RAW FOOD AND VEGETARIANism
So, let's try to give an accurate and concise definition of the most effective way of eating today.
A raw food diet is a nutritional system that does not allow any thermal effects on the foods consumed.
In other words, raw foodists do not boil, fry or bake what they eat. The nutritional principles of raw foodists are very close to those of vegetarians. The only difference is that vegetarians allow cooking over fire.
Like vegetarians, raw foodists believe that the best blood and the greatest vigor are provided by foods such as herbs, vegetables, fruits and grains. Not considering meat to be a natural and necessary food product, raw foodists abandoned its consumption, adding fish, shellfish and, quite often, dairy products to the “extra” foods.
As you can see, raw foodists are stricter followers of vegetarians, and in our opinion, in order to better understand the raw food system of nutrition, it makes sense to become better acquainted with the vegetarian tradition.
Were our ancestors vegetarians?
In accordance with the scientific classification, vegetarianism is understood as a nutritional system that allows the use of only plant products in food. The word "vegetarianism" comes from the Latin vegetabilis which means "vegetable".
Historical tradition claims that the food of primitive man consisted mainly of products of plant origin: berries, roots, fruits, edible herbs, leaves, nuts. If this is true, then the vegetarian lifestyle of Homo sapiens dates back at least several tens of thousands of years. True, not of his own free will, but out of necessity. It happened like this. Moreover, upon careful study of the remains of ancient people, archaeologists have proven that their increased carnivory against the backdrop of “wild hunts” is nothing more than a romantic myth. According to these studies, the food of primitive people consisted of 65% plants and only a third from the meat of wild animals.
Progress does not stand still. Slowly but surely, over thousands of years, man moved from vegetarianism to eating foods of animal origin. Indeed, over time, food became more varied, however, diseases also increased - after all, the genotype of the human body practically did not change, and it had to adapt to the new menu with great difficulty.
Vegetarianism through the eyes of the greats
The widespread use of a vegetarian diet in ancient times is evidenced by a mass of historical documents and legends. Evidence of this can also be found in the heritage of great philosophers and scientists of antiquity.
There is no doubt that the ancient Greeks, Egyptians and Jews relied on fruits for their diet. The priests of Ancient Egypt never ate meat. In Europe, one of the first famous vegetarians can be considered a philosopher Pythagoras(570–470 BC). As you know, Pythagoras abandoned the food generally accepted at that time, primarily meat, in his youth. He followed these principles throughout his long life, but did not stop there. In the southern Italian city of Croton, Pythagoras organized the first vegetarian community in European history, whose members built their lives on the principles of humanity and self-control, justice and moderation. The basic laws of the Pythagorean community were community of property and strict abstinence.
“In addition to many other means to pacify the soul, Pythagoras also established vegetarianism,” writes the Greek philosopher Iamblichus. “After all, the Pythagoreans, accustomed to considering the killing of animals as lawless and unnatural, considered the killing of humans even more contrary to the divine law and did not participate in the war...”
It is curious that, while defending the life of herbivores, Pythagoras did not approve of the fight against predators; on the contrary, he tried to change their nature, and not without success. It is known that with the help of exclusively plant foods, he tamed a huge bear, which terrified the villagers, teaching her to do without meat.
One of the central figures of Greek philosophy is considered Socrates(c. 469–399 BC). The most characteristic element of Socratic ethics is the statement about the identity of knowledge and virtue (wisdom, courage, moderation and justice - the four main virtues of the ancient Greek social consciousness). Socrates constantly pointed out the need to control one's passions and subordinate them to reason. The famous sage believed that a person should be moderate in food and give preference to plant foods.
He was a staunch supporter of Pythagorean ethics Plato(428–347 BC). His second book, “The State,” sets out views on food that reflected the influence of the Pythagorean school, with which the philosopher had the closest relations. Attaching paramount importance to the social side of the issue, Plato considered food as one of the most important social factors.
In his youth, Plato became a student and ally of the great Socrates, who was at the zenith of his fame at that time. In 399 BC. e., after the execution of his teacher, Plato withdrew from his hometown, which had previously stained itself with the persecution of another great sage - Anaxagoras. For some time the philosopher lived in Megara (near Athens), and then went on a journey. During his wanderings, Plato visited almost all the centers of ancient wisdom and modern science, studying languages and absorbing knowledge accumulated over thousands of years. It is known that the young philosopher was even a temple priest in Ancient Egypt for some time. Returning to Athens as a mature man, Plato opened his famous Academy in this city.
Plato's views on the purpose of man in the world are interesting. They are most definitely expressed in his answer to the question: what qualities should a true philosopher have? What are these qualities?
Firstly, this is the thirst for knowledge of everything that exists; secondly, aversion to lies and devotion to the truth; thirdly - contempt for carnal pleasures; fourthly - generosity and generosity; fifthly - justice and meekness; sixthly - speed of understanding and good memory; seventhly - an even and harmonious mood of the soul.
According to Plato, this can only be achieved by leading a correct lifestyle. In the ideal city described by Plato, the people, and especially the ruler, adhere to reasonable rules in food (here Plato meant vegetarianism).
By the way, the Greeks in the time of Plato, and even later, were famous among Europeans for their abstinence in food. The poet Antiphon called them “leaf eaters” because of their adherence to plant foods. The Spartans and Athenians were particularly moderate. Thus, abstinence in the way of life of the Spartans became a household word, eventually becoming a well-known saying. Satirist poets often ridiculed this incomprehensible indifference “to earthly goods” on the part of the intelligent and educated Attic people. An interesting observation: Greek literature almost never mentions slaughterhouses and butchers, while the literature of other European nations (Italians, English, French, Germans) is often replete with stories and paintings on this topic.
The traditional dishes of the Greeks, contemporaries of Plato and Hippocrates, were madsa - a kind of brew made from wheat or barley flour, various breads, cheese, honey, legumes, lettuce, lettuce, onions and leeks. Fruits served at dinner included olives, dates, figs, etc. As for animal food, only fish dishes were often consumed.
Among others, mention should be made of the great ancient Greek physician and philosopher Hippocrates(460–357 BC). Many famous doctors noted the genius of Hippocrates and his exceptional, outstanding services to humanity. Hippocrates was not a vegetarian and did not directly contribute to this teaching. But the basic principle of his diet (and he is considered the father of this science) - moderation in nutrition - to some extent determined the success of the humanistic teachings of Plato and other vegetarians of antiquity. Hippocrates believed that the best diet for developing physical strength and endurance was barley cakes with olive oil.
The views of Hippocrates have been confirmed by the historical research of modern scientists. A hundred years ago, a famous doctor and active promoter of vegetarianism A. Kingsford noted that in the glorious days of Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, before intemperance and debauchery had yet destroyed these peoples, their sons ate simple plant foods made from rye flour, fruit and milk, and were excellent warriors. The Roman soldier's food consisted of one pound of oatmeal, three ounces of olive oil and one pint of weak wine. And the Roman gladiators, who had monstrous physical strength and endurance, ate mainly barley cakes with olive oil.
Prominent Christian figures have also been vegetarians. It is known that the apostles ate mainly plant foods: bread, olives, herbs. Known words John Chrysostom:“We are like wolves and tigers! We are even worse than these animals! Nature created them in such a way that they should eat meat, while God gifted us with rational speech and a sense of justice.”
In medieval Europe, there were many vegetarians among famous cultural and medical figures. Great Leonardo da Vinci believed that the time would come when people would view the killing of animals the same way as the killing of humans.
Were also vegetarians Voltaire And J. J. Rousseau. Rousseau, in particular, considered it unnatural for humans to eat meat and inhumane to take the life of animals for the sake of taste. He wrote: “As one of the proofs that meat food is not typical for humans, one can point to the indifference of children to it and the preference they always give to vegetables, dairy dishes, cookies, and fruits.”
The purpose of life of the great English poet P. B. Shelley there was a struggle with suffering. He believed that by refusing to eat meat, a person becomes more moral and physically healthy. He was sympathetic to the idea of vegetarianism and J. Byron.
