Articles Every Vegetarian Should Read
JUST CLICK THE DOWN ARROW TO BROWSE
Imporant Article Archives
What New Vegetarians
Need To Know
If your a new Vegetarian or an old hand, this is information you need.
It is cutting edge material from a research paper so new it is unpublished.
Contributed by Beverly Ifcic
SUPPORT
AND CRITICISM
Like Beardsworth and Kiel (1992) individuals in the present sample
reported that their social relationships were affected by their dietary
choices. Responses indicated that friends and acquaintances had mixed
reactions. Some did not attempt to accommodate the vegetarian's food
needs at social functions, etc., some were critical, some were
supportive, while others were merely inquisitive. Many reported that
others wondered how an individual could possibly live without the taste
of meat. Others queried about the ability to be nourished and receive
sufficient amounts of protein. Still others, reported that their friends
respected them for the ability to refrain from eating meat. Many
reported that although their friends often teased it was understood to
be in good humor rather than hostile. For those raised vegetarian, due
to cultural/religious beliefs, all reported acceptance from friends and
acquaintances. Thus, for these individuals vegetarianism is accepted as
normative.
As expected, disruptions in family relationships were somewhat more
predictable. Only a few individuals reported that their families
(parents) were totally accepting and supportive. However, most reported
that disruptions in relationships with family members (primarily
parents) were only initially problematic. Most reported that parents
were initially skeptical/apprehensive, critical, concerned and even
hostile. Many report the source of their parents reactions were due to
fears that their son/daughter would be malnourished and sickly without
meat in their diets. However, most reported that with the passage of
time, they are accepted or tolerated as vegetarians and permitted to eat
as they please. Interestingly, many report that their parents believed
that it's merely a phase that their son/daughter is going through. Many
parents frequently asked if they are "still, not eating meat." Although
several reported that their parents had grown to accept their
vegetarianism, many reported the lack of a willingness of parents to
provide vegetarian food when they visited. Perhaps "acceptance" may mean
that their parents have simply stopped nagging or inquiring about their
son/daughter's diet.
A few female vegetarians did not speak as positively about their in-
laws. Many expressed the total disregard on the part of in-laws to
accommodate their daughter-in- law's food preferences. Instead, women
expressed the feeling that their in-laws act as if vegetarianism is a
terrible inconvenience to meal time. For a very few individuals
these types of sanctions as attempts to maintain social norms, serve as
social constraints that do guide food selection. A few individuals
adapted by occasionally eating a "little" meat/fish when they felt
socially obliged to do so. Others altered the visibility of their
identities by simply attempting to keep their dietary preferences hidden
by quietly just avoiding eating meat at social functions, without making
it an issue. For these individuals, being vegetarian was a personal
matter that they felt no need to proselytize about. Others were adamant
that they were vegetarians and would not succumb to eating meat at
whatever the cost. One individual responded to the question of whether
he ever eats meat to avoid embarrassment, "I'm a vegetarian, I would be
'embarrassed' to eat meat."
CONCLUSION The present study suggests that claiming "vegetarian" as
an aspect of who one is, is a significant aspect of one's identity for
many individuals. Findings suggest that individuals may be motivated by
a variety of causes or issues to convert to vegetarianism, but over time
will likely incorporate or assimilate other motives. This probably
occurs for several reasons. First, the process of assimilation of other
motives may be perceived relevant for the person's identity and thus
enhances one's self-esteem. Second, these new reasons may be perceived
as a logical continuation of one's present identity and thus provides
for a sense of continuity for how one sees him/herself.
Vegetarianism is important to a sizable number of individuals, and is
growing. The importance associated with being vegetarian is clearer when
one considers the social constraints present to maintain the centrality
of meat in the structure of meals. Vegetarian food availability in
restaurants and convenience foods is a constraint. In addition, social
relationships may serve as constraints; social relationships are greatly
affected, primarily in the initial stages of conversion to
vegetarianism.
Although there are social constraints present to maintain normative or
meat-based foodways, individuals report support in maintenance of their
vegetarian identity. That is, the present study finds support for
Maurer's (1995) contention that through the media individuals have been
able to find justifications for changing their eating patterns.
ALSO, BELOW ARE TWO TABLES THAT APPEAR IN THE PAPER:
Table 1---Categories of Vegetarians.
Types ofVegetarians Total
Vegan 12
Pesco 5
Lacto/Ovo 41
Lacto 18
Ovo 3
Table 2---Motivations for Converting
to Vegetarianism.
Motivations forVegetarianism Total
Health 28
Animal Rights 11
Ethics 12
Environment 4
Religion 8
Other 9
No Ranking/tie 7
Total 79
About The Author
Beverly L. Stiles is a graduate in the Ph.D. program at Texas A&M
University and is research assistant for the Laboratory For Studies of
Social Deviance. She has published in the areas of disability and deviance.
She is specializing in social psychology, sociology of deviance, and social
organization.
Go Back ToTOP
Looking For
Energy....Think Raw!
Energy, enzymes and raw veggie diet! Are they the road to optimum
health for vegetarians? Some doctors, vegetarians and juice advocates think
so.
Many new vegetarians turn to a diet high in dairy fat, pasta, tofu
and canned or packaged foods to replace the standard "American Fare" of
cooked carbohydrates and animal fat. Many believe, as a result of this,
new vegetarians often complain of lack of energy, feeling lethargic or
having pasty look and not feeling "On top of the world."
Well this could be the answer for many! Simply adding raw, uncooked,
LIVE foods to your diet. Some adamant "live only" advocates will tout raw
uncooked food as a cure all for every disease and malady known to man kind.
Others think that juice is the only solution. The truth most likely lies
somewhere between the two.
Although I am a big proponent of live, fresh food, I also know
from experience that the all raw-food diet is one that only the most disciplined
can achieve. It is very hard, for instance, to eat raw dried rice, even
after its been soaked for 24 hours. Cooking breakes down the plants cell
walls as well the starches and enzymes. Here-in lies the problem. It is
those very enzymes that we need for that super energy feeling.
The solution is a balance of raw and cooked foods for most. If
one starts with a 50% goal of raw-live food and adjust it to their own
circumstance, they can find the energy, taste and not have to make such
a radical dietary change that they cannot adjust, and fall back on old
ways. Juice is a super way to start adding raw food to your diet. Not the
juice in the bottles and cartons in the supermarket, they are usually long
"dead" by the time you buy them. FRESH juice made at the time of consumption,
with a home juicer is the kind that really delivers on taste, enzymes and
live food goodness.
WHY RAW?
In the stomach proteins are broken down into amino acids. In the
U.S. we are stuffing our stomachs with loads of protein every few hours
and producing huge acid foments. This is very good for the makers of Rolaids,
Tums, and other antacids, but not very good for our bodies. Most folks
constantly assault their stomach linings with hot coffee, alcohol, preservatives,
greasy donuts and burgers, dairy products, synthetic and laboratory created
chemicals, and over cooked food of every description. Raw foods, on the
other hand, do NOT create acid pools in your stomach and pass through the
digestive track much faster than cooked food
We now know that leukocytosis occurs whenever folks consume cooked
food. Leukocytosis is a large increase in the number of white cells in
blood. It could be temperature, or perhaps the body sees cooked food as
an invader of unknown origin, no one is sure at this time. We do know that
eating is an immunological stress and eating cooked foods are an even greater
stress. The body expends a full 60% of its engry resources on digestion.
This is why so many people report a super energy boost from fasting. 80%
of all immune tissue is packed around the intestine, as if waiting to fight
an invading army. Could this be a clue that raw is better for us?
So if you crave more energy and want that veggie glow, try incorporating
at least 50% to 75% raw veggies/juice/fruit into your diet. If you have
a hard time leaving that cooked food behind, try "lightly" steaming vegetables
(2 to 3 min.) that will keep most of the enzymes and other nutrients in
your food. Dried un-sulfured fruit and veggies are also very useful in
the winter months to help us retain robust health. Remember, enzymes are
destroyed at 108 degrees so try to keep your fixins KooL for good health
and good digestion.
Go Back ToTOP
RIGOR MORTIS ON
YOUR DINNER PLATE
by Hank Kelcinski
In the past I wrote about what causes your white blood cells to
decrease. Anything that you ingest (eat) that is not biological correct
in the human will increase your chances of undermining your immune system
(white blood cells.) Someone was said that we bury ourselves with our mouth
-- how true. In this great land of ours we eat anything that moves, from
cockroaches to lobsters to animals. Below is a little synopsis about the
dangers of eating animal products.
A point I would like to illuminate is that no matter what you do
or say or feel you cannot, I repeat, cannot negate cause and effect. If
you disobey nature, you will pay the price sooner for some and later for
others. Our biologically correct foods are fresh fruits, some vegetables,
and some nuts and seeds, all in a raw untampered condition. Anything else
creates problems.
Objections to the use of all animals products
Animal products leave an overload of toxic acid residues in the
body.
1. Leaves a high amount of acid-ash residues in the blood, fluids,
and tissues.
2. Uric, phosphoric, and sulfuric acids.
3. Calcium reserves are used (osteoporosis) up.
4. Calcium urate residues are deposited in the soft tissues and
calcify (arteriosclerosis).
Animal products are high in fat.
1. 30 - 70% fat, depending on the cut. Additionally, dairy products,
whole milk, cream and
2. butter and cheese are high fat foods.
3. Animal fats are high in saturation and cholesterol.
4. Cooked fats in the bloodstream reduce oxygen availability (Rouleaux
Effect).
5. Heated animal fats are linked to cancer.
Animal foods are fattening. Fat contains about 3 times the calories
of carbohydrates and twice the calories of protein, ounce-for-ounce.
Animal products contain man-made poisons in abundance.
1. Animals are walking reservoirs for accumulated poisons, which
they pass on to you. Pesticides, herbicides, and artificial fertilizers
should not be part of any diet.
Animal products stimulate overeating.
The stimulation received from eating animals products produce overeating.
They make you feel good. They act like drugs.
Animal products contain no fiber.
Animal product putrefy in the intestinal tract.
1. Leaving ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, purines, and other poisons
reducing the functioning of intestinal flora, and interfering with the
synthesis and utilization of Vitamin B-12, etc.
I hope you enjoy your rigor mortis on your dinner plate.
Go back
toTOP 
A VISIT TO A SLAUGHTER
HOUSE
"When the suggestion was made that I visit a
slaughterhouse to observe first-hand blatant infractions
upon the rights of animals, I was very skeptical. The
reason for my skepticism was that I felt a
slaughterhouse did not present an example of cruelty far
enough removed from everyday life to be poignant or
relevant in a discussion of animal rights. I felt that
I should be writing on something a little more esoteric
or something considered cruel or immoral, such as the
clubbing to death of baby seals. I was gravely
mistaken. And the fact that what goes on inside a
slaughterhouse is done because of the demand the vast
majority of the American public has for the flesh of
other living beings makes it all the more poignant and
relevant.
"There is no convenient escape from guilt by
association for what goes on inside a slaughterhouse as
there is from the case of the baby seals in the Arctic.
While it is easy for most of us to refrain from
purchasing the goods for which seals were slain -- thus
incurring no guilt for their deaths -- most people
willingly (and thoughtlessly) eat the flesh of one type
of animal or another whose life has been terminated
within the walls of a slaughterhouse.
"As I stepped from my car in the parking lot of the
packing plant, the combination of sounds and smells
emanating from the corrugated metal structure made me
question whether or not this was something I really
wanted to go through with. The first thing to hit my
senses was the sound of cattle -- not the pleasant
bucolic mooing one might hear on a stroll down a country
lane next to a small farm, but a rapid, frantic mooing.
It was the kind of mooing I heard during a weekend stay
at my uncle's dairy farm when one of the cows was
attacked by stray dogs. Aside from the noise, the
release of adrenaline in her body made the cow drool,
and caused her nose to run so profusely that she briefly
had difficulty breathing. At that moment in the parking
lot, I could only sense discomfort in the sound of the
cows, but later I discovered that each one awaiting
slaughter in the chute leading to the "killing stall"
was suffering the same symptoms of terror I witnessed at
my uncle's farm.
"The second thing I noticed was also a sound. As I
walked toward the building, I heard the strange muffled
whine that can only come from a saw cutting bone still
encased in flesh. At this point I realized that I was
not prepared for what I was about to experience. That
feeling was intensified to the point of nausea when, as
I walked closer, I caught my first whiff of the
combination of smells that I would have to endure for
the next few hours: the oddly sickening odor of newly
slaughtered flesh still so warm from the life so
recently removed that steam rises from it; the not so
oddly nauseating stench of the sausage and hot dog meat
boilers; and the quiet, cold reeking of flesh hanging,
carcass after carcass, row upon row, in the freezer
storage area. My imagination had prepared me a little
bit for the visual experience, but I was entirely
unprepared for the almost unbearable smell that
permeated the entire plant.
