands of years. Further, as Dr. Price's research showed, there were/are several native peoples around the world (the Innuit, Maasai,Swiss, etc.) whose traditional diets were/are very rich in animal products, but who nevertheless did/do not suffer from the above-mentioned maladies (30). Dr. George Mann's independent studies of the Maasai done many years after Dr. Price, confirmed the fact that the Maasai, despite being almost exclusive meat eaters, nevertheless, had little to no incidence of heart disease, or other chronic ailments (31). This proves that other factors besides animal foods are at work in causing these diseases.
Several studies have supposedly shown that meat consumption is the cause of various illnesses, but such studies, honestly evaluated, show no such thing as the following discussion will show.

OSTEOPOROSIS
Dr. Herta Spencer's research on protein intake and bone loss clearly showed that protein consumption in the form of real meat has no impact
on bone density. Studies that supposedly proved that excessive protein
consumption equaled more bone loss were not done with real meat but with fractionated protein powders and isolated amino acids (32). Recent
studies have also shown that increased animal protein intake contributes
to stronger bone density in men and women (33). Some recent studies on
vegan and vegetarian diets, however, have shown them to predispose women to osteoporosis (34).

KIDNEY DISEASE
Although protein-restricted diets are helpful for people with kidney disease, there is no proof that eating meat causes it (35). Vegetarians
will also typically claim that animal protein causes overly acidic conditions in the blood, resulting in calcium leaching from the bones and, hence, a greater tendency to form kidney stones. This opinion is false, however. Theoretically, the sulphur and phosphorous in meat can form an acid when placed in water, but that does not mean that is what happens in the body. Actually, meat contains complete proteins and vitamin D (if the skin and fat are eaten), both of which help maintain pH balance in the bloodstream. Furthermore, if one eats a diet that includes enough magnesium and vitamin B6, and restricts refined sugars, one has little to fear from kidney stones, whether one eats meat or not (36). Animal foods like beef, pork, fish, and lamb are good sources of magnesium and B6 as any food/nutrient table will show.

HEART DISEASE
The belief that animal protein contributes to heart disease is a popular
one that has no foundation in nutritional science. Outside of questionable studies, there is little data to support the idea that meat-eating leads to heart disease. For example, the French have one of the highest per capita consumption of meat, yet have low rates of heart disease. In Greece, meat consumption is higher than average but rates of heart disease are low there as well. Finally, in Spain, an increase in meat eating (in conjunction with a reduction in sugar and high carbohydrate intake) led to a decrease in heart disease (37).

CANCER
The belief that meat, in particular red meat, contributes to cancer is,
like heart disease, a popular idea that is not supported by the facts.
Although it is true that some studies have shown a connection between
meat eating and some types of cancer (38), its important to look at the
studies carefully to determine what kind of meat is being discussed, as
well as the preparation methods used. Since we only have one word for
"meat" in English, it is often difficult to know which "meat" is under
discussion in a study unless the authors of the study specifically say
so. The study which began the meat=cancer theory was done by Dr. Ernst
Wynder in the 1970s. Wynder claimed that there was a direct, causal
connection between animal fat intake and incidence of colon cancer (39).
Actually, his data on "animal fats" were really on vegetable fats (40).
In other words, the meat=cancer theory is based on a phony study.
If one looks closely at the research, however, one quickly sees that it
is processed meats like cold cuts and sausages that are usually
implicated in cancer causation (41) and not meat per se. Furthermore,
cooking methods seem to play a part in whether or not a meat becomes
carcinogenic (42). In other words, it is the added chemicals to the meat
and the chosen cooking method that are at fault and not the meat itself.
In the end, although sometimes a connection between meat and cancer is
found, the actual mechanism of how it happens has eluded scientists
(43). This means that it is likely that other factors besides meat are
playing roles in some cases of cancer. Remember: studies of meat-eating
traditional peoples show that they have very little incidence of cancer.
This demonstrates that other factors are at work when cancer appears in
a modern meat-eating person. It is not scientifically fair to single out
one dietary factor in placing blame, while ignoring other more likely
candidates.
It should be noted here that Seventh Day Adventists are often studied in
population analyses to prove that a vegetarian diet is healthier and is
associated with a lower risk for cancer (but see a later paragraph in
this section). While it is true that most members of this Christian
denomination do not eat meat, they also do not smoke or drink alcohol,
coffee or tea, all of which are likely factors in promoting cancer (44).
The Mormons are a religious group often overlooked in vegetarian
studies. Although their Church urges moderation, Mormons do not abstain
from meat. As with the Adventists, Mormons also avoid tobacco, alcohol,
and caffeine. Despite being meat eaters, a study of Utah Mormons showed
they had a 22% lower rate for cancer in general and a 34% lower
mortality for colon cancer than the US average (45). A study of Puerto
Ricans, who eat large amounts of fatty pork, nevertheless revealed very
low rates of colon and breast cancer (46). Similar results can be
adduced to demonstrate that meat and animal fat consumption do not
correlate with cancer (47). Obviously, other factors are at work.
It is usually claimed that vegetarians have lower cancer rates than
meat-eaters, but a 1994 study of vegetarian California Seventh Day
Adventists showed that, while they did have lower rates for some cancers
(e.g., breast and lung), they had higher rates for several others
(Hodgkin's disease, malignant melanoma, brain, skin, uterine, prostate,
endometrial, cervical and ovarian), some quite significantly. In that
study the authors actually admitted that:
Meat consumption, however, was not associated with a higher
[cancer] risk. And that,
No significant association between breast cancer and a high
consumption of animal fats or animal products in general was noted. (48)
Further, it is usually claimed that a diet rich in plant foods like
whole grains and legumes will reduce one's risks for cancer, but
research going back to the last century demonstrates thatcarbohydrate-based diets are the prime dietary instigators of cancer,
not diets based on minimally processed animal foods (49).
The mainstream health and vegetarian media have done such an effective
job of "beef bashing," that most people think there is nothing healthful
about meat, especially red meat. In reality, however, animal flesh foods
like beef and lamb are excellent sources of a variety of nutrients as
any food/nutrient table will show. Nutrients like vitamins A, D, several
of the B-complex, essential fatty acids (in small amounts), magnesium,
zinc, phosphorous, potassium, iron, taurine, and selenium are abundant
in beef, lamb, pork, fish and shellfish, and poultry. Nutritional
factors like coenzyme Q10, carnitine, and alpha-lipoic acid are also
present. Some of these nutrients are only found in animal foods--plants
do not supply them.

