# Vegetarian/Vegan vs. Traditional foods



## idigchaitea (Aug 21, 2007)

I have been a fan of traditional foods for quite some time--like whole milk (raw if I could afford it!), good quality meat, preserved foods, good quality butter, and organic fruits/veggies. But now my husband has been doing tons of research on how bad animal products are for you. He's never been more passionate about something. I have always disagreed with vegetarianism because people have been eating meat since the beginning of time--they survived on meat and berries, right? I do realize that the meat industry in America is horrible and I am definitely afraid of what I'm eating. I wish I could afford to raise animals myself so I'd know for sure it was a good source.

I'm just feeling so confused right now. How can I be a traditional foodie and DH be vegan? I feel like I could be swayed in his direction, but I want to know what is best for our family. Please give me any advice you have--from both points of view. We are also trying to lose weight, so any success stories would be encouraging. Thank you.


----------



## Sayward (Nov 16, 2009)

Well, I consider myself a traditional foods vegan. I eat whole unprocessed organic foods in ancient preparations (soaked/sprouted, cultured/fermented, etc). I don't think eating traditionally and eating veg*n are mutually exclusive, and I certainly believe that forgoing animal products is healthier for my body and better for the environment.

That said, these sorts of 'versus' topics are not really allowed on this board, and I'm expecting this thread will either be heavily modded or bah-leeted. =)


----------



## frugalmum (Nov 5, 2009)

i consider myself a traditional foodie and i am about 90% vegan. Sometimes a little less or a little more. I agree with your DH about animal products *in moderate to large quantities* as being bad for you but there really is no evidence that a diet that is ~8-10% animal products is harmful for you, and in fact it might be good for you. Even Dr. Fuhrman admits this in "Eat to Live."

i think there is also a big difference between an ideal child diet and an ideal adult diet. I can't say exactly what the proportions should be but it goes to reason that growing children need "high growth" foods like meat and dairy in ways that adults do not.

I would suggest reading 'Eat to Live" and following the omni plan he offers. I aim to eat mostly unprocessed vegan foods with small amounts of dairy and meat. When I am careful and avoid refined flours, sugars, eat tons of greens, the weight melts off effortlessly.


----------



## ambereva (Jul 15, 2004)

I eat an almost exclusively vegan whole foods diet. I've recently reincorporated salmon and pastured eggs back into my diet, but no more than 2-3 servings a week. I find that the way I eat is very much in line with TF philosophies, except for not eating the meat part. I still embrace the traditional preparations, etc. Like pp's said, they are not mutually exclusive.

Oh, and I lost 80 pounds eating this way and moving. The moving part is really important. Moving a lot.


----------



## Smokering (Sep 5, 2007)

What kinds of research is your DH using to back up his claims? Remember that this is a v*ganism vs TF argument, not a v*ganism vs SAD argument. To my knowledge, most studies about meat-eating use CAFO meat, which has quite a different nutritional profile to pastured meat. He needs to prove that pastured animal products, prepared in traditional ways (ie. not being seared to death on the barbecue or smothered in MSG/hydrolysed vegetable protein-laden sauces) are bad for you. Nourishing Traditions has lots of references to studies proving the value of animal products in diet - they're not well-referenced, unfortunately, but contain enough clues (ie "researchers in Switzerland") that you could probably dig up the originals via the internet. Your husband might not have seen the other side of the issue - and yes, he does have to address the fact that many traditional societies have avoided most debilitating Western-type diseases and achieved impressive lifespans, good bone structure etc, while eating highly animal-based diets. How does he account for that?

You also need to look at the effect of your diet on you as an individual. Some people seem to thrive on a vegan diet, others seem to thrive on a totally animal-based diet (the Masai, f'rinstance). If YOU feel sick/tired/lackadaisical/otherwise icky without meat, in a way it doesn't really matter if the research says you "should" feel better.

I don't think it would be impossible to have a household in which one partner was TF and one vegan, but it'd be something of a pain. You could "share" sourdough, ferments etc, but if you're used to cooking with animal fats and using chicken broth to braise veggies, etc, that might be more of an issue (although not insurmountable).

Oersonally I'm convinced of the value of TF eating, so if DH wanted to go vegan or vegetarian I wouldn't join him. But we'd take another look at the evidence for both sides until we hopefully arrived at the same conclusion.


----------



## Koalamom (Dec 27, 2007)

Please Mods, don't erase this thread. I so need this discussion as I am struggling with going vegan after eating meat. I feel that me just looking at websites isn't enough for me. I need the advice/support of other mamas I know and trust here in this site.


----------



## plantnerd (Aug 20, 2010)

I don't see why you couldn't work this out. I'm sure dh is a big boy and able to manage his own diet. I guess I would begin making a lot of veg, fruit, and grain side dishes with dinner and a meat for me and the kids, and let him worry about anything else he wants to add or supplement with.


----------



## CherryBomb (Feb 13, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smokering*
> 
> What kinds of research is your DH using to back up his claims? Remember that this is a v*ganism vs TF argument, not a v*ganism vs SAD argument. To my knowledge, most studies about meat-eating use CAFO meat, which has quite a different nutritional profile to pastured meat. He needs to prove that pastured animal products, prepared in traditional ways (ie. not being seared to death on the barbecue or smothered in MSG/hydrolysed vegetable protein-laden sauces) are bad for you. Nourishing Traditions has lots of references to studies proving the value of animal products in diet - they're not well-referenced, unfortunately, but contain enough clues (ie "researchers in Switzerland") that you could probably dig up the originals via the internet. Your husband might not have seen the other side of the issue - and yes, he does have to address the fact that many traditional societies have avoided most debilitating Western-type diseases and achieved impressive lifespans, good bone structure etc, while eating highly animal-based diets. How does he account for that?


----------



## Koalamom (Dec 27, 2007)

Does your Dh currently follow your Tf diet? If so, how does he feel on it. That is really what it comes down to. If he feels crappy then perhaps it is the best for him to seek a different diet.

I am not one to talk as I feel good when eat meat, but my brain thinks it is bad for me. What has really helped me is a book called the 3 Season Diet. It talks about eating meat during the winter amd less or none in the summer and has some really good info to back it up and it just makes more sense.