"After brief "pleasantries" with Jerry, the production
manager of the plant, I was allowed to procede through
the building unguided and at my own pace. I began the
tour "where it all starts", as Jerry put it, in the
"kill shed".
"I entered the kill shed through a short, tunnel-like
hall through which I could see what I soon learned was
the third butchering station. The kill shed consisted
of one room in which a number of operations are
performed by one or two of six butchers at four stations
along the length of the room. In the kill shed there is
also a United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
inspector who examines parts of every animal who goes
through the kill shed.
"The first station is the killing station. It is
worked by one man whose job is to herd the animal into
the killing stall, slaughter him or her, and begin the
butchering process. This stage of the process takes
about ten minutes for each animal, and begins with the
opening of a heavy steel door that separates the killing
stall from the waiting chute. The man working this
station must then go into a corridor adjacent to the
waiting chute, and prod his next victim into the killing
stall with a high-voltage electric cattle prod. This is
the most time-consuming part of the operation because
the cattle are fully aware of what lies ahead, and are
determined not to enter the killing stall. The physical
symptoms of terror were painfully evident on the faces
of each and every animal I saw either in the actual
killing stall or in the waiting chute. During the 40
seconds to a minute that each animal had to wait in the
killing stall before losing consciousness, the terror
became visibly more intense. The animal could smell the
blood, and see his or her former companions in various
stages of dismemberment. During the last few seconds of
life, the animal thrashes about the stall as much as its
confines allow. All four of the cows whose deaths I
witnessed strained frantically, futilely, and
pathetically towards the ceiling -- the only direction
that was not blocked by a steel door. Death came in the
form of a pneumatic nail gun that was placed against
their heads and fired.
"The gun is designed so that the nail never completely
leaves the gun, but simply is blown into the animal's
head and then pulled out by the butcher as the animal
collapses. Three of the four times I saw it used, it
did the job on the first try, but one cow struggled a
good deal after collapsing. After the animal has
collapsed, the side of the killing stall is raised, and
a chain is secured to the right hind leg. The cow is
then hoisted by that one leg to a hanging position. At
this point, the butcher drains the body of blood by
slitting the cow's throat. When the blood vessels are
severed, there is an amazing torrent of blood so profuse
that the butcher is unable to step aside fast enough to
avoid being covered with it. This steaming torrent of
blood lasts only about 15 seconds, after which the only
task left to the man at the first station is to skin and
remove the animal's head.
"At the second station in the kill shed, the headless
animal is dropped to the floor. The body is propped up
on the back and relieved of hooves and, if female, milk
sack and udders. At this time, any urine and feces that
didn't drain from the body during the first few seconds
of death now pour freely onto the floor. The body is
then slit down the middle, and the hide is peeled
partially away. A yoke is then hooked to the stumps of
the hind legs, the body is lifted upwards, and the rest
of the hide is pulled past a roller secured to the floor
and peeled off. The animal's body is now at the third
station of the kill shed where it is gutted and then
sawed in half -- becoming two "sides of beef".
"The sides of beef are sprayed down and weighed at the
fourth and final station of the kill station. They are
then placed in the cooling locker where the residual
warmth of life steams away slowly in preparation for the
deep-freeze storage locker. From the cooling locker, the
meat goes into a main storage area where it is kept for
as long as a week. This locker exits to a butchering
area where the sides of beef are reduced to parts for
the supermarket which end up on dining room tables.
"The final stop on my tour was the sausage and hot dog
production facilities. It is often said that if you
could see what goes into a hot dog, you'd never eat one
eat one again. Well that adage applies tenfold to the
production of sausage. The most violently nauseating
smell that I have ever experienced was the odor wafting
up from the sausage meat boiling vats.
"As I left the complex, I was embarrassed about my
previous skepticism, and I encourage anyone who has any
of the doubts that I once possessed to make a visit to a
slaughterhouse or spend a day at a factory farm. I think
it would become clear that there has to be better way to
feed ourselves, and that it is our duty as moral beings
to pursue the alternatives.
Published in The Forum
Go Back ToTOP
Milk,
Does it Do A Body In?
We now know that 50 to 60 % of the human race is lactase deficient
after weaning. This is a deficiency intended by nature and happens in all
mammals. Humans, however, have been taught that they should take pills
to "correct" this unnatural condition. Lets take an look at known studies
that tells what dairy products really do to our bodies!
It would seem absurd to picture 20 or 30 women sitting in a room
hooked up to milking machines, supplying adults with "mothers milk." Why
is it not absurd to see rows of cows hooked to milking machines? Dairy
is so entwined into the present culture that absurd ideas seem common placed,
even wholesome. Most would be repulsed by gallons of mothers milk, mothers
milk cheese, mothers milk yogurt or mothers milk sour cream in their dairy
case. Almost none find cows milk repulsive. Lets see just what bovine milk
has to offer.
When people have problems digesting lactose, they are told to consume
only "bacteria- fermented" dairy products, such as yogurt, sour cream and
cottage cheese in which the lactose is already broken down. Most believe
that little or no health worries are associated with such products and
even recommend yogurt as a folk remedy for several ailments. The truth
was reported by Daniel Cramer, MD , Harvard, in a report that showed that
GALACTOSE sugar derived from lactose is readily absorbed in the intestines
and have been linked to ovarian cancer. A study by F.J. Simons relates
galactose build-up from dairy to greater risk of cataracts.
Then we have FAT! Almost every American is now concerned with fat
in their diet, but very few consider dairy products fat! 48 to 50% of calories
in whole come from FAT (99% in butter) that is saturated. Dairy fats have
been associated with cancer in the colon, coronary disease, increased blood
cholesterol, uterine cancer and diabetes. While the most conservative health
organizations have been pushing for a 30% reduction of the calories derived
from fat, Americans have been switching from meat to dairy and INCREASING
their total intake of fat!
Milk proteins
In the largest study of its kind a Chinese-British-American group
studied proteins effect on 6,500 men and women in 65 counties of China.
The results pointed to direct correlation between dairy protein and heart
disease, cancer and diabetes and a robbing of calcium from boney masses
by raising serum cholesterol more than any other fat. This means that casein
milk proteins are just as bad if not worse than any meat product. Milk
proteins have a strong inciting effect on autoantibodies produced in connection
with systemic lupus and other autoimmune diseases. Milk proteins are strongly
correlated with kidney and bladder stones and high levels of uric acid,
ammonia, and phenols formed by proteolytic bacteria which line our digestive
tract when we consume a high-protein diet.
Then we have treatment of the "cow" that produces milk. The new
intense treatment designed to boost milk production to ten times its natural
level is now being supplemented with the use of BGH (Bovine Growth Hormone)
which further increases output while at the same time making the animals
more susceptible to infections and disease. To compensate, their feed must
be laced with doses of antibiotics, and increased shots and water born
antibiotics are being employed, just to keep them functioning. Despite
this madness the average lifespan of a dairy cow is only FOUR years. A
cows natural lifespan is 20 to 25 years. We still do not know the long
term effects that BHG will have on the consumers, but one must note that
the cows life is shortened by up to 75%. Consuming products from such animals
should give one pause if not for health reasons, moral concerns.
One may gain a greater knowledge by reading the following reference
studies:
A Diet for living - Dr. Jean Mayer, professor of nutrition, Harvard
Diet and coronary hart disease - S. Seely
Medical Hypotheses (1981; 7:907)
Four studies by Joel Fuhrman, MD - British Medical Journal (1961; 1:154
and 2:929 and 1979;1:382
Israel Journal Of Medical Sciences (1985; 21:575]
Rheumatic Disease Clinics Of North America (1988; 14:1:15);
Aladjem, Understanding Lupus (40)
J Of Chronic Diseases (1979; 32:6:469)
Eur Urol (1982; 8:334)
Braz J Med Biol Res (1993; 26:805
Fasting and Eating for Health (1995:34,97)
Immunol (1927:14:143, Am. J.Med. Sci (1927; 173:297
Learn More About Milk At The
No Milk Page
Go Back ToTOP
Doctors
Say: Don't Buy the Fish Story
A new report in the Journal of the American Medical Association(1),
suggests that eating oily fish reduces the likelihood of heart attacks.
This latest fish story must be put in context of other evidence which does
not support the use of fish products.
A much larger Harvard study, published earlier this year in the New
England Journal of Medicine(2), found that men who ate the most fish actually
ended up with more heart problems than those who rarely ate fish. The 44,895-person
study also showed that omega-3 fatty acids did not help either. Those whose
diets were richest in omega-3's had more heart problems than those whose
diets contained far less.
The only diet/lifestyle program that has been shown to reverse heart
disease, pioneered by Dr. Dean Ornish of the University of California at
San Francisco, uses a low-fat, vegetarian diet along with mild exercise,
stress reduction, and smoking cessation. Plant foods have no cholesterol
and are usually low in fat, while animal products, including fish, always
contain cholesterol, and are usually much higher in fat.
Using a fish-based instead of a vegetarian diet can be risky. The blood-thinning
effect of fish oils can increase the risk of hemorrhagic strokes. Second,
all fish contain both cholesterol and fat, including saturated fat. Third,
fish and shellfish are highly contaminated. As water passes over fish gills,
industrial and agricultural chemicals in waterways dissolve into their
blood, and end up in muscle tissue. As larger fish eat smaller fish, the
contaminants become more concentrated. A 1992 Consumer Reports survey found
that half of the flounder sampled in New York contained pesticides. Highly
toxic PCB's were found in 43 percent of salmon, 50 percent of whitefish,
and 25 percent of swordfish. The National Research Council reports that
PCB's are found in virtually every site where fish or shellfish are tested,
even in spots as remote as rural Alaska, the Virgin Islands, and Hawaii.
Of 145 sites recently sampled for mercury in shellfish, it was found in
every single one of them. Avoiding fish eliminates half of all mercury
exposure. Fish oils are also highly unstable, encouraging the production
of free radicals.
"Fish diets are certainly nothing like diets based on vegetables, fruits,
grains, and legumes," said Neal Barnard, M.D., of the Physicians Committee
for Responsible Medicine. "Vegetarian diets, along with an otherwise healthy
lifestyle, can actually reverse existing heart disease, with none of the
stroke risk that fish oils can bring. And while you can buy organic, pesticide-free
produce, there is no such thing as "organic fish" -- fish are loaded with
chemical contaminants."
1. Siscovick DS, Raghunathan TE, King 1, et al. Dietary intake and cell
membrane levels of long-chain n-3 polyunsaturated fatty ac ids and the
risk of primary cardiac arrest. JAMA 1995;274:1363-7.
2.Ascherio A. Rimm EB, Stampfer MJ, Giovannucci EL, Willett WC. Dietary
intake of marine n-3 fatty acids, fish intake, and the risk of coronary
disease among men. N Engl J Med 1995;332:977-82.
Go Back ToTOP
Slaying
the Great Protein
Myth
In the past, many people believed that one could never get too much
protein. Even today, some people worry that they may not be getting enough.
Yet the reality is that the average American takes in far more protein
than he or she needs. Americans now consume about 100 grams of protein
a day. That is anywhere from two to five times higher than what we need.
Why the obsession with protein in this country? It is the legacy of
outdated advice from well meaning health professionals, now appropriately
called "The Protein Myth."
The idea that one has to eat protein-dense foods for good health has
carried on despite a mountain of evidence showing that it isn't true. For
example, The Worid Health Organization has established a minimum daiiy
requirement for protein to be approximately 5 percent of daily calorie
intake. For a man consuming 3,000 calories a day, that would be 37 grams
of protein, and for a woman consuming 2,300 calories a day, that would
be 29 grams -- 60 to 70 grams less than Americans consume in an average
day.
The National Academy of Sciences has set the RDA for protein at 63 grams
per day for adult men, and 50 grams per day for adult women. But the Academy
admits that it added another 45 percent to the true minimum requirements
in order to leave a substantial margin of safety for mostpeople. In fact,
studies have shown that people can lead healthy, active lives while consuming
only 2.5 percent of calories a day as protein; equivalent to 20 grams a
day for an adult male, and even less for an adult female.