Philosophers M. Montaigne And A. Schopenhauer saw a direct connection between vegetarianism and a higher moral level of a person. Both philosophers thought about whether a person has the moral right to kill animals, whether people have duties to other living beings.
When a vegetarian B. Shaw asked why he stopped eating meat, the writer sarcastically replied: “Why demand from me an account of why I eat like a decent person? If I were eating the burnt corpses of innocent creatures, you would have reason to ask me why I do this.”
He was a fierce opponent of meat-eating L. Tolstoy. He believed that human culture and morality are incompatible with murder and cruelty, no matter who this cruelty is directed at. Before classifying oneself as a moral person, each person must relieve himself of personal responsibility for killing living beings and stop eating meat.
Reasons why people become vegetarians
Desire to lose weight
Modern man suffers from overeating; he eats a lot because it is so accepted. The body stores excess fat and people become obese. Vegetarian food contains fewer calories, fats, and extractives. Cooking requires less salt, so water is not retained in the body.
The desire to get rid of diseases
A vegetarian diet cleanses the body of toxic substances. Metabolic processes are normalized, the body's defenses are activated. The risk of developing cardiovascular, cancer and other diseases is reduced.
The desire for active longevity
According to statistics, there are a lot of long-livers among vegetarians. The fact is that their metabolic processes proceed more slowly, since there is no need to absorb excess amounts of proteins.
Desire to become more resilient
The endurance of vegetarians has long been known. This is due to the consumption of large amounts of carbohydrates, which are an energy source for the body.
Solving Moral Problems
People who are sure that animals cannot be killed become vegetarians. By switching to plant foods, they not only gain health, but also rise to a higher moral and spiritual level.
Vegetarian nutrition systems
Over the centuries, the basic principle of vegetarianism has received various interpretations from its apologists, which over time inevitably led to the emergence of several different vegetarian food systems. According to the degree of restriction of food of animal origin in the vegetarian food system, there are two main trends - old vegetarian And young vegetarian.
Old vegetarians or vegans
Old Vegetarianism (or Pure, True, Strict Vegetarianism) excludes the consumption of any products that come directly or indirectly from animals, including honey from bees. The diet of an old vegetarian consists of cereals, legumes, nuts, vegetables, fruits, berries and herbs. Old vegetarians are famous for their love of apples (although they are allowed to eat other fruits, as well as vegetables and berries). A well-known aphorism of old vegetarians says: “With a few apples in your pocket, you can already take a long journey.”
It is worth noting that old vegetarians consider culinary processing of food quite acceptable.
The most strict old vegetarians prefer to eat fruits and berries only raw, declaring that a person who has not been spoiled by civilization simply should not have the desire to cook food.
Young vegetarians
The second group of vegetarians - the so-called young vegetarians - includes milk and dairy products in their diet along with plant foods. Such vegetarians are called lacto-vegetarians. If young vegetarians, in addition to milk and dairy products, also consume eggs, then they are called lacto-ovo vegetarians.
In the modern world, there are about 1 billion supporters of vegetarian nutrition.
Raw food diet as a special form of vegetarianism
Among the “strict” vegetarians, there are even more “strict” adherents of this food system - the so-called raw foodists, completely rejecting any kind of heat treatment of food. Raw foodists eat exclusively plant foods (less often, dairy and plant foods) without any treatment with fire or steam. They believe that this method of nutrition allows the absorption of substances in their original form, since under the influence of heat treatment and contact with the surface of the dishes, the energy value of products decreases, and some of the beneficial substances are destroyed.
Among raw foodists, concepts such as “dead” and “live” food are common. “Dead” food is canned, refined, highly heat-treated and microwaved foods. Digestion of such food requires large energy expenditures, which diverts the body's vital resources and causes a decrease in immunity. In addition, such food is not completely digested, which is the main reason for the body’s slagging.
The principle on which raw foodists base their conclusions is simple: an organism cannot be alive if it has been eating dead food for a long time, that is, food that lacks the enzymes necessary for all living things that make any product biologically active and facilitate its digestion.
According to raw foodists, eating raw plant foods is especially beneficial because the body directly uses the energy of a living plant cell, which it, in turn, received from the sun during the process of photosynthesis.
So, we are convinced that, despite their related roots, raw food diet and vegetarianism are different trends in the “sea” of healthy eating. However, among raw foodists there is also no single point of view on what the ideal food should be. This is connected not so much with the diversity of food traditions, but with the different physiological characteristics of each individual person.
Raw foodists are different
In addition to vegetables and fruits, raw foodists, as a rule, include cereal seeds in their diet, for which, of all culinary techniques, they allow only one - crushing the grains. Moderate raw foodists, along with seeds and fruits, eat bread made from whole grains with any bran. They consider such bread, combined with fruit, to be the most delicious, healthy, nutritious and clean food for a true vegetarian. These foods, in their opinion, “do not excite, relax, pamper or irritate.”
Thus, in a raw food diet, as in vegetarianism, there are two directions: absolute raw food diet And omnivorous. An absolute raw food diet is the most strict and principled vegetarianism, allowing the consumption of only raw fruits, nuts and cereal grains.
Omnivorous raw foodists, in addition to raw plant foods, include dairy products, eggs and bread in their diet. Sometimes boiled vegetables can be consumed in small quantities. Typically, such a concession is made in relation to vegetables whose fibers are too coarse, bitter or tasteless when raw (for example, zucchini, squash, eggplant, etc.).
Of course, in addition to these two main trends in raw food nutrition, there are other, more or less original trends. This includes such an interesting method as monotrophic nutrition, in which all “raw food” products are consumed exclusively individually at one meal. Proponents of this method also have their own justifications, but we will talk about this a little later.
Vegetarians often talk about human nature. Who are we more - predators or herbivores?
Which type of vegetarianism is closer to us - omnivorous vegetarianism (ovo-lacto), veganism or raw food diet? Which is healthier? Is a 100% raw food diet harmful?
Today we will try to answer these questions - according to tradition, objectively, focusing on the facts.
Why you shouldn’t idealize nature and follow the Bible in matters of nutrition
To better understand the rest...
Many vegetarians almost deify nature. They believe that there are no shortcomings in it, that it is perfect, that one must eat and live exclusively “from the beginning.” And they make a mistake. Because in fact, the primary sources of nature are far from perfect, sometimes very cruel. We get sick and die in nature. In countries where the lifestyle is closest to nature (i.e. where people live naturally, without the benefits of civilization), life expectancy remains very low (Africa, etc.), in high-tech countries like Japan, on the contrary, it is high.
What is known about changes in life expectancy in different eras of human existence?
Paleolithic(2.6 million-10,000 BC) -33.3 and 28.7 (men and women, respectively)
Neolithic(9500-4000 BC)-20
Bronze and Iron Ages(4000-100 BC) - 35+
Classical Greece(V-IV centuries BC)-28
Ancient Rome(750 - 450 BC)-28
Pre-Columbian North America(until the 15th century) -25-30
Medieval Islamic Caliphate (632-1258)-35+
Medieval England(V-XVI centuries)-30
England(XVI-XVIII)-40+
Early 20th century-30-45
Present tense-67.2
Predators tear apart herbivores and cause them extreme pain and suffering in nature. Planets and stars crumble to dust in nature. Nature is merciless, although this makes it no less beautiful and complex. And she never ceases to be our parent, the place from which we take absolutely everything for life.
In matters of nutrition, we do not recommend following the Bible, religion, or divine concepts. We will not go into speculation about the existence of God. Its presence or absence will not shed light on what is best for a person to eat. Even if there is someone who launched the mechanism of constant birth and dying (which is quite possible), then he gave only the initial “push”. And then life was left to itself. Further, laws began to operate in nature that we must learn to understand., including the laws of evolution and adaptation.