MYTH #6: Saturated fats and dietary cholesterol cause heart disease,
atherosclerosis, and/or cancer, and low-fat, low-cholesterol diets are
healthier for people.
This, too, is not a specific vegetarian myth. Nevertheless, people are
often urged to take up a vegetarian or vegan diet because it is believed
that such diets offer protection against heart disease and cancer since
they are lower or lacking in animal foods and fats.
Although it is commonly believed that saturated fats and dietary
cholesterol "clog arteries" and cause heart disease, such ideas have
been shown to be false by such scientists as Linus Pauling, Russell
Smith, George Mann, John Yudkin, Abram Hoffer, Mary Enig, Uffe Ravnskov
and other prominent researchers (50). On the contrary, studies have
shown that arterial plaque is primarily composed of unsaturated fats,
particularly polyunsaturated ones, and not the saturated fat of animals,
palm or coconut (51).
Trans-fatty acids, as opposed to saturated fats, have been shown by
researchers such as Enig, Mann and Fred Kummerow to be causative factors in accelerated atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, cancer and other ailments (52). Trans-fatty acids are found in such modern foods as
margarine and vegetable shortening and foods made with them. Enig and
her colleagues have also shown that excessive omega-6 polyunsaturated
fatty acid intake from refined vegetable oils is also a major culprit
behind cancer and heart disease, not animal fats. A recent study of thousands of Swedish women supported Enig's conclusions and data, and showed no correlation between saturated fat consumption and increased risk for breast cancer. However, the study did show,as did Enig's work, a strong link between vegetable oil intake and higher breast cancer rates (53). The major population studies that supposedly prove the theory that
animal fats and cholesterol cause heart disease actually do not upon
closer inspection. The Framingham Heart Study is often cited as proof
that dietary cholesterol and saturated fat intake cause heart disease
and ill health. Involving about 6,000 people, the study compared two
groups over several years at five-year intervals. One group consumed
little cholesterol and saturated fat, while the other consumed high
amounts. Surprisingly, Dr William Castelli, the study's director, said:
In Framingham, Mass., the more saturated fat one ate, the more
cholesterol one ate, the more calories one ate, the lower the person's
serum cholesterol ... we found that the people who ate the most
cholesterol, ate the most saturated fat, [and] ate the most calories,
weighed the least and were the most physically active. (54)
The Framingham data did show that subjects who had higher cholesterol
levels and weighed more ran a slightly higher chance for coronary heart
disease. But weight gain and serum cholesterol levels had an inverse
correlation with dietary fat and cholesterol intake. In other words,
there was no correlation at all (55).
In a similar vein, the US Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial,
sponsored by the National Heart and Lung Institute, compared mortality
rates and eating habits of 12,000+ men. Those who ate less saturated fat
and cholesterol showed a slightly reduced rate of heart disease, but had
an overall mortality rate much higher than the other men in the study
(56).
Low-fat/cholesterol diets, therefore, are not healthier for people.
Studies have shown repeatedly that such diets are associated with
depression, cancer, psychological problems, fatigue, violence and
suicide (57). Women with lower serum cholesterol live shorter lives than
women with higher levels (58). Similar things have been found in men
(59).
Children on low-fat and/or vegan diets can suffer from growth problems,
failure to thrive, and learning disabilities (60). Despite this, sources
from Dr Benjamin Spock to the American Heart Association recommend
low-fat diets for children! One can only lament the fate of those
unfortunate youngsters who will be raised by unknowing parents taken in
by such genocidal misinformation.
There are many health benefits to saturated fats, depending on the fat
There are many health benefits to saturated fats, depending on the fat
in question. Coconut oil, for example, is rich in lauric acid, a potent
antifungal and antimicrobial substance. Coconut also contains
appreciable amounts of caprylic acid, also an effective antifungal (61).
Butter from free-range cows is rich in trace minerals, especially
selenium, as well as all of the fat-soluble vitamins and beneficial
fatty acids that protect against cancer and fungal infections (62).
In fact, the body needs saturated fats in order to properly utilize
essential fatty acids (63). Saturated fats also lower the blood levels
of the artery-damaging lipoprotein (a) (64); are needed for proper
calcium utilization in the bones (65); stimulate the immune system (66);
are the preferred food for the heart and other vital organs (67); and,
along with cholesterol, add structural stability to the cell and
intestinal wall (68). They are excellent for cooking, as they are
chemically stable and do not break down under heat, unlike
polyunsaturated vegetable oils. Omitting them from one's diet, then, is
ill-advised.
With respect to atherosclerosis, it is always claimed that vegetarians
have much lower rates of this condition than meat eaters. The
International Atherosclerosis Project of 1968, however, which examined
over 20,000 corpses from several countries, concluded that vegetarians
had just as much atherosclerosis as meat eaters (69). Other population
studies have revealed similar data. (70) This is because atherosclerosis
is largely unrelated to diet; it is a consequence of aging. There are
things which can accelerate the atherosclerotic process such as
excessive free radical damage to the arteries from antioxidant depletion
(caused by such things as smoking, poor diet, excess polyunsaturated
fatty acids in the diet, various nutritional deficiencies, drugs, etc),
but this is to be distinguished from the fatty-streaking and hardening
of arteries that occurs in all peoples over time.
It also does not appear that vegetarian diets protect against heart
disease. A study on vegans in 1970 showed that female vegans had higher
rates of death from heart disease than non-vegan females (71). A recent
study showed that Indians, despite being vegetarians, have very high
rates of coronary artery disease (72). High-carbohydrate/low-fat diets
(which is what vegetarian diets are) can also place one at a greater
risk for heart disease, diabetes, and cancer due to their hyperinsulemic
effects on the body (73). Recent studies have also shown that
vegetarians have higher homocysteine levels in their blood (74).
Homocysteine is a known cause of heart disease. Lastly,
low-fat/cholesterol diets, generally favored to either prevent or treat
heart disease, do neither and may actually increase certain risk factors
for this condition (75).
Studies which conclude that vegetarians are at a lower risk for heart
disease are typically based on the phony markers of lower saturated fat
intake, lower serum cholesterol levels and HDL/LDL ratios. Since
vegetarians tend to eat less saturated fat and usually have lower serum
cholesterol levels, it is concluded that they are at less risk for heart
disease. Once one realizes that these measurements are not accurate
predictors of proneness to heart disease, however, the supposed
protection of vegetarianism melts away (76).
It should always be remembered that a number of things factor into a
person getting heart disease or cancer. Instead of focusing on the phony
issues of saturated fat, dietary cholesterol, and meat-eating, people
should pay more attention to other more likely factors.
These would be trans-fatty acids, excessive polyunsaturated fat intake,
excessive sugar intake, excessive carbohydrate intake, smoking, certain
vitamin and mineral deficiencies, and obesity. These things were all
conspicuously absent in the healthy traditional peoples that Dr. Price
studied.

[Annar]