Except for malnourished people in third-world nations (whose diets are
low in all nutrients) protein deficiency is virtually unheard of. Nevertheless,
in the United States, where we are practically drowning in a sea of protein,
people still feel the need to load up on protein-rich foods, consuming
all the fat and cholesterol that usually come with them. Fortunately, there
is a better way. You can get more than enough protein from high-fiber,
low-fat, plant-based foods.
The Birth of A Second Myth,
The 1970s are remembered as the age of disco music, bell-bottom pants
-- and the birth of a second myth that vegetarians had to carefully combine
foods for their optimal protein value. Frances Moore Lappe's popular Diet
For A Small Planet, originally published in 1971, encouraged people to
eat beans and grains together to get their full protein value. While moving
people away from animal products was a great idea, the idea of intentionally
combining foods turned out to be a wrong turn.
The American Dietetic Association (ADA) in its 1988 position paper on
vegetarianism, stated that intentional combining is not necessary. Even
Lappe herself noticed how wrong she had been. In the revised edition of
her book, published in 1982, she wrote, "In combating the myth that meat
is the only way to get high quality protein, I reinforced another myth.
I gave the impression that in order to get enough protein without meat,
considerable care was needed in choosing foods. Actually, it is much easier
than I thought."
A varied diet of grains, beans, and vegetables provides all the essential
amino acids, even without intentional combining. As physician John A. McDougall,
M.D. has written, "...the combination of amino acids in proper proportions
takes place long before our foods reach the dinner table. Nature has designed
vegetable foods to be complete. If people living before the age of modern
dietetics had to worry about achieving the correct protein combinations
in their diets, our species would not have survived for these millions
of years."
Dr. Denis Burkitt, the researcher who discovered the value of fiber
in the diet, had two words to sum up the controversy: 'Forget protein."
Gerardus Johannes Mulder coined the term protein in 1838 (from the Greek
meaning "in first place".) He obviously couldn't foresee the myths and
misinformation that would follow over the next century and a half. But
if he had, he might instead have chosen words from the Greek language meaning
'don't believe the hype."
For a free brochure on healthy eating, your readers are invited to call
1-800-US-LIVES.
Go Back ToTOP
DRUGS IN
THE WATER
A new class of water pollutants has been discovered during the
past six years.[1] Pharmaceutical drugs given to people and to
domestic animals --including antibiotics, hormones, strong pain
killers, tranquilizers, and chemotherapy chemicals given to
cancer patients --are being measured in surface water, in
groundwater, and in drinking water at the tap. Large quantities
of drugs are excreted by humans and domestic animals, and are
distributed into the environment by flushing toilets and by
spreading manure and sewage sludge onto and into soil.
German scientists report that anywhere from 30 to 60 drugs can be
measured in a typical water sample, if anyone takes the time to
do the proper analyses.[2] The concentrations of some drugs in
water are comparable to the low parts-per-billion (ppb) levels at
which pesticides are typically found.[1] To some people this
is
reassuring, but others are asking, "What is the long-term effect
of drinking, day after day, a dilute cocktail of pesticides,
antibiotics, pain killers, tranquilizers and chemotherapy
agents?" Of course no one knows the answer to such a question
--it is simply beyond the capabilities of science to sort out the
many chemical interactions that could occur in such a complex
chemical soup. The only solution to such a problem would be
prevention.
The first study that detected drugs in sewage took place at the
Big Blue River sewage treatment plant in Kansas City in 1976.
The problem was duly recorded in scientific literature and then
ignored for 15 years.[3] In 1992, researchers in Germany were
looking for herbicides in water when they kept noticing a
chemical they couldn't identify.[4] It turned out to be clofibric
acid (CA), a drug used by many people in large quantities (1 to 2
grams per day) to reduce cholesterol levels in the blood.[1]
Clofibric acid is 2-(4)-chlorophenoxy-2-methyl propionic acid, a
close chemical cousin of the popular weed killer 2,4-D.[1] Based
on that early discovery, the search for clofibric acid (CA) in
the environment was stepped up.
Since 1992, researchers in Germany, Denmark and Sweden have been
measuring CA and other drugs in rivers, lakes, and the North Sea.
To everyone's surprise, it turns out that the entire North Sea
contains measurable quantities of clofibric acid. Based on the
volume of the Sea, which is 12.7 quadrillion gallons (1.27 x
10E16 gallons), and the average concentration of CA, which is 1
to 2 parts per trillion (ppt), researchers estimate that the Sea
contains 48 to 96 tons of clofibric acid with 50 to 100 tons
entering the Sea anew each year.[1] The Danube River in Germany
and the Po River in Italy also contain measurable quantities of
clofibric acid.[5,6] Of more immediate concern to humans is the
finding that tap water in all parts of the city of Berlin
contains clofibric acid at concentrations between 10 and 165
ppt.[5] The water supplies of other major cities remain to be
tested.
As a result of this European work, a few U.S. researchers are now
beginning to pay attention to drugs in the environment.
Individual scientists within the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) have been concerned about this problem for a
decade,[7] but so far FDA has taken the official position that
excreted drugs are not a problem because the concentrations found
in the environment are usually below one part per billion
(ppb).[2]
Drugs are designed to have particular characteristics. For
example, 30% of the drugs manufactured between 1992 and 1995 are
lipophilic, meaning that they tend to dissolve in fat but not in
water.[8] This gives them the ability to pass through cell
membranes and act inside cells. Unfortunately, it also means
that, once they are excreted into the environment, they enter
food chains and concentrate as they move upward into larger
predators. Many drugs are also designed to be persistent, so
that they can retain their chemical structure long enough to do
their therapeutic work. Unfortunately, after they are excreted,
such drugs also tend to persist in the environment. A landfill
used by the Jackson Naval Air Station in Florida contaminated
groundwater with a plume of chemicals that has been moving slowly
underground for more than 20 years. The drugs pentobarbital (a
barbiturate), meprobamate (a tranquilizer sold as Equanil and
Miltown) and phensuximide (an anticonvulsant) are still
measurable in that groundwater plume.[8,pg.362]
When a human or an animal is given a drug, anywhere from 50% to
90% of it is excreted unchanged. The remainder is excreted in
the form of metabolites --chemicals produced as byproducts of the
body's interaction with the drug. Researchers report that some
of the metabolites are more lipophilic and more persistent than
the original drugs from which they were derived. Because of the
complexity of the chemistry involved in drug metabolism, and the
interactions of the metabolites with the natural environment,
Danish researchers say is it "practically impossible to estimate
predicted environmental concentrations (PEC) of any medical
substances with available knowledge."[8,pg.385]
Yet U.S. regulatory policy for new drugs depends entirely upon
estimating concentrations that might result from excretion. When
a new drug is proposed for market, FDA requires the manufacturer
to conduct a risk assessment that estimates the concentrations
that will be found in the environment. If the risk assessment
concludes that the concentration will be less than one part per
billion, the drug is assumed to pose acceptable risks.[2] FDA
has never turned down a proposed new drug based on estimated
environmental concentrations, and no actual testing is conducted
after a drug is marketed to see if the environmental
concentration was estimated correctly.
German chemists have found that many drugs can be measured at
environmental concentrations that exceed one ppb. And of course
several drugs measured together can exceed one ppb. Furthermore,
there is ample evidence from research conducted during the past
decade showing that some chemicals have potent effects on
wildlife at concentrations far below one ppb. For example
estradiol, the female sex hormone (and a common water pollutant),
can alter the sex characteristics of certain fish at
concentrations of 20 ppt, which is 1/50 of one ppb.[2]
Another problem resulting from drugs in the environment is
bacteria developing resistance to antibiotics. The general
problem of antibiotic-resistant bacteria has been recognized for
more than a decade. (See REHW #402.) Antibiotics are only
useful to humans so long as bacteria do not become resistant to
their effects. Hospital sewage systems discharge substantial
quantities of antibiotics into the environment.[9] Bacteria
exposed to antibiotics in sewage sludge, or water, have an
opportunity to develop resistance. Janet Raloff of SCIENCE NEWS
quotes Stuart Levy, who directs the Center for Adaptation
Genetics and Drug Resistance at Tufts University in Boston,
saying, "[T]hese antibiotics may be present at levels of
consequence to bacteria --levels that could not only alter the
ecology of the environment but also give rise to antibiotic
resistance."[2]
What can we learn from the emergence of this new problem?
1) Hospitals and the health care industry are the major sources
of these problems, especially antibiotics and chemotherapy
chemicals.[10] The large national coalition of environmental and
health groups, Health Care Without Harm,[11] might consider
tackling this difficult but important problem.
2) Sewage sludge provides a major pathway by which drugs enter
the environment. Until the drug problem is understood and
controlled, it provides a solid scientific rationale for labeling
sewage sludge a dangerous soil amendment, the use of which should
be forbidden.
3) For a long time, people have worried that the world was going
to run out of natural resources. It is now apparent that we have
run out places to throw things away. There is no place left
where we can throw away exotic substances without affecting
people or wildlife (upon whose well being we ultimately depend).
>From the viewpoint of disposal, not many decades ago the world
still looked pretty empty. Today there can be no doubt that the
world is full --full of people armed with double-edged
technologies. To survive in a full world will require quite
different attitudes. We need to curb our numbers. We need
to
curb our technologies. We need to curb our appetites. And
we
need to operate from a position of humility. We should assume
that anything we do will have negative consequences on the rest
of the planet. We must limit our technological interventions
into nature long before we have definitive scientific proof of
harm. This is the principle of precautionary action, and if we
don't adopt it, nature will get along just fine without us.
--Peter Montague
(National Writers Union, UAW Local 1981/AFL-CIO)
===============
[1] Hans-Rudolf Buser and Markus D. Muller, "Occurrence of the
Pharmaceutical Drug Clofibric Acid and the Herbicide Mecoprop in
Various Swiss Lakes and in the North Sea," ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE
AND TECHNOLOGY Vol. 32, No. 1 (1998), pgs. 188-192.
[2] Janet Raloff, "Drugged Waters," SCIENCE NEWS Vol. 153, No. 12
(March 21, 1998), pgs. 187-189.
[3] C. Hignite and D.L. Azarnoff, "Drugs and drug metabolites as
environmental contaminants: chlorophenoxyisobutyrate and
salicyclic acid in sewage water effluent," LIFE SCIENCES Vol. 20,
No. 2 (January 15, 1977), pgs. 337-341.
[4] H.J. Stan and Thomas Heberer, "Pharmaceuticals in the Aquatic
Environment," ANALUSIS MAGAZINE Vol. 25, No. 7 (1997), pgs.
M20-M23.
[5] Thomas Heberer and H.-J. Stan, "Determination of Clofibric
Acid and N-(phenylsulfonyl)-Sarcosine in Sewage, River, and
Drinking Water," INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY Vol. 67 (1997), pgs. 113-124. And see:
Thomas Heberer and others, "Detection of Drugs and Drug
Metabolites in Ground Water Samples of a Drinking Water Treatment
Plant," FRESENIUS ENVIRONMENTAL BULLETIN Vol. 6 (1997), pgs.
438-443.
[6] "Pille im Brunnen [Pills in the Fountain]," DER SPIEGEL No.
26 (June 24, 1996), pgs. 154-155, translated for us by Thea
Lindauer, Annapolis, Maryland.
[7] Personal communication from Maurice Zeeman, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, March, 1998.
[8] B. Halling-Sorensen and others, "Occurrence, Fate and Effects
of Pharmaceutical Substances in the Environment --A Review,"
CHEMOSPHERE Vol. 36, No. 2 (1998), pgs. 357-393.
[9] Andreas Hartmann and others, "Identification of Fluoroquinone
Antibiotics as the Main Source of umuC Genotoxicity in Native
Hospital Wastewater," ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY Vol.
17, No. 3 (1998), pgs. 377-382.
[10] T. Steger-Hartmann and others, "Biological Degradation of
Cyclophosphamide and Its Occurrence in Sewage Water,"
ECOTOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY Vol. 36 (1997), pgs.
174-179.
[11] Contact: Charlotte Brody, Health Care Without Harm, c/o CCHW
Center for Health, Environment and Justice, P.O. Box 6806, Falls
Church, Virginia 22040. Phone (703) 237-2249. See
www.noharm.org.
Descriptor terms: drugs; pharmaceuticals; water pollution;
sewage sludge; precautionary principle; fda; north sea; germany;
################################################################
NOTICE
Environmental Research Foundation provides this electronic
version of RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY free of charge
even though it costs our organization considerable time and money
to produce it. We would like to continue to provide this service
free. You could help by making a tax-deductible contribution
(anything you can afford, whether $5.00 or $500.00). Please send
your tax-deductible contribution to: Environmental Research
Foundation, P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403-7036. Please do
not send credit card information via E-mail. For further
information about making tax-deductible contributions to E.R.F.
by credit card please phone us toll free at 1-888-2RACHEL, or at
(410) 263-1584, or fax us at (410) 263-8944.