The Bible is a book that is extremely contradictory and is based on myths, and not on information about the world supported by facts. It may be useful to historians studying ancient manuscripts and the movement of human thought, but not in our question of studying the nature of man and his nutrition. In addition, the majority, although many people refer to the Bible, Koran, etc. as authoritative sources, without implying otherwise, as in the case below:
How the diet of modern man was formed in nature
Planet Earth has not been suitable for life since its inception. She went through terrible times when it was impossible to exist on her. Naturally, there was no person on it then. But cataclysms, lavas, and tsunamis were present in abundance.
Favorable conditions gradually formed: elements came to Earth from space, in the presence of which life could form. This life was constantly adapting and changing. She fought for existence and died, and was replaced by another life.
No exception is the person who evolved from lower forms of life into intelligent and now civilized beings. He went through the stage of Neanderthals, Pithecanthropus, Australopithecines and other hominids (which appeared about 6 million years ago) before transforming into the current Homo sapiens. The same Homo sapiens, whose history averages about 100 thousand years.
Omnivores or herbivores?
What did our ancestors eat? All scientific research confirms that early hominids (the same Australopithecines) ate mainly fruits, tree leaves, and grass, like many modern primates. Our ancestors then mainly lived in Africa, in a hot climate, where there was freedom in terms of vegetation.
Then, during the Pliocene period, the cold came. Vegetation in large quantities became unavailable. Our ancestors were forced to start killing to survive. They needed to eat something due to the lack of their usual food. They were forced skinning animals to keep warm.
Subsequently, the climate constantly changed. The transition from one diet to another occurred repeatedly. Frugivorous hominids oriented towards a vegetarian diet lived in more comfortable warm conditions, while omnivores lived in harsher conditions.
Ultimately, by the period when hominids transformed into Homo sapiens (about 100 thousand years ago), their clearly identifiable (based on marks on tooth enamel) was revealed. omnivorous diet (about 90% plant foods and 10% animal foods).
Thus, nature contributed to the formation of omnivorous man.
1. Because omnivory increased the chance of survival in the changing unstable conditions of the ecosystem. The ability to hunt, obtain meat and other animal products and eat them was necessary when there were no plant sources of food on the horizon.
In addition, hunting was a very difficult activity for hominids unadapted for this. The development of hunting skills had a beneficial effect on the development of the brain of ancient people.
2. Because animal food (despite the fact that it was not specific and was extremely heavy) supplied the human brain with more necessary calories, which was beneficial in terms of saving energy resources.
What conclusions can be drawn from this?
1. We were raw vegetarians at an early stage in the development of our ancestors.
2. For many millions of years, an omnivorous diet was predominant among people and their ancestors.
Raw or cooked?
If we talk about vegetarianism, then, as we have found out, the most natural and natural for humans is omnivorous vegetarianism (ovo-lacto).
If we talk about veganism and a raw food diet, then veganism is still closer to modern people.
Firstly, Our digestive system has long since moved away from a plant-based raw food diet.", adapting to omnivorousness.
Secondly, the benefits of such a diet as the main diet for modern people are quite controversial. Yes, some people on a raw food diet feel good, they manage to lose weight and become healthier (we emphasize, not all, but only some). A raw food diet gives good results in a limited period. As well as . However The longer the period of raw food diet, the more problems. Some of them are associated with poor absorption of nutrients from raw food, others are associated with a lack of vitamin B12.
There are theories that this and other vitamins are produced in the intestines, that people are able to survive on raw plant foods alone, like ancient primates. However The lifestyle of ancient primates was significantly different from the lifestyle of modern humans. They ate the fruits, including insects, various caterpillars, and they ate them dirty, getting B12 from the dirt, from their own feces, and from the insects they ate. And given the multimillion-dollar evolutionary changes, a 100% comparison with primates seems incorrect.
Third, a person needs calories from thermally processed food. Despite the lower concentration of vitamins and other nutrients in boiled food (compared to fresh plant foods), thermally processed foods are no less important for us. Why?
According to the hypothesis of R. Wrangham (from Harvard University, USA), it was the transition to eating thermally processed food that contributed to the accelerated growth of the brain of hominids - our ancestors. Cooking on FIRE(clear evidence - about 300-400 thousand years ago - finds in Beeches Pit in England and Schöningen in Germany) - this is exactly what made it easier to digest and contributed to the release of energy, so necessary to feed a larger brain. Heat treatment made the food more nutritious. These calories were a treasure trove for our brain.
Once again about the raw food diet
1. A modern person, if he eats a variety of raw plant foods, may not die on a raw food diet, perhaps he will even lose weight and become healthier due to the low-calorie diet, but only if he sticks to such a diet for a short time. It can be assumed that a raw food diet may be useful as a short-term diet.
2. However, a 100% raw food diet as the main and only nutritional system is unrealistic. As surveys show, only 1% of 100% raw foodists manage to live normally on a 100% raw plant-based diet for more than 5 years. These are mainly people living in hot climates. The rest seem Izyum, his wife, the Butenko family, Dobrozdravin or Pavel Sebastianovich, who were once inspiring, are abandoning this food system in its original 100% sense due to serious health risks. They experienced the harm of a raw food diet firsthand. But those who dropped out are replaced by new ones full of enthusiasm, and the short cycle continues again.
3. Despite the fact that the main goal of most raw foodists is to force their microflora to produce all vitamins, amino acids, etc. on any raw plants, the overwhelming majority of them consume additionally either honey, or some percentage of boiled food, or eggs (like Ohanyan), or stale, spoiled, pesticide-laden vegetables and fruits from supermarkets, etc. In this situation, the possibility of the formation of self-reproducing microflora seems unrealistic even in theory.
Therefore, raw foodists often lack nutrients ( after all, they deprive themselves of many products suitable for consumption in heat-treated form), as well as. Some raw foodists find a way out of the situation - for example, they eat raw plant foods in large quantities or supplement them with cooked foods, and use supplements as needed. This raw food diet based on the principle of veganism is the most realistic. Otherwise, people have to go off a raw food diet due to health problems.
Conclusion: a long-term 100% raw food diet is a setback, and a rather extreme one at that, and without a reasonable approach it is also dangerous. And it's always EXPERIMENT, since scientific studies of groups of raw foodists have not been conducted.
It is more rational to combine a raw food diet with a vegan one, maintaining a balance of raw and cooked foods and using human-synthesized vitamin B12 and other necessary supplements in the correct proportions.
Veganism - the diet of our time
Now we are basically omnivores (here we emphasize that omnivorous vegetarianism is not much different from ordinary “meat” omnivory, except that it is a much more ethical diet).
But the man has changed. Our developed brain allowed us to be humane, to comprehend the inhumanity of torture, slavery, violence against our own kind, which was previously natural. It allows us to comprehend the same thing in relation to even less protected, but no less acutely feeling creatures - animals.
Living conditions have also changed. We began to invent technologies - convenient Internet, medicines that can cure many ailments that were previously incurable. We have established supplies of products all over the world, and now even a resident of the Far North can eat fresh plants if they wish.
Yes, human activity also brings destruction. But right now, like no other person, can minimize these destructions by creating biotechnologies, purification facilities, etc.
Man figured out how to synthesize vitamin B12, which previously could only be obtained from animal products. This has allowed many people to become vegan. That is, completely switch to a plant-based diet, but not following the example of our distant raw-food ancestors, but to a modern diet, including the inclusion of familiar thermally processed foods.
If you prepare a vegan diet correctly with the inclusion of additional synthetic vitamins and supplements, it will be balanced, providing the body with everything it needs. As a result, there is no need for global exploitation of animals.
But, alas, it is not suitable for everyone. For example, for those who are unable to think through their diet and eat a balanced diet, and whose body reacts poorly to supplements. In this case, it is wiser to adhere to omnivorous vegetarianism (ovo-lacto), in which it is much easier to balance the diet, but a certain dependence on animals still remains. Apparently, as long as it is on free sale products like animals will not appear,.
Let's summarize the article:
1. Omnivorous vegetarianism (ovo-lacto or ovo) can be considered a natural human diet, but more ethical than meat-eating. The omnivorous vegetarian diet (ovo-lacto) is recognized as a complete vegetarian diet by the American Dietetic Association and other nutritional associations around the world.