----------



## Smokering (Sep 5, 2007)

Just wanted to add: Traditional Foods doesn't mean heavy on the meat and dairy, necessarily. One diet that's mentioned approvingly in NT is the diet of the Roman soldiers - mostly grains and fermented cabbage, with only a touch of animal protein in the form of fish sauce. There are plenty of dairy-free traditional diets, and some that are meat-free but get their B12 and K2 and so on from eggs and dairy, and some that only eat seafood, etc. And in many societies meat itself is only used as a "garnish" - just flecks of it through rice, or whatever - but the animal fat (good for absorbing fat-soluble vitamins) and broth (good for all sorts of things!) are used as well. Broth is considered a protein sparer, meaning that it makes animal protein go further. And just a touch of meat apparently makes other protein sources (beans and rice) WAY more nutritious.

So if you're worried about affording ethical meat, that kind of diet might be a good option. Or you could "down" actual meat and "up" other animal products that are easier to find ethical sources for - where I live it's really not that hard to find decent-quality free-range eggs, for instance. And even fancy pastured lard is really cheap compared to meat. Would your DH be game for that, or is he pushing for absolutely NO animal products?


----------



## GoGoGirl (Oct 13, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *idigchaitea*
> How can I be a traditional foodie and DH be vegan?


If you're like me and my DH, it's pretty easy as long as you each make most of your own food. And when one of you gets on your soapbox about how your way of eating is the best, the other one just rolls their eyes.







There are a lot of threads on here about how to handle it when members of a family don't eat the same way. I think it helps if you can identify the foods that you can all agree on (for me and DH, that's vegetables) and try to base your meals around that. Then you add some TF components, and he can add some vegan components.

As for weight loss, when I started following the Eat to Live plan (vegan with almost no grains, oils, or sweeteners) I lost all my baby weight and then some.


----------



## Magelet (Nov 16, 2008)

One thing that's very poinent to me, is that while there have been people eating traditional diets of all sorts who were as a people extremely robust and healthy, there have not been people traditionally eating VEGAN diets. While some groups ate very high/almost all animal product, other groups ate very little, and mostly fish or eggs or milk, or sometimes even getting much of their animal food from insects. However there haven't been groups of people who traditionally ate vegan and thrived.

Personally I don't need more evidence against vegetarianism for me, beyond the fact that if I don't eat some animal products with great frequency, I feel terrible. Really awful. After 2 vegan meals in a row, and I start to feel like crud, no energy, ravenous no matter how much I ate, I feel so much better with some butter, some milk or eggs or cheese or a little meat or fish. But I don't need a lot of meat. I need some but not a ton. DP starts to feel sick and weaken quickly as well if he doesn't eat enough animal products (particularly meat). We eat very little meat, a pound of ground beef or a chicken stretched over a week, or sometimes a pound of fish, sometimes a few anchovies and about 6 eggs a week (between the two of us), plus plenty of milk, cheese, and butter. But for us, it's really really vital to have that animal protein. We eat it sparingly because we can't afford the high quality stuff in anything other than small quantities. The cat LITERALLY eats more meat in a week (possibly 2x) than the two of us combined, because we feed him conventional quality meat (which is cheap), and that's part of having a carnivore as a pet.

We both lost a lot of weight (getting us down to and maintaining a healthy weight effortlessly when we started eating TF (probably the biggest part of this is eating very little sugar), though we've been eating more grains and legumes and less veggies the past two months and feel like we've both put on a few pounds, so we're trying to increase our veggies and decrease our grains. Our diet at it's best is loads of fresh veggies, a good bit of whole grains (sometimes properly prepared) and legumes (always properly prepared), plenty of fat of all kinds, and sparing meat.). Once we cut out processed foods and sugars, and replaced them with healthy TF foods, for us, it has been so easy to maintain healthy weights.

I personally feel very strongly about the importance of a TF diet, and don't beleive that most people/anyone can be properly nourished on a vegan diet. The fat soluble vitamins, and many other important nutrients are just not there in their absorbable forms. I do think that a TF ovo-lacto vegetarian diet can be sufficiently or even extremely nourishing if you have high quality dairy products and eggs. (A pescetarian diet is also certainly perfectly nourishing enough.) but no animal products at all? I think one is ruining their health, and their offspring's health (for women), to eat that way. JMHO.


----------



## ambereva (Jul 15, 2004)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magelet*
> 
> One thing that's very poinent to me, is that while there have been people eating traditional diets of all sorts who were as a people extremely robust and healthy, there have not been people traditionally eating VEGAN diets. While some groups ate very high/almost all animal product, other groups ate very little, and mostly fish or eggs or milk, or sometimes even getting much of their animal food from insects. However there haven't been groups of people who traditionally ate vegan and thrived.
> 
> ...


Magalet, I see we're both in the Bay Area! I'd be happy to meet up with you to demonstrate how malnourished and weakened my vegan diet has left me, any time!


----------



## marimara (Jan 31, 2008)

Ok I'm not even going to read the other posts and only give my opinion. First of all, I think it's total crap that we can't host these types of discussions for FEAR of it being deleted or what not. That's bogus IMO.

I will tell you right here and now that I have officially been on both sides of this fence. I can only offer you my own experiences. The amount of information out there is vast and often misguided.

I prefer Michael Pollan's "eat real food, mostly plants". I prefer this because high quality produce is cheaper and easier to come by in my neck of the woods than high quality animal products. As my 4yo dd said the other day, we have flat teeth and sharp teeth and that means we're omnivores. Humans have evolved and adapted to eat a wide range of foods and be healthy and prosper on any variety provided it is free of chemicals, pesticides, or any other man made stuff.

There is the China Study, which is widely criticized and there is Sally Fallon who is also widely criticized. It is up to you to decide what makes you feel better. There is no right and wrong. Period. Humans can survive and thrive on all kinds of food, all meat, no meat, all veggies, high carb, low carb, you name it humans have done it. The most important thing is to avoid pesticides, chemicals, hormones, artificial anything, and to avoid the things that don't agree with you.

You will lose weight as long as you take in less calories than you expend. Period. There is no black magic, voodoo. Didn't you read on the news about the guy who ate twinkies and lost weight? Simple-calories in vs calories out.


