Vegan Couple nearly murders their child with Veggie Diet!

[kidvilla]

Baoh, i would certainly welcome an intellectual discussion with scientific backing that proves why a well-planned vegan diet is unsound for most individuals, but just saying wrong does not explain the point you are trying to dismiss as erroneous so i have no idea whethere you are specifically saying that veganism is incompatible with balanced nutrition, or specific vegan practices are incompatible with balanced nutrition. with that said, i am not a vegan, but have studied all dietary practices in modern and old times of all types of nutritious pursuits such that i completely agree that a vegan diet can certainly be balanced.

with that said, there are many extremely muscular bodybuilders who don't eat meat or animal products, so anabolism works without the need for fauna (although i will agree much less efficiently, but it works and works well)

height (an old argument for carnivorism and against vegeterianism), argued that vegetarian diets were incomplete and as such, didn't help a person reach their height potential, but for the past 30 years, it's actually been proven that the same anabolic agents which we love so much (and which exist in trace amounts along with natural testosterones in meat already) in our meats and milk are actually also extremely counter-productive to height development, so much so that children in mexico who eat meat are being treated with androgen blocking drugs (depo provera, a birth control drug, but also very useful in blocking androgens), and the results are height increases to dramatic levels (most will outgrow siblings by 6 inches or more), and the fact their emotional stability is great (not having so many raging hormones sure makes teen life easier to deal with), also is a plus. now the results are simplified and we can discuss this at end, but the point im making in this paragraph is that vegan diets can be balanced and can help one grow to their max potential, and meat diets are actually counter-productive to max height such that drugs which block androgens prove this point.

notice im not discussing baby nutrition in veganism, but if we were to include this in the discussion, almost all vegans are completely aware that human breastmilk is the best nutrition source for a growing baby and as such, almost all are complete advocates for breastfeeding. you may ask if this contradicts their objection to cow milk, but you must understand the idealism behind veganism objections to cow milk is due to the cruelty with which cows are are subjected to in order to give us our daily milk doses. because of this, there is no ideological objection to vegans using human milk because of course, usually the mother isn't subject to cruelty in order to feed her child. as for other foods besides breastfeeding, including formulas (for the a-lactic mothers), there are actually soy-based nutritional forumulas which rival and sometimes exceed the nutritional density of similac and other animal-based foods, and they are organic, and without food additives, preservatives, or colorants not only in the ingredients, but in the manufacturing process (something most people are unaware of is that most foods can be processed with toxic chemicals, but as long as they are not a substantial part of the ingredients (something like .5% i believe, but the FDA has the ruels)(such as the chemicals used to clean the vats in which the formula is prepared, this can be hydrogen peroxide, formaldehyde, or chlorine), they don't have to label them, but in vegan preparations, they don't even clean their vats with anything but water and orange juice.

 

[kidvilla]

some vegan food choices

And although i have an idealistic problem with meat substitutes (my argument is if you don't want meat, don't act like your eating it eather), they are popular and for some (not for all, i admit some will hate the taste, so no need to remind me), and a practical way to enjoy meat-like foods (i guess the argument is that for those who have been meat-eaters all their life, meat-like foods can help the transition, ergo the large array of meat-like and cheese-like products)..... and this doesn't include all the wonderfully spicy and tasty indian food.... most of which i enjoy too:
cereal/granola with soy/rice milk
oatmeal or other hot cereal
bagel/toast with jelly
pancakes
soy yogurt
fruit smoothie
peanut butter & jelly
grain/soy burger
vegetarian hotdog
veggie lunchmeat sandwich
baked/mashed potatoes
french fries
tofu, tempeh, or Seitan stir fry
Seitan casserole
pasta with tomato sauce
tofu lasagna
bean burrito
seitan casserole
tofu lasagna
chips & salsa
banana, apple, orange
raisins, figs, dried apricots
pie, cookies, cake
Thai-Style Leaf-Wrapped Appetizer Bits
Five-Spiced Portobello Sautee
Lebanese Fattoush (bread salad)
Cajun-Style Collards
Moroccan Fava Bean Stew
Poor Man's Pesto (poor because it has no cheese)
Stuffed Baked Pears
chocolate rice pudding
Moroccan Couscous with Seven-Vegetable Tagine
Sicilian Eggplant Relish
Hiziki Tapenade
Italian Minestrone
http://www.ladolcevegan.com/