2. The raw food diet, although natural, is an ancient diet, and its benefits as the only one worth sticking to are very doubtful.
3. The vegan diet is not natural, but it is humane and meets modern concepts of rationality. If it is formulated correctly, taking into account synthesized vitamin B12 and some other food additives, then, according to experts from world nutritional associations, it can be absolutely complete.
Vegetarianism
Personal preference, religious belief, lifestyle or health concerns are the most common reasons for choosing a vegetarian lifestyle. Some choose this food system because they are concerned about animal rights and the environment. For many people in the world, vegetarianism is mainly associated with savings - meat costs much more than, say, rice or beans.
There are different types of vegetarianism: lacto-ovo vegetarians eat dairy products and eggs, but exclude meat, fish and poultry; lacto-vegetarians eat dairy products but do not eat eggs, while ovo-vegetarians eat eggs, but do not consume dairy products; pesco-vegetarians They eat fish, but do not eat poultry. A stricter form of vegetarianism is veganism. This diet excludes not only eggs and dairy products, but also animal products such as honey and gelatin. As a rule, macrobiotic diets, which exclude not only animal products, but also refined and processed foods, foods containing preservatives, as well as caffeine and other stimulants, also fall under the category of veganism.
Let me start with the fact that vegetarianism (refusal to consume animal proteins) is an illusion, and a person continues to consume animal proteins in any case. Why is vegetarianism an illusion? Everything is very simple. What, by and large, distinguishes a vegetarian from a meat eater is that he does not eat meat and, therefore, does not receive some essential amino acids that are not found in plant foods. And how does he live if he doesn’t receive these amino acids?
It turned out that a vegetarian gradually adapts to a vegetarian diet; saprophytic bacteria appear in the intestines, which process the fiber that comes with food and provide the body with the same animal essential amino acids. Those. If a meat eater depends on the intake of meat along with food, then a vegetarian depends on the state of his own microflora in the intestines.
What's the downside to this? The first obvious disadvantage of vegetarianism is that the intestinal microflora is killed by various foods and drugs: garlic, onions, antibiotics, sulfonamides and other drugs. Therefore, a vegetarian will have to give up these foods and medications.
Giving up onions and garlic is a difficult matter, I know from myself, because... I always loved them and got used to them. But from my own experience and the experience of other raw foodists, I can say that when you eat raw plant foods, without overindulging in too heavy meals, the taste of garlic and onions becomes too pungent and bright, as if you ate them in the morning on an empty stomach after several days of fasting. People who try to trust nature consider this to be clear evidence that these foods are rejected by the body, a natural defense mechanism similar to smoking, which is suppressed over time. The trouble is that raw food recipes sometimes break all records in the number of ingredients, including spices, oil, nuts, etc., and in mixing incompatible products. What is better: to be a raw foodist, eating these mixtures, or to eat animal products without overeating.
As for medications, raw foodists need them only in the most catastrophic situations, in which any meat eater would have problems with the flora. The usual drugs that we and our friends had to use before the raw food diet turned out to be unnecessary. In general, this is a separate topic in which modern pharmacology, homeopathy, yoga, metaphysics of diseases, and more can be discussed. In general, I believe that regardless of nutrition, unless really absolutely necessary (when it comes to saving a life or an organ), it is better not to take antibiotics and other potent drugs that suppress not only the microflora, but also the immune system in general.
In addition, back in the middle of the twentieth century, our physiologists (I.P. Razenkov, 1948) discovered the fact that a person eats himself.
It turned out that in the human stomach and intestines not only food received from the outside is processed, but also proteins secreted into the digestive tract from the internal environment of the body, and there were a lot of such internal proteins! Scientists made a comparative calculation of protein consumption per day and found that the ratio of eaten and endogenous (internal) proteins is approximately the same - 1:1 (G.K. Shlygin, 1997). This means that a person who eats 100g of protein per day will actually get another 100g of their animal protein (from themselves). In total, it turns out to be 200 g of protein per day, which means that if a vegetarian completely stops consuming animal protein, then all the same, he will receive a “piece of meat” in the form of 100 g of his own endogenous animal proteins. This is provided by nature just for such cases. That is, Mother Nature insures her unreasonable child - man and does not allow a sharp shortage of essential amino acids. If a person stops eating meat altogether, then he still continues to eat himself, his meat.
So, as we see, vegetarianism is an illusion. Both vegetarians and meat eaters eat ANIMAL proteins. Meat eaters take them with food, vegetarians take them from saprophytic bacteria living in their own intestines, and from themselves.
A wonderful mechanism. It sounds scary, but this is normal: different processes occur every day, new tissues are created, others are disposed of for their own benefit, no one dies, the body is renewed.
I really want to be objective, so I’ll honestly say that vegetarianism also has a lot of positive aspects. According to statistics, vegetarians are slimmer and healthier than those who eat meat. This leads many to consider giving up animal products (meat, and sometimes eggs and dairy) to lose weight and improve overall health. But does a vegetarian diet really help you lose weight and maintain your desired weight?
Yes, in many cases this is true. But only when creating a negative energy balance. In other words, you will still have to be careful not to gain too much, because 100 g of any vegetable oil contains approximately 1000 kcal. This means that, theoretically, a vegetarian can consume the same number of calories as a meat eater. In fact, some vegetarians turn to sweets, fried potatoes and buns when they stop eating meat, which can lead to even more weight gain.
I completely agree, in addition, vegetarians often eat a lot of fried foods (consuming carcinogens), add too many spices, and as a result overeat.
Now a few words about the dangers of vegetarianism. If you completely exclude meat from your diet, there will not be much harm to the body; it will be much worse if you try to completely exclude all products of animal origin, since no (!) vegetable protein can replace animal protein, either in amino acid composition or in digestibility! I will quote a few lines from the “bible” of any medical student - the textbook “Human Physiology” edited by V.M. Pokrovsky, G.F. Korotko: “Proteins have a different amino acid composition, therefore the possibility of using them for the synthetic needs of the body is not the same. In connection with this, the concept of the biological value of food proteins was introduced.Proteins containing the entire necessary set of amino acids in such ratios that ensure normal synthesis processes are biologically complete proteins.
On the contrary, proteins that do not contain certain amino acids or contain them in very small quantities are incomplete. Thus, incomplete proteins are gelatin, which contains only traces of cystine and lacks tryptophan and tyrosine; zein (a protein found in corn), which is low in tryptophan and lysine; gliadin (wheat protein) and hordein (barley protein), which contain little lysine; and some others. The highest biological value of proteins is meat, eggs, fish, caviar, and milk.
In this regard, human food must not only contain a sufficient amount of protein, but must contain at least 30% proteins with high biological value, i.e., of animal origin.
In humans, there is a form of protein deficiency that develops with a monotonous diet of plant products with low protein content. This causes a disease called “kwashiorkor”. It is found among the population of tropical and subtropical countries in Africa, Latin America and Southeast Asia. This disease mainly affects children aged 1 to 5 years.”
You may object to me that you can combine two or three plant foods with different types of incomplete proteins to end up with a complete protein! It’s possible, but, firstly, imagine how much “grass” you need to eat (the constantly chewing herbivores immediately come to mind - that’s why they chew constantly!), and secondly, why? If, due to personal convictions, you do not eat meat or fish, for God’s sake, I’m in favor with both hands! But eggs, milk, dairy products, cheeses - how will they harm poor animals?
Try not milking a cow for one day, or preventing chickens from laying eggs!
This means that with a varied vegan diet, you can still gain the necessary amino acids. But you need to eat a lot and varied. To the question “Why?” there are two answers:
1) Meat, dairy products, eggs are rich not only in these complete proteins, but also in hormones, complex indigestible substances, antibiotics, etc. This is discussed in detail and a lot in studies justifying and calling for vegetarianism. In addition, an excess of some seemingly beneficial substances can also be harmful, as we see in the example of osteoporosis, which is caused by milk consumption.