MYTH #10: Soy products are adequate substitutes for meat and dairy products.
It is typical for vegans and vegetarians in the Western world to rely on various soy products for their protein needs. There is little doubt that the billion-dollar soy industry has profited immensely from the anti-cholesterol, anti-meat gospel of current nutritional thought. Whereas, not so long ago, soy was an Asian food primarily used as a condiment, now a variety of processed soy products proliferate in the North American market. While the traditionally fermented soy foods of miso, tamari, tempeh and natto are definitely healthful in measured amounts, the hyper-processed soy "foods" that most vegetarians consume are not.
Non-fermented soybeans and foods made with them are high in phytic acid (110), an anti-nutrient that binds to minerals in the digestive tract and carries them out of the body. Vegetarians are known for their tendencies to mineral deficiencies, especially of zinc (111) and it is the high phytate content of grain and legume based diets that is to blame (112). Though several traditional food preparation techniques such as soaking, sprouting, and fermenting can significantly reduce the phytate content of grains and legumes (113), such methods are not commonly known about or used by modern peoples, including vegetarians. This places them (and others who eat a diet rich in whole grains) at a greater risk for mineral deficiencies.
Processed soy foods are also rich in trypsin inhibitors, which hinder protein digestion. Textured vegetable protein (TVP), soy "milk" and soy protein powders, popular vegetarian meat and milk substitutes, are entirely fragmented foods made by treating soybeans with high heat and various alkaline washes to extract the beans' fat content or to neutralize their potent enzyme inhibitors (110). These practices completely denature the beans' protein content, rendering it very hard to digest. MSG, a neurotoxin, is routinely added to TVP to make it taste like the various foods it imitates (114).
On a purely nutritional level, soybeans, like all legumes, are deficient in cysteine and methionine, vital sulphur-containing amino acids, as well as tryptophan, another essential amino acid. Furthermore, soybeans contain no vitamins A or D, required by the body to assimilate and utilize the beans' proteins (115). It is probably for this reason that Asian cultures that do consume soybeans usually combine them with fish or fish broths (abundant in fat-soluble vitamins) or other fatty foods.
Parents who feed their children soy-based formula should be aware of its extremely high phytoestrogen content. Some scientists have estimated a child being fed soy formula is ingesting the hormonal equivalent of five birth control pills a day (116). Such a high intake could have disastrous results. Soy formula also contains no cholesterol, vital for brain and nervous system development.Though research is still ongoing, some recent studies have indicated that soy's phytoestrogens could be causative factors in some forms of breast cancer (117), penile birth defects (118), and infantile leukemia (119). Regardless, soy's phytoestrogens, or isoflavones, have been definitely shown to depress thyroid function (120) and to cause infertility in every animal species studied so far (121). Clearly, modern soy products and isolated isoflavone supplements are not healthy foods for vegetarians, vegans, or anyone else, yet these are the very ones that are most consumed.

MYTH #11: The human body is not designed for meat consumption.
Some vegetarian groups claim that since humans possess grinding teeth like herbivorous animals and longer intestines than carnivorous animals, this proves the human body is better suited for vegetarianism (122). This argument fails to note several human physiological features which clearly indicate a design for animal product consumption.
First and foremost is our stomach's production of hydrochloric acid, something not found in herbivores. HCL activates protein-splitting enzymes. Further, the human pancreas manufactures a full range of digestive enzymes to handle a wide variety of foods, both animal and vegetable. Further, Dr. Walter Voegtlin's in-depth comparison of the human digestive system with that of the dog, a carnivore, and a sheep, a herbivore, clearly shows that we are closer in anatomy to the carnivorous dog than the herbivorous sheep. (123)
While humans may have longer intestines than animal carnivores, they are not as long as herbivores; nor do we possess multiple stomachs like many herbivores, nor do we chew cud. Our physiology definitely indicates a mixed feeder, or an omnivore, much the same as our relatives, the mountain gorilla and chimpanzee who all have been observed eating small animals and, in some cases, other primates (124).

MYTH #12: Eating animal flesh causes violent, aggressive behavior in humans.
Some authorities on vegetarian diet, such as Dr Ralph Ballantine (125), claim that the fear and terror (if any, see myth #15) an animal experiences at death is somehow "transferred" into its flesh and organs and "becomes" a part of the person who eats it.
In addition to the fact that no scientific studies exist to support such a theory, these thinkers would do well to remember the fact that a tendency to irrational anger is a symptom of low vitamin B12 levels which, as we have seen, are common in vegans and vegetarians. Furthermore, in his travels, Dr Price always noted the extreme happiness and ingratiating natures of the peoples he encountered, all of whom were meat-eaters.

MYTH #13: Animal products contain numerous, harmful toxins.
A recent vegetarian newsletter claimed the following:
Most people don't realize that meat products are loaded with poisons and toxins! Meat, fish and eggs all decompose and putrefy extremely rapidly. As soon as an animal is killed, self-destruct enzymes are released, causing the formation of denatured substances called ptyloamines, which cause cancer. (126)
This article then went on to mention "mad cow disease" (BSE), parasites, salmonella, hormones, nitrates and pesticides as toxins in animal products.
If meat, fish and eggs do indeed generate cancerous "ptyloamines," it is very strange that people have not been dying in droves from cancer for the past million years. Such sensationalistic and nonsensical claims cannot be supported by historical facts.
Hormones, nitrates and pesticides are present in commercially raised animal products (as well as commercially raised fruits, grains and vegetables) and are definitely things to be concerned about. However, one can avoid these chemicals by taking care to consume range-fed, organic meats, eggs and dairy products which do not contain harmful, man-made toxins.
Parasites are easily avoided by taking normal precautions in food preparations. Pickling or fermenting meats, as is custom in traditional societies, always protects against parasites. In his travels, Dr Price always found healthy, disease-free and parasite-free peoples eating raw meat and dairy products as part of their diets.
Similarly, Dr Francis Pottenger, in his experiments with cats, demonstrated that the healthiest, happiest cats were the ones on the all-raw-food diet. The cats eating cooked meats and pasteurized milk sickened and died and had numerous parasites (127). Salmonella can be transmitted by plant products as well as animal.
It is often claimed by vegetarians that meat is harmful to our bodies because ammonia is released from the breakdown of its proteins. Although it is true that ammonia production does result from meat digestion, our bodies quickly convert this substance into harmless urea. The alleged toxicity of meat is greatly exaggerated by vegetarians.
"Mad Cow Disease," or Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), is most likely not caused by cows eating animal parts with their food, a feeding practice that has been done for over 100 years. British organic farmer Mark Purdey has argued convincingly that cows that get Mad Cow Disease are the very ones that have had a particular organophosphate insecticide applied to their backs or have grazed on soils that lack magnesium but contain high levels of aluminum (128). Small outbreaks of "mad cow disease" have also occurred among people who reside near cement and chemical factories and in certain areas with volcanic soils (129).

Purdey theorizes that the organophosphate pesticides got into the cows' fat through a spraying program, and then were ingested by the cows again with the animal part feeding. Seen this way, it is the insecticides, via the parts feeding (and not the parts themselves or their associated "prions"), that has caused this outbreak. As noted before, cows have been eating ground up animal parts in their feeds for over 100 years. It was never a problem before the introduction of these particular insecticides.
Recently, Purdey has gained support from Dr. Donald Brown, a British biochemist who has also argued for a non-infectious cause of BSE. Brown attributes BSE to environmental toxins, specifically manganese overload (130).

MYTH #14: Eating meat or animal products is less "spiritual" than eating only plant foods.
It is often claimed that those who eat meat or animal products are somehow less "spiritually evolved" than those who do not. Though this is not a nutritional or academic issue, those who do include animal products in their diet are often made to feel inferior in some way. This issue, therefore, is worth addressing.
Several world religions place no restrictions on animal consumption; and nor did their founders. The Jews eat lamb at their most holy festival, the Passover. Muslims also celebrate Ramadan with lamb before entering into their fast. Jesus Christ, like other Jews, partook of meat at the Last Supper (according to the canonical Gospels). It is true that some forms of Buddhism do place strictures on meat consumption, but dairy products are always allowed. Similar tenets are found in Hinduism. As part of the Samhain celebration, Celtic pagans would slaughter the weaker animals of the herds and cure their meat for the oncoming winter. It is not true, therefore, that eating animal foods is always connected with "spiritual inferiority". Nevertheless, it is often claimed that, since eating meat involves the taking of a life, it is somehow tantamount to murder. Leaving aside the religious philosophies that often permeate this issue, what appears to be at hand is a misunderstanding of the life force and how it works. Modern peoples (vegetarian and non-vegetarian) have lost touch with what it takes to survive in our world--something native peoples never lose sight of. We do not necessarily hunt or clean our meats: we purchase steaks and chops at the supermarket. We do not necessarily toil in rice paddies: we buy bags of brown rice; and so forth, and so on.