 

[atlantabiolab]

Baoh, i would certainly welcome an intellectual discussion with scientific backing that proves why a well-planned vegan diet is unsound for most individuals, but just saying wrong does not explain the point you are trying to dismiss as erroneous so i have no idea whethere you are specifically saying that veganism is incompatible with balanced nutrition, or specific vegan practices are incompatible with balanced nutrition.

with that said, i am not a vegan, but have studied all dietary practices in modern and old times of all types of nutritious pursuits such that i completely agree that a vegan diet can certainly be balancedwith that said, there are many extremely muscular bodybuilders who don't eat meat or animal products, so anabolism works without the need for fauna (although i will agree much less efficiently, but it works and works well)

Agreed. Food is food, as long as one gets adequate nutrition for growth and development. This board will be biased towards omnivorous diets, heavily based on protein, due to the concept of diet for purpose, and not diet for sustenance.

height (an old argument for carnivorism and against vegeterianism), argued that vegetarian diets were incomplete and as such, didn't help a person reach their height potential, but for the past 30 years, it's actually been proven that the same anabolic agents which we love so much (and which exist in trace amounts along with natural testosterones in meat already) in our meats and milk are actually also extremely counter-productive to height development, so much so that children in mexico who eat meat are being treated with androgen blocking drugs (depo provera, a birth control drug, but also very useful in blocking androgens), and the results are height increases to dramatic levels (most will outgrow siblings by 6 inches or more), and the fact their emotional stability is great (not having so many raging hormones sure makes teen life easier to deal with), also is a plus. now the results are simplified and we can discuss this at end, but the point im making in this paragraph is that vegan diets can be balanced and can help one grow to their max potential, and meat diets are actually counter-productive to max height such that drugs which block androgens prove this point.

This is both specious and suspect argument. Chemical agents in meats has nothing to do with the value of the macronutrients, since the chemical is considered an adulterant. This would be analogous to saying that veganism is bad because vegetable may have pesticides present. All diets are examined by their macronutrients and secondary metabolites, those chemicals that are not introduced by man, i.e. soy isoflavones, vitamins, etc.

As for the chemicals you mentioned, I am not aware of cattle farmers using medroxyprogesterone in beef production, where progesterone is used. The former is not as rapidly metabolized as the latter, thus having less chance of human exposure. But since your evidence was based on Mexican inhabitants, this is possible but is due to their poor food standards. In Mexico, vegetables are more prone to the spread of disease than animals, but this is actually the case in the US too.

notice im not discussing baby nutrition in veganism, but if we were to include this in the discussion, almost all vegans are completely aware that human breastmilk is the best nutrition source for a growing baby and as such, almost all are complete advocates for breastfeeding. you may ask if this contradicts their objection to cow milk, but you must understand the idealism behind veganism objections to cow milk is due to the cruelty with which cows are are subjected to in order to give us our daily milk doses. because of this, there is no ideological objection to vegans using human milk because of course, usually the mother isn't subject to cruelty in order to feed her child. as for other foods besides breastfeeding, including formulas (for the a-lactic mothers), there are actually soy-based nutritional forumulas which rival and sometimes exceed the nutritional density of similac and other animal-based foods, and they are organic, and without food additives, preservatives, or colorants not only in the ingredients, but in the manufacturing process (something most people are unaware of is that most foods can be processed with toxic chemicals, but as long as they are not a substantial part of the ingredients (something like .5% i believe, but the FDA has the ruels)(such as the chemicals used to clean the vats in which the formula is prepared, this can be hydrogen peroxide, formaldehyde, or chlorine), they don't have to label them, but in vegan preparations, they don't even clean their vats with anything but water and orange juice.

A toxin/poison is defined by the dose, nothing is toxic in non-toxic levels. Thus compounds that are found in infant formulas, as infintismal quantities cannot be defined as "toxic". To be toxic it would have to kill or poison a specified number of those who consume it. This eliminates any argument that vegans claim over non-organic foods, but then I never expect them to understand science and reason.

