/ck/ - Food & Cooking

vegetarian. just trying to do it a few months a year with limited meat content becusse high cholesterol is gentic in my family

Provided the trial goes well, and everybody doesn't turn into horrifying mutants, sure. It's not like I avoid meat because I don't like meat.

>>6408847
I don't think I would. I don't miss it enough to go back to eating meat, even if you remove the ethical issue.

>>6408885
>muh genetics

>>6408909
>>6408924
oddly enough, i started bc of the way they keep the animals and the literal trash they feed them.
But i really dont miss it at all.

No, I became vegan for the health benefits and environment but now meat just doesn't seem appetizing anymore. I've been one 2 years now and enjoy both feeling great and seeing all the obese fucks on blood pressure meds complain about how their CAFO garbage is so expensive now while I'm bulking on $120 a month.

>>6408885
The cholesterol and saturated fat in meat isn't a huge contributor to cholesterol, it's an excess of sugar that's associated with higher LDL and triglycerides as well as lowered HDL.
High cholesterol also runs in my family but I've managed it with a proper diet, that includes meat, and daily exercise. Meat isn't the fucking problem.

>>6409847
>huge contributor to cholesterol
That should be serum cholesterol obviously.

I would eat it if the price/ quality ratio was good. I would probably get it to try if it was twice the cost of soy meat substitutes or if it was hade into salami. I have yet to find a substitute for that and I miss it.

Its a joke that some people are such ridiculously picky eaters that developing such a product is even viable

>>6409833
>I became vegan for the health benefits
lol

>>6410129
What is sustainability?

>>6410133
what is artificial scarcity

>>6410136
What is environmental impact?

>>6408847
Those faggots don't know the pleasure of eating a chicken tendie with buffalo sauce.

Their loss while they get fucked in the ass.

I can tell you seriously, I don't live my live caring about some vegan with it's tofurky.

>>6410137
What is arbitrary quantification?

Also, keep in mind that the regulatory organizations that craft those arbitrations are not doing anything to stop the truly worst offenders. It's only to control your average person that has an objectively low impact.

>>6410132
Yes, every single piece of whole plant food you consume has micronutrients and health benefits like anti-oxidants, fiber, anti-inflammatories, etc. Every animal product you consume fuels cancer and has negative health impacts because of the horrible practices in the industries that produce said products.

>>6410201
If a person was concerned with nutrition they would eat both in proper portions, not cut out an entire food group.

Vegans are not vegan for the health benefits.

>>6409623
but that is something that is affected by genetics. does not mean that you can't control it.

>>6408847
I eat meat but feel like going veggie pretty often but I just eat so many dishes it's going to be a hard transition.

If lab grown meat became commercially viable and available I'd switch to it given it tastes nice, as meat substitutes at the moment are pretty bad.

>>6410217
Meat and dairy food groups offer very little nutritional value along with lots of saturated fat, trans fats, cholesterol, and hormones. Meanwhile, dark leafy greens, fruits, nuts, seeds, and other whole foods like rice and potatoes are very high in vitamins and minerals with no negative health consequences. Yes, cutting out entire food groups can be healthy. Some vegans go vegan for morals, others do it for health.

>>6410536
>and hormones

Only in America

>>6410536
>Meat and dairy food groups offer very little nutritional value
are you really this stupid or are you a troll?

>>6410536
PETA shill

Nah, I went vegetarian (well, really, pescetarian) because I just didn't like meat.

>>6410536
>Some vegans go vegan for morals, others do it for health.
This level of conditioning is not good for your mental health, I'm afraid.

>>6408847
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_vitro_meat#First_public_trial

In all honesty, it just look unnatural and absolutely fucking disgusting. I wouldn't trust it and I'd never eat.

>Venison master race

>>6410564
>pescetarian

So you're just a normal fucking person? you still eat meat. Are we going to make food groups for every little food group people choose to exclude?

>>6410672
Pescetarians are named because they're pesky little shits.

>>6410536
>Meat and dairy food groups offer very little nutritional value

What the flying fuck

>>6410142
>edgelord
>muh meats

>>6410615
>nature is best!!!
>POSTED USING MY ALL NATURAL FRESHLY GROWN COMPUTER

It could, in time, taste way better than any natural meat because there is total control over every aspect of its production

>2015
>not eating Kanye salami

>>6410201
Except it's all under a heavy coating of pesticides.

Get fucked hippie

>>6410217

>if it's a food group, you need to eat it for maximum health

By that logic people who don't cut out candy are healthier than people who do. You don't eat meat and dairy for your health.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30gEiweaAVQ

>>6411038
"Candy" is not a food group. "Oils/Fats/Sweets" is a food group but a very tiny one that you're not supposed to consume much of. You do consume it, though, in other foods especially. Learn to nutrition, please.

>>6411018
I thought cannibalism was outlawed.

>>6411047

>"Candy" is not a food group. "Oils/Fats/Sweets" is a food group but

Thank you. See yourself out.

>>6411021
The pesticide content in meat is even worse from biomagnification.

>>6409847

What do you base that on? Virtually every recognized expert in the world would tell you otherwise

>>6411018
I would "eat" Kanye's "salami" if you know what I mean.

