ATLANTA (CBS ATLANTA) – Vegetarians may have a lower BMI and drink alcohol sparingly, but vegetarian diets are tied to generally poorer health, poorer quality of life and a higher need for health care than their meat-eating counterparts.
A new study from the Medical University of Graz in Austria finds that vegetarians are more physically active, drink less alcohol and smoke less tobacco than those who consume meat in their diets. Vegetarians also have a higher socioeconomic status and a lower body mass index. But the vegetarian diet — characterized by a low consumption of saturated fats and cholesterol that includes increased intake of fruits, vegetables and whole-grain products — carries elevated risks of cancer, allergies and mental health disorders.
Vegetarians were twice as likely to have allergies, a 50 percent increase in heart attacks and a 50 percent increase in incidences of cancer.
The cross-sectional study from Austrian Health Interview Survey data and published in PLos One examined participants dietary habits, demographic characteristics and general lifestyle differences.
The most significant dietary habit difference between meat-eaters and vegetarians concerned their BMI and alcohol consumption – with both being higher for those who consume meat.
Many past studies have instead put an emphasis on the health risks associated with red meat and carnivorous diets, but this study points the other dietary direction. However, the researchers do caution that continuing studies will be needed to substantiate some of the rather broad dietary distinctions, associations presented in this current research.
Overall, vegetarians were found to be in a poorer state of health compared to other dietary groups. Vegetarians reported higher levels of impairment from disorders, chronic diseases, and “suffer significantly more often from anxiety/depression.”
Subjects who consumed lower amounts of animal fat were also linked to poor health care practices, such as avoidance of vaccinations and a lack of preventive care.
Chronic problems associated with vegetarians and people eating carnivorous diets rich in fruits and vegetables were linked to more frequent visits to doctors, which the study authors suggest requires public health programs to reduce the health risk due to their nutritional factors.
The researchers conclude: “Our study has shown that Austrian adults who consume a vegetarian diet are less healthy (in terms of cancer, allergies, and mental health disorders), have a lower quality of life, and also require more medical treatment.”
“Therefore, a continued strong public health program for Austria is required in order to reduce the health risk due to nutritional factors.”
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention notes that healthy diets rich in fruits and vegetables may reduce the risk of cancer and other chronic diseases for all dietary groups. A 2009 study from the CDC found that about 1 in 200 young Americans, or 367,000 US children, are vegetarians.
– Benjamin Fearnow


----------------------------------------------


THIS IS SUCH BS. CALL TO ACTION: I commented- on the article, that it was BS. You guys should too. The link is here
[atlanta.cbslocal.com]





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/02/2014 06:09PM by coconutcream.

It's a bogus, flawed study obviously funded by people with an agenda, probably big pharma or the meat industry. The sad part is that people will actually believe this. Actually, the entire thing looks completely fake and I highly doubt there even was a study. These types of things are becoming more and more see-through.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 04/02/2014 06:06PM by jtprindl.

there exist the so called "junk vegetarians." So vegetarian does not really mean much. There are non-vegetarian people that die at age ~35 and have poor quality of live. What does that prove?

Vegetarianism of the past was very bad.
Eating cooked beans and tofu. Very unhealthy.
Now we have juices, green smoothies, sprouts, micro greens and seaweeds.
And b12 supplementation.

I almost believe studies like this. I've been around this movement for awhile and so far the results I've seen haven't lived up to the hype.

For me, longevity is a key indicator, such that an ancient Sequioa lives to a long age because the conditions for its longevity are right.

The same goes for humans, diet philosophy is just an empty theory without the longevity to back it up.

When The Sproutarian said he would live to some 60 years of age and exit, that gave me pause as to his diet...Not enough stamina to have the will to live.

How does this represent a scientific and fair approach when you will be interviewing those who are on rawfood and have mental health issues?

What about those on rawfood with no mental health issues?

And some of those with mental issues may have come to raw food to find a cure.

savvyjb Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> These are very interesting findings, and a timely
> study too. I am a doctoral candidate who just so
> happen to be a raw vegan. I have decided to
> narrow my doctoral dissertation interests down to
> researching this phenomenon - raw foodism,
> particularly as it comes to mental health. I am
> going to post a new thread asking for individuals
> who are/were rawtarians who had or know someone
> with a mental health issue (depression, anxiety,
> bipolar, ADHD) to participate in my study. I
> simply want to briefly interview these ones to
> find out how this dietary lifestyle improved their
> mental health. This study will be a balanced
> study published and available for anyone to read.

I don't think this will be ok'ed as a doctoral dissertation unless things have changed radically over the years and are done way differently now.

There is just no way you will know if what people are telling you is true for one of way too many problematic things with this idea. IMO.

@Nunativs, i think that is projection on your part. Maybe in your life and mind it requires stamina and will to want to live beyond 60. Some folks are happy in the present and dont desire longevity per se. Dont make that wrong or bad. :-) and ofc my own post does not contain any passive aggressive comments about peoples stamina. I am purely addressing longevity desires.

Sounds like disguised suicide to me. I believe WE are here to Live as long and as abundantly as possible. Everything contrary to that is a premature exit and thus contrary to what Life IS.

A mighty aged oak knows nothing more than to continue to thrust its roots ever deeper into the ground, and reach ever higher into the sky and shower more and more acorns down upon the Earth bringing yet more Life onto the planet. The thought of death never on its mind.

If only WE could stop thinking so much and do the same...

From the study:

"Potential limitations of our results are due to the fact that the
survey was based on cross-sectional data. Therefore, no statements
can be made whether the poorer health in vegetarians in our study
is caused by their dietary habit or if they consume this form of diet
due to their poorer health status."

[www.plosone.org]



So its possible there are a great number of sick people who turn to a vegetarian diet for its healthfulness, which could skew the results (or conclusions)..

