As an example of a plant-based food that has an almost perfect balance of essential amino acids and is high in protein, Quinoa:
http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/cereal-grains-and-pasta/10352/2 (warning, if you're like me, this site can be a little addicting... I find myself looking up everything... "oooo, look, pretty graphs") <http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/cereal-grains-and-pasta/10352/2>Yes, Quinoa is not currently going to feed the world, as we currently try to do with corn, rice, and soy (and often fail as it is), so these amino acids are a real problem if the whole world were to become 100% vegan. However, it is possible to be healthy and be vegan if you know what you're doing and have enough money to afford the things you need or have the environment and resources to grow your own. Perhaps there are native plants in many of the places that need more protein that could be cultivated more greatly. Quinoa is the secret of the Andes after all, that has now been "discovered" by some of us North Americans. Of our countries health problems, my opinion (based on quite a bit of personal investigation into nutrition) is that meat consumption is related to far more of our health problems than is a malnutrition due to a lack of amino acids. Sure there are lean meats and a lot of problems come from fats and simple carbs, which are not necessarily part of a meat based diet. But in this country these things are often associated (e.g. fast food hamburger). A more plant-based diet, that may contain animal products, but to a lesser amount, is now recommended by many, if not most, nutritionists. So, I think concerns over amino acid acquisition related to a vegetarian diet are primarily those of countries where people are struggling to achieve minimal nutrition. Those countries tend to have relatively low "footprints." If everyone in this wealthy nation became vegetarian, I think we would have no problems getting all our amino acids and many of us would be much healthier for it. I do not, however, advocate everyone becoming vegan or even vegetarian. I myself am more of psuedo-vegetarian. The chairman of the IPCC didn't say we should all become vegan, he just encouraged us all to eat less meat, because of the direct, demonstrated link between livestock and greenhouse gases (like I said... around 20% of all human related emissions... more than all cars). Additionally, if you don't eat very much meat, you can afford to buy more "sustainable" animal products for when you do decide to eat some. Not all animal products are equal when it comes to environmental impact. All that said, really, I AM NOT ADVOCATING THAT I AM BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSE OR HAVE ALL THE SOLUTIONS, I DON'T. In fact, if you read the last paragraph of my original message, I am saying just the opposite... that we should all try to be open to other ways to live and not be trapped by our own perceptions, cultures, and habits. For instance, I found Malcolm's suggestion that we should all eat more goat products and less cow really interesting. Seems reasonable to me (and tasty, as I love goat cheese). I still think it would be really interesting to conduct some polling about lifestyle choices made by different groups and ages of ecologists and the general public. Many people think knowledge translates into action. Does it? This kind of study would help to answer that question. Some recent research by a professor at my own university suggests that one thing that does translate into action is social norms. If all your friend's are doing it, you feel like you doing it too. http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200907/green-envy We need more discussion about different lifestyle choices and more information about what other people are doing. Thanks for a great bunch of responses everyone! Kevin On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 7:03 PM, malcolm McCallum < [email protected]> wrote: > here is a quick article that briefly discusses amino acid deficiencies > in plants. Of course, you must manage your diet very carefully, but > lys, trp, and met are the key AA of importance here. > http://www.plantphysiol.org/cgi/content/full/147/3/954 > > I tried to find further references, but simply do not have the time. > > M > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Lesley Campbell <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > > > While I'm more than happy to agree that the amount that ecologists travel > > (relative to the average earth resident) is an outrageous disaster, and > I'm > > happy to agree that curbing travel has a far larger impact on one's > > ecological footprint than curbing the consumption of