2) The phrase about cows and chickens does not take into account how these cows and chickens live today. Perhaps a domestic cow that grazes in a meadow (and not a mixture of bones stuffed with hormones and antibiotics) and is not forced to stand in a narrow stall all its life, after the birth of a calf, will give milk for about a year with pleasure and with a surplus that the family can have take her. So she will live 20-25 years versus four that cows live on dairy farms.
It is also possible that the eggs of wild or domesticated birds that eat what nature has provided for them, and not the same as cows, can sometimes be stolen by humans for food. But the way these industries are structured today cannot provide a healthy product. I’m not talking here about compassion for these animals. And this phrase “Try not to milk a cow for one day, or make sure that the chickens don’t lay eggs!” speaks of ignorance (or self-deception or deliberate deception of others) of its author.
And a couple more lines “from Pokrovsky”: “A negative nitrogen balance develops with the complete absence or insufficient amount of protein in food, as well as with the consumption of food containing incomplete proteins. The possibility of protein deficiency with normal intake, but with a significant increase in the body's need for it, cannot be excluded. In all these cases, protein starvation occurs.
During protein starvation, even in cases of sufficient intake of fats, carbohydrates, mineral salts, water and vitamins into the body, a gradually increasing loss of body weight occurs, depending on the fact that the costs of tissue proteins (minimal in these conditions and equal to the wear coefficient) are not compensated by the intake of proteins from food, so prolonged protein starvation ultimately, like complete starvation, inevitably leads to death. Protein starvation is especially difficult for a growing organism, which in this case not only loses body weight, but also stops growth due to a lack of plastic material necessary for the construction of cellular structures.”
Protein starvation can occur in people who eat “traditionally” bread, pasta, rice, fast food, drink alcohol, smoke, and in general in everyone, not just vegetarians. We have already found out above that with sufficient consumption of a variety of plant foods, there will be no problems with proteins. In order to get enough nutrients, a raw foodist does not have to chew all day like a cow; here we can take advantage of the achievements of technological progress and prepare a salad with herbs in a blender or chopper.
Due to the nature of my work, I have more than once had to deal with vegetarians and raw foodists, and I will say one thing - vegans (and veganism is an extreme degree of manifestation of vegetarianism, when they not only do not eat meat and fish, but also completely abandon ALL animal products, including honey and nests of swallows) - in 99% of cases out of 100 they turned out to be unbalanced, aggressive, hyperactive people, causing irritation after a few minutes of communication!
I began to study this topic in more detail, and realized that I was practically right - I was not the only one who noticed this feature! There is a good Russian proverb: “Every sandpiper praises its own swamp!” What I mean is that vegans and raw foodists never, you hear, never admit their mistakes, but will foam at the mouth to promote their lifestyle and their eating style! Why do I unite raw foodists and vegans? Yes, because in our time almost all raw foodists, willy-nilly, become vegetarians - it is very unsafe to eat raw meat, milk, fish, eggs now - you can never be sure of their bacterial purity! And vegans have a lot of problems!
Let me start with the fact that most often vegetarians and raw foodists have a low-calorie diet: try to gain enough calories by eating vegetables and fruits, and raw foodists also eat raw ones! Yes, vegetable oil and nuts can increase calorie content, but at what cost? That's right, fat! And a person urgently needs a balanced ratio of proteins, fats and carbohydrates and a sufficient amount of calories! Of course, reducing calorie intake for an overweight person is very good. For a person suffering from non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (type II diabetes), this is simply a salvation from his illness. But everything has its limit. And at a certain stage, refuse a vegetarian diet, otherwise the consequences can be very sad. Moreover, I emphasize this again, this applies not only to a vegetarian diet, but also to any other low-calorie diet, even if it includes meat (Montignac, Protasov, etc.).
What is their danger? The fact is that a vegetarian is no different morphologically (i.e. structurally) from an ordinary person. Consequently, he spends approximately the same 1400-1600 kcal on basic metabolism (maintaining body temperature, moving blood through the vessels, working the respiratory muscles, working the heart, intestinal motility, etc.) as an ordinary person.
But an ordinary person eats 2500 kcal per day, and a vegetarian only 1000 kcal, and can live like this for years. Where do these missing 400-600 kcal per day, so necessary for a vegetarian, come from? Perhaps we are faced with a violation of the law of conservation of energy here? Of course not. The fact is that the human body has an energy source that allows you to use the energy received once many times. This source of energy is muscles, or rather lactic acid, which is released when muscles work.
Let's look into this issue. So, let's assume that a vegetarian eats 1000 kcal per day. Of these, approximately 800 kcal are carbohydrates. Carbohydrates entering the human body are converted into glucose and enter the blood. Glucose is stored in the liver and skeletal muscles in the form of glycogen in a ratio of 1:3. In total, out of 800 kcal of glucose entering the blood, 267 kcal of glycogen enters the liver, and 533 kcal of glycogen enters the skeletal muscles.
If everything is clear about liver glycogen - it is released into the blood and consumed as needed, then the consumption of glycogen by muscles is a very interesting and important question.
The fact is that skeletal muscles do not use their glycogen completely in an oxygen-free mode, but only 5% of their energy reserves! The remaining 95% is excreted into the blood in the form of lactic acid (lactate). This lactic acid (lactate) enters the liver, is converted into glucose and can be reused. So, in the human body, 95% of stored muscle energy can be reused. For a vegetarian who has 533 kcal of glycogen in his muscles, these reserves of lactic acid, which can be used again, amount to 506 kcal per day. In total, we see that with a diet of 1000 kcal and active movement, releasing energy from the muscles in the form of lactic acid, a vegetarian enters the bloodstream in the amount of 1000 + 506 = 1506 kcal per day. And if you “move”, then even more.
Outwardly, everything seems wonderful, but what is the danger here?
Let's go back to the average person eating 2500 kcal per day. Its reserves of lactic acid are 1020 kcal per day. If these 1020 kcal also entered the blood and returned again to the skeletal muscles, then such a person would inevitably gain weight, because 2500 + 1020 = 3520 kcal of energy enters his blood per day
But this doesn't happen. Where does lactic acid (lactate) go in the body of an ordinary person? Where does an ordinary person spend this reserve that allows a vegetarian to survive?
It turned out that in the body of a normal person (not a vegetarian), almost all the energy of lactic acid (lactate) is given to the brain! Here is what American researchers P. Hochachka and J. Somero write about this in the book “Biochemical Adaptation” (1988): “If the concentration of lactate in the blood is increased, then it can be used in skeletal muscles, lungs, heart and brain tissue as a source of carbon and energy, often in preference to glucose." "In the liver and kidneys, lactate is primarily used in the process of gluconeogenesis; in most other tissues and organs, including the brain, heart and lungs, lactate serves as an excellent substrate for oxidative metabolism and is often utilized even before glucose, which contributes to the rapid restoration of metabolic homeostasis.”
Why is lactic acid (lactate) more beneficial for tissue nutrition than glucose? We read the answer from the same authors: “experiments show that the rate of absorption and oxidation of lactic acid is 2-10 times higher compared to glucose.” In the same work, American biochemists, based on the results of experiments on adaptation to diving, conclude that the brain of an ordinary person consumes 90% of the energy of glucose and lactate contained in the blood.
So, in an ordinary person (not a vegetarian), as soon as lactic acid appears in the blood, almost all of it (more precisely 90%) is immediately used as a source of nutrition for the brain.
A vegetarian does not have the same opportunity to use lactic acid. In a vegetarian, all lactic acid, after being processed in the liver into glucose, is returned to the skeletal muscles. The brain stops receiving its usual nutrition. Oxygen, which in an ordinary person oxidizes lactic acid in the brain, becomes unnecessary. This leads to two important conclusions that can easily be verified by looking at vegetarians. The first important consequence: since there is no need to nourish the brain, the body’s need for the universal oxidizing agent—oxygen—is sharply reduced. As a result, the vegetarian’s breathing rhythm slows down and reaches 4-5 respiratory movements per minute. Over time, a vegetarian’s breathing is completely restructured in such a way that the brain’s use of lactic acid energy becomes impossible.