When Native Americans killed a game animal for food, they would routinely offer a prayer of thanks to the animal's spirit for giving its life so that they could live. In our world, life feeds off life. Destruction is always balanced with generation. This is a good thing: unchecked, the life force becomes cancerous. If animal food consumption is viewed in this manner, it is hardly murder, but sacrifice. Modern peoples would do well to remember this.

MYTH #15: Eating animal foods is inhumane.
Without question, some commercially raised livestock live in deplorable conditions where sickness and suffering are common. In countries like Korea, food animals such as dogs are sometimes killed in horrific ways, e.g., beaten to death with a club. Our recommendations for animal foods consumption most definitely do not endorse such practices.

As noted in our discussion of myth #1, commercial farming of livestock results in an unhealthy food product, whether that product be meat, milk, butter, cream or eggs. Our ancestors did not consume such substandard foodstuffs, and neither should we.

It is possible to raise animals humanely. This is why organic, preferably Biodynamic, farming is to be encouraged: it is cleaner and more efficient, and produces healthier animals and foodstuffs from those animals. Each person should make every effort, then, to purchase organically raised livestock (and plant foods). Not only does this better support our bodies, as organic foods are more nutrient-dense (131) and are free from hormone and pesticide residues, but this also supports smaller farms and is therefore better for the economy (132).

Nevertheless, many people have philosophical problems with eating animal flesh, and these sentiments must be respected. Dairy products and eggs, though, are not the result of an animal's death and are fine alternatives for these people.

It should also not be forgotten that agriculture, which involves both the clearance of land to plant crops and the protection and maintenance of those crops, results in many animal deaths (133). The belief, therefore, that "becoming vegetarians" will somehow spare animals from dying is one with no foundation in fact.

[marta]

Procitah za D vitamin i vise mi se ne da uopce, jer pisu smijesne stvari.

[Annar]

Evo to je sve što sam dobila, ispričavam se još jednom zbog dužine ali nisam htjela ništa "editirati". Mene ovaj tekst kao vegetarijanku ne uzrujava niti me vrijeđa, ali me uzrujava stav moje okoline (čitaj familije) koji na svaki mogući način pokušavaju promijeniti moj sad već desetljetni način prehrane. Ja ipak vjerujem da je istina, kao i uvijek, negdje u sredini...Bitno da se s ničim ne pretjeruje.

[mama courage]

sjecam se jedne bbc reportaze o zdravoj ishrani i rekose tamo da vegetarijanci ne jedu zdravo iz razloga sto ne jedu meso, nego iz razloga sto u zamjenu za meso jedu VISE povrca, voca, zitarica, mahunarki i sl. i onda su dodali kad bi takav jedan vegetarijanac jos tjedno pojeo malo mesa (komadic doslovno) onda bi jeo najzdravije.

mene ishrana mesom vise brine zbog ekoloskih razloga (mesna industrija koncipirana po sistemu jeftino i svakodnevno meso), nego sto sad konkretno taj jedan mali snicl unistava moje tijelo.

[flower]

ne znam gdje ce rasprava otici - ako cete o izazovima odgoja djeteta u vege obitelji mozete ostati ovdje ako cete vise otici u vitamine i sl. prebacit cu vas na zdravlje - ok

[sarah]

Evo da ohrabrim sumnjicave link na http://www.thegardendiet.com/
Djeca su jela samo sirovu vegansku hranu, znaci dvostruki ekstrem.Dovoljno da pogledate slike i sve vam je jasno. Ne mogu prihvatiti cinjenicu da s eu nasem drustvu dopusta sljedeca predrasuda: kad se dijete vegetarijanac razboli za to je kriva prehrana a kad dijete nevegetarijanac onda je to losa sreca il nesto trece.

[mama courage]

Djeca su jela samo sirovu vegansku hranu

ovo je ko stvoreno za zene koje ne vole kuhati. mi inkludid. frknem muzu sirovi poriluk i tri grozdice, dodam komad sirove cvjetache (nije beg cicija ) i voila, gotov rucak. 8)

[BusyBee]

da s eu nasem drustvu dopusta sljedeca predrasuda: kad se dijete vegetarijanac razboli za to je kriva prehrana a kad dijete nevegetarijanac onda je to losa sreca il nesto trece.

Najcesce je tako i to mi skroz ide na zivce. No, treba dosta vremena da se neka ustaljena vjerovanja i predrasude promjene.
Slicno je s obiteljima koje naginju ili preferiraju prirodne pripravke umjesto klasicnih lijekova (ne religiozno, ali ne kljukaju djecu paracetamolom, antibioticima i sl. na prvo kihanje).

[passek]

Samo par primjedbi:

Koga zanima zdravstvena strana:
http://www.eatright.org/cps/rde/xchg...3_ENU_HTML.htm

Vege ishrana nije ishrana u kojoj bi meso (pogotovo kolicine koje se danas konzumiraju) trebalo zamijeniti sojom (a propos, bolje je da je fermentirana) vec uravnotezena prehrana bazirana na biljkama..

O etici, duhovnosti itd. se lako moze progooglati (ajde, dobro da bar osuduju "industrijski" nehumani uzgoj zivotinja...)...

[Zorana]

Ja soju stvarno ne volim. A jedno vrijeme je bas bilo uvrijezeno misljenje da vegetarijanci moraju konzumirati soju ili sojine preradjevine.

[ljiljan@]

Ja soju stvarno ne volim. A jedno vrijeme je bas bilo uvrijezeno misljenje da vegetarijanci moraju konzumirati soju ili sojine preradjevine.

A "službeno" tumačenje je bilo da jedino meso i od biljaka soja sadrži potpunu bjelančevinu sa sve 22 esencijalne aminokiseline koja je ljudskom organizmu potrebna za opstanak.
Pokušavala sam prije mnogo godina neko vrijeme malo smršavjeti ne jedući meso. Međutim, bila sam stalno gladna...to za moj organizam nije

[MGrubi]

a šta je s onim da moraju uzimati (tablete) vitamin B6 (valjda taj ili B12) jer njega ima samo u mesu?
da li soja zamjenjuje meso? prema nutriitivnosti

[ljiljan@]

Da, informirala sam se dobro u to vrijeme, prema onda važećim informacijama. Ne samo B kompleks, nego je i željezo slabo iskoristivo iz biljaka, pa je potrebno uzimati i dodatne preparate željeza. Sve me to skupa odbilo - jedeš, ne dobivaš sve što ti treba, plus toga si stalno gladan...pa čemu onda?
Sada se vjerojatno raspolaže sasvim drugačijim informacijama...a prava istina - vjerojatno negdje u sredini

[kailash]

poznajem obitelji koje su generacijski vegetarijanske....sama ne jedem meso ribu i jaja već 12 godina pa kad su mi kontrolirali vitaminsko mineralsko stanje je bilo sve 5.
ono što se često brka je da je zdrava prehrana=vegetarijanska prehrana, što nije točno. a ako je uravnotežena, veg. prehrana definitivno može dati sve što je organizmu potrebno, bez nadomjestaka prehrani (nisam nikad uzimala umjetne dodatke...)