animal products, the > > statement that humans cannot survive on a plant based diet is clearly > false. > > Humans do not require any animal-derived amino acids (although they are > > certainly tasty!). If it is not proof enough that there are entire > cultures > > (with reasonable life-spans) that eat strictly vegetarian diets, just > survey > > the academic literature on vegetarian (vs non-vegetarian) health. > Vegetarian > > diets do require humans to consume foods differently than non-vegetarians > > but they are not impossible, nor unhealthy. Unfortunately, most people > > switch to a vegan diet with little education in nutrition and end up > rapidly > > depleting essential nutrients that come from food the normal North > American > > doesn't use regularly. > > > > Here's an abstract of a the first comparative study of vegetarians and > > non-vegetarians I pulled up on Web of science. It looks as if Buddhist > > vegetarian nuns are just as healthy (if not more) as non-vegetarian > > omnivores. > > > > Body composition and nutrient intake of Buddhist vegetarians (2009) > > Lee, Yujin, Krawinkel, Michael. > > ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION 18(2): 265-271 > > Abstract: We described the body composition and nutrient intake of > Buddhist > > vegetarians and compared the data with that of omnivores in South Korea. > > Vegetarian subjects were 54 Buddhist nuns, who adhered to a vegetarian > diet > > in accordance with Buddhist teachings. We compared these finding with a > > group of 31 omnivore Catholic nuns who shared a similar lifestyle but > > different dietary pattern than those of the Buddhist nuns. All subjects > > completed the estimated three-day dietary record. Body composition was > > determined by a segmental multi-frequency-bioelectrical impedance > analysis > > method. No height difference between the dietary groups existed but the > > vegetarians had a significantly higher body weight, fat free mass, body > fat > > and body mass index (BMI, kg/m(2)) than the omnivores. The median BMI of > > both vegetarians and omnivores fell in the normal range (22.6 vs. 20.7 > > kg/m(2)). In vegetarians, body fat was inversely correlated with the > > duration of vegetarianism (p for trend = 0.043). The long duration group > of > > the vegetarians had lower body fat than the short duration group (12.1 > vs. > > 15.0 kg, p = 0.032). The status of the nutrient intake of Korean Buddhist > > vegetarians was comparable to that of omnivores, and the intake of some > > nutrients in vegetarians was more favorable than in the omnivores. > > > > And the most highly cited, manipulative study I could find, revealed that > a > > vegetarian diet (including dairy products) has beneficial consequences > for > > blood pressure. > > > > A clinical trial of the effects of dietary patterns on blood pressure > (1997) > > Appel LJ, Moore TJ, Obarzanek E, Vollmer WM, Svetkey LP, Sacks FM, Bray > GA, > > Vogt TM, Cutler JA, Windhauser MM, Lin PH, Karanja N > > NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE 336 (16): 1117-1124 > > > > Abstract: Background It is known that obesity, sodium intake, and alcohol > > consumption influence blood pressure. In this clinical trial, Dietary > > Approaches to Stop Hypertension, we assessed the effects of dietary > patterns > > on blood pressure. > > Methods We enrolled 459 adults with systolic blood pressures of less than > > 160 mm Hg and diastolic blood pressures of 80 to 95 mm Hg. For three > weeks, > > the subjects were fed a control diet that was low in fruits, vegetables, > and > > dairy products, with a fat content typical of the average diet in the > United > > States. They were then randomly assigned to receive for eight weeks the > > control diet, a diet rich in fruits and vegetables, or a ''combination'' > > diet rich in fruits, vegetables, and low-fat dairy products and with > reduced > > saturated and total fat. Sodium intake and body weight were maintained at > > constant levels. > > > > Results At base line, the mean (+/-SD) systolic and diastolic blood > > pressures were 131.3+/-10.8 mm Hg and 84.