--Peter Montague, Editor
################################################################
NOTE: most of the veterinary drugs mentioned in the article are used
in
factory farming.
Go Back ToTOP
A Brief
History of Vegetarianism
by Anne Dozell
The following is a short summary of some of the highlights of "The Heretic's
Feast, a History of Vegetarianism" by Colin Spencer. (The information and
views are those of Mr. Spencer.) This book is now available from bookstores
or TVA's Resource Centre.
Colin Spencer is a British vegetarian who once wrote a regular food
column in the Guardian and has published a dozen cook books.
We often hear the phrase, "vegetarian- ism's time has come at last."
But vegetaranism is not a new idea. It has a long and fascinating history
stretching back to the early evolution of human beings.
Our Earliest Ancestors
Our hominid ancestors evolved over a period of 24 million years and,
according to Spencer, for all but one-and-a-half million of these years
lived on an almost completely vegetarian diet, except for occasional insects
and grubs.
Spencer suggests that lack of a varied plant & fruit diet may have
been the reason Neanderthal man died out, while Cro-Magnon man, our direct
ancestor, survived. The Cro-Magnons lived in a more temperate climate and
had ready access to plentiful supplies of plants and fruit, while the Neanderthals,
who lived in the icy wastes of northern Europe, were forced to subsist
mainly on flesh food.
Pythagoras
The first prominent modern vegetarian was the Greek philosopher Pythagoras
who lived towards the end of the 6th century BC. The Pythagorean diet came
to mean an avoidance of the flesh of slaughtered animals. Pythagorean ethics
first became a philosophical morality between 490-430 BC with a desire
to create a universal and absolute law including injunctions not to kill
"living creatures," to abstain from "harsh-sounding bloodshed," in particular
animal sacrifice, and "never to eat meat."
The Vegetarian Heretics
Another big surge in vegetarianism came from the Manicheans in the early
centuries AD. The Manicheans were a sect of "heretics" with vegetarianism
as the centre of their beliefs, and were much reviled by the Christians.
[It is for this reason that the book is called the Heretic's Feast] Manicheanism
survived in the Near East as late as the seventh century AD and kept a
foothold in China as late as the 16th century, the Manicheans being known
as "vegetarian demon worshippers."
The Renaissance
By Renaissance times in Europe, meat eating had became surrounded by
an aura of wealth and power. Only the Christian monks abstained, hoping
to bring a closer affinity to God.
From the 17th century, a time of radical ideas, vegetarianism began
to grow steadily in England. Religious sects that abstain from animal food
began to proliferate. Moral objections began to appear as people discovered
a distaste for exploiting animals: "as the threat from wild beasts receded,
so man's right to eliminate wild creatures from whom he had nothing to
fear was increasingly disputed" (Keith Thomas: Man and the Natural World).
Thomas Tryon was a prominent vegetarian of the early 17th century. His
writings and teachings recommended a vegetable diet and a complete refusal
to "gorge on the flesh of fellow animals." Tryon strongly influenced the
Quakers, and much later the young Benjamin Franklin was greatly impressed
by one of Tryon's books, The Way to Health.
The dilemma of whether humans should kill and eat animals was now being
debated and written about by scores of people, some, like John Evelyn,
advocating the wholesomeness of a "Herby-diet" and others, such as Henry
More, advocating that cattle and sheep were only given life in the first
place so that their meat could be kept fresh "till we shall have need to
eat them."
Moving into the 18th century, we find the writer and dietitian Dr. William
Lambe recommending a vegetarian diet to his patients as a cure for cancer.
By the end of the 18th century, there was an upsurge in humanitarian feelings,
and the concept of animal welfare began to strengthen. The vegetarian movement
now had real reason to hope for expansion due to the fact that vegetables
and grains were becoming more abundant and available to everyone. All the
arguments that sustain modern vegetarianism were now in circulation, including
the view that meat eating was bad for health, was cruel and unnatural,
and fostered a wasteful form of agriculture compared with arable farming
which produced far more food per acre.
Blandness and Purity
The Pythagorean diet officially changed its title to vegetarianism in
1847 at a meeting in Ramsgate, an English seaside town. From this meeting
came the Vegetarian Society, branches of which were subsequently established
in Manchester and London. One of the first members was George Dornbusch
who ate all his food quite cold and without salt and condiments. Many members
of the Society believed that salt and condiments were stimulants and as
bad as alcohol. This led to vegetarian food being enormously bland. At
this time, too, vegetarianism became equated with moral earnestness, do-gooding
and the higher grounds of purity and moral rectitude. Meat was considered
a generator of lust. Vegetarianism even went hand in hand with abstention
from alcohol. Because British beef was regarded as one of the positive
forces behind the growth of the British Empire, vegetarianism was very
quickly relegated to the level of a joke by the rich and powerful.
In 1847, the Manchester branch of the Vegetarian Society held their
first annual meeting and a banquet. At this banquet they ate macaroni omelette,
onion and sage fritters, savoury pie, plum pudding, moulded rice, flummery
[fruit pudding], and several other dishes.
In the early 1880's, membership in the Vegetarian Society rose until
it reached over 2,000. In 1889 there were estimated to be 52 vegetarian
restaurants in England, 34 of them in London. In 1889, Gandhi became a
member of the London Vegetarian Society.
The 20th Century
At the outbreak of the First World War, pacifism and vegetarianism became
intertwined and vegetarianism suffered a bitter backlash from a society
which saw refusal to fight as treason. Seventy vegetarian conscientious
objectors died in prison because of harsh treatment, including their inability
to survive on prison meals. A food strike eventually produced a vegetarian
diet for prisoners.
For the remainder of this century, vegetarians have continued the struggle
to put forward their message. In Canada, the Toronto Vegetarian Association
was founded in 1945 and has flourished for 50 years. As history shows,
vegetarianism has had its ups and downs. Surely, by the year 2000, we will
be able to say with absolute certainty, "Now our time has surely come."
Go Back ToTOP
Ready
Veggie Go!
from The Vegetarian
Michael Fox gives a general overview of the nutritional requirements
for the aspiring vegetarian sports person.
Just as there is no single food that will make you lose weight, likewise,
there is no one particular item you can eat that will suddenly make you
healthier and fitter. What should he considered from the very start is
that your diet is almost like a fingertprint - unique to you. Sure, there
are certain rules that should be followed but these are not set in stone.
Any advice that you read or hear should be thought of as guidelines only
with the final adaptation of a training diet being entirely your decision.
Certainly in recent years it has become increasingly obvious that diet
plays a major part in the success of a sports person. Motor racing drivers,
cyclists, runners, boxers - almost any physical sport that you can think
of has been taken to a new level of intensity. This has come about by the
introduction of combined training and dietary regimes, designed to optimise
an individual human body for success in a certain sport.
Training is tailored to suit the sport. There is no point in extensive
weight training and muscle gain if you intend to run 26 mile marathons.
Similarly, a diet as tailored to suit the sport. To customise a diet to
suit your specific training needs the best approach is to consider how
the body reacts to training and to the food that is provided. This is the
common element that can be applied to any sport.
A certain degree of scepticism has crept in during the past few years.
Scientists constantly seem to come up with foods that one day are very
good for you and, sometime later, must be avoided at all costs. To answer
this there are a few hints that should be followed as a first step to a
healthy diet.
Avoid excessive amounts of processed food Avoid excessive amounts of
food and drink that are high in fat, sugar or alcohol Try and maintain
a dietary balance that covers carbohydrates, protein and fat
Basically, remember the phrase everything in moderation.
Food is fuel for the body. How is this fuel used in training? That is
dependant upon the type of training that you do. There are two basic types
of physical activity, aerobic and anaerobic. We have all heard of aerobic
exercise and the term conjures up images of people in brightly coloured
leotards, standing together in a large room, working up a sweat by following
the moves of the instructor. But aerobic exercise can take many forms,
distance running, cycling and swimming for example and can easily be remembered
as exercise that may make you breathless. After all, the term aerobic indicates
exercise with oxygen.
Anaerobic exercise is not such a common term. This is the sort of physical
activity that you repeat until your muscles give up on you. Weight training
is the best example although sprinting, jumping and kicking are also considered
to be anaerobic. It may leave you breathless but will certainly make the
muscles that you have been exercising feel weak.
There are few physical activities that are entirely aerobic or anaerobic.
Instead one or other type will predominate.
The body burns fuel to create energy which, in turn, allows you to perform
various physically demanding activities. This fuel is called glycogen.
The main stores for glycogen are the muscles as this is where fuel is needed.
As you exercise, the glycogen stores are depleted. If you are performing
aerobic exercise then, once the body has warmed up, it will start using
fat deposits for its energy source. Anaerobic exercise will, when the body
has warmed up, only use glycogen. Once the stores have been depleted, your
muscles will tire and you will have to stop.
What fuel should be used? For general meals you should consider foods
that take time to be absorbed by the body. If a food is absorbed too quickly
then, if you are not training, fat may be a by-product. Slow absorption
allows the body to process all the incoming food in good time to avoid
fat build up. Such foods would include various pulses, certain fruits (apples,
dates, peaches) and yoghurt. If you have just finished training then you
can select foods that can be quickly absorbed. This is because the body
can refuel at a much faster rate for anything up to two hours after intense
physical activity. Such foods could include wholegrain bread, brown rice,
muesli, raisins, bananas, sweetcorn, pasta and potatoes. As mentioned previously,
avoid eating any one of these foods exclusively. Mix between low and high
absorption groups but ensure that the appropriate food type predominates.
It is quite possible that you do not feel hungry after exercise. If
this is the case then you may consider eating a power bar or an energy
drink. Some of these are better than others. Check the label of contents
and apply the food hints given previously.
One last issue. Many people imagine that eating a high protein diet
will ensure super athlete status. This is not true. Excess protein could
easily end up as fat on your body. What do you need protein for? The body
always needs a certain amount of protein to build cells, enzymes and some
hormones. But if you participate in a sport that requires strength then
you will need some extra protein in order to allow for the growth of new
tissue. If you are a body builder then your protein needs will be even
greater. Good sources of protein include skimmed milk, cottage cheese,
certain pulses and some nuts.
As well as being low in sugar, fat and salt, vegetarian diets are generally
high in carbohydrates and fibre. A good supply of catbohydrates is essential
for successful training and sports participation. Without sufficient fuel
your body will be unable to maintain the energy levels required to succeed.
Go Back ToTOP
Pro
athletes are turning vegetarian
by Bernie Thimian, CTM
Recently there have been some interesting tidbits in the news on the
eating habits of pro athletes in Toronto and around the world, including
the following indication that some of the Toronto Maple Leafs might be
vegetarian.
After Wendel Clark's return to the Toronto Maple Leafs, the Toronto
Sun on March 17, 1996 described Clark as "a meat-eater on offence coming
to a team where vegetarians have taken over."
Veteran Toronto Raptor John Salley upon seeing rookie teammate Damon
Stoudamire eating a ham sandwich on a return charter flight from Chicago,
stated: "I got on him to stop it.... You learn that you don't eat meat,
it just sits in your stomach" (Hamilton Spectator, Nov. 9, 1995.)
Local jocks aren't the only ones kicking the meat habit. An article
that appeared in the Hamilton Spectator, July 7, 1995, on Tour de France
cyclists, shows a similar trend. Every year the Tour de France organizes
a three week trek complete with gourmet cuisine, but the cyclists have
to avoid all the fine food. Team chefs prepare carbohydrates, not cassoulet
or coq au vin.
As one team chef explained, "They are like high powered engines. You
put some funny motor oil in and it all explodes". Instead (of meat and
high fat foods), the riders got low fat foodstuffs for the road and a seemingly
endless supply of pasta, rice and muesli.
"They used to say, eat meat, eat meat. Meat in the morning and meat
at night," said Bernard Hinault, who won five tours between 1978 and 1985
on a more refined diet after it was found that steaks did more harm than
good.
Even the Toronto Blue Jays are putting a greater emphasis on nutrition.
This past season a TV reporter interviewed the Blue Jays food service provider
who noted that the players were eating less meat and fatty foods and more
carbohydrates. The meals consisted of more whole grains, breads, pastas,
etc., than in previous years.
