Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Being vegan isn’t as good for humanity as you think

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 80 posts

Re: Being vegan isn’t as good for humanity as you think

#31

Post by erdogin »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #20
cryodesign wrote: post #15

A pretty weak article and omits any new developments in the future of food production. The main argument of the article appears to be that some farm land won't be used (perennial cropland) when people are on a vegan diet. Well, then use that space to build some aeroponic or hydroponic farms [1]. You'll get produce all year around. Other studies have shown that it's not sustainable if we'd have to rely on meat to feed…

One of the larger problems I've found with the vegan diet is, where do you source your Omega 3 from? ALA (found in flax and chia seeds) has low bioavailability as opposed to EPA and DHA found in fish and eggs. Not only that, flax and chia seeds are very high in Omega 6, thus promote dangerous levels of inflammation. So, can a vegan please explain to me how your community has managed to solve this?

Not a vegan but algal oils look promising.

http://www.foodprocessing.com/articles/2012/algae-dha-health...

Re: Being vegan isn’t as good for humanity as you think

#32

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast »

wlesieutre wrote: post #2

The main point of the article appears to be that the vegan diet doesn't use the perennial cropland. Would be nice if they bothered to mention why. Are the perennial crops 100% feed crops and not something that humans can use, even in crazy reprocessed vegan food substitutes?

I didn't get that either, there certainly are crops grown solely for animal feed, but it's not at all clear why that land can't be repurposed for human-edible crops.

Re: Being vegan isn’t as good for humanity as you think

#33

Post by gorhill »

wlesieutre wrote: post #2

The main point of the article appears to be that the vegan diet doesn't use the perennial cropland. Would be nice if they bothered to mention why. Are the perennial crops 100% feed crops and not something that humans can use, even in crazy reprocessed vegan food substitutes?

This made me wonder: Maybe returning these lands to their wild state can also be good for humanity when looking at it from another angle than just food production. Something to also consider.

Re: Being vegan isn’t as good for humanity as you think

#34

Post by crustygirl »

mrob wrote: post #19
hoggleboggle wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why the downvotes? such a welcoming community. I seem to have replied to the wrong parent. well, I'll leave then :(

It's not at all obvious that the "medical costs of today are extremely large mostly due to overconsumption of animal products". Some people blame sugar, which is made from plants. Some people blame fat, which in the modern American diet is largely vegetable oil. But human nutrition is notoriously difficult to study, so making strong claims about any specific thing being to blame is probably dishonest in some way.

USA eats excessive amounts of sugar, fat and calories.

3500kcal per person per day 150kg of meat per person per year (compared to chinese of 60kg, or world average of 40kg).

overconsumption is the word. there was not a hint of criticism of meat being "unhealthy" -- it was mentioned in the frame of overconsumption.

Re: Being vegan isn’t as good for humanity as you think

#35

Post by mrob »

PerfectElement wrote: post #29
DiabloD3 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the larger problems I've found with the vegan diet is, where do you source your Omega 3 from? ALA (found in flax and chia seeds) has low bioavailability as opposed to EPA and DHA found in fish and eggs. Not only that, flax and chia seeds are very high in Omega 6, thus promote dangerous levels of inflammation. So, can a vegan please explain to me how your community has managed to solve this?

It's likely that vegans don't suffer from EPA and DHA deficiency because the body gets better at converting them from ALA. As this study have found: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20861171 From the study: "Despite having significantly lower intakes of EPA and DHA (from fish or fish oil), blood levels of EPA and DHA in vegans and vegetarians were approximately the same as regular fish eaters. The results indicate…

Humans vary in their ability to elongate fatty acids. It's possible that poor elongaters fail to thrive on a vegan diet and revert to a omnivorous diet, biasing the sample. We'd need a randomized controlled study to see if this is important.

Re: Being vegan isn’t as good for humanity as you think

#36

Post by jahewson »

watchtheworld wrote: post #14

The idea of the vegan diet being "good for humanity" isn't solely about land use which this article focuses on. It's mostly about use of energy. Vegan diet: food from land -> truck -> grocery store -> my mouth. Meat/dairy/what have you: food from land -> truck -> animal's mouth -> truck -> grocery store -> my mouth. And when it comes to meat it means years feeding and water etc. until the product can actually be sent…

I don't really see the energy problem here, I mean it's not like cows are powered by electricity.