 

[Baoh]

I'll stick with "Wrong." Not because I have to, but because it frustrated the holy Hell out of you for me to do so, prompting your long-winded response. A total waste of effort on your part.

Unsound relative to a omnivorous diet? Well, then. Check out a human cadaver. Check the teeth. Check the digestive tract. When you find multiple stomachs, and flat, relatively uniform teeth, you make sure to publish your findings so you can get your Nobel Prize.

I believe a vegan diet can provide the necessary nutrition for some adults for some time, but not for the developing or those with problems of digestion (absorptive) (which often occurs with age).

Also, to extend it further, please show me the throng of Elite Athletes who are vegans. Match omnivores with vegans. It's one thing to recycle crude soy proteins in a trendy teen punkette who spray-paints fur coats. It's another to consume enough to compensate for the tissue regeneration required for those who have impressive performances.

Also, if you care to mentally masturbate further, do address the NEGATIVE effects that phytoestrogens will have upon males, both developing and those who have already reached adulthood.

I had won before you had even begun.

So, in concise conclusion:

Wrong.

 

[kidvilla]

thank you for the reply, as for the use of medroxyprogesterone,

I apologize if i didn't clarify that its use is not in beef, but rather used therapeutically in Mexico to assist children in reaching height (height therapies were an old obsession of mine), and were administered by a doctor to a young man in an effort to reduce serum androgens which have long been suspected of causing premature maturation/closure of the epiphyseal tissues, thus reducing a maturing adolescent's time in which he can grow.

the concerns with beef are so many that i could spend the next 50 megabytes writing on each of them, but a few of the endogenous hormones in use are for purposes as: (1)(2)

Fertility enhancement and improvement of in-vitro success
genetic manipulation of cattle in order to maximize natural marketable efficiency (designing cattle with more beef on them)
Production (milk) enhancement for maximum efficiency
metabolic agents to limit beef adipose production
antibiotics, antidiabetics, and other illness management drugs used to insure cattle utilization.
anabolic agents used to maximize feed efficiency
growth agents used to maximize cattle partitioning

of all of these, the ones which are suspected of growth retardation are growth agents (HGH), anabolic agents (steroids), metabolic agents (t3, clenbuterol), and production enhancers (igf1).

zearalenone, a fermentation estrogen (RALGROW) which binds to epyphesial tissues is suspected of slowing the growth process (3).

diethylstilbestrol (DES)(discontinued, but still ocasionally used) - an estrogen which is used to treat hormonal problems brought on by ovarial operations or misadministration of androgens, is highly suspect in premature epiphesial closure.

thyroprotein - used along with T4 and T3 to stimulate increased milk production. this protein increases somatotropins in milk (igf, gh) and also tends to taint the milk with trace amounts of triiodothyronine (t3) and thyroxine(t4).

melengestrol acetate (BOVATEC) - another estrogen-type feed enhancer which is commonly used to improve feed efficiency and prevent estrus in cattle. it increases serum androgens (kind of like reverse aromatization) and can be used as late as 48 hours prior to slaughter.

trenbolone acetate - our old friend fimaplix, im sure i don't need to explain the fact that androgens are well known for epyphesial maturation.

testosterones and their esters - again, well known to stunt growth.

now, the first thing to keep in mind is these substances exist in infinitesimal amounts, and typically, the FDA allows their use because studies (funded by the proponents) have shown that residues from these components are supposedly below any amounts which could collect in an average person. as for the fast-acting androgens, well this is why fina is so popular too (because it is supposed to clear the system quickly with no residues), but unfortunately, there is evidence that these androgens under many circumstances will not entirely clear the system. trenbolone alone is actually known to last 90-120 days (and typically, heifers are not alive that long after implantation)(5). the simple act of improperly implanting fina is known to increase residue(4) levels which its funny, but as long as the beef council tests it, it passes, but when independent studies test it, the numbers are always higher(6).

now i must point out, this is a hotly disputed item (the discussion of whether or not there are sufficient residues in meat to be a problem for humans) because every side comes up with its own proof that either there are, or there are not harmful residues....

kind of like the rBST controversy with milk, the dairy industry argues that rBST is not detectable in humans, yet time and again, serum IGF levels in humans are statistically higher in milk drinkers than non-milk drinkers(7)(8)

now the point here (before i digress too much) is:

1. that meat is known to contain androgens
2. the amount and residues of which are disputed
3. therapy to reduce the effects of these androgens is proving highly effective in negating the effects of these androgens (particularly the deleterious ones such as stunted growth).


now, as for the argument about the substances used to clean the devices in which infant formulas being within acceptable levels because of the fact they have been "proven" to be below toxic amounts is theoretically correct, and i cannot argue that. but my concern is that (and ask around), there will be times when you buy a t-shirt and put it on, and it itches the hell out of you. you wash it a few times and it will no longer itch. the idea here is that although the chemicals used to process our goods are supposed to be below toxic levels for residues, there are many times when these residues (either by human error, substitution, or downright criminal negligence by the manufacturers) will reach unhealthful or even toxic levels, and buying products which don't use these methods (if more effective and less toxic methods are available) seems to be a way of "playing it safe" and avoiding the possibility....


============references==========
(1) Goldman, Patti, J.Martin Wagner World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Proceeding European Communities - Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones)
http://www.citizen.org/pctrade/gattwto/beef.html

(2) FSNET August 1, 1999: SAFETY OF HORMONE-TREATED BEEF QUESTIONED; CP (July 30, 1999)

(3) Nilsson LO, Boman A, Savendahl L, et al. Demonstration of estrogen receptor-beta immunoreactivity in human growth plate cartilage. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1999;48:370-3.

(4) http://www.maverickranch.com/faq.htm#13

(5) http://www.fsis.usda.gov/oa/pubs/focusbeef.htm

(6) http://ansci.colostate.edu/ran/meat/redmeatsafety.html

(7) Daxenberger A, Breier BH, Sauerwein H. Increased milk levels of insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) for the identification of bovine somatotropin (bST) treated cows. Analyst 1998 Dec;123:2429-35

(8) Epstein SS. Unlabeled milk from cows treated with biosynthetic growth hormones: a case of regulatory abdication. Int J Health Serv 1996;26:173-85

 

[kidvilla]

i don't want to deviate from the original topic, so forgive me if i do, but...

Originally posted by Baoh
I'll stick with "Wrong." Not because I have to, but because it frustrated the holy Hell out of you for me to do so, prompting your long-winded response. A total waste of effort on your part.

Frustrated? no, i try not to let emotions rule me to the point of a fault, but to explain, i thoroughly respect, and welcome dissenting opinions which are well thought out and also like mine, driven by the desire to determine the truth. As such, being an extremely fast and prolific typist and thinker, its relatively painless for me to ask for clarification and to explain my positions as hopefully the proof will speak, as I prefer not to claim authority but rather leave that to the evidence.

Unsound relative to a omnivorous diet? Well, then. Check out a human cadaver. Check the teeth. Check the digestive tract. When you find multiple stomachs, and flat, relatively uniform teeth, you make sure to publish your findings so you can get your Nobel Prize.

no, I believe I said "I would certainly welcome an intellectual discussion with scientific backing that proves why a well-planned vegan diet is unsound for most individuals", the difference is that I am not comparing them (as saying "Unsound relative to a omnivorous diet" infers) because on a macro level, the diets may appear to be fundamentally different, but again, a well-planned vegan diet is not unsound because of the fortifications which your intelligent vegan will include when they eat (including vitamin supplements, oils, and other non-animal-based nutrients), and what this means is that once a vegan meal has been broken down to its constituent compounds, it has the same balanced nutritional value that any other balanced diet has. part of the wonderful benefit that our bodies have is that they aren't usually highly specific in their needs for nutrients, so this is what allows our body to synthesize most of the nutrients that it needs even when it doesn't get them, the few compounds which it cannot make, are added (such as some essential amino acids).

I believe a vegan diet can provide the necessary nutrition for some adults for some time, but not for the developing or those with problems of digestion (absorptive) (which often occurs with age).

Actually, as I stated, yes, babies are always best benefited by breast milk and as such, vegans feed their children breast milk. As for digestive problems, no, most plant carbohydrates are actually simpler to absorb than most animal products and as such, people with dietary abnormalities can all benefit from eating things such as rice and potatoes.