[ronin]

U našoj se obitelji hranimo pretežno cjelovitim žitaricama,voćem i povrćem i tu i tamo piletina i riba.
Poštujem vegetarijance i njihov izbor,no ljudska biologija je jasna :čovjek je svejed,njegov je želudac stvoren za probavu i biljaka i mesa,a nije biljojed i nema želudac ko krava.

Pa da sam i sama vegetarijanka ja nipošto ne bih djeci uskraćivala proteine iz mesa koji su ključni za dječji rast i razvoj.
Kad budu odrasle osobe,kako žele i izvole!

Sama činjenica da treba uzimati suplemente jer takva prehrana sama po sebi nije dovoljna po meni je zvono za uzbunu.....znači da nas priroda nije stvorila za takav način prehrane koji ne zadovoljava naše potrebe-u ptpunosti.

[kailash]

Sama činjenica da treba uzimati suplemente jer takva prehrana sama po sebi nije dovoljna po meni je zvono za uzbunu.....znači da nas priroda nije stvorila za takav način prehrane koji ne zadovoljava naše potrebe-u ptpunosti.

upravo sam gore napisala da NE TREBA uzimati suplemente. ukoliko se kvalitetno uravnoteži prehrana. bilo koja. vegetarijanska ili ne.

[kailash]

a što se tiče odgajanja djece...mislim da se djeci svakako nameće NAŠ izbor prehrane, načina života itd. e,sad, ukoliko ja vjerujem da je najbolji način prehrane uravnotežena vegetarijanska prehrana, naravno da ću tako hraniti i svoje dijete. isto kao što je moja poznanica vjerovala da nije bitno što daje djetetu za jesti, da dijete samo ekstrahira ono kvalitetno iz hrane pa ju je hranila koječime (flipsevi, čipsevi, fast food....). i ona je svom djetetu nametnula izbor u koji sama vjeruje

[Anita-AZ]

Uh, kako mi se ne da.

[Zorana]

Anita, ajde malo.

Tesko je u kulturi u kojoj se prakticki svakodnevno jedenje mesa smatra normom govoriti o uravnotezenoj prehrani bez njega. Ja mislim da otuda dolazi i sva ova prica o potrebi za suplementima i kojecim.
Jako puno ljudi misli da je npr. dobar rucak rucak iz kojeg izbacis meso i pojedes ostatak. (ko sto sam ja prije radila, mama ispece meso i krompir, ja pojedem samo krompir i eto vegetarijanstva)
Ali, mislim da ideju o uravnotezenoj prehrani mozemo dobiti samo ako se odmaknemo od te ideje da je meso osnova obroka i u svakodnevnu prehranu ukljucimo sve ostale skupine namirnica, informiramo se o nekakvim detaljima tipa kako pravilno nesto skuhati itd.

Ja cesto vidim na forumu da mame svojoj djeci (cak i na pocetku dohrane) kuhaju meso svaki dan. Cak i za one koji jedu meso, meni se to cini puno i previse. Nasa pedijatrica koja je zagovornik jedenja mesa kaze da je meso dovoljno pojesti jednom do dva puta sedmicno. Vise od toga je previse.

I na kraju, vazno je gdje i u kakvoj klimi zivimo, kakva nam je hrana prirodno dostupna, cemu je organizam sklon, u kakve se duhovne dimenzije bacamo itd. Pa neka svatko sebi izabere.
Ja meso pojedem jako rijetko, ali nije da nesto uzivam. iskreno receno, bljuje mi se na sve ove gadosti koje se svakodnevno provode od strane mlijecne i mesne industrije pa i nemam bas cistu savjest dok jedem komad nekog jadnog teleta.

[suzyem]

kad već govorimo o mitovima vegetarijanstva......
Ovo su moji mitovi:
1. Kuhanje je komplicirano, ne mislim kao samo kuhanje, al ako govorimo o uravnoteženoj vegetarijanskoj prehrani, onda pojesti krumpir nije dovoljno, mislim da bi mi trebalo puno vremena kojeg nemam za proučiti svo to brdo novih sastojaka, recepata, te alga ova, te ona, te soja koju sam probala spremati al je imala okus kartonske kutije....
2. Skupoća namirnica
3. Mislim da bih bila stalno gladna...
4. Što jedete za, recimo, doručak? Jer lakše mi je posegnuti za nekim mliječnim namazom, jogurtom, kruhom, salamom... nego kuhati neku kašu...
5. Što je glavno jelo a što prilog
6. Mislim da bi spala na 40 kg jedući samo povrće
Eto to su samo moje dileme, pa ako ima neki raspoloženi vegetarijanac
Znači, razmišljala sam o tome, al svjesna sam toga da taj krumpir i sl, koje recimo sad jedem kao prilog nije dovoljno da bi mi prehrana bila uravnotežena, pa me to uvijek omelo

[Zorana]

Suzyem, to ti je jedna od zescih zabluda, da ti treba brdo skupih i teze dostupnih namirnica. Mislim da te fore uglavnom potjecu iz elitnih makrobiotickih redova koje nastoje progurati ideju o vaznosti jedenja kojekakvih nedostupnih namirnica. (sto ne znaci da neke od tih namirnica nisu dobre, samo kazem da su nepotrebne)
Znaci, ako ti u svoju prehranu ukljucih jedenje voca, povrca, zitarica i mahunarki, na manje vise svakodnevnoj osnovi, onda u biti nemas problema. Recimo, izbor ti je jos siri ako si ne uskratis mlijecne proizvode. Pa ujutro mozes imati jako nekompliciran dorucak tipa kruh, sir i jogurt. Ili kruh, sir i neko nasjeckano povrce (krastavac npr.)
Ja mojima kuham cesto zobenu kasu pa je pomijesam s vocem. Ali obicno uz to moram dodati nesto "slano" jer mi se cini da od slatkog dorucka jako brzo ogladne)

Sto se ruckova tice, vjerovatno je najlakse da se prvo posegne za idejama iz lokalne kuhinje. Pa ti je tako npr. najobicniji cuspajz od graha, uz koji se jede crni kruh ili pogaca sa nekom salatom jaaaako zdrav rucak. I to sve bez imalo egzotike.
Tjestenine uz kojekakve umake od povrca vecina djece voli. Isto vazi za rizu, jecam, kus-kus itd.
Ako ti bas treba nesto da ostavlja dojam "glavnog jela" na tanjiru, nije tesko napraviti npr. pohani karfiol pa uz njega prilog i salatu, popecke od povrca ili bilo koje mahunarke. (princip slican kao i pohanje mesa, samo sto nije meso)

U biti, ideja ima jako puno, financijski se meni cini cak isplatnije (pod uvjetom da izbjegavam egzotiku), a sve sto trebas je mozda odvojiti malo vremena i isplanirati sta i kako kuhati.
na onom starom topicu o vegetarijanskim jelovnicima ima jako dobrih ideja.