----------



## Toolip (Mar 7, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marimara*
> 
> You will lose weight as long as you take in less calories than you expend. Period. There is no black magic, voodoo. Didn't you read on the news about the guy who ate twinkies and lost weight? Simple-calories in vs calories out.


I don't believe it is that simple.


----------



## ambereva (Jul 15, 2004)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Toolip*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> ...


It's generally not a good idea to use personal belief as a rebuttal to physics, though.


----------



## Toolip (Mar 7, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ambereva*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> ...


There's personal belief in all of it, your theory and mine. There's "evidence" supporting the idea that it is not as simple as "calories in calorie out." I didn't want to get into because I'm still researching and I don't have all the facts at my finger tips but it is not just a mythical belief that I pulled out of thin air. You didn't provide anything but your personal belief either







I'm hoping some more well read mamas will chime in and help me with the facts that I am not able to supply right now.

I haven't gotten to finish yet but I am reading "good calories bad calories" and "eat fat, loose fat." They both address this issue.


----------



## ambereva (Jul 15, 2004)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Toolip*
> 
> There's personal belief in all of it, your theory and mine. There's "evidence" supporting the idea that it is not as simple as "calories in calorie out." I didn't want to get into because I'm still researching and I don't have all the facts at my finger tips but it is not just a mythical belief that I pulled out of thin air. *You didn't provide anything but your personal belief either*
> 
> ...


I didn't provide a personal belief? Or posit a theory.

After you finish reading Good Calories Bad Calories I'd be happy to discuss Taubes theories, at length!


----------



## Magelet (Nov 16, 2008)

Ambereva, it's possible that some people are healthy and strong long term on a vegan diet, but my expeirience (which is admitedly biased towards TF, given my circle of friends/coworkers) is that I know a huge number of former vegans who felt great for a while (a decade or two even), and then their health slowly started to fall to peices, and only repaired upon adding healthy (grass-fed, raw, pastured etc) animal products back into their diet, and a lot of vegans who are very very sickly and weak, and I personally know no one who has been vegan (as compared to ovo-lacto vegetarian) for a prolonged period of time and maintained their health. There may be some people (like you) who thrive on a vegan diet long term and over generations, however I beleive for the large majority of people, it is not a healthy diet.

I agree that weight loss is not as simple about calories in/calories out. Different foods (while they may burn with the same calorie amounts) are processed differently in the body, and some are more likely to be stored as fat than others. It's not my area of expertise (once I discovered that I thrive on this diet, I became a lot more focused on how to cook it and eat it than the science behind it.), however there are equally valid theories that are extremely counter to the "calories in, calories out" theory.


----------



## ambereva (Jul 15, 2004)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magelet*
> 
> Ambereva, it's possible that some people are healthy and strong long term on a vegan diet, but my expeirience (which is admitedly biased towards TF, given my circle of friends/coworkers) is that I know a huge number of former vegans who felt great for a while (a decade or two even), and then their health slowly started to fall to peices, and only repaired upon adding healthy (grass-fed, raw, pastured etc) animal products back into their diet, and a lot of vegans who are very very sickly and weak, and I personally know no one who has been vegan (as compared to ovo-lacto vegetarian) for a prolonged period of time and maintained their health. There may be some people (like you) who thrive on a vegan diet long term and over generations, however I beleive for the large majority of people, it is not a healthy diet.
> 
> I agree that weight loss is not as simple about calories in/calories out. Different foods (while they may burn with the same calorie amounts) are processed differently in the body, and *some are more likely to be stored as fat than others.* It's not my area of expertise (once I discovered that I thrive on this diet, I became a lot more focused on how to cook it and eat it than the science behind it.), however there are equally valid theories that are extremely counter to the "calories in, calories out" theory.


And I know a huge number of vegans who ARE healthy and strong. Neither of our personal experiences have a bit of relevance to this debate.

Whether a food is stored as fat has absolutely no bearing on actual total body mass. Weight and fat are not the same thing. A person's body mass is a product of energy expenditure in relation to fuel consumed, it is simple physics. Now if we want to talk about body composition, we can start looking at what specific foods and physical activities contribute to fat vs. lean mass, that's an interesting topic! And one I'm ALWAYS happy to discuss! If someone wants to argue that total body mass is more complicated than energy in/energy out, though, they're going tohave to come up with a much better source than Gary Taubes or Sally Fallon. Which isn't to say that there isn't value in either of their bodies of work! But neither is exactly a bastion of scientific credibility.


----------



## Toolip (Mar 7, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ambereva*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> ...


I said you didn't provide anything BUT your personal belief in your statement that it's just simple "calories in, calories out." And then went on to say "It's generally not a good idea to use personal belief as a rebuttal to physics, though." I felt as though you were saying that your belief was a law of physics and mine was, well "voodoo" or whatever.

I know that there are a lot of different ideas about nutrition and I would hate to go around touting my beliefs and understanding as the laws of the universe or some ultimate truth that applies to everyone. I would be really misrepresenting myself if I didn't preface my interpretation of the literature I have read, my personal experience and what I have learned from others as my "personal beliefs." That's why I said that "I believe" it's not that simple. Because that's all we really have, our own beliefs that is. I don't think that makes them any more or less relevant.

I looked at your pictures and you look amazing. Clearly you feel like you are feeding your body the best way that you can. I hope that you continue to be healthy and strong. I'm not so invested in my beliefs about traditional foods to have any reason to believe that you will not continue to be.

I too have had major improvements in my body since changing my diet. I have lost weight, gained muscle and I am even seeing some grey hairs turning back to brown! I have not cut back on total calories at all, I'm about the same I was before maybe slightly higher, but I have cut out "empty" calories and I really focus on nutritionally dense foods and lots of quality fats. Why am I losing weight? I don't know. Maybe I've been more active, but I don't think so, I've been sitting at a desk for the better part of the last three months and studying my butt off (literally I guess, lol)!


----------



## ambereva (Jul 15, 2004)

Decades of peer reviewed scientific research have established fairly effectively that body mass = energy in +/- energy out. Sure, we may have some huge breakthrough some day, but it hasn't happened yet, and Taubes and Fallon cherry pick outlying (and often suspect) data to support their claims that it has. They ignore VAST bodies of evidence that contradict their hypotheses.