+/-4.7 mm Hg, respectively. The > > combination diet reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure by 5.5 and > > 3.0 mm Hg more, respectively, than the control diet (P<0.001 for each); > the > > fruits-and-vegetables diet reduced systolic blood pressure by 2.8 mm Hg > more > > (P<0.001) and diastolic blood pressure by 1.1 mm Hg more (P=0.07) than > the > > control diet. Among the 133 subjects with hypertension (systolic > pressure, > > greater than or equal to 140 mm Hg; diastolic pressure, greater than or > > equal to 90 mm Hg; or both), the combination diet reduced systolic and > > diastolic blood pressure by 11.4 and 5.5 mm Hg more, respectively, than > the > > control diet (P<0.001 for each); among the 326 subjects without > > hypertension, the corresponding reductions were 3.5 mm Hg (P<0.001) and > 2.1 > > mm Hg (P=0.003). > > > > Conclusions A diet rich in fruits, vegetables, and low-fat dairy foods > and > > with reduced saturated and total fat can substantially lower blood > pressure. > > This diet offers an additional nutritional approach to preventing and > > treating hypertension. (C) 1997, Massachusetts Medical Society. > > > > > > On Sep 8, 2009, at 10:50 PM, malcolm McCallum wrote: > > > >> I tend to believe that any absolute answer that is declared an end all > >> answer > >> is probably not the answer. For example, I'm not convinced that > everyone > >> jumping into a vegetarian diet is going to suddenly or even slowly > >> save the world. > >> Especially, considering that some of these stats are based on > unrealistic > >> estimates. > >> > >> For example, suggesting that x acres of corn would feed x number of cows > >> and > >> that would feed x number of people whereas the x acres of corn would > feed > >> way > >> more people is flawed. Humans cannot survive on a corn diet. Even if > >> we expanded > >> this to grains and soybeans, humans cannot survive on a corn-soybean > diet. > >> Why? because vegetables in general are low in two or three essential > >> amino acids > >> that humans must get in their diet. those amino acids are produced by > >> animals > >> and so you must ultimately get them from animals or artificially > >> produced products. > >> > >> Furthermore, even if the plant has x amount of lysine for example, the > >> amount in > >> the plant is not completely biologically available to the human > >> because we simply > >> do not have the enzymes for breaking these products down. > >> > >> Also, outside of feedlots where high-concentrate diets are fed, if you > >> look at > >> grass fed cattle/sheep/goats you are going to find that these animals > >> are raised > >> on lands that are not very suitable for food crop production AND that > much > >> of > >> what they are fed is not human food but rather grasses. However, most > >> beef is fed out in feedlots and relatively little is raised on grass. > >> Sheep and > >> goats, however, are virtually entirely fed using areas that would not be > >> used > >> for any kind of crop farming. > >> > >> Now, growing row crops such as corn and soybeans is not a one-to-one > >> conversion > >> to growing horticultural food crops. Horticultural food crops require > >> more intensive > >> care in order for them to have shelf life and for other technical > >> reasons. The seeds > >> are planted further apart, the rows further apart and the necessary > >> irrigation and > >> pest control much more extreme than row crops. Other crops such as > fruits > >> waste tons of land in comparison. It takes a good 5 years before a > fruit > >> tree > >> reaches maturity (semi dwarf) and closer to two years for a dwarf. > Again, > >> high use of pesticides is the norm. And what about nuts? Aren't > >> these one of the > >> wonder foods that will supplant meat in our diet??? Well, a pecan tree > >> takes a > >> good 15-30 years to reach maturity depending on the hybrid!!!! now that > >> tree > >> will produce for a good long time, but do you really think a pecan > orchard > >> is > >> all that productive? > >> > >> Overall, we would do well to lower our meat intake for both > environmental > >> and > >> health reasons. However, if we wanted to really do this right, we > >> would all buy > >> a goat for milk, have it eat our grass and weeds for milk, then eat the > >> kids. > >> > >> In fact, goat meat is much more in line with human nutrition than lamb > and > >> lamb > >> more in line than beef or pork. > >> > >> My wife and I have our own flock of chickens we use for eggs. We raise > a > >> couple of pigs each year, and do raise a few meat goats each year. I > >> still > >> like to eat a nice juicy steak once in a while. We raise most of our > >> vegetables > >> from the garden, although the weather in East Texas has been anti-garden > >> for > >> three years strait...luckily, we put away a lot three years ago. > >> > >> I don't know if what I am doing is making any great contribution to the > >> earth's > >> environment. I certainly can't say that I'm setting some great example, > >> as > >> who the heck sees what I'm doing anyway? However, I have always had > this > >> idea that pseudohomesteading (my term I invented comparing what we do to > >> the > >> movement from the 1970s) would be fun. So, we are doing it because we > >> like to live this > >> way. If it wasn't for a pile of student loans and medical bills, I > >> might just go