Boycott_CAFOs wrote:In all honesty I don't feel like googling that information right now since you can just as easily look into it yourself. I usually only post articles I have bookmarked already. Maybe I'll look into it later but right now I'm very tired and don't give a shit. I just know that 40% of meat eaters test as B12 deficient, which has been speculated to be due to overuse of antibiotics in factory farms.
I've never heard that before, and so would like the source when you get the time. Like I said, I try for grass-fed over factory-farmed when I can anyways. If, on top of high omega-6's, there is an issue w/ b-12 as well it'd be a most interesting read.
Depends on what kind of pasta you're talking about. They sell brown rice (my favorite for taste), quinoa, I think they even have spelt pasta, and whole grain. We could argue about the possible negative effects about each of these but we could talk about many, many more significant negative effects of animal products. Ones that kill people...
You admit to being gluten sensitive- certainly you're aware of the general problems of gliadin in the human gut? One compied gy sapsonids in most grains, but usually not as poorly, or phytoestrogens from soy? Then, of course, there's the problems w/ essential fatty acids and amino acids, both of which mean you need to focus on having a diverse array of plants to obtain
all. I can't even think of a good vegetable oil aside from olive oil and coconut oil for healthy fats.
Sorry, bit of a rant, but the point there is that meat, milk, and eggs are a much more available source of proteins and fats than grains and legumes, which also contrain anti-nutrients that can make them backfire as a source. I'f say that you also have to forgo honey, tmk, which is a very good low-glycemic sweetener. The point of all this being that you certainly have to pay attention to what you eat in order to get the nutrients you would from animal products. Not that it can't be done, but I'm aware many fall into a trap thinking they're eating healthier and they're still relying on white pastas and other high-glycemic, protein-poor sources.
You could maybe use beans or quinoa instead of beef, or a blend. Then top with a Vegg (haven't tried it, just heard about it), and cover it with Daiya, which I believe is both soy and gluten free. Not sure how that'd taste but it's what immediately comes to mind. Sounds kind of gross to me, but so does the original honestly.
Just looked up daiya- I have no idea what's in it, but apparently uses coconut oil among other things. Not a bad choice- usually ricotta and spinache would work, more so than the quinoa, so daiya and spinache would be a good vegan alternative. Unfortunately, it would still be missing something akin to an egg cracked on top- be hard to get an alternative for that. Oh, and keep in mind to bake the tomatoes approx. 20 mins, already opened and scooped out, before adding the fillings. :tu:
I just collected a TON of gluten free and vegan recipes, since I happen to have a gluten intolerance. Not all soy free though. I'm soon going to go on the nutritarian diet plan by Dr. Fuhrman, so I've been collecting recipes to make sure I stick to it and don't get bored of the food.
Can't wait to see them- probably find myself a few new side dishes.
[quote=]Because natural = good. Right. That's why everyone is pro-rape and pro-murder, and pro-shitting wherever we like.[/quote]
The problem with that assessment is that good here means healthy rather than moral. Unlike pro-rape, and pro-murder, and pro-shitting in public, being pro-natural diet is prompting the best health of a person rather than being a moral question. Not killing eachother over food might not be natural, but it's irrelevent to the question of morality- however, that the source of food is natural, rather than plastic goo, is a perfectly defensible position to uphold.
There are a lot of people who are in denial, obviously. You can find lots of blogs about veganism being unhealthy. You'll find doctors who pretend to know about nutrition saying it can be unhealthy. But when you look at the evidence, no. I encourage you to look into it, because I know the more you look into it, the more you'll see that.
But beware of the USDA, blogs and Weston A. Price is all I'll say to keep you on the right track. Oh, and no nutritionists. Anyone can call themselves a nutritionist.
Don't hate on Weston A. Price foundation- there's a good amount of research there. After all, you're a gluten-free vegan, and I believe you indicated leaving soy as well? In which case, you're not so unfamilar w/ some of the same dietary principles.
Meat is no longer necessary and not enough importance is placed on glucose - which is found in plants, not meat. It's absolutely essential for our brains to function. Meat would be a source of calories and fats, but we can get much healthier sources of those from plants.
Not true, we actually have way too much carbs these days, and many of it too high glycemic. In fact, you really don't need plants- 1) milk has carbs, 2) your Alpha cells produce glucogen, the opposite of insulin, which breaks down your fat cells to increase glucose levels in your blood. Basically, our body's perfectly capable of creating it's own glucose.
Of course, it's disengenious to say glucose is absolute necessary for brain functions- so is protein, and your brain will operate on ketones and lactic acid as well.