[Zorana]

Zaboravila sam napomenuti da se ja ne deklariram kao vegetarijanac, moja djeca tu i tamo pojedu neko meso, ja isto. Ali, nastojim prehranu usmjeriti tako da se ne orijentira oko mesa. (ovo sam napisala zato sto trazis raspolozene vegetarijance , a ja to nisam-sto ne znaci da se manje informiram o zdravoj prehrani 8) )

[suzyem]

E to mi je u biti više prihvatljivo, da se meso pojede povremeno, a ne kao glavni obrok svaki dan. Hvala Zorana na objašnjenjima
Moje curke jedva jednom tjedno pojedu meso, ribu tako, tako al ja sam zabrinuta.... plaše me s tim željezom i sl. Jer njima je teže uvalit mahunarke i sl. žive na voću i jogurtu (eto mi vegetarijanaca ) pa onda guram meso... zanima me, iz vaših iskustava, kako vegetarijanstvo utječe na djecu, pogotovo malu, koja ne doje, pa ne mogu reći, ma nema veze što ne jedu to i to, sve će dobiti u mom mlijeku
Anita ?

[Zorana]

Evo ja cu se opet javiti. jer moja djeca stvarno rijetko jedu meso. Do nedavno su htjele pojesti sniclu jednom-dvaput mjesecno, sad nece vise ni to. Cca jednom tjedno pojedu neku ribu. Tako da ja to njihovo jedenje mesa ne mogu uopce racunati kao nesto iz cega redovno dobivaju hranjive sastojke.
Ja sam uvijek smatrala da se svi hranjivi sastojci mogu dobiti i iz ostalih namirnica, nisam se nikad na meso oslanjala. Zeleno lisnato povrce npr. i kojekakve mahunarke (leca itd.) su stvarno dobar izvor zeljeza. Jos ako dijete dojis, ja stvarno ne vidim tu mjesta za brigu.

Ali, ako one vole i hoce tu i tamo pojesti komad mesa, ne mislim bas ni da im to trebas uskracivati.

[ronin]

Evo ja bih se složila sa Zoranom....ni mi meso ne jedemo češće.
Pitam se da živimo u nekoj metropoli i da meso nabavljam u dućanu koliko bi mi mesa uopće jeli.
Napisala sam već da svoju prehranu baziram na cjelovitim žitaricama,bijelom mesu i ribi i mislim da je to ujednačeno i zdravo.

A opet....meso ne kupujem u dućanu.
Piliće kupujem par puta godišnje od jedne bake sa sela nedaleko mog grada,junetinu za lešati u juhi i za paštašutu kupujem također od ljudi iz tog sela na dan kad kolju,ribu MM donosi svakog petka(radi preko tjedna u Šibeniku)od ribara s Murtera-svježi ulov...tako da znam porijeklo a da o kvaliteti ne govorim.

Inače moj pojam zdrave prehrane je mediteranska,i tako nastojim kuhati(prosvjetlio me muž Dalmoš... ),smatram je prilagođenijem našem podneblju od makrobiotičke.

Anita žao mi je da nisam "vrijedna"tvog odgovora.Ja nisam nikog napadala,volim razmjenu mišljenja.

[ljiljan@]

I na kraju, vazno je gdje i u kakvoj klimi zivimo, kakva nam je hrana prirodno dostupna, cemu je organizam sklon, u kakve se duhovne dimenzije bacamo itd. Pa neka svatko sebi izabere.

Potpisujem. Ja ću teško osobe koje su strastveni ljubitelji mesa uvjeriti da su kolači ukusni, a voće zdravo. Netko tko je navikao na život s manje kalorija dnevno mene neće moći uvjeriti da mogu živjeti samo od biljaka. Iako ne pretjerujem s mesom jer nemam prevelike potrebe za njim.
Ali mislim da isključivost zaista ima duhovnu dimenziju, kao što je natuknula Zorana.
A što se tiče mitova i istina, napisala sam vam, prije mnogo godina, dok ste većina još bile mala djeca, važile su istine koje se danas smatraju mitovima. Sve teče, sve se mijenja...

[BusyBee]

upravo sam gore napisala da NE TREBA uzimati suplemente. ukoliko se kvalitetno uravnoteži prehrana. bilo koja. vegetarijanska ili ne.

Ja se s ovime ne slazem.
Osim ako sve namirnice (iz svih "vitaminsko-mineralnih grupa") ne dobivate iz bio/organske proizvodnje (po mogucnosti one 100% pouzdane, dakle, sami uzgajate na, od oneciscenja zasticenom podrucju), ne kuhate odmah nakon branja i po pravilima koja odrzavaju ravnotezu hranjivih sastojaka u namirnicama.

Cinjenica je da je tlo na kojem se uzgajaju biljke najcesce osiromaseno, onecisceno, a nacini proizvodnje i tretiranja vecine nase hrane/namirnica takvo da je njihova hranjivost bitno umanjena.
I zato vjerujem da je suplementiranje tu i tamo opravdano i potrebno.

[suzyem]

Hm, i to me brine. Jer recimo, u malim gradovima ne postoji baš neka mogućnost kupovine organski uzgojenih biljaka. Po ljeti je super, većina ljudi ima svoj vrt, nama baka uzgaja povrće... a što po zimi? Baka nam pravi i domaću zimnicu i bolje mi je to jesti nego neki tamo paradajz iz vragznaotkud... al ne mogu živjeti od zimnice.... znači, mit ili istina: Da li sezona povrća ograničava vegetarijansku prehranu? Jer ako ćemo i sa mahunarkama, npr. mahune, grašak, to je zimi sve smrznuto :/
I još nešto: Da li je vama vegetarijancima mesu ružno po okusu, ili je to samo gađenje prema ubijanju životinja, što recimo kužim, al da nekome meso nije fino

[vertex]

Cinjenica je da je tlo na kojem se uzgajaju biljke najcesce osiromaseno, onecisceno, a nacini proizvodnje i tretiranja vecine nase hrane/namirnica takvo da je njihova hranjivost bitno umanjena.
I zato vjerujem da je suplementiranje tu i tamo opravdano i potrebno.

A onda, postoje i potpuno suprotne teze - ljudi nikad u povijesti nisu imali priliku jesti ovako raznovrsno! Recimo, u doba feudalizma su siromašni uglavnom jeli zobenu kašu i još par namirnica, svakako vrlo monotono, a bogati meso na sto načina, opet vrlo monotono. Ukratko, čovjek je tvrdio (bila je neka emisija, ne znam više tko je to bio) da nema šense da danas nekome tko jede raznovrsno fali nekih vitamina ili minerala. Meni to ima smisla, kad se npr. sjetim da je naranča svojevremeno bila djeci poklon za Božić.
Ništa ne tvrdim jer ne mogu reći da pouzdano znam, ali meni je sasvim neobično kako se olako uzimaju vitaminski pripravci, na svoju ruku i dugo vremena. Dodaješ nešto, a uopće ne znaš da li ti toga nedostaje, i svi su uvjereni kako to sigurno ne škodi. Zašto ne bi škodilo?

[Davor]

e baš sam znatiželjan koji je to drmrsci
Oko pola tvrdnji nisu uopće relevantne za vegetarijanstvo, a u preostaloj polovini frcaju bedastoće da se sve praši.
Posebno mi je moćan dio s D2/D3 i vitaminom A

Ja sam to ovako shvatio:
Cholecalciferol (D3) se generira u koži i svi hvalospjevi se plasiraju samo zato što se D3 prodaje u suplementima. Time je jasno u koje zurle drmrsci zapravo puše.