So, slowing breathing is the first and very important sign that it is time to return to a normal diet, it is a sign that it is time to end the low-calorie diet, the brain has already stopped receiving its usual nutrition and has begun to slow down its work! If a person eats normally, then his norm is 16-17 breaths per minute. If a person is on a low-calorie diet, then a decrease in the number of respirations per minute means that all fat reserves have already been exhausted and the body is forced to begin taking food away from the brain just in order to survive. Energy for the muscles, for survival, becomes more important than energy for the brain, more important than the thinking process.
This is all very useful to know in order to gain the required amount of calories on any diet. The experience of, for example, Frederic Patenaude, author of The Secrets of the Raw Food Diet, suggests the same thing, and he confirms that it is difficult to get enough calories from raw foods. Therefore, he includes baked or steamed vegetables, root vegetables, and herbs in his diet. That is, the point is not to eat meat, but to eat well. In addition, he explains in detail in his book why it is better to gain calories from plant foods, which are less fatty than animal foods.
The second important consequence: since the only additional source of energy is in the muscles, a vegetarian must force himself to move a lot, only in this case it is possible to replenish the body’s energy in the form of lactic acid. And look for yourself - all vegetarians are always on the move - Galina Shatalova runs through deserts, Paul Bragg climbs mountains, Leo Tolstoy plows on a horse, Porfiry Ivanov runs 70-140 km a day. A vegetarian cannot live without movement! While spending only 5% of muscle glycogen during movement, he receives 95% of his energy in the form of lactic acid. By the way, this is exactly why morning exercises are useful - glycogen reserves in the liver have been depleted overnight, in order to recharge the body with energy, you need to work your muscles a little, then the released lactic acid (lactate) will replenish energy reserves.
But let's think, what will happen if a vegetarian does not move, does not play sports, but leads a sedentary lifestyle? The fact is that the body has provided for this. Such a person will be prone to outbursts of rage and anger, which (ATTENTION!) are accompanied by reflexive tension in all the muscles of the body! Nature, one way or another, will force a person on a vegetarian low-calorie diet to strain his muscles. If he does not do this himself through physical exertion, then he will do it in a fit of hysteria or other mentally abnormal excitement.
This is confirmed by observations of famous vegetarians. Vegetarian Isaac Newton, according to contemporaries, was an extremely arrogant and greedy person. An unsatisfied thirst for action pushed him into all sorts of dubious adventures, and, in the end, he became a stock speculator. But the search for thrills ultimately led to his collapse. Newton invested his entire fortune in shares of the South Sea Bubble Company, which promised its investors fabulous profits from the development of metal deposits in Mexico and Peru, and from the slave trade. Having earned huge sums of money from speculation in these shares, Newton did not slow down his incredible greed in time and went bankrupt in 1720, when the South Sea Company bubble burst. This was one of the first major stock market speculations in history.
Vegetarian L.N. Tolstoy, during periods when he could not engage in hard peasant labor (autumn-winter period), committed many actions that both interfered with his life and disturbed the whole country. In addition, Tolstoy was known for his stormy family scandals with his wife and children, because of which, in fact, he left his home in October 1910 and soon died.
Vegetarian Adolf Hitler amazed his compatriots with public hysteria, the proportions of which were so great that they managed to infect the whole of Germany. There is probably no need to remind about the depth of his hatred of the Slavs and Jews. On his orders, they were destroyed by the millions.
This is already a classic way of juggling facts in order to convince the reader of his personal subjective opinion. Why don't we talk about Mahatma Gandhi, the Dalai Lama, Buddha, and thousands, thousands of other vegetarians who do not show a drop of aggression, about yogis whose calmness and harmony would be the envy of most of the world's population? Why don't we talk about murderers and tyrants among meat eaters? To cite as an example a few selective facts, moreover, not very obvious and confirmed; in my opinion, such arguments are worthless and speak rather against the author. For example, I can believe that Hitler was like this because his mother weaned him early.
So, long-term vegetarianism in the absence of constant movement is the shortest path to scandals, squabbles, mental illness and suicide. All of the above applies to any low-calorie diet (less than 1000-1200 kcal per day), even if it includes meat. I note that for an overweight person, low-calorie nutrition is an inevitable part of the weight loss process. But as soon as the weight has reached normal, you need to gradually increase the calorie intake to normal - 1800-2500 kcal per day.
“All of the above applies to any low-calorie diet (less than 1000-1200 kcal per day), even if it includes meat.” - That's it.
But vegetarianism also has a second harm - it is dangerous not only because it is low in calories, but also because it causes hormonal imbalances. According to research by American scientists (E. Vliet, 2001), a strict vegetarian diet disrupts the balance of thyroid hormones T3 and T4. Studies were carried out in different countries, but they all showed that in people who refused to consume animal proteins, the functioning of the endocrine system was disrupted when converting T4 to T3 in the thyroid gland, and in women, the production of estradiol and progesterone by the ovaries was also disrupted. All this led to the fact that vegetarian women experienced more frequent menstrual irregularities and showed signs of hypothyroidism (thyroid dysfunction), and therefore a slower metabolism, lethargy, dry skin, swelling, constipation, low heart rate, poor cold tolerance (“I can’t get warm”), etc. All these signs and disorders disappeared when animal proteins were included in the diet.
Therefore, I want to warn ideological vegetarians - if you want to eat mainly plant foods, then be sure to include dairy and fermented milk products and eggs in your diet. This will be quite enough to satisfy the body’s need for animal protein, and in this case vegetarianism (or rather, it will already be called lacto-vegetarianism) will not bring harm.
This is the first time I have come across this information about hormones; it is quite possible that this is true. I am surprised that this article does not say a word about vitamin B12, which is so controversial among raw foodists and vegans. Perhaps if we ate like animals (for example, bonobo monkeys, now considered our closest “relatives”), we would not have problems with this vitamin and hormones. To do this, one would have to eat unwashed parts of plants, and very rarely insects. But we cannot afford this luxury; we are forced to wash everything thoroughly to avoid infections and chemicals (poisonous or fertilizing - it doesn’t matter) getting into the body. Therefore, I, together with Victoria Butenko and other well-known vegans with extensive experience, come to the conclusion that the benefits of consuming small amounts of fermented milk products and egg yolks can outweigh the harm, and it is safer to include them in the diet than to fanatically refuse.
Think about the fact that the ideal food for a baby - human milk - contains animal proteins, and not plant proteins at all. And if nature simply obliges a baby to eat animal proteins, then doesn’t this mean that animal proteins should not be feared or avoided?
No, he doesn’t, because... This is normal for all mammals, herbivores and frugivores.
I repeat that this also applies to a raw food diet!
Raw plant foods are truly healthy and necessary. But it’s hardly worth going to extremes! Of course, primitive people and modern inhabitants of the Far North ate (or eat) exclusively raw meat, but their life expectancy is very short. Raw foodists also like to refer to the experience of the Japanese, who eat a lot of raw vegetables, raw fish and boast the highest life expectancy on the planet. But the Japanese eat boiled rice and other cooked dishes, including fish and meat.
In addition, each nation has its own nutritional traditions, which have evolved over centuries and formed a special microflora of the body, a special composition of enzymes. It is known that the bodies of representatives of the peoples of the North lack an enzyme that helps metabolize alcohol, and some peoples of Southeast Asia cannot eat meat. It is not for nothing that many people, coming to a country with completely different food traditions, often feel discomfort.
That is why it is hardly advisable to recommend switching to complete vegetarianism or a raw food diet to a person who has been eating porridge, soup and cutlets since childhood. In addition, as I already mentioned, raw meat and fish, and even raw eggs, are now simply unsafe, since no one can vouch for their complete purity and the absence of pathogenic bacteria, which are usually destroyed during cooking.