>>6409833
You do realise that most fit people eat chicken right?
Though you have a point, most fat Americucks eat low quality beef and pork.

>>6411423

Does that mean chicken is good for you or that people who exercise eat chicken?

>>6411051
>Thinks oils, fats and sweets only come from candy.

>>6411457
It means chicken naturally lowers the exercise inhibitors common in most mammals, obviously..

>>6411522

Oils, fats, and sweets refer to refined foods/junk foods. They aren't a necessary part of the diet and are deemed detrimental to health, hence the recommendation to limit them. The fact that they have a food group dedicated to them doesn't mean they're necessary for your survival, it's just a classification system. Meat, eggs, and dairy are similar. They aren't necessary in the diet and health recommendations worldwide focus on discouraging their consumption in favor of healthy plant foods.

>>6411532
>Oils, fats, and sweets refer to refined foods/junk foods.
Lol, keep digging. This is gold.

>>6411532
surviving =/= thriving

>>6411669

Got anything to say, friend?

>>6411671

Well, with lower rates of heart disease, obesity, diabetes, alzheimers, cancer, etc in the people who avoid those foods, I think we can call it thriving.

>>6411676
Got a source on that? Last I've heard, nutrition isn't a complete field. It's still an active area of research and a theory of everything for diet hasn't been found yet.

do you think vegans would eat in vitro meat?

>>6408847
Are there any uses for a vegan other than using as test subjects for the most efficient gas chamber?

>>6411138
It means that you are a faggot?

>>6411680

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10479226
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21983060
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8327020
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23169929
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12833118
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24346473

There's a few studies. The health benefits of meatless diets are pretty well recognized now, making health concerns a solid reason to adopt such a diet.

The US dietary guidelines now list "the healthy vegetarian pattern" as one of its models of healthy eating alongside other low-meat diets like the mediterranean diet and the DASH diet, and recognize the benefits of increasing intake of legumes, whole grains, fruits, and vegetables while decreasing meat and dairy intake, referencing at one point that the "organic vegan diet" may confer the most potential benefit for health and environmental sustainability

http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015-scientific-report/PDFs/Scientific-Report-of-the-2015-Dietary-Guidelines-Advisory-Committee.pdf

The largest healthcare organization in the US also recognizes a vegan eating pattern as potentially the healthiest, recommending that all of their patients be encouraged to eat that way

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3662288/

>>6411741
>may confer
>as potentially
Thought so.

While interesting, it seems premature to conclude these effects are solely due to the consumption of animal products and not other factors. There is abundant anthropological evidence suggesting humans are omnivores. Doesn't seem unreasonable to think that we obtain bioactive compounds from animals not found in plants that have benefited our darwinian fitness in some way. Glycosaminoglycans, hydroxylated amino acids, taurine, carnitine, creatine (some papers report improved cognitive functioning when given to vegetarians), coenzymated vitamins (such as pantethine), phospholipids with PUFA as their acyl chains (which have been shown to be an effective adjunctive nutraceutical for ADHD and some other psychiatric/neurological disorders), conjugated PUFA, selenoneine, histidyl dipeptides, other peptides that are end products from the proteolytic digestion of animal proteins, etc might all fit into this category and there is research suggesting this. More alarming is what we haven't even identified yet.

The downsides to consuming plants and only plants hasn't been thoroughly investigated either, from what I know. Plant secondary metabolites are often cytotoxic to mammalian cells though some species such as ruminants have evolved digestive systems to cope with them. The canonical detoxification pathway is through glycine conjugation, and indeed vegetarians, from consuming so many, seem to have lower glycine levels and subsequently lower glutathione synthesis:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8914953

Similar stuff happens with O-methylation reactions, which can be seen by the elevation of homocysteine after acute intake of polyphenols and flavonoids. All uncharted territory.

>Vegans actually thinking that their extreme minority boycotting the industry will see it stop
Factory farming is shit and awful but once in vitro meat can PROPERLY synthesis meat (fats, proteins, flavours) and it becomes more cost effective than farming animals (something that has a ridiculous amount of overheads as it is) that's when factory farming will end.

Why don't they just chill? Factory farming was the meat industry adopting to huge consumer demand by a poor populace who couldn't afford exorbitant meat prices. Once they have the resources they'll do it again.

>>6411893
>Factory farming was the meat industry adopting to huge consumer demand by a poor populace who couldn't afford exorbitant meat prices.

I'd read that factory farming was created during the Second World War, as a more efficient way to mass-produce food during a labor shortage resulting from the draft and mass industrialization during the war. It was an application of the techniques of assembly-line mass production to animal husbandry.

>>6411885

>Thought so.

Come on, you know scientists don't like to use absolutist language. When we're talking about if we have enough data to make informed decisions about diet and health, clearly we do. Is everything set in stone and it's impossible for anything to be wrong or incomplete? Of course not, but with the data the way it is, we have to accept that this is the way we currently understand things to be after decades of research, and it should have some influence on the way we think about nutrition.