There is plenty of evidence that the foods you eat can have a positive or negative affect on your metabolic rate (google food thermogenics). A properly fueled engine runs better. That does NOT mean that the body mass you are losing is magically evaporating. It means your body is using more energy simply processing the food you are eating. Energy out. You are probably moving more without realizing it because your energy levels have improved (google NEAT). Energy out. Your brain uses energy when it works, and you're using your brain more. Energy out. Your experience, while perhaps appearing more complicated, ultimately boils down to: body mass = energy in +/- energy out.

I don't think Taubes and Fallon (and their ilk) are totally wrong, they're just drawing the wrong conclusion from their observations. They're on to something, they're just not using good science to fill in the missing pieces.


----------



## Toolip (Mar 7, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ambereva*
> 
> Decades of peer reviewed scientific research have established fairly effectively that body mass = energy in +/- energy out. Sure, we may have some huge breakthrough some day, but it hasn't happened yet, and Taubes and Fallon cherry pick outlying (and often suspect) data to support their claims that it has. They ignore VAST bodies of evidence that contradict their hypotheses.
> 
> ...


please don't pretend that you know what my activity level is like. Yes I understand that brain activity burns calories (and a lot of them) and I also understand the idea of NEAT and that my energy level is higher, etc. I am not totally ignorant to other ideas about nutrition, I don't use Fallon or anyone else as my bible, I do what is working for me and I didn't pull my ideas out of thin air.

I agree with what you're saying, that a "well stocked engine runs better" but honestly I think your evidence supports the point that I was trying to make. That it's not *that* simple as *just* calories in calories out. There are lots of factors that come into play, making our bodies more efficient and effective.


----------



## ambereva (Jul 15, 2004)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Toolip*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> ...


But 'more efficient and effective', for our purposes in this discussion, means higher energy expediture. (if we want to get technical, a more efficient engine would burn less energy, but we're using analogies here, not technicalities). Higher energy expenditure means more calories out (and more calories out than calories in = reduced body mass).

ETA: all this to say, your new diet is fiddling with the calories out factor in the equation, not the equation itself.


----------



## catnip (Mar 25, 2002)




----------



## earthmama369 (Jul 29, 2005)

The kids and I are pesco-vegheads and dh is thinking about incorporating some local, small-farm meat back into his diet for health and philosophical reasons. He's reading The Omnivore's Dilemma and it's really resonating with him. Hey, it's his choice. I have no problem with this. I'll help him get the meat if he needs me to (a friend has a farm and we really admire their practices, but they're an hour away and dh works full-time), I may learn how to prepare and cook it, but I have no desire to eat it myself. If the kids want to try it, that's their choice as well. If it bothers me to get, prepare, or cook the meat myself, or if I just don't have the time, dh would have no problem figuring out how to handle it himself. He's good about taking responsibility for his choices and I'm happy to support him in something that he wants to try.


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

Ambereva, if it's not too personal, would you share how long you've been vegan? The reason I ask is that for me and my family, going grain-free vegan (and 95% raw) was really relieving. We had a surprising detox period, and afterward, we all had more energy, more mental clarity, and looked better than ever before. We ate lots of nut and seed oils and evoo, too. At the nine month-mark, all of us suddenly lost all of that energy, became almost lethargic, dark circles appeared around all of our sets of eyes, dp and I felt mentally hazy, and it was clear that our dc did too. We thought we were fighting off a virus or something, but after the third week of this, during which we also turned a sickly pale shade of grey, it occurred to us that maybe we were not getting enough nutrients. I went back to researching everything I could find from one extreme perspective, right through the spectrum to the other extreme. We decided to add in raw cheese and organic, free-range eggs. We all felt ravenous for more than the small amounts we introduced, so we began to seek out organic meats. We ate those meats like we had never eaten before. Once we reincorporated dairy and meat, our colour returned, our energy returned, and I started us on bone broth and all things TF, including grains because mt dp really wanted bread back in his diet.

Now we've all decided enough with the grains. I eat little anyway because I don't enjoy them and having been grain-free for seven years before meeting my previously grain-loving dp, I knew that I was very much healthier without them.

Now we eat grain-free TF, very much like The Primal Blueprint, but more emphasis on fermented foods than the PB, and we do eat raw organic cheeses and butter.

Soooo, the reason I wondered how long you've been vegan is because it seems to me from my experiences and those of others I know, some of whom were vegan for a very long time and had to rescue their deteriorating health by reintroducing dead animal to their diets, the length of time most people feel great as vegans is often proportionate to the length of time they ate very poorly before that. That is, eating vegan serves as a detox-program, and for some, there is more to detox than for others, and the longer one ate poorly before, the longer his/her health improves as a vegan. This was certainly true for me, relative to the experiences of others. But, ime, there's a cut-off, after which the benefits once so abundant, are replaced by symptoms that are alleviated by eating animal and animal products (dairy, eggs).

I know this is anecdotal and not formally scientific, but I am doing field science with this myself: the whole scientific method is stringently employed through practice here. "Science" is human beings gathering and analysing information, including how to best do that, and then positing conclusions. This is not in a lab, but it's actually peer reviewed, in spite of our lackadaisical presentation and lack of conferred credentials. I'm being somewhat facetious, but not completely: science serves its master, the human faculty of reason, and I have one of those. I also know from objective evidence that it works very well, so I trust my observations and agree with my conclusions unless and until something more accurate presents; then I align my conclusions accordingly.

So saying, it appears to me that the raw vegan diet was beneficial for a time for detoxification. I felt great because of that and because I was not eating inflammatory grain products. But it isn't good for the body to be in a sustained state of externally imposed detox; it is tiring to the body. Meat and dairy brought back nutrients I needed, bone broth returned minerals and further healing, but then I ate grains again. Soaking, sprouting and all manner of preparation just didn't take away the effect it had always had on my body. Now, grain-free, traditional foods from my particular ancestry are the best sustainable and nourishing way I can eat. My family is healthy with this, too. My children are sleeping (after seven years of constant struggle to sleep and stay asleep), waking refreshed, growing beautifully- muscular; very high bone density; thick layers of clear enamel on beautifully-formed teeth; curious, alert, calm dispositions; highly intelligent; etc...- and my baby's gassiness has stopped since this change. I've lost weight, too- no doubt unneeded water now that I don't have grain to process.

