This reminds me of this guy that was on a nutrition discussion list once -- for people with intolerance to grain products. Our bodies can become intolerant to grain proteins; some people develop food allergies.
Anyway, he was a chiropractor who was possessed of the idea that typical vitamins (like Centrum) in the US were not digested properly. It of course helps that chiropractors sell things like the "right" vitamins in their office. heh.
so, he starts warning everyone on the list -- and of course, he can't stand not to have that Dr. in front of his name because, you know, he's an AuthoriTAH -- that they shouldn't use ordinary vitamins because he's actually seen Xrays of undigested vitamins in people's intestines. And then there are the workers that clean septic tanks and port-johns who've reporte massive amounts of pills in the refuse.
I thought I was going to bustagut laughing. I couldn't help mocking him: Dude! What if it was an undigested kidney bean or something! And you're telling me that sanitation works like, what?, dig through the refuse to retrieve these pills and tablets so we can know for sure?
My problem with talk of vegans -- the way they present their arguments -- is precisely that they point to healthy _vegetarians_ in places like public forums to justify their choices. But, as far as I know, most historical forms of vegetarian practice did not exclude _all_ animal products. In practice, they rely on milk, cheese, and eggs. This is disingenuous in the context of a conversation about Singer who is advocating that, apparently, we refuse to all eat animal products because said animals are raised only for the purposes of eating their flesh or eating the products of their bodies (eggs, cheese, milk). As such, we only raise them for our own ends and treat them as commodites, not sentient beings.
All things being equal, the omnivore diet or vegetarian diet relying on small amounts of animal products such as eggs, milk, cheese and sometimes fish is, in principle, what a human body needs to live. A vegan diet, OTOH, is not -- in principle -- what a human needs to live.
What I mean is that the deficiencies that arise from an omnivore diet are the _result_ of human agricultural and livestock practice, _not_ a result of the diet itself. The deficiencies associated with a vegan diet, however, _result from_ the diet itself.
So, all things being equal means: we're not talking about the deficiencies associated with modern ag practices where the vitamins and nutrients in vegetables and fruits are greatly diminished because of how we raise them and we're not talking the problem of more saturated fats due to livestock practices (where free range meat is much healthier for us b/c more omega 3)
To propound on veganism without making that abundantly clear is, in my estimation, very harmful. I have utterly nothing against anyone's food choices or decisions on how they should, personally, eat. But when such activities are part of a social movement and seen as a way to solve social, political, and economic problems -- we're moving it into politics. And, in that case, I have a problem with veganism when it's claimed as an ethical practice but refuses to acknowledge that, in principle, the diet isn't suited to human health. (Vegetarianism is different since, in practice, these historic cultures aren't vegan)
In my experience, the study below describes exactly what goes on among vegans. In the zeal to protect the practice from criticism that, in principle, it leads to specific health problems, they lay the blame at the feet of the individual for failing to supplement or for using refined grains. Supplements _must_ be taken for a healthy vegan diet, IOW.
-------------------------------------------------
J Health Psychol. 2004 Jul;9(4):599-616.
'Health should not have to be a problem': talking health and accountability in an internet forum on veganism.
Sneijder P, te Molder HF.
Department of Social Sciences, Communication and Innovation Studies, Wageningen University, The Netherlands. Petra.Sneijder at wur.nl
This article draws upon insights from discursive psychology to examine how participants in an Internet forum on veganism orient to the relationship between food choice, health and accountability. First, we explore the ways in which participants ascribe responsibility for health problems like vitamin deficiency to individual recipients. By suggesting individual practices as a cause for problems, speakers undermine the notion that problems arise through veganism as a matter of principle. Second, we show how participants construct solutions to individual health problems as involving mundane and simple actions. Both discursive procedures enable speakers to resist negative assumptions about the potentially complicated nature of veganism in relation to health protection.
-------------------------------------------------
Bitch | Lab http://blog.pulpculture.org