You know, domestic animals (cats, dogs), which from generation to generation (for centuries!) people feed with cereals and other food, without allowing them to eat specific food (raw meat), only get sick more and more and their life expectancy is shorter and shorter. There are more of them, just like people, but they are not getting healthier. Several centuries or millennia of ancestors do not change our nature, and the composition of enzymes and microflora adapt to nutrition in a few weeks, sometimes months, in extreme cases - in a couple of years.
But vegetables, fruits and juices, especially raw ones, should be included in your diet every day, even if you are not on a diet. Raw vegetables and fruits help with obesity and constipation, diabetes and cardiovascular diseases.
A few diet days when you eat only raw vegetables will undoubtedly be beneficial. You can get rid of swelling and normalize intestinal function (if you have a tendency to constipation).
Try to first follow a “raw” diet for 1 day, if you feel good (within normal limits, bowel movements may become more frequent), you can continue on the diet for 3 more days. After this diet, you cannot immediately start eating a lot of protein foods and fatty meats. You need to return to your usual diet gradually, over about 1-2 days. It is best to spend days on this diet in the summer, when there are various vegetables and fruits, and the human body needs less fats and carbohydrates.
All this would be true if it weren’t for the stunning healing effect that raw foodists feel, and especially raw foodists who adhere to a separate diet for several months. In a few days you can lose excess weight, cleanse your intestines, but you can’t get rid of asthma, allergies, eczema, chronic bronchitis, arthritis and other serious diseases.
Besides all this, I believe that in no case can we speak generally about raw foodists and vegans because the latter often simply eat everything except animal products: fast food, fried foods, sugar, white bread, baked goods with yeast, and gluten-containing products in general , ground grains (cereals), and much more that is not in the diet of a raw food vegan.
There are also things that we cannot see. We cannot see that their food contains the antibiotic needed to prevent diseases that spread easily in such crowded barns. We also cannot see that four out of five birds have broken bones or deformed legs because their bones are not strong enough to support their body weight. And, of course, we don't see that many of them have burns and ulcers on their legs and chests.
These ulcers are caused by ammonia contained in chicken droppings. It is unnatural for any animal to be forced to spend its entire life standing on its own manure, and ulcers are just one of the consequences of living in such conditions. Have you ever had tongue ulcers? They're pretty painful, aren't they? So very often unfortunate birds are covered with them from head to toe.
What's in the bottom line? There is no need to eat animal products. Moreover, they are harmful to health. However, manufacturers make us believe the opposite, and we, in pursuit of the pleasure of tastes, easily succumb. As a result, there is cruelty to animals, and people suffer more and more from various diseases and grow old early.
Original article here: www.abcslim.ru/articles/44/vegetarianstvo
There are many supporters and opponents of each method, both among ordinary people and among certified representatives of official medicine. Raw food diet and vegetarianism, which is better? In this article we will try to explore this current topic as much as possible and learn something new. It is possible that some of the readers, after reading it, will want to make adjustments to their diet.
Raw food diet and vegetarianism are nutritional systems that today many consider a tribute to fashion. People who adhere to one of these systems have different reasons for such a radical change in diet. This may be due to health conditions, personal beliefs, or religion. Some people simply want to experiment with nutrition and lose excess weight by choosing one of these types of nutrition.
Vegetarianism as a food system
Vegetarianism requires excluding meat, fish, and game from the diet, that is, meat products. Foods such as honey, eggs, milk and its derivatives remain in the diet. Although the issue regarding eggs is still quite controversial. Some people call vegetarians who eat eggs ovo-vegetarians.There are many different opinions regarding the “pure” definition of the term “vegetarianism”. Some experts say that vegetarianism is a complete exclusion of meat and animal products from the diet, but other experts argue that this method of eating is called “veganism,” that is, a more radical type of vegetarianism.
Representatives of religious and philosophical movements make their own adjustments to vegetarian nutrition. Hare Krishnas excluded meat, fish, eggs, as well as garlic, onions, and mushrooms from their diet. Dairy products are only encouraged in their food culture as a source of food for the “hunns of goodness.”
In order for the reader not to get confused in this large number of controversial opinions, we will take as a basis the classic type of vegetarianism, which is considered generally accepted today - the so-called “lacto-ovo vegetarianism,” that is, the inclusion of dairy products, honey, and eggs in food.
If you are interested in vegetarianism, consider its pros and cons and maintain a balanced diet. Otherwise, there is a risk of getting health problems, since blind fashion trends without thinking through the diet will have a detrimental effect on the body.
On a note! Many girls who want to lose weight resort to using this type of nutrition temporarily to improve their figure. Read what it can be harmful and useful, according to an expert nutritionist, what causes weight loss and what problems this can entail.
Pros and cons of vegetarianism
An abundance of vegetables and fruits, herbs, nuts, grains - this is an undeniable plus of vegetarianism! However, some beginners feel a lack of satiety and... lean on vegetarian baked goods and sweets.
The result: excess weight, poor health, heaviness in the stomach, etc. You should plan your meals wisely, study the abundance of vegetarian recipes that provide taste and benefits.
A small amount of essential vitamins for life. Serious minus. Calcium, iron, zinc and vitamin B12 are elements that plant foods cannot provide to a person in full. A special complex of vitamins prescribed by a doctor will come to the rescue.
Raw food diet: advantages and disadvantages
A raw food diet is a stricter nutritional system compared to vegetarianism. Convinced raw foodists consider heat treatment a destructive force that kills nutrients, so their diet consists only of raw vegetables and fruits.Some people go further and choose only raw fruits or only vegetables. Modern medicine is very wary of this approach to nutrition and attributes any ailment in the body to a raw food diet. But we don't want to show only one side of the raw food diet, as that would be unfair.
There are many raw foodists who have been practicing this lifestyle for many years and have a beautiful body and excellent health. Many of them undergo regular medical examinations and their results are truly amazing in a positive way.
When choosing a raw food diet as the basis of nutrition, do not make hasty decisions. This can be a real shock to the body. As with vegetarianism, gradually eliminate prohibited foods from your diet, especially if you were previously a convinced meat eater.
A raw food diet brings both benefits and harm; the main thing is to choose the right direction for this diet. Despite the strictness of this diet, it has several variations. If you are a beginner raw foodist, we advise you to choose a raw food diet option, the menu of which has a wider assortment: raw vegetables, fruits, raw nuts, yeast-free bread (read about).
What are the main advantages of a raw food diet?
Unlimited portions. A great opportunity to lose weight and improve your health by eating as much as you want;
Hemorrhoids, intestinal sluggishness, hypertension - these and other problems will become a myth for a raw foodist;
Joint disease, urolithiasis, neuroses. If you suffer from these diseases, then a temporary or permanent raw food diet will be an excellent panacea.
Cons of a raw food diet:
General sluggish health;
High probability of exacerbation of allergies;
Failure to comply with proteins, fats and carbohydrates;
Psychological stress, especially for meat eaters who like to eat in excess.
The disadvantages of this diet appear only with a sharp transition from the usual diet and an incorrect selection of products in general.
Raw food diet and vegetarianism: review from a nutritionist
It is definitely impossible to answer the question of which is better - a raw food diet and vegetarianism. The characteristics of each organism are individual; one should not forget about genetic habits and personal taste preferences. Any eating plan will only be beneficial if you enjoy it.The differences between these two systems can be appreciated by re-reading the description of each type.
Modern nutritionists are wary of these food options, and this is a healthy approach. Radical changes can lead to mental disorders, exhaustion, and general harm to the body.
He says that raw food and vegetarianism should be approached gradually, starting from one day at a time, gradually increasing the intervals, and in between, giving up prohibited foods.
Experiments in nutrition or a complete change should be carefully thought out and discussed with your doctor based on your tests.
How many people - so many opinions. There is no one universal panacea for everyone. Each person is individual and chooses the option that they like. If in childhood everyone eats what their mother prepared, then in adulthood the cards are in your hands - you are already an adult and can finally create your ideal diet.
Over the course of a lifetime, taste preferences can change many times, surprising you with more and more new preferences.
There are many power systems. With the advent and popularization of fast food, food culture faded into the background. Family evenings and breakfast around a large table have become rare. But in vain. This is a wonderful tradition, I try my best to preserve it.