You are feeling great on a vegan diet. If you stop feeling great, please consider that it might be your vegan diet. Of course, above all, do what's best for you.

Now here's a convincing long-term raw, vegan lifestyle. Their dc are gorgeous. They have a trait that is common to every (always) raw vegan child I've seen, though. They have almost or no nose bridge at all. Their cute little noses just sort of spring off their faces below their eyes. Neither of their parents have this trait, but neither of them grew up raw vegan, either. Their whole life seems to be about food; I cannot figure out how else it could work. It seems to be working for Jinjee and Storm at least.

Here's the blog of the author of The Primal Blueprint. Pay special attention to the pics of Mark in the header, and check out the success stories here and on the forum.

Here's an interesting site called Beyond Vegetarianism, and it has information about/against many types of non-animal-eating restrictive diets and anthropological findings to support animal-based diets.

Well, there's some food for thought.









Also, I have always understood the definition of omnivore to be that it is expected, systemically, that vegetation and animal products be consumed, not that one may be completely eliminated and replaced with the other by individual preference. At least not without the potential for dire consequences. The proportions of each seem to me to be the reasonable variable, as long as one of them isn't "zero."


----------



## ambereva (Jul 15, 2004)

Preggie, I have never, in any way, shape or form, claimed that a plant based diet is healthier then a TF diet. I am not advocating a plant based diet over a TF diet in this thread (and if I am, please show me where). It is a personal choice I made for myself for social, economic, environmental and ethical reasons. I am absolutely not arguing that Taubes and Fallon are off the mark in advocating whole, organic, pasutured animal foods. It is their claim that body mass is more complicated than calories in vs. calories out that I question, and I question it for very compelling reasons. (But it does beg the question, if their research methods and subsequent conclusions are so off the mark in regards to calories, can I really trust their other conclusions?) In any case, I do not think that whole, organic, pastured animal foods are unhealthy.

I am very familiar with Mark's Daily Apple, I think it's a great site, and I wish more people, especially women, would embrace the exercise component of his philosophy as well as the diet! (I squat my bodyweight (150) and deadlift 220) According to MY 'field research', diet alone will never produce optimal health. Exercise is the *foundation* of health, diet is just a supporting structure.

I have been eating a plant based diet (I far prefer the term plant based to vegan, because' vegan' has a whole lot of baggage wrapped up in it, and I have not embraced all the lifestyle aspects of veganism) for close to three years now. I track my diet (less so now than in the beginning) and am getting 100% or more of every single essential vitamin and mineral daily, through diet alone. Part of the reason I am able to meet my needs to effectively through diet alone is that I am very active so am able to eat a lot more calories worth of food than average women, which allows for more nutrients without weight gain. My blood work is pristine. I have optimal levels of everything. I don't take any supplements. I don't eat a raw diet, btw. I loooove cooking, and eating cooked food. I mean, yeah, I eat raw foods, but I also eat cooked foods.

Interestingly, I have previously read all the links you supplied, and while I find value in all of them, I just haven't found them to be more compelling than what I've read (and experienced) of plant based diets.


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

Ambereva, I made the mistake of assuming that you were not against (I caught that part), but not for an animal-foods diet. The thread title with vs in it, that other posters were suggesting pure plant-based diets as unhealthy, and your counter-arguments all had me thinking that the disagreement was between your perspective and the perspective of those who eat a meat inclusive TF diet. Of course it was, but not in the way I presumed. I actually thought that I was stepping outside the intent of the vs by sharing my experience and acknowledgment that some people do very obviously well on plant-based diets, though clearly not all- me being one of them. Lol, my mistake. 

That said, I agree with you that diet is certainly not everything! I often tell my children that if we were not meant to move, we'd have shells on our backs. They think it's funny, but they also get the point: our bodies are full of joints and muscles and long bones for moving. We'll never be healthy if we're not moving most of the time, in some way. I love the PB view of movement. It isn't really exercise in the sense of working out for the sake of working out, but rather a loose description of activities we would use our bodies to perform if we had not created machines to do the work for us. The Primal Blueprint's "Lift something heavy" as a category for movement always makes me laugh; it's a universe away from the perspective that underlies "do 12 reps at 130 lbs, followed by 32 push-ups, 25 pull-ups and finish with AbRipperX."

That said, I want to use my body in the most natural ways, and given that I live on a wilderness farm and we haul water, garden, tend livestock, etc..., I find that there is lots of opportunity for natural or necessary exertion. Our neighbour, who works at a farm and works his farm too, is totally ripped at age 50, and I always joke with him by asking if he wants to come over and "work-out" (or to do some yoga, to which he replies, "No thanks, I had some for breakfast.") My dp is trying to rescue his body from shell-on-the-back syndrome, so he's doing P90X, but within a PB framework, if you can imagine. He's making excellent progress this way.

I am just beginning to re-establish my core from 8 pregnancies in 8 years, so I am certainly not fit by my or anyone's standards. I'm not overweight, but I had a monster diastasis after my last (and final) pg, that I am presently working on. For me, right now, while breast-feeding and repairing tissues, my diet is supremely important. Movement is too, but I can do a lot more with my diet than with movement right now. Of course, as I become stronger, I'll move more. I hate, hate, hate sitting around. I love moving, but I enjoy and benefit from a primal movement pattern- lots of steady movement with spurts of fast, spurts of lifting heavy things, and random movement either within sport or by chasing the dog (or the geese)- necessary! 

I posted what I did because many people get very excited about plant-based diets before they've had adequate time to fully integrate or appreciate whether or not it's actually going to work for them long-term. They just assume that because it's working now, it obviously will forever, but I haven't known anyone personally for whom that has been true. There obviously are people for whom it does work (Storm, for instance), but he, like you, has to work his body really hard to eat enough to end up with adequate nutrients. This was my contention with my dp's decision to undertake P90X as it's laid-out- total body transformation in 90 days. Yes, he could work his butt (literally) off, and yes, we could increase our food budget to feed his exercise program, but in the end, it has to be about what he will enjoy in the long-term, what is personally sustainable for him. If he does the program, it will have to be his life- working out, eating, working out, eating- because as you already shared, energy in-energy out (when the flow of energy isn't impeded in some way, of course).