From my own experience at the 1992 World Triathlon Championships in
Huntsville, Ontario, the meatless trend was quite evident. Of the two pre-race
meals I attended for the athletes from around the world, there wasn't a
single meat dish served. This was not unusual for endurance sports. Out
of nearly 35 triathlons, duathlons and road races I have done, I recall
seeing meat served at a pre-race or post-race meal about half-a-dozen times.
Vegetarian Watch Dogs needed. If you come across any articles on sports,
athletics and vegetarianism, please forward them to TVA in care of Bernie
Thimian. Bernie Thimian is past-president of the Mississauga Vegetarian
Association and owner of "One Step Closer," a venture providing vegetarian
merchandise from clothing and accessories to placemats and fridge magnets.
Bernie is an accomplished athlete and a frequent spokesperson for TVA.
Go Back ToTOP
The
Calcium Myth
by Eric Karlsson, DN ND
There are the a number of myths about vegetarian diets such as
the protein, the iron and the vitamin B12 myth. I feel that the protein
myth is slowly becoming less of a problem although still very actual, but
the biggest myth today is perhaps the calcium myth. It appears that almost
everyone dealing with nutrition still recommends milk and dairy products
and often in great amounts, to ensure calcium supply. Most people believe
that you have to eat dairy products for your calcium and that dairy products
is the best way to prevent osteoporosis, a condition of loss of calcium
and other alkaline minerals from the skeleton resulting in brittle bones.
Most people believe that this can only occur when there is too little calcium
in the diet but this is wrong.
All this is probably most of all the result of advertising by the
dairy industry who for decades successfully "informed" us how good milk
and dairy products are for our health. Many people also tend to believe
that if one glass of milk per day is good, three to four glasses must be
even better.
Here we shall look further into the diet which is the most important
factor in osteoporosis which is a very actual problem and of especial concern
to women.
Osteoporosis is not caused by lack of calcium in the diet. It is
caused by an excess of acid in the diet which causes the body to draw calcium
from the skeleton. It is true that dairy products contain a lot of calcium,
but it is also true that people who have a high intake of calcium from
dairy products have higher levels of osteoporosis. That the calcium myth
survived is very much due to superficial quantitative thinking.
Modern research shows that populations have a low intake of calcium
actually have a stronger skeleton. This can be explained by the fact that
the populations who eat a lot of calcium rich foods also eat acid forming
foods which rob the body of calcium. For instance, cheese which is very
rich in calcium is also very rich in protein and if eaten in excess or
together with too much other protein, would cause loss of calcium and other
alkaline minerals.
Calcium and other alkaline minerals are lost through an intake
of too much acid forming foods and lack of calcium has very little, if
at all, (except in the case of starvation) relationship to actual intake
of calcium. The world's largest investigation on diet shows that in populations
where the intake of calcium from dairy products is high, the level of osteoporosis
(as well as many other diseases) is the highest. The intake of dairy products
and calcium tablets do not prevent osteoporosis. Osteoporosis is prevented
and cured simply by not causing it.
Many separate medical investigations all over the world have established
that osteoporosis has little to do with calcium intake but a lot to do
with protein intake. The British Medical Journal [date] has reported that
calcium intake is completely irrelevant to bone loss. The American Journal
of Clinical Nutrition wrote in 1970 "Osteoporosis is in fact a disease
caused by a number of things, the most important of which is excess intake
of protein".
Vegetarians do not have as much osteoporosis as omnivores. The
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition published the largest study ever
made of osteoporosis in 1983. Researchers found that by 65 years of age,
female vegetarians had 18% bone loss and non-vegetarians had 35%. The equivalent
figures for males were 3% and 7%. The figures can be explained by the fact
that although vegetarians generally eat too much protein, they do not eat
as much protein as meat eaters and, moreover, that the protein is of a
better quality.
A long term study showed that as little as 75 grammes daily intake
of protein more calcium is lost in the urine than absorbed from the diet.
Several studies confirm the fact that the more protein that is taken in,
the most calcium is lost.
African Bantu women take in only 350mg calcium per day. They bear
nine children on average which they breast feed for two years but they
never suffer from calcium deficiency.
The skeleton acts as a storage of calcium and other alkaline minerals.
The pH level (measure of acidity or alkalinity) of the blood is vital and
must be kept fairly constant or we would die. The body with its innate
wisdom therefore draws alkaline minerals from the skeleton if we eat too
many acid forming foods. Soft drinks, medication, smoking, salt, sugar,
coffee and tea may also contribute to osteoporosis. Exercise is also of
great importance to prevent osteoporosis.
To conclude: cow's milk in its raw natural state is a perfect food
for fast growing calves. Too many dairy products, especially in the denatured
forms sold by supermarkets may cause health problems. Problems with calcium
are best avoided by maintaining a balanced alkaline forming diet.
Reference: Diet for a New America, John Robbins.
Go Back ToTOP
The
EPIC study
from EVU-News, Issue 4 /1996 - Deutsch
The European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition
(EPIC) is a large medical study aimed at expanding the presently limited
knowledge of the role of nutrition and other lifestyle factors in the causes
and prevention of cancer and other life-threatening diseases. The study
is being carried out in nine European countries (Denmark, France, Germany,
Greece, Italy, The Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and The United Kingdom).
Data on diet, other lifestyle and environmental factors, physical measurements,
and blood samples are being collected from about four hundred thousand
healthy adults in these countries. Participants will be followed up for
cancer incidence and death, and the relation between incidence/death rates
and dietary and biochemical factors investigated. EPIC will be the largest
ever study of diet and health of its kind, and should clarify many of the
uncertainties surrounding the relationship between the food we eat and
the diseases that we suffer and die from.
Different groups of people (cohorts) are being recruited to EPIC
in each of the participating countries. In the UK, the cohort includes
a large number of vegetarians (recruited through vegetarian and health
food societies, shops, and magazines) reflecting the interests of the coordinating
group based at the Imperial Cancer Research Fund Cancer Epidemiology Unit
in Oxford, England. Thus far more than thirty-five thousand individuals
have been recruited to the cohort, roughly half of whom are vegetarians.
The first results from the UK EPIC cohort were published in the
British Medical Journal on 28 September 1996 in the form of a letter to
the editor. Body mass index (a measure of body weight relative to height)
and obesity rates in men and women were compared in four diet groups: meat
eaters, fish eaters (who did not eat any meat), vegetarians, and vegans.
Among both men and women, mean (average) body mass index was highest among
the meat eaters, lowest among the vegans, and intermediate among the fish
eaters and vegetarians, suggesting that vegetarians are generally lighter
than non-vegetarians of the same height.
Among the meat eaters, 6.4% of the men and 9.2% of the women were
clinically obese (body mass index above 30 kg/m2) after adjustment for
age. These figures are well below the average for England (which was 13.2%
of men and 16.0% of women in 1994), but fail to reach the targets set in
the UK Government’s Health of the Nation strategy (which aims to reduce
obesity rates in men and women to 6% and 8% respectively by the year 2005).
In contrast, the prevalence of obesity was well within these targets in
each of the groups that did not eat meat, suggesting that a meat-free diet
is associated with a low prevalence of obesity. This is important because
obesity increases the risk of a range of diseases.
(Reference: Key T, Davey G. Prevalence of obesity is low in people
who do not eat meat. British Medical Journal 1996; 313:816-7.)
Paul Appleby, ICRF CEU, Gibson Building, Radcliffe Infirmary, Oxford
OX2 6HE, England. (e-mail: pna@vax.ox.ac.uk)
Paul Appleby is most willing to send a copy of the original article
to any interested reader. Please contact him at the above addresse. - SDL
Go Back ToTOP
The
Fat
Information
Sheet
Introduction -- Structure & Functions -- Essential Fatty Acids
-- Cholesterol -- Trans Fatty Acids -- Free Radicals -- Dietary Sources
-- Required Intakes
Introduction
Fats provide a concentrated source of energy in the diet. The building
blocks of fats are called fatty acids. These can be either saturated, monounsaturated
or poly-unsaturated. Foods rich in saturated fats are usually of animal
origin. Vegetable fats are generally unsaturated.
Saturated fat raises the level of cholesterol in the blood. Cholesterol
is present in animal foods but not plant foods. It is essential for metabolism
but is not needed in the diet as our bodies can produce all that is needed.
Raised blood cholesterol is associated with an increased risk of heart
disease.
Fats and oils are essentially the same. Fats tend to be solid at
room temperature whilst oils are liquid. The term lipids include both fats
and oils.
Structure & Functions
Fats consist of fatty acids and glycerol. Nearly all the fats in
our bodies and in foods are triglycerides, being made up of three fatty
acid molecules to one glycerol molecule. There are about 16 different fatty
acids commonly present in foods. The nature of fat depends on its constituent
fatty acids.
Fats can be classed as either saturated, monounsaturated or polyunsaturated.
This depends on the type of chemical bonds present in the fatty acid. If
a fatty acid has all the hydrogen atoms it can hold it is termed saturated.
However, if some of the hydrogen atoms are absent and the usual single
bond between carbon atoms has been replaced by a double bond, then it is
unsaturated. If there is just one double bond then it is monounsaturated.
If there is more than one then it is polyunsaturated. Most fats contain
a proportion of each of these three basic types of fatty acid but are generally
described according to which type predominates.
Saturated fats tend to be animal fats and are solid at room temperature.
Butter, lard, suet and meat fat are saturated fats. Unsaturated fats are
liquid at room temperature. They are usually of plant origin, though fish
oils may also be high in polyunsaturated fatty acids. Plant oils may be
hardened by the addition of hydrogen atoms, converting double bonds to
single bonds. This process is known as hydrogenation. Hydrogenated vegetable
oils are often present in margarine and other processed foods.
Fats have a number of important functions in the body. As well
as being a concentrated source of energy, fats act as carriers for fat-soluble
vitamins A, D, E and K. Fats are also essential for the structure of cell
membranes and are precursors of many hormones.
Essential Fatty Acids
Two fatty acids are termed essential fatty acids. These are linoleic
acid and a-linolenic acid. These must be present in the diet as the body
is unable to make them itself. They are widely present in plant oils such
as sunflower, rapeseed and soyabean oils.
Linoleic acid is converted into the body to arachidonic acid from
which prostoglandins and other vital compounds are made. Because of this
conversion, arachidonic acid is not an essential fatty acid as was once
believed. a-Linolenic acid is converted to eicosapentanoic acid (EPA) which
is important in proper nerve function. EPA is present in fish oils and
is claimed to be beneficial in reducing the symptoms of arthritis and the
risk of heart disease. For this reason, fish oils are sometimes used therapeutically.
Plant oils containing large amounts of a-linolenic acid can be used as
an alternative by vegetarians. Linseeds and linseed oil are particularly
rich sources of a-linolenic acid.
Cholesterol
Cholesterol belongs to the sterol group of fats. It is present
in all animal tissues but is absent from plants. Cholesterol is essential
as a component of cell membranes and a precursor of bile acids and certain
hormones. The body can make its own cholesterol and so a dietary source
is not required.
Cholesterol is transported in to various proteins. These complex
molecules are called lipoproteins. There are four main types of lipoprotein
involved in cholesterol transport. The most commonly refer red to are low
density lipoprotein (LDL) and high density lipoprotein (HDL).
Cholesterol may form plaques on artery walls if levels in the blood
are too high. This can lead to atherosclerosis. Because of this high blood
cholesterol is linked with heart disease. It is the LDL cholesterol which
has been linked to heart disease. HDL cholesterol may help protect against
the risk of heart disease.
The amount of dietary cholesterol is not clearly linked to levels
of cholesterol in the blood. Blood cholesterol is more closely related
to the amount of saturated fat in the diet, saturated fat raising blood
cholesterol. Unsaturated fats are not thought to raise blood cholesterol
and may indeed lower levels.
Trans Fatty Acids
Unsaturated fatty acids can exist in two different geometric forms.
These are called the cis and trans forms. Unsaturated fatty acids exist
naturally in the cis form. During food manufacturing processes these cis
fatty acids may be changed to trans fatty acids. Hydrogenation of margarine
causes this to occur. It has been suggested that trans fatty acids can
increase the risk of heart disease.
Free Radicals
Free radicals are highly reactive molecules which have been linked
to both heart disease and cancer. A number of factors, including alcohol,
stress and environmental pollutants can increase the generation of free
radicals in the body. Polyunsaturated fats can also generate free radicals,
especially when exposed to heat or sunlight. Because of this it is suggested
that vegetable oils should be stored out of direct sunlight. Mono-unsaturated
olive oil is less vulnerable to free radical generation and so is a better
choice for frying.