Re: Being vegan isn’t as good for humanity as you think

#37

Post by crustygirl »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #20
cryodesign wrote: post #15

A pretty weak article and omits any new developments in the future of food production. The main argument of the article appears to be that some farm land won't be used (perennial cropland) when people are on a vegan diet. Well, then use that space to build some aeroponic or hydroponic farms [1]. You'll get produce all year around. Other studies have shown that it's not sustainable if we'd have to rely on meat to feed…

One of the larger problems I've found with the vegan diet is, where do you source your Omega 3 from? ALA (found in flax and chia seeds) has low bioavailability as opposed to EPA and DHA found in fish and eggs. Not only that, flax and chia seeds are very high in Omega 6, thus promote dangerous levels of inflammation. So, can a vegan please explain to me how your community has managed to solve this?

According to [1] the conversion rate puts the required daily intake of 2 teaspoons of flaxseed oil per day to meet the EPA and DHA RDA.

GMO could easily solve the problem of omega-3 and B12. [2]

[1]: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9637947

[2]: http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/database/plants/63.rapeseed.h...

Re: Being vegan isn’t as good for humanity as you think

#38

Post by marricks »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #20
cryodesign wrote: post #15

A pretty weak article and omits any new developments in the future of food production. The main argument of the article appears to be that some farm land won't be used (perennial cropland) when people are on a vegan diet. Well, then use that space to build some aeroponic or hydroponic farms [1]. You'll get produce all year around. Other studies have shown that it's not sustainable if we'd have to rely on meat to feed…

One of the larger problems I've found with the vegan diet is, where do you source your Omega 3 from? ALA (found in flax and chia seeds) has low bioavailability as opposed to EPA and DHA found in fish and eggs. Not only that, flax and chia seeds are very high in Omega 6, thus promote dangerous levels of inflammation. So, can a vegan please explain to me how your community has managed to solve this?

Fish get their Omega 3 from algae, and so that's probably the best and most direct way to get it. That's what Soylent does for Omega 3's using bio reactors.

Also, vegans are healthier than the average population with lower rates of death in major categories like heart disease[1]. In other words, from the standard american diet to veganism, it's generally much healthier which I think is the better comparison to make.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veganism#Health_effects

Re: Being vegan isn’t as good for humanity as you think

#39

Post by Turing_Machine »

watchtheworld wrote: post #14

The idea of the vegan diet being "good for humanity" isn't solely about land use which this article focuses on. It's mostly about use of energy. Vegan diet: food from land -> truck -> grocery store -> my mouth. Meat/dairy/what have you: food from land -> truck -> animal's mouth -> truck -> grocery store -> my mouth. And when it comes to meat it means years feeding and water etc. until the product can actually be sent…

"And when it comes to meat it means years feeding and water etc. until the product can actually be sent to the store. "

Years? No. Chickens are normally slaughtered at around 40 days. Pigs, 4-10 months. Beef cattle around 14 months.

Re: Being vegan isn’t as good for humanity as you think

#40

Post by crustygirl »

mrob wrote: post #28
DiabloD3 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the larger problems I've found with the vegan diet is, where do you source your Omega 3 from? ALA (found in flax and chia seeds) has low bioavailability as opposed to EPA and DHA found in fish and eggs. Not only that, flax and chia seeds are very high in Omega 6, thus promote dangerous levels of inflammation. So, can a vegan please explain to me how your community has managed to solve this?

Although this is no good for religious vegans, if you are only following a vegan diet for health/ethical/environmentalist reasons, it's hard to argue against eating rope-farmed salt-water mussels. They are high in long chain omega-3 fats. See: https://sentientist.org/2013/05/20/the-ethical-case-for-eati... The article approves of oysters too, but note that oysters may contain oyster crabs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wi…

They are rich in mercury in my waters, so I don't want to consume them :D

Although eating animals that do not have a central nervous system is equivalent to eating plants, so it should be vegan.

Post reply on HN