My editorial about diet just appeared in our local paper. Here is is:
Gruesome reports of animal cruelty are reason enough to be critical of the food industry. We should treat other creatures humanely and the prevention of animal suffering is a worthy moral imperative that trumps preference or convenience. Becoming a vegan or a vegetarian decreases the demand for animal products and publicizing the plight of animals in the food industry is a good strategy for getting converts.
Gruesome reports of animal cruelty are reason enough to be critical of the food industry. We should treat other creatures humanely and the prevention of animal suffering is a worthy moral imperative that trumps preference or convenience. Becoming a vegan or a vegetarian decreases the demand for animal products and publicizing the plight of animals in the food industry is a good strategy for getting converts.
These
editorial pages routinely see letters from animal rights advocates who
point out the health and environmental benefits of removing animal
products from our diets. Mack Davison ("Letter: Replacing Obamacare,"
Jan. 18, 2017) cites studies that find "consumption of animal protein is
associated with higher risk of death." He then makes several
questionable leaps to conclude the consumption of animal products is the
root cause of our society's medical problems. This conclusion is at
odds with the work he cites.
The
2016 JAMA Internal Medicine study he refers to concludes the slight
elevated risk of death associated with consuming animal protein only
applied to participants who had at least one other factor associated
with unhealthy lifestyle, such as obesity or smoking. When these other
unhealthy factors are eliminated, no correlation with increased
mortality remains. Each of us has the right to study the data and choose
a morally defensible lifestyle that works for us. I have made weight
loss through a low carb diet my primary health strategy, so I eat lots
of meat.
My
data: I lost almost 50 pounds (body mass index is now 23) by consuming
less than 10 percent of my calories from carbohydrates and getting fat
from eating mostly meat, cheese, eggs and dairy products. As a result,
my cholesterol ratio (total to HDL) dropped from 7.8 to 3.4 (see the
plot at tinyurl.com/jg7r2uz).
In addition, my blood pressure fell from 148/87 to 119/69; my resting
heart rate is now at or below 50 bpm; chronic migraines disappeared;
insomnia improved; heartburn gone; physical stamina greatly enhanced;
and Simpson's diversity index of my gut microbiome is 7.92, more diverse
than 69 percent of the general population and most vegetarians.
A
new trial that is consistent with my own data reports on a highly
controlled study where researchers fed 167 adults all of their daily
meals and snacks for 20 weeks, while closely tracking their body weight
and a number of biological markers such as metabolism with doubly
labeled water (see https://tinyurl.com/ycvnzh6g).
After five months on the diet, the subjects' bodies burned 250 calories
more per day than people who ate a high-carb, low-fat diet with the
same number of calories.
My
goal is not to proselytize, but to stress freedom of personal choice in
what we eat, free from criticism by others who disagree, especially if
good health results. The human body is a complex biochemical system that
responds differently to diet from one person to another, and the low
carb high fat diet has worked for me for decades. I felt awful on a
vegetarian diet, weight loss was elusive, I was constantly hungry, and
my health markers remained mediocre.
Though
a meat eater, I am sympathetic to the animals that suffer to
accommodate my lifestyle, so I am willing to pay more for meat to offset
the burden that my actions impose on animals and the environment. In
return, I ask that animal rights groups and vegans respect my choices
and refrain from advocating for the elimination of all animal food
products and misrepresenting the data.
Davison
("Letter: Consider reducing your meat consumption," March 23) extols
the virtues of a vegan diet and the promise of mass production of faux
meat. The Aug. 25 issue of the Daily News ran an article on
vegetable-based "meats" that focused on taste. My concern is not that
these alternatives taste like meat, which seems to be an emphasis of
R&D in this industry, rather I need the nutritional contents and
fat, protein, and carbohydrate composition to match that of animal meat.
Only then would I embrace artificial meats unless they are found to be
unhealthy, as have so many artificial foods. For now, I need my meat,
and cannot accept Nick Gier's challenge to become a vegan ("His View:
Progress on animal rights around the world," Jan. 31). Perhaps I will be
forgiven since I am pro-choice.
No comments:
Post a Comment