UNICEF je plasirao vitamin A kao suplement za neuhranjenu djecu jer podiže imunitet. Vegetarijanci nisu nužno vegani, a ni vegani (većinom) nisu neuhranjeni i cijela priča pada. Uzgred, jetrica (često preporučena kao izvor vitamina A) sadrže toksične koncentracije vitamina A i nikako ih ne treba davati djeci i trudnicama. Toliko o dobroj namjeri.

Soja nije zamjena za meso, nego mahunarka. Jao si ga vegetarijancu koji te dvije teze pobrka. Uzgred, na planetu Zemlji ne postoji soja s manje od 1% GMO i sve je manje vegetarijanaca s konfuzijom soje i prehrane.

Uf, koliko toga još ima. Daj vidi koji je to drmrsci pa da vidimo zašto ovako piše.

[Metvica]

kad već govorimo o mitovima vegetarijanstva......
Ovo su moji mitovi:
1. Kuhanje je komplicirano, ne mislim kao samo kuhanje, al ako govorimo o uravnoteženoj vegetarijanskoj prehrani, onda pojesti krumpir nije dovoljno, mislim da bi mi trebalo puno vremena kojeg nemam za proučiti svo to brdo novih sastojaka, recepata, te alga ova, te ona, te soja koju sam probala spremati al je imala okus kartonske kutije....
2. Skupoća namirnica
3. Mislim da bih bila stalno gladna...
4. Što jedete za, recimo, doručak? Jer lakše mi je posegnuti za nekim mliječnim namazom, jogurtom, kruhom, salamom... nego kuhati neku kašu...
5. Što je glavno jelo a što prilog
6. Mislim da bi spala na 40 kg jedući samo povrće
Eto to su samo moje dileme, pa ako ima neki raspoloženi vegetarijanac
Znači, razmišljala sam o tome, al svjesna sam toga da taj krumpir i sl, koje recimo sad jedem kao prilog nije dovoljno da bi mi prehrana bila uravnotežena, pa me to uvijek omelo

1. Pa nemaš neko ograničeno vrijeme da to moraš proučiti u npr. tjedan dana pa onda više ne smiješ proučavati novu hranu - ja godinama uvodim malo po malo ono što "savladam" i isprobam. I učim i isprobavam i dalje
2. Povrće valjda jedeš tako i tako, a cjelovite žitarice su po kilogramu bitno jeftinije od mesa i ne možeš ih pojesti puno
3.Upravo od cjelovitih žitarica se možeš itekako najesti - ja sam stalno sita i presita
4.Prelijem pahuljice (sojinim) mlijekom ili vrelom vodom za što mi treba ravno tri sekunde (pahuljice pripremam sama unaprijed veću količinu -zobene sitne, grožđice, mljeveni orasi, pšenične klice, kokos, rogač, cimet, pa ujutro samo izvadim iz staklenke od 2 l). Sir, putar, ajvar, namaz od kikirikija, suncokreta... premažem preko crnog kruha (pečem ga sama).
5.Ova podjela na prilog i glavno jelo mi je skroz postala strana. Pun tanjur heljde, riže, ječma ili prosa s dinstanim povrćem i začinima mi je glavno jelo. Ako imam još neku mahunarku i salata onda je to valjda prilog. (Inače, stav da je meso glavno jelo a sve ostalo prilog podsjeća me na stav da je penetracija seks, a ostalo predigra )
6.Uz žitarice i zdrave kolače meni to baš ne uspijeva... No smanjila sam višak kila bez ikakvog truda, isključivim prebacivanjem na zdravu hranu.

[BusyBee]

Vertex, upravo tako, ne treba nista tvrditi (nadam se da moj post nije tako shvacen). Ono sto sam napisala moj je stav izgradjen na temelju x stvari i tako za sad razmisljam.

Nadam se da se ostatak posta nije odnosio na mene jer se iz mog posta ne da zakljuciti koliko cesto i na ciju preporuku i na temelju cega uzimamo dodatke i koje.

[vertex]

Nadam se da se ostatak posta nije odnosio na mene jer se iz mog posta ne da zakljuciti koliko cesto i na ciju preporuku i na temelju cega uzimamo dodatke i koje.

Ma naravno da nije, žao mi je ako tako izgleda.

Poanta mog posta je, ustvari, da ima puno teorija o prehrani od kojih mnoge zvuče tako fino logično. Ja tu jednostavno nikome ne vjerujem toliko da bih rekla: ovo je sigurno ovako! Niti imam potrebu nekog uvjeravati da radi krivo (jer ne znam).
I ja sam izgradila nekakvu shemu kako mislim da je dobro jesti, ali ne bih je krvlju branila.

[Zorana]

Sto se tice suplemenata, moja prica je jednostavna: krvni nalaz dobar, sve stima, nema potrebe za suplementima. Nisam ljubitelj preventive, osim one koja kaze da se moramo sto kvalitetnije hraniti i sto vise biti na zraku.
Vec trecu trudnocu nisam dobila nikakav suplement jer krvna slika stima. Moja djeca nikad nisu dobila nekakav suplement pa cak ni u vremenima tipa kasno ljeto kad je vecina ljudi nabrijana na rajcanje imuniteta itd.
Nedavno sam gledala na teveu reportazu o tome koliko suplementi ustvari stete cine. Pa ih se cak ne preporucuje ni kronicnim pusacima, sto je i mene iznenadilo. (znaci, nikakav sinteticki pripravak ne moze nadoknaditi ono sto nam stigne direktno iz prirode, pa makar i ne bilo u idealnom izdanju)
Ali eto...svatko izvodi svoj zakljucak, svatko bira sebi. Ja sam nekako jos uvijek uvjerena da se unatoc svim gadostima koje se rade oko danasnje ishrane, prosjecan covjek moze jos uvijek jako dobro prehraniti. I bez konzumiranja iskljucivo bio namirnica, i bez da ga trajno osteti poneko konzumiranje junk fooda itd.
Na jednoj drugoj temi smo ja i Apricot pricale o tome kako se ustvari nije dobro ni previse opterecivati nekim stvarima....pa tako dodjosmo do zakljucka da je bolje pojesti eventualno spricano povrce nego bio povrce oko kojeg smo se dobro iznervirali i posijali oko sebe gomilu negativne energije....Sto ne treba znaciti da ne moramo teziti boljemu. Ali, u datom trenutku izabrati najbolje i prihvatiti izbor s mirom i veseljem, to bi valjda bilo to.

[Anita-AZ]

Anita žao mi je da nisam "vrijedna"tvog odgovora.Ja nisam nikog napadala,volim razmjenu mišljenja.

Ma daaaj .... ovako ti je to išlo... čitam - odgovori nadolaze - isti odgovori koje sam izrekla jedno 1376 puta i onda pomislim, ma ne da mi se.... opet i još, posebice nakon što sam vidjela da ima drugih koji su inspirirani.

No, odgovorit ću čim ću imati koju minutu više. Općenito u posljednje vrijeme nastojim manje internetirati.

[ronin]

Anita žao mi je da nisam "vrijedna"tvog odgovora.Ja nisam nikog napadala,volim razmjenu mišljenja.

Ma daaaj .... ovako ti je to išlo... čitam - odgovori nadolaze - isti odgovori koje sam izrekla jedno 1376 puta i onda pomislim, ma ne da mi se.... opet i još, posebice nakon što sam vidjela da ima drugih koji su inspirirani.

No, odgovorit ću čim ću imati koju minutu više. Općenito u posljednje vrijeme nastojim manje internetirati.