>There is abundant anthropological evidence suggesting humans are omnivores

Sure, but we don't look to the fossil record to see what's good or bad for us. Ancient humans practiced cannibalism and carried heavy parasite burdens too. The behavior of short-lived cavemen who also lived in a completely different environment than us has no bearing on how we should eat today to have the best chance of living a long, healthy life.

Those are neat words you're throwing around, but apparently they aren't powerful enough to make a difference, because the data doesn't reflect it. Bioactive compounds that are known to decrease the risk of chronic disease both in theory and in practice are abundant in plants though.

>>6410551

It's hard to tell when it comes with vegans. The brain loses mass with age and the lack of protein in ones diet accelerates this process.

>>6411960
>The brain loses mass with age and the lack of protein in ones diet accelerates this process.

*pseudoscience intensifies*

>>6410142
I can't imagine lab meat tasting much worse than an industrial floor-sweepings nugget.

>>6410142
>tendies
>food
Pick one

>>6410546
I's not like milk doesn't naturally contain growth hormones. It's growth juice. For a cow.

>>6411669
Well it does refer to that. The food pyramid is wrong in that it doesn't recognize the importance of fat.

>>6412101

What do you mean?

>>6412103
"Fats and oils" is lumped together with sugar into the tiny piece of the food pyramid because it's based on the idea that fat is bad. Replacing carbs with fat isn't automatically bad for you.

>>6412093
nuggie =/= tendie

>>6412124
>the spongebob easy mac does too taste different , mom!!

>>6412116

What are their benefits? Oils tend to be empty calories and not particularly nutritious. Fats as animal fats raise your risk of heart disease, diabetes, and certain cancers. Thus, "use sparingly" makes sense as a recommendation

>>6412134
It's like saying steak is the same thing as a hotdog.
They're completely different things.

>>6411955
>When we're talking about if we have enough data to make informed decisions about diet and health, clearly we do.
Nobody has been awarded a Nobel prize yet for successfully solving the composition of human diet, nor has there been a center spread on Nature reporting that meat consumption should be completely eliminated. Many leaps of reasoning and equating absence of evidence with evidence of absence are necessary preconditions for this to hold basis in reality.

>Sure, but we don't look to the fossil record to see what's good or bad for us.
Don't promote a black and white picture. It's anti-scientific and on the contrary history surely has some impact on the present.

>The behavior of short-lived cavemen who also lived in a completely different environment than us has no bearing on how we should eat today
Have anything to back up that claim? I'm sure many nutritional anthropologists would tend to disagree with you.

>Those are neat words you're throwing around, but apparently they aren't powerful enough to make a difference, because the data doesn't reflect it.
They are, when looking at their pharmacodynamics and the currently available datum. Seems that you're just in denial.

>Bioactive compounds that
You leave out the fact that publication bias leaning towards benefits, without analysis of risk, is rampant in this class of compounds despite the need for caution. Your pic exemplifies this point. There is a lack of evidence right now to rigorously quantify ideal human intake and possible side effects. Many are unnecessary for normal physiology and instead hormetic, for example resveratrol acts by inhibiting translation, a very tightly evolutionarily conserved process:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25533949

Hormesis is in many cases a zero-sum game and comes with a cost.

>known to decrease the risk of chronic disease
Source? I'm unfamiliar with any primary endpoint studies.

>>6412136
>empty calories
Right, it's calories. Whereas you get your other nutrition from low calorie vegetables.

Also it depends on what fat source we're talking about. Butter or olive oil have a lot of nutrients dissolved in the fat.

>Fats as animal fats raise your risk of heart disease
I'm a vegetarian and I still don't believe this. Heart disease became more likely AFTER the introduction of vegetable oils.

>>6412143
I know "tenders" are supposed to be whole strips of meat but I've had a bunch that seemed molded into that shape. Steak-shaped hot dog.

If that's not true well you're one high-class motherfucker then, aren't you.

>>6412156
>Steak-shaped hot dog.
Salisbury?

>>6412146

>Nobody has been awarded a Nobel prize yet for successfully solving the composition of human diet

And they probably never will, but you don't use "we'll never know absolutely everything with 100% certainty" as a means to discard all the evidence, in any scientific field. There's being skeptical and then there's just being in denial.

>Don't promote a black and white picture. It's anti-scientific and on the contrary history surely has some impact on the present.

I don't accept being called anti-scientific when you're telling me it's more important to just look and see what people do and conclude that widespread behavior points to what's correct, rather than using scientific inquiry to get a better understanding.

>Have anything to back up that claim?

See above

>They are, when looking at their pharmacodynamics and the currently available datum

When we look at practical associations in populations, even if there's any benefit to be had from anything you mentioned, they're apparently counteracted by the negative effects of the total package of the food they come from. The result, higher rates of disease.

>You leave out the fact that publication bias leaning towards benefits, without analysis of risk

The fact that any potential risk doesn't manifest in a way that we can detect, and we see clear benefits from these foods, means it's not crazy to say that things like fruits, vegetables, and whole grains are healthy. We see health associations with these foods, then study them further and see that it's due in part to their huge array of bioactive compounds and the functions they perform when we eat them.