He can also be supremely fit, like our 50 yr old neighbour who has never "exercised" in his life, by simply eating and moving naturally, but the key is that his lifestyle must be one that necessitates movement. If he wanted to live in a condo in NYC and work a desk job, but wanted to be fit, then an exercise program with food to feed into it would be a viable option for health for him, and likely the only viable option. By going "primal", he can live a sort of hunter-like existence around the rest of his life. You and Storm, on the other hand, are like hyper-gatherer-supers, which is great, of course, but only if you enjoy that and your life is such that it is both possible and necessary.

So, I think we agree on a lot, here. And you seem like a pretty spunky gal.  I genuinely delight in seeing/hearing of people who have taken responsibility for their lives and health- like you have; thanks for sharing your story. 

ETA: I took your cue about your deliberate use of the term "plant-based diet".


----------



## Koalamom (Dec 27, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ambereva*
> 
> I have been eating a plant based diet (I far prefer the term plant based to vegan, because' vegan' has a whole lot of baggage wrapped up in it, and I have not embraced all the lifestyle aspects of veganism) for close to three years now. I track my diet (less so now than in the beginning) and am getting 100% or more of every single essential vitamin and mineral daily, through diet alone. Part of the reason I am able to meet my needs to effectively through diet alone is that I am very active so am able to eat a lot more calories worth of food than average women, which allows for more nutrients without weight gain. My blood work is pristine. I have optimal levels of everything. I don't take any supplements. I don't eat a raw diet, btw. I loooove cooking, and eating cooked food. I mean, yeah, I eat raw foods, but I also eat cooked foods.


I am so grateful you are posting here. I was considering going more (not completely) raw, so why would you say that you don't. Would you mind sharing what you eat in a day that gets your nutrients up? I keep toying with the idea of going vegan like I was years ago, but didn't feel good then as I ate way too much soy ice cream, and not really much whole foods. I may just go vegan this coming spring, but want to do it right.

Here is another books recommendation for the OP's dh- The Blue Zone by Dan Butener. A great newer book on the diets of many pople who live over 100, and are still alive and healthy.


----------



## greenmulberry (Jan 11, 2009)

I think you have to go with what works for you.

During my decade of vegetarianism (vegan for 4 yours of it) I was very depressed and had a lot of a anxiety. I had been prescribed meds (SSRI) that initially helped the anxiety. They initially helped the mental problems, but I really hated the side effects. It never occurred to me my diet was making me depressed. I really felt as if, of course a veg*n diet is the healthiest!!!

At one point towards the end of my veggie journey, I became very apathetic and depressed. I just stopped caring about a lot of things I used to care about. I was getting fat because I was so freaking hungry all the time and had no energy, so I would come home from work, wolf down a huge dinner, and crash on the couch. (yeah, I took a B12 and multi) Since I really didn't care about anything anymore, I ended up eating meat a few times when it came up. (I think someone at a work function offered me some or something). I started including meat in my diet here and there, (I was also shocked how amazingly good and satiating it was).

One day, I realized that I hadn't taken my SSRI all week, it was the "off" week on my BC pills and I would occasionally forget one or two SSRI during that time but would be instantly reminded when the crazy beyotch in me would surface. But no, I felt cool and clam. (I had already been on the stepped down dose for a while that I could not seem to shake off while veg).

So, I have been eating omnivorously again for about 5 or 6 years now, with a TF style diet. I feel freaking great. I feel so sane and calm. I used to scream and be tense at DH, or hide in bed all day and just not want to do anything. It's awesome now! I have no idea what I was missing, or getting too much of, as a veg*n, but I truly to feel better about myself and my health. I have a friend who didn't know me back then and she says she cannot imagine me as a depressed/anxious person because she finds me so reasonable. (I still have some OCD type thoughts but find them very easy to manage now)

On the other hand, a have a friend who has been Vegan for 15 years. He is happy with the diet. So it works for some people.


----------



## greenmama66 (Nov 11, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C*
> 
> Ambereva, if it's not too personal, would you share how long you've been vegan? The reason I ask is that for me and my family, going grain-free vegan (and 95% raw) was really relieving. We had a surprising detox period, and afterward, we all had more energy, more mental clarity, and looked better than ever before. We ate lots of nut and seed oils and evoo, too. At the nine month-mark, all of us suddenly lost all of that energy, became almost lethargic, dark circles appeared around all of our sets of eyes, dp and I felt mentally hazy, and it was clear that our dc did too. We thought we were fighting off a virus or something, but after the third week of this, during which we also turned a sickly pale shade of grey, it occurred to us that maybe we were not getting enough nutrients. I went back to researching everything I could find from one extreme perspective, right through the spectrum to the other extreme. We decided to add in raw cheese and organic, free-range eggs. We all felt ravenous for more than the small amounts we introduced, so we began to seek out organic meats. We ate those meats like we had never eaten before. Once we reincorporated dairy and meat, our colour returned, our energy returned, and I started us on bone broth and all things TF, including grains because mt dp really wanted bread back in his diet.
> 
> ...


I was a raw vegan several times over. The last stint nearly cost me my life (and I was a raw food teacher LOL) and I went back to a paleo/primal type diet and my health returned. I don't do tPrimal Blueprint primal even though I am a member and post on that forum- I keep protein levels minimal (although now I'm pregnant and so I up my levels) according to the research of Nora Gedgauda's whose approach resonates with me.

Years ago (15 to be exact) when NT came out- I jumped on the bandwagon. Way too much for me. I gained over 60 pounds during my NT pregnancy. I went raw primal and lost it but wasn't feeling well from raw primal either and that's when I went paleo and it calmed my immune system down (as shown via bloodwork).