Anti-oxidants such as vitamins A, C and E offer protection against
free radicals. Fresh fruit and vegetables are rich in these anti-oxidants.
Dietary Sources
Saturated fats are nearly always from animal foods. Meat, eggs
and dairy products all contain saturated fats. Lard and suet are saturated
fats. Coconut oil and palm oil are vegetable sources of saturated fats.
Olive oil is a monounsaturated fat. Polyunsaturated fats are usually from
plant sources.
The ratio of polyunsaturated to saturated fats in the diet is often
called the P:S ratio.
Cholesterol is present in all animal foods but not plant foods.
Egg yolks and high-fat dairy products are high in cholesterol.
Required Intakes
Currently it is believed that around 42% of energy in the typical
British diet is from fat. Dietary advice is to reduce this. The COMA (Committee
on Medical Aspects of Food Policy) report advocated that no more than 35%
of daily energy requirement should come from fat whilst the NACNE (National
Advisory Committee on Nutritional Education) paper recommends a reduction
to no more than 30%. Special emphasis is placed on reducing the amount
of saturated fat in the diet.
Vegetarian diets tend to be lower in fat than omnivore diets. However,
vegetarians consuming dairy products and processed foods high in fat may
still be consuming too much. Advice to vegetarians is to keep fat intake
to a minimum, avoid high fat dairy products and processed foods containing
dairy fats and hydrogenated vegetable fats, and to use olive oil for cooking
purposes.
Go Back ToTOP
Meat
Eaters are made,
not born!
from the World Vegetarian Congress, 1996 EVU News, Issue 3 / 1996
- Deutsch
"I'm so glad I don't like asparagus," said the small girl to a
sympathetic friend. "Because, if I do, I should have to eat it, and I can't
bear it!" This quote from Lewis Carroll, the nineteenth-century British
writer, illustrates how children's food tastes are more dependent upon
their expectations (learned from others) than their own interpretations.
The fact that one's taste for meat and dairy products is not a part of
the human genetic blueprint often comes as a surprise to families coming
to my clinic.
Virginia, the mother of two teenage boys, appeared in my office
in a state of confusion. Typical of many parents I see, She felt that her
family's taste for meat, high-fat dairy products, and pastries is inborn
and, therefore, a lifelong burden. "I thought it was natural", she told
me. "It seems like all the boys' friends stuff themselves on pizza, hamburgers
and french fries." Then shaking her head, she added, " Besides, my husband
would die without his steak and fried chicken!" Like many other wives and
mothers, she assumed that trying to change her family's eating habits would
be futile.
Not so. I explained that her family acquired a desire for meat
and other animal products at a very early age; they weren't born with it.
No matter how closely you examine the human tongue, no fat taste buds can
be found; there are only sweet, sour, salty, and bitter sensors. The desire
for fat is learned, and it results from a combination of the way these
foods smell and their smoothness on the mouth's surface.
Butter and ice cream, for example, are said to "melt" in one's
mouth. Often used to sell products, fat is frequently combined with refined
sugars in a single product to make it more "palatable." This combination
is found in desserts, pastries, candy, cookies, and almost all packaged
snacks - all high in fat though commonly referred to as "sweets."
In essence, the fat taste is just a habit, created by conditioning.
All too often, high-fat foods, or "sweets," are held out as rewards to
children for "good" behavior. Dr. Leann Birch, at the University of Illinois
Child Development Laboratory, has found that in Western countries young
children are conditioned or taught to like animal-based foods. For example,
how many times have you heard parents say, "You can have your ice cream,
if you eat your spinach?" They quickly assume that if ice cream is the
reward, then spinach must be the punishment. By contrast, most children
in rural China and Japan, who haven't been offered such a deal, are repulsed
by the thought of eating animals or foods made from them.
Still, Virginia wasn't entirely convinced. "If the fat taste is
already thoroughly ingrained, "she asked, "what can I possibly do about
my teenagers?" Good question. I went on to explain that older children,
and even adults, are not destined to live out the rest of their lives with
an addiction to meat and dairy products acquired during their youth. During
my 35 years of clinical practice, I've seen many parents, and even grandparents,
of children in my clinic change to a plant-based diet. Often this has resulted
after I've found a high cholesterol level in one of the children and then
discovered that this was part of a family pattern.
Clinical studies seem to confirm the experiences in my clinic -
the taste for fat and animal products can readily be changed. Dr. Richard
Mattes, a researcher at the Monell Chemical Senses Center in Philadelphia
reported in 1993 that when fatty foods were sharply reduced or eaten only
rarely, the desire for them declined, or even disappeared entirely, after
8 to 12 weeks. One warning, however; he also found that if moderate amounts
of high-fat foods were continued wither as side-dishes or condiments, the
fat taste persisted.
Further clinical evidence comes from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer
Research Center in Seattle, which surveyed 448 women participants in a
program to reduce dietary fat. A majority said that while they were on
the program, which lasted for several weeks, they lost their taste for
fat. Returning to fatty foods after the program ended resulted in physical
discomfort for most, whether or not they had lost their taste for fat.
Virginia and her family were given my "Four Stages to an Ideal
Diet," (see December '95 issue of Nutrition advocate for full details),
to use as a guide when food shopping and cooking. Once the family reaches
Stage Three, consisting of vegetables, fruits, whole grains, and legumes,
with only occasional consumption of meat and dairy products, they will
be well on their way towards taming their fat tastes. And by the time they
arrive at Stage Four (with no meat or dairy products) they'll have banished
it completely. Hopefully, Virginia's grandchildren will not need these
transitions. I've seen "Stage Four toddlers" who never had to bother with
Stages One through Three!
Whereas children and healthy adults seem to need these gradual
diet changes, adults with heart disease, stroke, or other fat-related disorders,
may successfully go directly to Stage Four. Dr. Dean Ornish has found that
a totally plant-based diet is less difficult for his patients to attain
when it's done suddenly, without first trying moderate reductions in fat.
They have the added assurance of the diet's positive health grains - lower
cholesterol levels, weight loss, and a vastly reduced risk of death from
heart disease and cancer - not fully attainable while still eating modest
amounts of fat. Following a mild stroke, my good friend, Dr. Spock, made
the switch at age 88. Now, approaching 93, he is actively writing, speaking,
and traveling - and he's never felt better.
Charles Attwood, M.D. 621. N. Ave. K, Crowley, Luisiana 70526 USA
Go Back ToTOP
Milk,Calcium,and
Bone Density
A Catch-22 by Charles R.
Attwood, M.D., F.A.A.P. Svenska
from EVU-News, Issue 4 /1996 - Deutsch
A note from the school dietitian was handed to me by a young mother
of a 7 year old boy. "Billy’s diet has come to our attention," it read,
"because he no longer selects milk in the cafeteria." He had recently given
up milk at my suggestion because it worsened his asthma and eczema. The
note went on to conclude, "Milk is absolutely necessary for protein and
calcium!” This last sentence was heavily underlined. I quickly realized
how concerned Billy’s mother was, because there was also a history of osteoporosis
among several elderly members of her family.
This delemma is encountered most frequently by families who are
trying to reduce saturated fat and animal proteins in their diets. They’ve
read that both may increase the risk of heart disease and certain cancers,
but worry about calcium balance and bone density if milk, the chief source
of saturated fat for children, is discontinued. I often reassure concerned
parents that some bowing of their child’s legs is normal up to the age
of 3, and is not due to a calcium deficiency or rickets. Dental decay in
early childhood, causes the same concern, but ironically it is partially
due to the frequent bathing of the teeth with milk, rather than a calcium
dificiency.
Why is this paronoia so commen among Americans? [and Europeans
- editor] The milk-calcium-bone density myth has been created and perpetuated
by the intense lobbying of the dairy industry throughout the lifetimes
of most adults living today. Throughout kindergarten and grade school,
most of the nutrition teaching aids were supplied by the American Dairy
Council. As a result, most parents, teachers, doctors, lawyers, judges,
and significantly, members of congress grew up with the not unbiased view
that milk is a necessary and wholesome food for both children and adults.
The council’s most effective campaign tool has been to link milk, calcium,
and bone density.
To further confuse the consumer, milk and infant formulas have
been fortified with vitamin D, which is necessary for proper calcium absorption.
It may also be obtained by eating sardines, herring, salmon, tuna, egg
yolk, and fish oils. However, none of these are necessary, because it’s
manufactured in adequate amounts by exposure to as little as 10-15 minutes
of sunlight about three times a week. Rickets may be prevented in children
getting no sunlight - such as the totally disabled, by a vitamin D supplement,
if the parents do not wish to feed them fortified milk.
The true connection between milk and strong bones isn’t exactly
what the dairy industry has been telling us all these years. Calcium balance,
the relationship between the intake and loss of the mineral determines
bone density, mostly during childhood and adolencence. Good bone density
attained by the age of 18 usually lasts a lifetime for people consuming
a balanced plant-based diet and remaining physically active. Milk and other
dairy products, although rich in calcium, are high in aminal protein, which
has been shown to create calcium loss through the urinary tract. A 1994
National Institutes of Health Consensus Conference concluded that calcium
balance and bone density depended at least 30 percent on the ratio of intake
to loss, not on calcium intake alone. According to a report in Science
magazine in 1986, evidence is accumulating that calcium intake (considered
alone) is not related to bone density.
This may explain why countries consuming the most milk also have
the highest incidence of osteoporosis. Exceptions exist, but a common determining
factor seems to be the high protein consumption in populations who require
very high levels of calcium intake. For instance, the RDA of calcium in
the United States is up to 1,200 mg daily. This is much higher than the
World Health Organization’s recommendation of 500 mg. for children and
800 mg for adults. Areas of the world where dietary protein is very low
have low national recommendations. In Thailand, for example, the recommended
daily intake of calcium is only 400 mg. for all ages. Elderly South African
Bantu women, who consume a very low protein diet (5O grams daily, compared
with 91 grams for Americans) and only 450 mg. calcium daily, have no osteoporosis
despite the calcium drain of nursing an average of 10 children. On the
other hand, Eskimos, consuming a very high protein diet (250-400 grams)
of fish, and a calcium intake of over 2,000 mg daily, have the highest
rate of osteoporosis in the world!
Now, let’s take a new look at milk and dairy products as a calcium
source, regardless of their protein content. Calcium expressed as mg. per
100 calories instead of per gram show milk and cheese at the bottom of
the list and green vegetables at the top (see chart).
At first glance, one may conclude, "but I would have to eat so
much more spinach or kale to get adequate calcium.” Not so, individuals
on a plant-based diet generally eat as many total calories as meat and
dairy-eaters. In other words, adequate ammounts of vegetables are BETTER
SOURCES OF CALCIUM THAN MILK AND CHEESE. Also, consider that a cup of broccoli
contains about the same amount of calcium as a cup of milk. But wait!
Haven’t we been told that many green vegetables contain oxalic
acid, which reduces the absorption of their calcium. This too, has been
exaggerated by the dairy lobby. A 1990 report in the American Journal of
Clinical Nutrition concluded that greens such as broccoli and kale have
high levels of calcium which is absorbed at least as well as that in milk.
Excellent calcium balance on a non-dairy diet is easily attained because
ALL vegetables and legumes contain calcium, and collectively it’s more
than adequate. This calcium stays in the bones, unlike much of that from
the high protein-containing dairy products.
Now it begins to make sense. In cultures where the most protein
is consumed, the calcium requirement for good bone density and protection
against osteoporosis may be UNATTAINABLY high, without supplements—it’s
a Catch-22. But for the majority of the world population, and among those
consuming a plant-based diet in Western countries, calcium requirements
for normal bone density are easily obtained without milk or other dairy
products. Milk, it now seems clear, is not the solution to the malady of
poor bone density. It may be a part of the problem.
Go Back ToTOP
My
Visit to Dairy Farm (Revision-2)
By Pravin Shah
Two years ago (May 1995), I visited
a dairy farm located on Route 2
about 20 miles north of Burlington,
VT. The dairy owns about 150 cows
and supplies all its milk to Ben
and Jerry for ice cream. Ben and
Jerry Company is considered to be
an ethical company in the dairy
industry. I do not know whether
they owned the dairy or not.
Here is the summary of what I saw
and learnt:
It was milking time
(5:00 pm) and the machine was milking the cow at
3.5 minutes per cow,
without regard to how hard it was on the cow.
It was extremely difficult
for me to watch the cows' sufferings
during the milking.
To extract the last drop of milk, sometimes
traces of blood gets
mixed with the milk.