Also, to extend it further, please show me the throng of Elite Athletes who are vegans. Match omnivores with vegans. It's one thing to recycle crude soy proteins in a trendy teen punkette who spray-paints fur coats. It's another to consume enough to compensate for the tissue regeneration required for those who have impressive performances.

Actually, I can't bring them to the table as I’m relatively new, but they are here, and hopefully they will respond with their results. I’m not expecting monstrous bodies, but then again, not everyone here has that as a goal. As for personal friends, I’m actually working with a client who is a vegan (from whom I got my education in veganism), has an IQ of around 150 or so, and is in exceptional shape, I will ask him for permission to post info on him tonight

Also, if you care to mentally masturbate further, do address the NEGATIVE effects that phytoestrogens will have upon males, both developing and those who have already reached adulthood.

Well, phytoestrogens are actually one of the points i addressed in my previous post as diethylstilbestrol, a phytoestrogen is definitely implicated in premature epiphyseal maturation due to its uncanny ability to express itself on the receptors at that place.
And this is not including the longstanding debate of environmental phytoestrogens which as I’m sure you are well aware, is extremely controversial and there are plenty of educated individuals arguing on both parts. there is the argument that soy (yes, plant based product) could increase a child's risk of developing leukemia(1), then there are the studies of isoflavones (a family of phytoestrogens) which are found in milk, soy, and meats (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10), but then again, discussing phytoestrogens isn't necessarily the topic at hand here because our main topic was that vegan diets can be complete and nutritious when intelligently planned, and phytoestrogens are actually a constituent of all foods, floral or faunal.

I had won before you had even begun.

I didn't realize that a glove had been thrown down, if so, let me congratulate you, but more importantly, I must apologize because it is never my intent to fight or win, my main intent is to learn and as such, I’ve learned much from many wonderful members here who have taken the time to provide well thought-out responses. Even now, I’m more than happy to be corrected because there is no bad correction, the only bad things in life are to be stubborn about being wrong, so if I am wrong and we can intelligently discuss this, I will thank you all the more for it...

So, in concise conclusion:

Wrong.

please refer to the scientific evidence below to determine how “wrong” I am

========= references ==========
(1) Infantile leukemia and soybeans--a hypothesis [editorial] Abe T. Leukemia 1999, 13:317-20

(2) Balk JL and others. A pilot study of the effects of phytoestrogen supplementation on postmenopausal endometrium. J Soc Gynecol Investig 2002 Jul-Aug;9(4)238-42. This was a double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial comparing the effects of 6 months of dietary phytoestrogen supplementation versus placebo in postmenopusal women. “Phytoestrogens did not cause stimulation of the endometrium. Insomnia was more frequent over the 6-month study in the soy group, whereas hot flushes, night sweats and vaginal dryness improved from baseline in the placebo group but not in the soy group.”

(3) Lephard ED and others. Neurobehavioral effects of dietary soy phytoestrogens. Neurotoxicol Teratol 2002 Jan-Feb;24(1):5-16. Male mice fed diets rich in phytoestrogens had lower levels of maze performance than male mice fed diets free of phytoestrogens. (Opposite results were observed in female mice.) The results indicate that consumption of dietary phytoestrogens resulting in very high plasma isoflavone levels (in many cases over a relatively short interval of consumption in adulthood) can significantly alter sexually dimorphic brain regions, anxiety, learning and memory.

(4) Lindner HR. Occurrence of Anabolic Agents in Plants and their Importance. Environment Quality Supplement 1976;5:151-158. “Coumestrol and genistein stimulate estradiol in stimulating macromolecular changes in the uterus. The biological effects of clover estrogens responsible for fertility impairment appear to be multiple.”

(5) Martin PM and others. Phytoestrogen interaction with estrogen receptors in human breast cancer cells. Endocrinology 1978 Nov;103(5):1860-7. Phytoestrogens “translocate the cytoplasmic estrogen receptor and bind to unfilled nuclear estrogen receptors in whole cells. Bound nuclear receptors are then processed in a manner similar to estradiol in a step which rapidly decreases total cellular estrogen receptors. The phytoestrogens are also biologically active; they can markedly enhance tumor cell proliferation.”