off the > >> grid and give the world the proverbial phalange, except for the > >> occassional journal > >> article I publish, letter to the editor, and maybe even a listserv > >> post if I kept the > >> internet for contact with the real world. I also enjoy watching TV, > >> so it can't go > >> either. And then there is central air and heat. Oh, and running water. > >> Radio, > >> music, damn....I'm back on the grid and almost hit yupeeville :( > >> > >> If everyone pics ONE CAUSE and stuck with it, the world would be a > better > >> place. > >> If your cause is recycling, and you do it religiously, and a bunch of > >> other people also do it, > >> it will have an impact. > >> > >> But the real problem is that there are a lot of people who do > >> absolutely nothing, have > >> absolutely no interest in the health of the environment, and a mess of > >> people who are > >> actually at war with environmental causes. If even most people tried > >> to do something, > >> I think you would see an environmental revolution. Unfortunately, most > >> people > >> are consumed by other things and even if they are concerned about the > >> environment, > >> they really are not engaged in anything of environmental importance. > >> > >> How's that for a completely bleak outlook. > >> Ask me tomorrow and I may have a more positive slant! > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Kevin McCluney<[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> I recently attended the 2009 annual meeting of the Ecological Society > of > >>> America (ESA). The theme of this year’s meeting was sustainability. > >>> There > >>> were many great talks on this subject and a few truly pessimistic ones. > >>> One > >>> speaker proposed that human beings are, by our very nature, destined to > >>> consume and reproduce as much as possible, and despite our best > efforts, > >>> this will lead to our own demise. During the same talk the speaker > also > >>> asked, “who is responsible?” He answered his question by saying that > we > >>> at > >>> this conference are just as much a part of the problem as anyone else. > >>> > >>> Is this true? I know I myself have taken many steps to lower my > >>> footprint > >>> and many other ecologists have as well. > >>> > >>> For instance, at last year’s ESA meeting in Milwaukee there was an > >>> interesting occurrence at local restaurants. The first night of the > >>> conference I had a really good veggie burger at one restaurant. I went > >>> back > >>> later in the week for another. The waitress apologized… they were all > >>> out. > >>> She went on to explain that the manager had heard our conference was > >>> coming > >>> to town, so bought extra ahead of time, but ran out of those quickly > >>> anyway. > >>> The manager then went to the local grocery store and bought more. But > >>> alas, > >>> by the time I returned, they had run out of those as well. Further, > when > >>> I > >>> dine with friends at ESA meetings, I often find that more than half the > >>> table orders vegetarian entrees. > >>> > >>> Why does eating vegetarian matter so much? Modern, industrialized > >>> livestock > >>> production is one of the more environmentally destructive human > >>> endeavors. > >>> It contributes roughly one fifth of all our greenhouse gas emissions, > >>> more > >>> than all cars, and these gases are major contributors to the rapid > >>> climate > >>> change we’re experiencing. Livestock production also may, in certain > >>> cases, > >>> be leading to deforestation and destruction of important ecosystems, as > >>> well > >>> as to pollution of rivers, lakes, and even oceans. In addition, we all > >>> know > >>> that basic ecological principles hold that it takes less resources to > >>> raise > >>> plant based food sources than meat based, since energy is lost as you > >>> move > >>> up the food chain. Thus we can feed more people and use fewer > resources > >>> on > >>> a plant-based diet. All this caused the chairman of the > >>> Intergovernmental > >>> Panel on Climate Change recently to proclaim that the best thing a > person > >>> could do to reduce their impact on climate change was to eat a more > >>> plant- > >>> based diet. > >>> > >>> My wife and I haven’t stopped at eating low on the food chain. We’ve > >>> also > >>> joined community supported agriculture, where we buy a share of produce > >>> from > >>> a local farm. The farmer gets upfront economic security and we get > very > >>> affordable, local, fresh organic produce. We pay just $18 per week for > a > >>> large bag of food. At this price we can afford to supplement our diet > >>> with > >>> additional organic items from the grocery store. > >>> > >>> We’ve also taken a variety of other steps, from riding my