Every morning hormones
are injected into the cows to increase their
milk yields.
Since cows produce the
most milk during and after pregnancy, they
are kept pregnant for
their entire fertile life through artificial
insemination.
The pregnant cow delivers
a baby after 9 months same as human does.
If a male calf, of no
use to the dairy industry, is born, he is
shipped to the veal
industry within two or three days of birth. The
evening I was there,
the farm was shipping three baby calves in a
truck to a veal factory.
The mother cows were crying when their
babies were separated
from them. I cannot forget the scene and can
still hear the cries
of the mother cows.
The veal industry is
the most cruel meat industry in the world. It
produces very tender
meat for delicacy meal. The baby calves are
raised in the darkness
in a very confining crate, which allows
practically no movements,
and are fed an iron-deficient diet. This
way the meat gets very
tender and properly textured. They slaughter
the baby calves after
six months. There is enough literature
available about the
cruelty in the veal industry.
Within two months of
delivery, the cows are made pregnant again. I
did not have the stamina
to watch the process of artificial
insemination that the
farm was showing off to us.
About four to five times
a year, this farm would take the cows
outside for a walk.
Otherwise, the cows are tied in one place and
they have no choice
but to defecate where they are confined. It
badly stunk when I was
there; the farm would wash the confinement
areas once or sometimes
twice a day, and the remaining times the
cows would then live
in their own waste.
The life expectancy
of cows is about 15 years. However, after 10
years, their milk production
drops significantly so these cows are
sent to the slaughterhouse
for meat.
Last year (Nov 1996) I visited India
and also visited a dairy farm near
Bombay. I observed similar
things; overall, things were actually
probably worse because there are
few enforced regulations.
In the past (before the birth of
a high tech dairy farm) in India, cows
were treated like a part of the
family, and after feeding the baby calf,
leftover milk was consumed by humans.
However, as my daughter Shilpa
always says, cows' milk is for baby
cows and not for humans or their
babies; no other animal consumes
the milk of another species. We do not
have the right to consume cow's
milk for our benefit, and furthermore
milk and its products are not essential
for our survival.
As I learned about cruelty in the
dairy industry, I at first found it
hard to believe. On a personal level,
I feared that it would be
impossible for me to become vegan.
How could I eliminate milk, yogurt,
butter, ghee, and cheese from my
diet? To become vegan means that I
cannot drink tea, eat any Indian
sweets, pizza, milk chocolate, ice
cream, eggless but dairy-containing
cake, and many other items.
However needless to say that the dairy farm tour made me an instant
vegan.
Go Back ToTOP
Will
Pasteurization Kill Dangerous
Bacteriumin
Milk?
AntiDairy Coalition Faults FDA and USDA for Misinterpreting Scientific
Study
New York, July 14, 1998 -- The AntiDairy Coalition has denounced a
claim,
based on a recent U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) study, that
normal
pasteurization practiced by dairy producers nationwide inactivates
a dangerous
bacterium routinely found in raw milk.
In his weekly AntiDairy Coalition Newsletter column on the Internet,
Coalition
Executive Director Robert Cohen says the USDA study, which was reported
in the
May 10, 1998 issue of Hoard's Dairyman, a trade publication, has been
completely misrepresented by the agency and by the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) in claiming that normal pasteurization (72C for
15
seconds) destroys mycobacterium paratuberculosis, the bacterium linked
to
Johne's disease in cows and Crohn's disease in humans that produces
persistent
and severe diarrhea.
Cohen, author of "Milk-the Deadly Poison," says that the USDA study
actually
revealed that the dangerous bacteria were not totally inactivated until
after
15 minutes of pasteurization at 72 degrees centigrade.
That's "very bad news for all milk drinkers," says Cohen. "Normal
pasteurization at this temperature calls for only a 15-second treatment,
not
15 minutes. We believe the government and Hoard's Dairyman are misleading
the
public into thinking pasteurized milk is safe from mycobacterium
paratuberculosis when the USDA's own scientist is saying that pasteurization
inactivates the bacterium only when the process maintains at least
72 degrees
centigrade for at least 15 minutes. That's 14 minutes and 45 seconds
longer
than the normal commercial pasteurization of milk in the United States."
The USDA study is entitled "Heat Inactivation of Mycobacterium
paratuberculosis in Raw Milk: Are Current Pasteurization Conditions
Effective?" Based on this study, Hoard's Dairyman told its 100,000-plus
milk
producer subscribers, "Heat treatment (pasteurization) destroys this
dangerous
disease."
Cohen says the FDA supports the same conclusion. He refers to a letter
addressed to government officials from Joseph Smucker, team leader
of the Milk
and Safety Team at the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition,
a branch
of the FDA. The letters says: "After a review of the available literature
on
the subject, it is the position of FDA that the latest research shows
conclusively that commercial pasteurization does indeed eliminate this
hazard."
Cohen says every assertion about pasteurization's effectiveness is refuted
in
the abstract of the USDA study, which states: "Currently, it is not
known
whether commercial pasteurization effectively kills mycobacterium
paratuberculosis in contaminated raw milk."
"This sentence," Cohen says, "contradicts every conclusion made from
this very
same paper!"
The senior author of the abstract is Judy Stabel, Ph. D. On the second
page of
Dr. Stabel's paper (published in the December 1997 issue of Applied
and
Environmental Microbiology), she reveals: "Bacteria were not totally
inactivated until after 15 minutes of incubation (pasteurization) at
72
degrees centigrade."
In her paper, Dr. Stabel also writes: "There is no definitive evidence
to date
that viable M. paratuberculosis is present in retail pasteurized dairy
products."
When she was asked why there was no evidence and if milk samples had
ever been
tested at retail sites, Cohen says her response was "No." When asked
"Why
not?" she replied, "I don't know."
However, Cohen contends that British scientists have taken milk samples
at the
point of retail purchase and have cultured live tuberculosis bacteria
from
these samples.
Cohen concludes that the FDA and USDA have misinterpreted Dr. Stabel's
paper,
and scientific evidence suggests that this dangerous bacterium survives
pasteurization. "This is just another example of how Americans are
being
betrayed by regulatory agencies like FDA and USDA," Cohen warns.
Formed in June 1998, the AntiDairy Coalition includes some of the country's
top physicians and health educators: Dr. Julian Whitaker, author and
editor of
the monthly newsletter, Health & Healing; Dr. Charles Attwood,
often called
heir apparent to Dr. Benjamin Spock; Dr. Vicki Griffin; Dr. Daniel
Twogood;
Dr. Richard DeAndrea and Dr. Richard Schwartz.
Go
Back ToTOP
Low-Fat
Diet Reduces Skin Cancer Risk
NEW YORK (Reuters) -- A diet low in fat and rich in antioxidants
may
help prevent skin cancer, the most common type of cancer diagnosed
in
the US, according to a new analysis of past studies.
The data show that eating five servings of fruits and vegetables
a day
and a diet that contains no more than 20% of calories from fat
reduces
the occurrence and recurrence of nonmelanoma skin cancer. Only
about 9%
of people in US consume five servings of fruits and vegetables
a day,
according to Dr. Harvey Arbesman, who presented his findings at
the
American Academy of Dermatology meeting in Orlando, Florida. A
low-fat
diet has been shown to help reduce risk of precancerous lesions
known as
actinic keratoses, as well as basal cell and squamous cell carcinomas,
the most common types of skin cancer, Arbesman said. One study
found
that people with actinic keratoses who consume diets with no more
than
20% of calories from fat are less likely to develop new lesions
compared
with those who consume a diet with 36% of calories from fat. And
antioxidant compounds found in fruits and vegetable also appear
to lower
the risk, Arbesman told Reuters.
"Carotenoid intakes of carrots, squash and tomatoes -- for
their
lycopene content -- and dark green, leafy vegetables -- for their
luteinin content -- reduces risk of precancerous actinic keratoses
and
basal cell and squamous cell carcinomas," said Arbesman, a clinical
assistant professor of dermatology at the University at Buffalo
in New
York.
Some studies have also suggested that vitamin C may lower
risk of
nonmelanoma skin cancer and that vitamin E may prevent ultraviolet-light
induced tumors in animals. An antioxidant mineral that may also
be
helpful is selenium, which is found in high concentrations in Brazil
nuts. Arbesman is cautious about recommending the use of nutritional
supplements because of their potential interaction with other
medications. He noted in particular vitamin E's interaction with
blood
thinning drugs, such as aspirin. Almost one million new cases of
nonmelanoma skin cancer are diagnosed each year in the US.
Go
Back ToTOP
Antibiotics
in Animals Threaten Humans
WASHINGTON, Feb 12 (Reuters) - The widespread
use of
antibiotics in farm animals is helping the
spread of
drug-resistant germs and should be phased
out, a German
expert said on Thursday.
Although evidence of this was clear, most
countries had done
little or nothing to stop farmers from dosing
pigs, cattle and
chickens with unnecessary drugs, Wolfgang
Witte of the
Robert Koch Institute in Wernigerode, Germany
said.
``All of the pathogens usually found in hospitals
are affected,
as well as mycobacteria (which include the
tuberculosis bug)
pneumococci and Enterobacteriacae (which
include E coli and
salmonella),'' Witte wrote in a commentary
in the journal
Science.
There is a good reason that farmers feed
drugs to their
stock. ``Animals receiving antibiotics in
their feed gain four
to five percent more body weight than animals
that do not
receive antibiotics,'' Witte wrote.
In fact, animals get many more drugs than
people do. ``In
Denmark in 1994, 24 kg (53 pounds) of ...
(the antibiotic)
vancomycin were used for human therapy, whereas
24,000
kg (53,000 pounds) of the similar (antibiotic)
avoparcin
were used in animal feed,'' Witte wrote.
``From 1992 to 1996 Australia imported an
average of 582
kg (1,300 pounds) of vancomycin per year
for medical
purposes and 62,642 kg (138,100 pounds) of
avoparcin per
year for animal husbandry.'' But he said
this was not
necessary. Better hygiene could lead to healthier
farm
animals as well -- something argued by organic
farmers who
eschew crowded factory farming.
In 1969 a British panel called the Swann
Committee decided
that antibiotics used to treat people or
drugs closely related
to medical antibiotics -- which could make
bacteria resistant
-- should not be given to animals. The World
Health
Organization reinforced the recommendations
in 1997.
``That the Swann committee's resolution needs
repetition
after 28 years indicates that we have not
seen sufficient
adherence to the principles stated,'' Witte
wrote.
This was a global problem, Witte added. ``Meat
products are
traded worldwide, and evolving bacterial
populations do not
respect geographical boundaries.''
It was not enough for some countries to develop
controls. ``In
the countries of the developing world, which
are responsible
for about 25 percent of world meat production,
policies
regarding veterinary use of antibiotics are
poorly developed
or absent,'' he said.
``In Southeast Asia use of antimicrobials
in shrimp farming is
unregulated.''
Vancomycin is one of the strongest antibiotics
known and is
the last line of treatment for some resistant
bacteria. But
cases of vancomycin-resistant bacteria have
worried
doctors in the United States, Europe and
Japan.
Bacteria can evolve resistance when an incomplete
or light
course of drugs allows just a few to live.
But they can also
give resistance to one another. Bacteria
such as the very
common E coli can meet up and swap genes,
and pass
resistance to new bacteria.
Go Back ToTOP
Soy
Protein Lowers Cholesterol and Can
Help Modify Risk of Heart Disease
ST. LOUIS, PRNewswire-- Soy protein, when substituted for animal
protein in the diet, lowers blood cholesterol, and can be a "viable
alternative" for persons who want to modify their risk of coronary
heart
disease without taking medication, a new review of soy's effects on
heart
disease indicates.
Dr. Susan M. Potter, of the Department of Nutritional Sciences at Protein
Technologies International in St. Louis, conducted the review and published
a
special article on her findings in the August issue of the publication
Nutrition Reviews.
She found that recent research also provides evidence that soy protein
and
isoflavones, the naturally-occurring nutrients in soybeans, can improve
functioning of blood vessels and help prevent formation of blood clots.
Dr. Potter, formerly an associate professor of nutrition at the University
of
Illinois where she conducted research on soy and heart disease, reported
on
the "potential mechanisms by which soy protein lowers cholesterol
concentration."
Her review focused on the effects of soy protein research which, among
other
findings, has demonstrated that soy can reduce low-density lipoprotein,
or
LDL, cholesterol, while high-density lipo protein or HDL cholesterol
either
remains unchanged or is increased. LDL is so-called "bad cholesterol,"
and
HDL is known as "good cholesterol."