Taste preferences are established in childhood. Probably each of us remembers our mother’s favorite dish, our grandmother’s pastries and disgusting semolina porridge from kindergarten. For me, the most terrible food was kindergarten rassolnik (pickled cucumber soup), which was given every day. Since then I haven't liked the first one. Any soup is associated with “need”, and not tasty or healthy. But cottage cheese, I was never forced to eat it, and I didn’t really want it, but as an adult I fell in love with it)
It is in the family that food culture is formed. The manner of eating food, quantity and quality. It’s the same with addiction to alcohol and smoking. If people drink, smoke and eat French fries in bed at home, what should we expect from the heir? Nothing good. An aristocrat will not be raised in such a family. Children eat what their parents eat. During this period, the main menu is laid out for the next 10 years.
I've been a vegetarian for 4 years. This is not heredity, not the choice of parents, but an exclusively acquired desire. My family always ate meat. Moreover, if 5 years ago someone had said that I would give up meat products, I would not have believed it. The morning started with 3-4 cutlets) or didn’t start)
To this day, grandma remembers with what pleasure I ate chops, without leaving the stove while she fried them, and she still can’t believe that I became completely indifferent to them.
Reasons why people exclude meat from their diet, enough. This includes a moral and ethical principle (“thou shalt not kill”), economic motives (greens are cheaper than meat), a medical aspect (diet without cholesterol), family tradition (from parents to children), and physiology (the body refuses itself).
I think the worst option is to impose your system on others. To force, to persuade, to compel. Nutrition is the main condition of human life. This is the intake and absorption by the body of necessary substances to restore lost energy and further vital activity.
Vegetarians don’t shout at every turn that “I don’t eat meat.” This is not something to be proud of, something surprising or unusual. Recently, being a vegetarian has become fashionable. I get asked this question very often “How were you able to give up meat?”. The word “could” is clearly superfluous. For me it was not a painful separation. Oh, if only one day I stopped loving sweets too..)
“I really want to become a vegetarian”
What for? I absolutely don’t see the need to purposefully switch to any of the power systems. If you have lived 20, 30, 40 years and love meat, why torture yourself and become a herbivore? Do you want to lose weight? It’s not meat that makes you gain weight! And from buns, sweets, pasta, Coca-Cola, mayonnaise and chips!
Both vegans and meat eaters can have fat, and before you refuse, understand what you want to achieve with this refusal.
Even though I don't eat meat, I cook it perfectly. My children will eat cutlets, chicken and whatever they want, in no case will my choice affect their diet.
So how did I become a vegetarian?)
I didn’t join Greenpeace and I didn’t convert to Buddhism. I just got a dog) Up to this point, my mother and I cooked occasionally, an omelet, a salad, but not meat dishes. The cooking process itself remained behind the scenes for me. And so, having made an adult decision to get a pet, the parents said, “Now cleaning, cooking, and raising are entirely up to you. If you wanted to, do it."
It’s clear that cooking for an animal and for yourself are two different things. A piece of fresh meat, without spices, salt, or aromatic additives, to put it mildly, it doesn’t smell or look very good) And it’s terribly tough.
In general, I saw the “working material”, without the holiday packaging) and after the 3rd time, I realized that there was absolutely no desire to eat the same bits. The picture of this stale piece in the pan kept popping up before my eyes. Pork, beef, sausages, balyks - everything that was solid, there was no desire to eat. For some time I continued to eat chicken and liver. But after a couple of months, the desire to eat even this disappeared.
“Well, don’t you really want to try!?” for example, the shish kebab that we fried outdoors)))) No) I absolutely don’t want to) Yes, I like the smell of the dish, but I have no desire to eat it. I associate a piece of meat with something not meant to be eaten. For example pressed paper. If you marinate it and serve it beautifully, it won’t become edible) That’s the same with meat.
My parents never forced me to eat certain foods. For example, I haven’t eaten soup since I was 10 years old, and I feel great. If you still believe that constipation is because people don’t eat the first thing, you made me smile).
My refusal to eat meat was perceived as absolutely normal. There are many other products and the light has not converged on pork.
Therefore, if your household does not want to eat something, do not force them. Try to find out the reason for the failure and replace with other products.
After my post, some people started writing: “What kind of vegetarian are you!? Vegetarians don’t eat seafood, fish, or eggs!” Guys, do you really think that I would write something that I don’t know or that I’m not sure about?) and you opened America to me)
I want to explain once and for all who is who, so that such ridiculous statements will no longer be heard.
As was written earlier, there are a huge number of power systems. Conventionally, it is customary to divide people into those who eat meat (meat eaters) and those who do not eat meat (vegetarians).
To be precise - I'm a pesco-vegetarian) but saying this word to people who are far from knowledge of the system = square eyes, 1000 questions and a lot of wasted time.
Therefore, for everyone who doesn’t know, I’m just a vegetarian) And now in more detail.
Various types of vegetarianism are practiced. True vegetarians They don’t eat meat, chicken or fish at all.
Lacto-vegetarians eat dairy products, but do not eat eggs.
Ovo-vegetarians eat eggs but do not consume dairy products.
Lacto-ovo-vegetarians They eat dairy products and eggs, but exclude meat, poultry and fish.
Pesco-vegetarians They eat fish and eggs, but do not eat meat and poultry.
Raw foodists They differ from everyone else in that they eat exclusively fresh foods without subjecting them to heat treatment. Everything is only in its natural form. Raw foodists are closest to vegans, but there are also omnivorous raw foodists(all types of food, including meat, fish, dairy, but only in raw form). Carnivorous raw foodists(raw meat, fish. Keep fruits and vegetables to a minimum). Fruitarianism(raw fruits) vegetarian and vegan raw food diet(see vegetarian systems. The same principle only without heat treatment).
Initially, the system is not selected. During the process of nutrition, the body itself regulates the need for food, and after 1-2 years you can easily determine which clan you belong to)
I never say never. There are periods in a woman’s life when everything turns upside down and an avid vegetarian becomes an ardent carnivorous raw foodist (I want bloody meat).
Just kidding) In general, I'm talking about hormones and pregnancy. If I ever want doctor’s sausage, no problem, I’ll buy it and eat it.
Is it necessary to purposefully give up foods?
It depends on which ones. If these are whites from the station, of course refuse them, no matter how much you love them, there is nothing useful in them.
And if these are meat dishes that you absolutely love, why exclude them?! Eat for your health!
Advantages and disadvantages of vegetarianism.
—
Feeling of lightness. Meat is a fairly heavy food and takes much longer to digest than fruits or vegetables.
—
The sweat secretions of vegetarians and meat eaters are really different. For the former, the sweat has no odor, while for the latter it is more pungent and noticeable. I'm not talking about dirty armpits.
—
It's not that cheap to be a vegetarian anymore. If you eat carrots from the garden, it’s possible. And if you buy organic dairy products and organic vegetables/fruits, the price of meat is not even close)
Vegetarian man.
I don't understand at all. A normal man should eat meat. A lot of meat. Dandelions, cheesecakes, salads... where does the strength come from, brother? I am against pimples and against male vegetarianism.
Where do you get your protein if you don't eat meat?
And really, why don't you ask this before you find out that I'm a vegetarian?)
Meat is not the main source of protein. There are many products that can perfectly replace it.
There is a theory that initially all people were herbivores, and only during the Ice Age, when there was practically no vegetation left, were they forced to eat meat.
Dairy products, a protein alternative to meat?
Including. But only on the condition that you have complete lactose tolerance and no dysbacteriosis.
Again, after the publication of my diet, some claimed that dairy was almost poison and should not be eaten.
As you can see, she’s alive and well)
Products should be chosen based on what suits you. I can drink a liter of milk and feel great, and you, with lactose intolerance, from one glass will spend the whole evening in sartir. Of course, there will be no benefit from such food. More likely harm.
Don’t blindly follow advice and recommendations, tormenting yourself with products you don’t like. Always listen to your body, it knows best what you need.