bike to work, > >>> to > >>> offsetting car and air travel through renewable energy from an > >>> independently > >>> certified company, to buying 100% of our electricity from renewable > >>> sources > >>> through our local utility for as little as $15 per month. > >>> > >>> While we may not be reaching the small ecological footprint of those in > >>> many > >>> third world countries, we’ve done our best to come in line with our > >>> planet’s > >>> limits while maintaining a decent quality of life. > >>> > >>> So, are ecologists just as much a part of the problem as everyone else? > >>> Are > >>> all ecologists the same? What are the variety of lifestyle choices > made > >>> by > >>> ecologists? Not only would the answers to these questions provide a > >>> response to the ESA presenter, but I think the answer would be > >>> interesting > >>> to a wide audience. I propose that ESA conduct a poll of members, > asking > >>> questions about lifestyle choices and demographics, comparing ours to > >>> that > >>> of the general public. If we are not different, this would be a bit of > a > >>> wake-up call. However, if we are different, then perhaps some of our > >>> lifestyle choices would be informative to understanding how to achieve > a > >>> more sustainable society. > >>> > >>> If there is one thing I learned from a cultural anthropology course I > >>> once > >>> took, it was that there isn’t just one right way to live. Human > cultures > >>> throughout the world are very diverse. But, from the inside of one > >>> culture > >>> it is often very hard to see other ways to live. Let us not be trapped > >>> in > >>> our culture, but seek a better understanding of all the ways of living, > >>> so > >>> that we might find a more sustainable path. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Kevin E. McCluney > >>> Graduate Student > >>> School of Life Sciences > >>> Arizona State University > >>> Tempe, AZ 85287-4601 > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Malcolm L. McCallum > >> Associate Professor of Biology > >> Managing Editor, > >> Herpetological Conservation and Biology > >> Texas A&M University-Texarkana > >> Fall Teaching Schedule: > >> Vertebrate Biology - TR 10-11:40; General Ecology - MW 1-2:40pm; > >> Forensic Science - W 6-9:40pm > >> Office Hourse- TBA > >> > >> 1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea" W.S. Gilbert > >> 1990's: Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss, > >> and pollution. > >> 2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction > >> MAY help restore populations. > >> 2022: Soylent Green is People! > >> > >> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any > >> attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may > >> contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized > >> review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not > >> the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and > >> destroy all copies of the original message. > >> > >> > >> -- > >> BEGIN-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS > >> ------------------------------------------------------ > >> > >> Teach CanIt if this mail (ID 931782601) is spam: > >> Spam: > https://antispam.osu.edu/b.php?i=931782601&m=974a7b4b1780&c=s > >> Not spam: > https://antispam.osu.edu/b.php?i=931782601&m=974a7b4b1780&c=n > >> Forget vote: > https://antispam.osu.edu/b.php?i=931782601&m=974a7b4b1780&c=f > >> ------------------------------------------------------ > >> END-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > Malcolm L. McCallum > Associate Professor of Biology > Managing Editor, > Herpetological Conservation and Biology > Texas A&M University-Texarkana > Fall Teaching Schedule: > Vertebrate Biology - TR 10-11:40; General Ecology - MW 1-2:40pm; > Forensic Science - W 6-9:40pm > Office Hourse- TBA > > 1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea" W.S. Gilbert > 1990's: Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss, > and pollution. > 2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction > MAY help restore populations. > 2022: Soylent Green is People! > > Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any > attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may > contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized > review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not > the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and > destroy all copies of the original message. > -- Kevin E. McCluney Graduate Student School of Life Sciences Arizona State University Tempe, AZ 85287-4601 "I am only one; but still I am one. I cannot do everything, but still I can do something; I will not refuse to do something I can do." --Helen Keller