Studying what component of soy protein is responsible for fighting fat
in
blood, she wrote that one isoflavone, genistein, can enhance vascular
activity
and also can inhibit blood vessel damage as well as formation of blood
clots,
or thrombus.
"These inhibitory effects may be either independent effects of genistein,
perhaps acting as an estrogen, or responses related to suppression
or
inflammation," Dr. Potter wrote.
(Foods for the Future provides factual information to the media concerning
food products, health and nutrition. It is a project of the T.
Dean Reed
Company and is supported by U.S. agribusiness.)
SOURCE Foods for the Future
Go To Top
Potassium
found in fruits and veggies may protect against stroke
Reuters News Service - Washington, September 21, 1998
With their high potassium content, fruits, vegetables and whole grains
may help people lower their risk of stroke, U.S. researchers said
Monday.
The findings add to a growing body of evidence that vegetables, fruits
and grains contain important vitamins and minerals that can protect
against a range of heart disease, including heart attacks, high blood
pressure and clogged arteries.
Now stroke is added to the list of diseases that plant foods can protect
against.
"The beneficial effect appears to be due to the high potassium content
of these diets, but other components of fruits and vegetables may also
contribute to the reduced risk of stroke," Dr. Alberto Ascherio of
the
Harvard School of Public Health, who led the study, said in a statement.
Ascherio's team studied nearly 44,000 men, part of an ongoing regular
survey of health professionals.
Those who ate the most potassium -- they were in the top fifth of
potassium intake -- had a 38 percent lower risk of stroke than those
in
the bottom fifth, they wrote in a report in the American Heart
Association's journal Circulation.
A big potassium intake means a lot of vegetables by American standards
-- about nine servings of fruits and vegetables a day, compared with
four a day in the group that ate the least.
A serving is about one medium fruit or half a cup of cooked vegetable.
Foods with a lot of potassium include tomatoes, spinach, bananas and
oranges. "Two tomatoes and one serving of cooked spinach provide about
one gram of potassium," Ascherio said. Fruits and vegetables are also
high in magnesium and fiber and many are rich in calcium.
"While the data do not prove a causal relationship, there is strong
support for a stroke-preventive effect from diets rich in potassium,
magnesium and cereal fiber," Ascherio said.
"This was found to be particularly true in individuals with high blood
pressure, further suggesting that high-potassium diets might be
beneficial in this segment of the population."
Ascherio said men who were taking potassium supplements had a 60 percent
lower risk of stroke compared to men with high blood pressure who were
not taking the supplements. Potassium supplements are often given to
people on diuretics to help replace the loss of the mineral in their
urine.
Research has shown people who eat plenty of fruits, vegetables and
whole
grains and cut their intake of fat and meat can lower their blood
pressure and reduce not only the risk of heart disease but also of
some
forms of cancer.
Go To Top
The
NEW Four Food Groups
Deutsch - from EVU-News, Issue 1 /1997
Whole Grain
This group includes bread, rice, pasta, hot or cold cereals, corn,
millet, barley, bulgur, buckwheat groats and tortillas. Build each of your
meals around a hearty grain dish – grains are rich in fiber and other complex
carbohydrates, as well as protein, B vitamins and zinc.
Vegetables
Vegetables are packed with nutrients; they provide vitamin C, beta-carotene,
riboflavin and other vitamins, iron, calcium and fiber. Dark green, leafy
vegetables such as broccoli, collards, kale, mustard and turnip greens,
chicory or bok choy are especially good sources of these important nutrients.
Dark yellow and orange vegetables such as carrots, winter squash, sweet
potatoes and pumpkin provide extra beta-carotene. Include generous portions
of a variety of vegetables in your diet.
Legumes
Legumes, which is another name for beans, pea and lentils, are
all good sources of fiber, protein, iron, calcium, zinc and B vitamins.
This group also includes chickpeas, baked and refried beans, soy milk,
tofu, tempeh and texturized vegetable protein.
Fruit
Fruits are rich in fiber, vitamin C and beta-carotene. Be sure
to include at least one serving each day of fruits that are high in vitamin
C – citrus fruits, melons and strawberries are all good choices. Chose
whole fruit over fruit juices, which don’t contain as much healthy fiber.
Notes:
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine P.O. Box 6322, Washington,
D.C. 20015, (202) 686-2210
The Medical Costs Attributable to Meat Consumption from PCRM
Go Back To:TOP Back
Home
Vegetarianism
- An Offensive Stand by
Dr. John McDougall, M.D. Box 14039, Santa Rosa, CA 95402
When right, take an offensive posture, not a defensive one.
Nutritional Myths Keep People from a Healthier Diet, KNOW THE FACTS!
Myth #1: Starches
are fattening.
Starches are high-carbohydrate, low-fat.
Starches are calorie dilute.
Food Calories per gram
Corn Oil 9
Lard
9
Butter
7.2
Cheese
4
Beef
4
Sugar
4
Bread
2
Beans
1.2
Rice
1.2
Potato
0.6
Oatmeal 0.6
Carrots 0.4
Onions 0.4
Zucchini 0.2
Carbohydrates become glycogen---Fat becomes
fat.
There are no fat Chinese---in China.
Myth #2: Meat is
Necessary for Protein
Protein is in all unrefined plant foods in adequate quantities to build
elephants.
Adult men require 20 grams per day, The WHO [World Health Organization]
recommends 37 grams (with safety margin), Rice alone provides 64 grams
per
day.
No dietitian can design a diet (adequate in calories) based around unrefined
starches and vegetables that fails to supply adequate protein for children
and
adults---Challenge One!
Myth #3: Meat/Dairy/Eggs
are necessary to supply all the amino acids
All plant foods contain all the amino acids including all 8 essential
ones.
Single sources of unrefined starches and vegetables are plentiful in
all
essential amino acids.
Amino Acid Recommended
Rice Potato
Tryptophan
0.5 0.71
0.8
Phenylalanine
0.56 3.1
2.5
Leucine
2.2 5.5
4.1
Isoleucine
1.4 3.0
3.6
Lysine
1.6 2.5
4.4
Valine
1.6 4.5
4.4
Methionine
0.22 1.1
1.0
Threonine
1.0 2.5
3.4
(Amino acid values are in grams per day. Figures
are based on an adult man
consuming 3000 calories per day. Requirements
for phenylalanine and methionine
are adjusted for replacement by unessential amino
acids tyrosine and cystine.)
No dietitian can design a diet (adequate in calories) based around any
unrefined starches and vegetables that fails to supply adequate essential
amino acids for children and adults---Challenge One!
Myth #4: Milk is
necessary for Calcium
Calcium is a mineral found in the ground.
Our intestine is an active absorber of calcium, not passive.
Our requirements for calcium are as low as 150 to 200 mg/day even during
pregnancy and lactation (Post Grad Med J 54:244, 1978).
Around the world people grow normal skeletons without milk or calcium
supplements.
Calcium deficiency due to a low calcium diet has not been found among
any
people living on a variety of diets--"calcium deficiency disease" is
not
described in the medical--nutritional literature.
Protein excess is the major determinant of calcium balance and bone
strenght.
Exercise plays a secondary, important, role.
Myth #5: Vegetarian
Diets Prevent Child Growth
Most of world's children have been raised on near-vegetarian diets.
This myth is founded in two studies:
"Zen Macrobiotic Dietary Problems in Infancy" Robson J. Pediatrics 53:25
1974
2 infants (7 & 13 mos).
Inadequate breast-feeding (5 & 4 mos).
Poor diet by any standards.
"Malnutrition in Infants Receiving Cult Diets: A Form of Child Abuse"
(Roberts
I, Br Med J 1:296, 1979)
too early weaning of children.
Common cause of failure to thrive is to replace breast milk with cow's
milk at
any age.
Myth #6: Vegetarian Diets Cause Rickets
Rickets is due to Vitamin-D deficiency.
Based on studies, "Risk of Nutritional Rickets Among Vegetarian Children"
(Am
J Dis Child 133:134,1979), and "Multiple Nutritional Deficiencies in
Infants
from a Strict Vegetarian Community" (Am J Dis Child 133:141, 1979).
Meat and milk are vitamin D deficient.
Vitamin D is from conversion of plant sterols by sunlight.
Abused Children--not allowed sun exposure.
Myth #7: Fat is Necessary
to Prevent Essential Fat Deficiency
Less than 1% of diet must be from essential fat.
Rice provides 2% as essential fat.
Essential fat is made by plants--not cows or pigs.
Essential fat deficiency is seen only experimental or with skim-milk
infant
feeding.
Myth #8: Fat is necessary
for fat-soluble vitamin absorption
There is plenty of fat in plants to allow adequate absorption of fat-soluble
vitamins.
There have never been cases of fat soluble vitamin deficiency due to
natural diets.
Myth #9: Fiber, Oxalates,
Phytates will Prevent Mineral Absorption
Minerals are found in the ground.
Minerals enter animals through plants (or through other animals).
Plants are high in minerals--the more plants consumed the more mineral
taken in.
Mineral absorption is active--not passive
Never been cases of mineral deficiency due to plant component
inhibition--theoretical, except possible zinc--phytate one study
Myth #10: Meat is
necessary for iron
Examples of iron content mg/100cal
broccoli
3.4
peas
2.3
beef
2.0
chicken
1.0
whole wheat 1.1
brown rice 0.5
banana
0.8
orange
0.8
milk
0.7
cheese
0.03
Intake of 1525 mg/day, absorption of 0.5 to 2 mg/day--active transport
Heme (organic) vs. non-heme (inorganic) iron
Ascorbic acid enhancement of inorganic iron absorption.
Dairy products inhibit absorption.
Increase blood loss from dietary origins--ulcers, hemorrhoids, colitis,
nephritis, uterine bleeding.
Endurance athletes--blood loss
Myth #11: B12 Deficiency
is Caused by Vegetarian Diets
Almost all cases of B12 deficiency are not a result of diet deficiency,
rather
malabsorption--deficiency develops in 2 years.
Rare--four actual cases reported that meet criteria of dietary cause.
Long storage-320 years
Recycled and reused--takes 2030 years for vegetarians to deplete B12.
Deficiency means a reversible anemia and neurological damage. Folate,
high in
a vegetarian's diet, protects against B12 deficiency diseases.
Bacteria and microalgae produced
Mouth and gut bacteria are sources of B12
Environmental bacterial sources
Recent articles worry vegetarians:
"Increased Urinary Methylmalonic Acid Excretion in Breast-fed Infants
of
Vegetarian Mothers and Identification of an Acceptable Source of B12"
(Specker
B. Am J Clin Nutr 47:89, 1988)
"Vitamin B12 and Seaweed" Van Den Berg H. Lancet 1:242, 1988)
Solution--Non animal sources of B12 after
3 years of vegan diet, pregnant or
nursing.
What are good non-animal sources of B12? For now your best bet is a
B12
supplement vitamin pill.
Blood levels do not mean deficiency but may relieve some worry--levels
should
be above 150 ng/dl.
DEFICIENCIES FROM A PURE VEGETARIAN DIET ARE LARGELY
A MYTH--FOOD WAS CREATED COMPLETE LONG BEFORE ARRIVING AT THE DINNER
TABLE
The Most important fact to know is:
MISUNDERSTANDING THE VALUE OF VEGETARIANISM AND
HEALTHFUL LIVING CAN LEAD TO MANY SERIOUS HEALTH PROBLEMS
ACNE
DIABETES
HYPERTENSION
ALLERGIC DISEASES
Childhood-Onset
HYPOGLYCEMIA
ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE
Adult-Onset
KIDNEY DISEASE
Kidney Failure
ANEMIA
DIVERTICULAR DISEASE
ARTHRITIS
Diverticulosis Nephritis
(Glomerulonephritis)
ATHEROSCLEROSIS
KIDNEY STONES
CANCER
GALLBLADDER DISEASE
Stones
CHOLESTEROL (High)
HEADACHES
COLITIS (Mild)
HEART DISEASE
LIVER DISEASES
HIATUS HERNIA
MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS
HORMONE DEPENDENT DISEASES
Non Specific
OBESITY
OSTEOPOROSIS
COLITIS (Severe)
ULCERS
Crohn's Disease
Fibrocystic Breast Disease
Ulcerative Colitis
Fibroids of Uterus
Gastritis
CONSTIPATION
Late Menopause
Indigestion
Hemorrhoids
Baldness (Male Pattern)
Varicose Veins
Prostate Disease
DEPRESSION
To learn more got to DR.McDougles
Page
Go Back To:TOP Back
Home