I'm somewhat a believer in metabolic typing and with that I will say- I know a few healthy whole food long term vegans.It seems to work for them. Never worked for me long term (I grew up vegan too BTW and growing up my health was a mess) and I do what feels best for me (no grain, somewhat paleo except I do eat goat kefir and grassfed butter on occasion) loads of vegetables, very little fruit except small amounts in season and grassfed and wild animal foods (meats, fish and some pastured eggs). I have energy and feel so much better than the 4 year raw vegan stint I did a few years ago (for the 4th time LOL) and I'm not bruising anymore nor is my hair falling out like it used to and I don't need to sleep 12 hours a day.

Not to be mean, but I don't want my kids looking like Jinjee and Storm's kids(classic Weston Price example of nutritional degeneration) and some of the other raw food kids I know (especially the all fruitarian/811 one's). Jinjee and Storm appear to do well, but I don't think a healthy diet for growing children should consist of orange juice as the source of calories.

And yes, while a healthy organic whole foods diet is health insurance IMO- one's lifestyle doesn't need to revolve 100% around food. The majority of the raw community fosters this behavior IMO.


----------



## mnnice (Apr 15, 2003)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluebirdmama1*
> 
> Does your Dh currently follow your Tf diet? If so, how does he feel on it. That is really what it comes down to. If he feels crappy then perhaps it is the best for him to seek a different diet.
> 
> I am not one to talk as I feel good when eat meat, but my brain thinks it is bad for me. What has really helped me is a book called the 3 Season Diet. It talks about eating meat during the winter amd less or none in the summer and has some really good info to back it up and it just makes more sense.


I grew up with my dad having a really big garden and this really describes how we ate. Our diet was definitely meat light in the summer and meat heavy in the winter. Interesting.


----------



## Smokering (Sep 5, 2007)

Slightly OT, but this has been bugging me for a while. It's my understanding that non-animal sources of certain vitamins - specifically K2 and B12, and I think vitamin A as well? - aren't bioavailable, or don't correct deficiences, or otherwise just aren't good enough - hence why vegans need to supplement. But what the heck are the supplements made of?

There's probably some blindingly obvious answer to this, but I can't figure it out. If the supplements were animal-based vegans wouldn't take them, and if they're plant-based doesn't that prove that you can get bioavailable versions of the vitamins from plant sources? Have vegan supplements been tested and proven to be as good as non-vegan ones (say, a vegan B12 capsule vs a non-vegan one)? I don't get it.


----------



## catnip (Mar 25, 2002)

B-12 is a byproduct of bacterial fermentation. You can get it in a vegan diet from fermented foods, (kombucha, for example) the problem is that the quantities available in these foods are not predictable or reliable, and B-12 deficiency can cause a lot of damage before you notice any symptoms for it. The B-12 in vegan supplements is sourced from bacteria and then the quantities are checked to make sure that they are sufficient. Lots of omnivores are deficient in B-12, too.


----------



## Smokering (Sep 5, 2007)

I thought I read once that the bacterial version wasn't bioavailable (or active, or something)? I found this study, which said that "Most of the edible blue-green algae (cyanobacteria) used for human supplements predominantly contain pseudovitamin B(12), which is inactive in humans. The edible cyanobacteria are not suitable for use as vitamin B(12) sources, especially in vegans." But it didn't mention any alternative ways of getting vegan B12, and it also, puzzlingly, said this: "Fortified breakfast cereals are a particularly valuable source of vitamin B(12) for vegans and elderly people." Which would be helpful if it had mentioned what such breakfast cereals are fortified with! Presumably not cyanobacteria.

ETA: I found another link on a vegan blog which said that bioavailable B12 is found in button mushrooms... but only 5% of the RDA per 100g, which doesn't sound terribly useful. Maybe some companies extract the B12 from shrooms?


----------



## catnip (Mar 25, 2002)

There are vegans who try to use straight up algae supplements rather than standardized vitamin supplements, and those not only are insufficient but actually INHIBIT absorbtion of B-12. I wonder if that is the type of supplement that the study is talking about.


----------



## Koalamom (Dec 27, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *greenmama66*
> 
> I was a raw vegan several times over. The last stint nearly cost me my life (and I was a raw food teacher LOL) and I went back to a paleo/primal type diet and my health returned. I don't do tPrimal Blueprint primal even though I am a member and post on that forum- I keep protein levels minimal (although now I'm pregnant and so I up my levels) according to the research of Nora Gedgauda's whose approach resonates with me.
> 
> And yes, while a healthy organic whole foods diet is health insurance IMO- one's lifestyle doesn't need to revolve 100% around food. The majority of the raw community fosters this behavior IMO.


Trying to learn here- You say you are paleo/primal, but don't follow the primal Blueprint. What is the difference? And raw primal?

Who is Nora Gedgauda?

What is metabolic typing?

I agree about life revolving around food. This is so true for me, and I can't stand it sometimes. i want to enjoy a meal, but not think about the next one seconds later.


----------



## greenmama66 (Nov 11, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluebirdmama1*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> ...


Correct, I follow Nora Gedgauda's type primal diet which is green vegetable heavy as the base of diet, low in starchy vegetables and fruit, moderate in fat and lower in protein than fat since the object is to burn fat for fuel over sugar (Primal Body Primal Mind) and lower in animal protein due to current research. " For example, Gedgaudas claims that we should keep our protein intake low to down-regulate the newly discovered mTOR metabolic pathway".

Raw Primal is the name given to a completely raw diet as practiced by Aajounus Vonderplanitz. This differs greatly from Nora and Mark's approach. Copious amounts of raw honey are eaten together with raw butter, raw meats and green juices are permitted as well as some berries and raw unsalted cheeses. The honey got to me and I got sick from raw lamb once. Other than that it was easy to follow and implement and I stayed on it for almost 4 years.

Metabolic Typing advocates various diets for various metabolic types. There are mixed types, carb types, low fat types, high protein types, vegetarian types and so on.

"Metabolic typing was introduced by William Donald Kelley, a dentist, in the 1960s. Kelley advocated basing dietary choices on the activity of one's sympathetic andparasympathetic nervous systems. In 1970, Kelley was convicted of practicing medicine without a license, as he had diagnosed a patient with lung cancer based on a fingerstickblood test and prescribed nutritional therapy. He continued to promote a metabolic typing diet through the 1980s.[3] The practice has been further developed by others including Harold Kristol and William Wolcott."