[Davor]

Nisam našao bolji topic, a bedasto mi je otvarati novi. Imam pajdu koji se nešto više bavi autoimunologijom nego komunikacijama i među njegovim radovima sam našao nešto friško i aktualno. Tiče se vitamina D.

Rad je opširan i postavlja nešto više pitanja nego što nudi odgovora. Ukratko, ukazuje na mogućnost da sklonost bolestima, osobito kroničnima, pretilost, artritis i slično mogu biti pospješeni kroničnom suplementacijom vitaminom D.

Vitanin D je secosteroid i unošenjem u vidu suplementa se ravnoteža njegovih produkata može lijepo ausdrajsati. Utječe i na plodnost.

Cijeli članak je ovdje: http://trevormarshall.com/BioEssays-...l-Preprint.pdf

[abonjeko]

a šta je s onim da moraju uzimati (tablete) vitamin B6 (valjda taj ili B12) jer njega ima samo u mesu?
da li soja zamjenjuje meso? prema nutriitivnosti

NE!!!! Soja nema dovoljno bjelančevina (proteina) u sebi (ima 22 aminokiseline - što je nedovoljno) ...jedino s drugim žitaricama može biti zamjena mesu + konzumacija posebnih dodataka s vitaminom B12 kojega meso ima (ali ima ga i quinoa - divna, divna žitarica).

Ono što meso ima je i puno štetnih masti (kolesterol je najzloćudnija od svih masti koji je uzrok mnogih bolesti!)

Annar... i ja imam veliki problem s neprihvaćanjem okoline....zanimljivo je to što oni meni prosipaju svu pamet svijeta, a nikada niti jednu knjigu nisu pročitali o zdravoj prehrani...

Zato im ja uvijek kažem: čitajte, čitajte, čitajte....tek tada možemo razgovarati!!! :/

[magriz]

Ono što meso ima je i puno štetnih masti (kolesterol je najzloćudnija od svih masti koji je uzrok mnogih bolesti!)

na žalost - još jedna izjava utemeljena na nepotpunom poznavanju metabolizma i fiziologije prehrane iz 60-ih, koja je pomoću prehrambene industrije postala misao vodilja mnogih nemesojeda

[abonjeko]

Ono što meso ima je i puno štetnih masti (kolesterol je najzloćudnija od svih masti koji je uzrok mnogih bolesti!)

na žalost - još jedna izjava utemeljena na nepotpunom poznavanju metabolizma i fiziologije prehrane iz 60-ih, koja je pomoću prehrambene industrije postala misao vodilja mnogih nemesojeda

Vidiš, od tada se štošta u svijetu spoznalo, a ova rečenica koju sam izjavila o mesu i kolesterolu, je (zanimljivo) izjava koja mi je ostala u sjećanju od Earl Mindel-a - nutricionista 60.-ih i 70.-ih godina. Knjiga iz koje sam naučila neke stvari je, između ostalih, njegova "Vitaminska biblija"!!!

[Davor]

Pa da, nedavno je dokazano da maslo (ghi) umanjuje "loš kolesterol" u krvi, iako je masnoća mliječnog porijekla i krcata kolesterolom. Fora.

[stray_cat]

Ja soju stvarno ne volim. A jedno vrijeme je bas bilo uvrijezeno misljenje da vegetarijanci moraju konzumirati soju ili sojine preradjevine.

A "službeno" tumačenje je bilo da jedino meso i od biljaka soja sadrži potpunu bjelančevinu sa sve 22 esencijalne aminokiseline koja je ljudskom organizmu potrebna za opstanak.
Pokušavala sam prije mnogo godina neko vrijeme malo smršavjeti ne jedući meso. Međutim, bila sam stalno gladna...to za moj organizam nije

cesto vegeterijanci proteine zamjene ugljikohidratima

i vegeterijanci najnormalnije moraju unositi preoteine

ja sam frisko otkrila tofu od provamel (onaj mariniran sa tamarijem je GROK GROK)

moj klinac nije vegeterijanac (premda je to bila originalna zamisao) jer ima intoleranciju na gluten i casein a gluten je strpan u gotovo sve vegeterijanske proizvode

kupujemo samo organsko meso jer sam uvjerena da nemre bit dobro jesti meso zivotinja koje nisu vidile sunca osim na putu do klaonice, zivotinja sopanih antibioticima i smecem. mislim da masovno klanje zivotinja izaziva lucenje adrenalina kod tih zivotinja kad ih ulovi panika pred smrt i kad cuju druge zivotinje kak ih ubijaju nemre bit dobro

meni su psi odbijali jesti meso iz tog industrijskog uzgoja

neko je napisao o jednoj snicli.... i za tu jednu sniclu treba ubit cijelu zivotinju

[stray_cat]

problem sa mesom nije kolesterol, nego proteini zivotinjskog porijekla koji ako ih se previse konzumira mogu pokrenut rak

jos je jedan veliki problem kod prekomjernog jedenja mesa (znaci vise od 1-2 put tjedno). kako mi imamo duga crijeva, kao prezivaci, za razliku od mesozdera to se meso truli i razgradjuje po ljudima predugo i jednostavno nije zdravo za organizam

[štrigica]

vitaminski dodatci prehrani...

sudeći po ortopedu koji liječi mog susjeda nakon višestrukih prijeloma kostiju uzimanje suplemenata bilo kakve vrste samo puni džepove farmaceutske industrije. npr. moj susjed je uzimao nadomjestke kalcija zbog tih prijeloma no kosti nisu zacjelivale - njegov metabolizam kalcija u krvi (ovo citiram susjeda - šta god to bilo) nije dobro funkcionirao...
on je mogao popiti cilu Plivu kalcija i još uvijek bi mu kosti sporo zarastale (iako je kalcij kombiniran s vit. D, sunčanjem itd)...

da je priroda zamislila da mi moramo uzeti 100 kg paprika da bismo si osigurali dovoljnu količinu vit. C onda bi nam vjerovatno i dala probavni sustav u skladu s time...

iz ovoga se da zaključiti da ja suplemente ne uzimam niti ih dajem djeci...
u vremenima kada su povećane opasnosti od prehlada (npr.) pojačam konzumaciju prirodnih limunada, naranača, paprike itd.

[Davor]

A limunada povećava pH (koliko god to bilo nelogično) i popravlja opće stanje inače prekiselog organizma sklonog bolestima.

[magriz]

problem sa mesom nije kolesterol, nego proteini zivotinjskog porijekla koji ako ih se previse konzumira mogu pokrenut rak

jos je jedan veliki problem kod prekomjernog jedenja mesa (znaci vise od 1-2 put tjedno). kako mi imamo duga crijeva, kao prezivaci, za razliku od mesozdera to se meso truli i razgradjuje po ljudima predugo i jednostavno nije zdravo za organizam

NETOČNO!

karcinom debelog crijeva jest povezan s pretjeranim unosom mesa (točnije životinjskih proteina), ali istovremeno prehrana mora biti apsolutno lišena vlakana

razlog je preveliko lučenje žučnih kiselina koje se ne uspiju resorbirati natrag, nego se talože u debelom crijevu gdje dovode do stvaranja tumorskih stanica

[magriz]

A limunada povećava pH (koliko god to bilo nelogično) i popravlja opće stanje inače prekiselog organizma sklonog bolestima.

nije nelogično ako poznaješ princip kem reakcija