(6) Setchell, KD and others. Dietary estrogens - a Probable Cause of Infertility and Liver Disease in captive cheetahs. Gastroenterology Aug 93(2):225-233. Captive adult cheetahs consuming approximately 50 mg soy isoflavones per day from soy-based feed develop reproductive failure and liver disease. When chicken-based feed was substituted for soy-based feed, liver function improved. “. . . the relatively high concentrations of phytoestrogens from soybean protein present in the commercial diet fed to captive cheetahs in North American zoos may be one of the major factors in the decline of fertility and in the etiology of liver disease in this species. The survival of the captive cheetah population could depend upon a simple change of diet by excluding exogenous estrogens.”

(7) Habito RC and others. Effects of replacing meat with soyabean in the diet on sex hormone concentrations in healthy adult males. Br J Nutr 2000 Oct;84(4):557-63. Men consuming tofu instead of meat for 4 weeks had lower testosterone-oestradiol ratios as well as changes in other hormone levels. “Thus, replacement of meat protein with soyabean protein, as tofu, may have a minor effect on biologically-active sex hormones which could influence prostate cancer risk.”

(8) Setchell KD and others. Isoflavone content of infant formulas and the metabolic fate of these early phytoestrogens in early life. Am J Clin Nutr 1998 Dec;68(6 Suppl):1453S-1461S. Noting the results of an earlier study which found that plasma isoflavone levels in infants fed soy-based formula were 13,000-22,000 higher than concentrations found in fed breast milk or milk-based formula, the authors explain these high levels as due to “. . . reduced intestinal biotransformation, as evidenced by low or undetectable concentrations of equol and other metabolites, and is maintained by constant daily exposure from frequent feeding.” The authors assert that these unnaturally high levels of isoflavones in the bloodstreams of soy-fed children “may have long-term health benefits for hormone-dependent diseases.”

(9) Newbold RR and others. Uterine adenocarcinoma in mice treated neonatally with genistein. Cancer Res 2001 Jun 1;61(11):4325-8. Genistein in soy was found to be more carcinogenic than DES, especially during “critical periods of differentiation.. . . the use of soy-based infant formulas in the absence of medical necessity and the marketing of soy products designed to appeal to children should be closely examined.”

(10) den Tonkelaar I and others. Urinary phytoestrogens and postmenopausal breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2001 Mar;10(3):223-8. “We were not able to detect the previously reported protective effects of genistein and enterolactone on breast cancer risk in our postmenopausal population of Dutch women.”

 

[kidvilla]

oh, and as for my previous comments on meats, actually, the jury is still out on their definitive causes and my intent was not to dismiss meat as a valuable nutrient, as i said, im an idealistic carnivore and love meat, and although meat is suspect in growth retardation, this is an infrequent concern because a greater concern (and has been since the dawn of civilization) is malnutrition (a problem which meat resolves), which in the history of humankind has been responsible for more stunted growths than meat ever could be. so in short, meat 'might possibly' prevent you from growing an inch or two, but if you eat nutritiously, you will already reach above average heights (as in 5-10 and above in America) and as such, will probalby never notice the difference.

 

[Baoh]

lmfao Keep going.

 

[kidvilla]

no need Baoh, as I'm certain that its unlikely that although there is evidence counter to some of the information i have provided, i seriously doubt you will resort to intellectual discussion and will probably instead resort to:

namecalling ("mentally masturbate") - of either my theories, or my verbiage, syntax, spelling, or somethng else related to the information and not the topic at hand

heckling - "lmfao," "wrong." without posting a cogent argument to state your point from the get-go, this is heckling and...

yelling and deflecting - change the subject to attack a subpart of the argument in order to aquire the ego-satisfaction of feeling that "I had won before you had even begun".

but as you said in your first response, you will not agree not for the sake of an honest belief arrived to from careful consideration that my theories are flawed, but rather for ego-gratification ("because it frustrated the holy Hell out of you"), and now even if you do chose to consider it, you will be guided by personal bias to prove me wrong, which any respectable scientist can say, defeats the purpose of scientific inquiry.....


prove me wrong and provide an "dis-passionate" response
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=dispassionate

 

[Baoh]

Calm down. Did you ever stop to consider the possibility that I was egging you on? My girlfriend is a vegan, and I know full well that it can be done.