----------



## JMJ (Sep 6, 2008)

I think that it matters more that you are getting enough micronutrients. Regardless of whether you are veg*n or omnivore, you should be eating nutrient-rich foods and maximizing your ability to absorb those nutrients. Different people may need different macronutrient compositions or have an easier time absorbing micronutrients from different sources.

When I got pregnant (not TF), I thought I had a healthy, mostly plant-based diet, and I tried counting micronutrients and had a hard time finding foods that got me enough of several key nutrients. I recently went back and tried it again with my TF diet with a focus on certain nutrient-rich foods that I had added into my diet, and I very easily came out over 100% on every nutrient. I think a lot of people, both veg*n and omnivore, are malnourished because they miss key nutrients, and that is really one of the most important factors in good health.

As far as the calories in/calories out idea, I haven't seen Sally Fallon or Gary Taubes try to defy the laws of Thermodynamics. By "more complicated," they are generally referring to the multiple factors that contribute to calories in and calories out. Many people are under the mistaken impression that calories in and calories out are controlled primarily by an act of the will. People eat too much because they lack self-control and gain weight because they do not exercise. It is more complicated than that, but the laws of thermodynamics are not violated. Are more calories going in because you lack self control or because your body is telling you to grow or because your malnourished body is starving for nutrients or because your body is programmed to wish for a certain body fat percentage or because you are addicted to a particular food or because your blood sugar drops and your body is calling for food to raise it again? Are fewer calories coming out because you are failing to exercise or because you have a hormonal problem that lowers your metabolism or because your body is not effectively converting your food and fat into energy or because your body thinks it is starving and is holding onto fat? There's just a lot that goes into that equation, and for a lot of people, that means it is difficult to just count calories in and calories out and practice self control in order to lose weight. They often leave themselves hungry and tired and gain it all back as soon as they quit counting. Weight gets harder and harder to lose as their bodies adapt to the reduced calories in and/or increased exercise. It is much more effective for them to address the underlying causes for their excess of calories in and their inadequate calories out.


----------



## shantimama (Mar 11, 2002)

Quote:


> How can I be a traditional foodie and DH be vegan?


If we can keep the discussion to this question then we can keep this thread open and the discussion going.







Closing or removing threads is always a last option for me, so let's all work at posting within the forum guidelines, okay?

Debating the merit or advantages of one diet over another is not permitted in the MDC Nutrition and Good Eating forums. I will need to go back over the thread and ask people who have done so to edit their posts. Please feel free to go back and do so yourself before I get to it - we are in day five of a huge snowstorm up here and I need to go shovel and bring in more firewood before doing any more moderating!

The OP is asking for some help in how to manage a kitchen where two people have very different diets. Let's stick to that discussion and not get into which one of them has made the better choice about how they want to eat.

Thanks!


----------



## catnip (Mar 25, 2002)




----------



## nicolelynn (Aug 18, 2006)

Are you both positive you have to be all or nothing? Hopefully you can make compromises and support each other. In my experience just relaxing a bit has made a far more positive impact on my health than being dogmatic about never consuming vegetable oils or on the other hand, meat.

My personal experience is that I got terribly sick on a TF diet (was on it for 3 years before becoming ill), I was perfectly healthy before. So maybe that would help sympathize with DH that a TF diet isn't for everyone? I don't intend to start a debate, just sharing my personal experience. It's not always the vegans that get sick on their diet after awhile, it was me on a high animal fat/protein diet (and I even did paleo/LC for a while for my intestinal yeast...and I felt awful doing that). I am feeling much better on a mostly plant-based diet.

Currently I am dabbling in a mostly vegan diet, and while DH is supportive in going vegetarian he is clear he would never go vegan. That for us is pretty easy, I just keep eggs and dairy on hand for him...and he is happy to eat meat while out.

I guess for me it wouldn't be difficult if I did go vegan and DH stayed omni, as I wouldn't be vegan for animal rights reasons, meat does not make me squeamish, I know how to cook it, etc.

I guess practically speaking are you the primary cook? If the primary cook is vegan for animal rights reasons, it would be hard to cook for an omni spouse, but I have no experience with that so I won't judge. It seems being the omni spouse and being the one to cook your meat might be easier, and hopefully DH can support you a bit in that. Can you support him as well and instead of drenching a side dish (veggies or cooked grains) in butter or pastured lard use coconut or olive oil? Make baked goods, pancakes, etc vegan AND TF (use coconut milk and oil and flax seed instead of milk and egg)? While chopping veggies for your bone broth soup throw some in veggie broth with some beans for DH?

Basically any sauce base you can quickly make two separate batches: 1 ground beef and 1 tempeh batch of sloppy joes or chili, 1 lentil and 1 ground meat tacos, 1 TVP (not TF) and 1 meat sauce for pasta. Or 1 stirfry with chicken and 1 with tofu. Or while making a kefir smoothie use the same fruit to make a soy yogurt smoothie for DH? Same basic menus, not two separate meals. Maybe an occasional vegan meal is agreeable for you, so you can all enjoy a meal together without all the extra work?

Hope that helps...


----------



## PNCTink (Jan 12, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nicolelynn*
> 
> Basically any sauce base you can quickly make two separate batches: 1 ground beef and 1 tempeh batch of sloppy joes or chili, 1 lentil and 1 ground meat tacos, 1 TVP (not TF) and 1 meat sauce for pasta. Or 1 stirfry with chicken and 1 with tofu. Or while making a kefir smoothie use the same fruit to make a soy yogurt smoothie for DH? Same basic menus, not two separate meals. Maybe an occasional vegan meal is agreeable for you, so you can all enjoy a meal together without all the extra work?
> 
> Hope that helps...


This is what I was going to suggest. I have recently started a vegan diet because of pancreatic issues, and the rest of my family still eats dairy, meat, etc. An example of this for us is sweet potato burritos. I put veggies, nutritional yeast, and almond milk in with mine and he uses pork and beans, whole milk, and cheese. I have also made good use of my crockpot (not that I didn't before







) so I am only cooking one meal instead of trying to coordinate two.


----------