Thats your belief, nunativs. Not everyone else's:-)

I'm not sure what you're arguing for..the desire to want to die young is healthy?!? Seems contrary to the design of Life to me, seems that all living organisms try to Live as long as possible...YMMV

What is healthy is keeping your ego out of it and stop making judgments and assumptions

Powerlifter is being missed here. He would have enlightened us about this topic



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/05/2014 05:03AM by CommonSenseRaw.

from: [www.facebook.com]

Note from Dr.Garth Davis:

“Social media, and its infinite viral wisdom, strikes again. A ridiculously bad article was published in an online crappy journal and it is now spreading like wildfire as if it is the truth handed down by God.

The article states that vegetarians are less healthy than meat eaters. What?! There has never been a study that has been so bold as to state such a fact! They must have something big, right? I mean this goes against the vast majority of recent science. Anytime an article is an outlier it needs to be well understood, and for it to have meaning it should be replicated. So lets take a look.

This study is from Austria. They looked at over 15,000 people. So since this is a comparative study I would imagine there must be quiet a few vegetarians right? WRONG!!!! 0.2% where vegetarian. That is it. A few measly vegetarians. With such a low amount there is no way that you can do an adequately powered statistical analysis, so the authors didn’t try. Instead they matched the few vegetarians they had with age matched meat eaters. Some of the vegetarians had no age matched counterparts so they were dropped from the study!!!!! Even fewer vegetarians now.

OK so we are going to take these few vegetarians and compare them with meat eaters and follow them for years and see how the do, right? WRONG!!!!! They just did one interview with them to assess their health and their eating habits. So do we know how long they have been vegetarian? No. Could they have turned vegetarian because they were sick. Of course. Many people facing a diagnosis of heart disease turn to vegetarian diet. In this case the heart disease would have been equated with being vegetarian. This was a 1 day study not a multiple year prospective study like the Adventist Health Study.

Well at least we should be able to discern exactly what “vegetarian ” means, right? We should at least know that these vegetarians are in fact eating vegetables, right? Wrong! They applied labels on people but never assessed their exact meal plan. There is no mention as to how many fruits and veggies they were eating. In fact, they noted that the vegetarians were less likely to pursue preventative health, which in itself could explain their poor health. What this means is that these people were unlikely vegetarian for health reasons. In predominately meat eating populations when you find very few people abstaining from meat, and not going in for regular doctors visits, it could be that they are “ethical” vegetarians. In other words, they do not eat meat because of the cruelty aspect. Often times these people eat quite a junk food diet. Lots of processed carbs and not much actual fruit and veggies.

In the end this is just bad science. Their conclusion is not worth the paper this would have been printed on had it actually been printed. Instead this wound up on an online journal known for poor peer review. This was not debated at a large scientific conference. This study would have gotten F had a student turned it into me, regardless of the findings, just based on the poor experimental design. In the end, this study would have been never looked at again, except that social media loves a good controversial study that confirms what everybody wants to believe. Now it is showing up all over the internet as if Harvard had just released the study in The New England Journal of Medicine. And this is why people get so confused!”



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/05/2014 02:43PM by Panchito.

Its funny, even if I wanted to be vegan or vegetarian, I cannot be. I am naturally raw vegan. I can't be anything else no matter how hungry I get or pregnancy cravings I have. I have to stay raw to stay on track.

Panchito thats a great response.

I know vegetarians may not be healthiest people, but compared to meat eaters? Are they saying meat eaters are healthier???

A person on a plant-based diet with the exception of some wild-caught salmon is arguably going to be much more healthy than a vegetarian who eats fried mozzarella sticks and potato chips, etc. every day. I'm speaking in obvious terms here, right? This is not a black or white dilemma. There are variant degrees of vegetarianism and carnivorism.

coconutcream Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Panchito thats a great response.
>
> I know vegetarians may not be healthiest people,
> but compared to meat eaters? Are they saying meat
> eaters are healthier???

Austrians have terrible high processed diets. Lots of cake, high fat animal stuff, sausages, fried fried fried. etc. My guess is the the vegetarian Austrian cuisine is similar (junk). I saw it a long time ago on Anthony Bourdain tv show.

[www.google.com]

Yet Austrians, according to 2 different metrics, have the 19th and 14th highest life expectancy rates in the world. You basically linked pictures of foods that are considered "Austrian" and then cited a tv show. Are we really supposed to assume that this is what the average Austrian eats every day? [en.wikipedia.org]

Panchito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Austrians have terrible high processed diets. Lots
> of cake, high fat animal stuff, sausages, fried
> fried fried. etc. My guess is the the vegetarian
> Austrian cuisine is similar (junk). I saw it a
> long time ago on Anthony Bourdain tv show.
>
> [www.google.com]
> ource=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=4dJBU5G7FYHk0gGsuoGYAw
> &ved=0CAgQ_AUoAQ&biw=1280&bih=909

They eat and drink elaborate culinary junk. BTW wealth has more effect on longevity than diet. There are many other factors like stress, hormones (TOR, SOD), etc.

[en.wikipedia.org]

Well yeah because people with money are typically more educated than the poor and make better dietary decisions that often require more money. You know nothing about what Austrians eat. You have a mild grasp on traditional Austrian cuisine from a quick google search and an episode of a tv show. Per usual, you talk out of your emotional, one-track keister.

Panchito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They eat and drink elaborate culinary junk. BTW
> wealth has more effect on longevity than diet.
> There are many other factors like stress, hormones
> (TOR, SOD), etc.
>
> [en.wikipedia.org]
> _per_capita_personal_income



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/07/2014 12:33AM by HH.

you assume many things. as usual, you talk out of your emotional keister.