Vegetarianism and the role of meat in human evolution?

11 Comments

1. AndyB says:

   June 13, 2009 at 4:39 pm

   That's quite a complex question.

   I do know that with a herbivorous diet we wouldn't have been able to grow such large brains, and eating meat contributed hugely to our evolution, but I'm unsure of how that would affect successive generations NOW. I know that there would be very serious problems with veggie diets were fortified foods or supplements not around, our body cannot digest all types of plant matter or get everything from plants alone. That does correspond to whet you mentioned about the link to digestion and brain size, as that affected the evolution of our digestive system. I don't believe it's as good a diet nutritionally, even with supplements (especially considering that the nutrients aren't as good quality when taken in such unnatural forms), and obviously nutrition affects following generations, but beyond that I have no idea.

   I'll just give you this link, it's quite a long and complex article (or series of articles) on meat and evolution. The answer to your question is bound to be in there somewhere, although a bit of digging may be required.

   http://www.beyondveg.com/index.shtml
2. Irina C says:

   June 13, 2009 at 4:39 pm

   Vegetarianism
   From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
   Jump to: navigation, search
   For plant-eating, non-human animals, see Herbivore.
   Vegetarianism is the practice of not consuming meat or fish (although fish is technically meat)[1], with or without the use of dairy products or eggs. Some people choose to refrain from wearing clothing derived from animals, such as leather and fur. Veganism excludes all animal products from diet and attire, whether or not this involves the actual death of an animal (dairy, eggs, honey, down feathers and silk). Vegetarians are found in countries across the world with varied motivations including religious, ethical, enviromental, and health concerns. Many are also just pragmatists who recognise that vegetarianism is a much more efficient means of feeding people (i.e. it takes less land and resources).

   Gnocchi with mushrooms and tomatoes, a typical vegetarian dish in the Western world.Contents [hide]
   1 Terminology and varieties of vegetarianism
   2 Vegetarian cuisine
   3 History
   4 Motivation
   4.1 Religious
   4.2 Nutritional
   4.3 Ethical
   4.4 Environmental
   4.5 Physiological
   4.6 Psychological
   4.7 Food safety
   4.8 Social
   4.9 Spiritual
   4.10 Medical
   5 Vegetarian clothing
   6 Vegetarian societies
   7 Country specific information
   8 Criticism
   8.1 Vegetarian diet and longevity
   8.2 Health
   8.3 Resources
   9 References
   10 See also
   11 External Links
   12 Recommended Reading

   [edit]
   Terminology and varieties of vegetarianism
   Different practices of vegetarianism include:

   Lacto vegetarianism — Lacto vegetarians do not eat meat or eggs but do consume dairy products. Most vegetarians in India and those in the classical Mediterranean lands, such as Pythagoreans, are or were lacto vegetarian.
   Lacto-ovo vegetarianism (also called eggitarian colloquially in India) — Lacto-ovo vegetarians do not eat meat but do consume dairy products and eggs. This is currently the most common variety in the Western world.
   Ovo vegetarianism — Ovo vegetarians do not eat meat or dairy products but do eat eggs.
   Veganism — Those who avoid eating any animal products, including eggs, milk, cheese, and sometimes honey, are known specifically as dietary vegans or strict vegetarians[2]. Some vegans choose not to wear animals prodcuts such as leather and fur.
   The following are less common practices of vegetarianism:

   Raw food diet involves any type of vegetable, usually vegan, which is not heated above 46.7 °C (116 °F) ; it may be warmed slightly or raw, but never cooked. Raw foodists argue that cooking destroys enzymes and/or portions of each nutrient. However, some raw foodists believe certain foods become more bio-available when warmed slightly as the process softens them, which more than negates the destruction of nutrients and enzymes. Other raw foodists, called "living foodists", activate the enzymes through soaking the food in water a while before consumption. Some spiritual raw foodists are also fruitarians, and many eat only organic foods.
   Macrobiotic diet involves a diet consisting mostly of whole grains and beans and is usually spiritually based, like fruitarianism.
   Natural Hygiene, in its classic form, involves a diet principally of raw vegan foods.
   Fruitarianism involves a diet of only fruit, nuts, seeds, and other plant matter that can be gathered without harming the plant. Some fruitarians eat only plant matter that has already fallen off the plant. Thus, a fruitarian will eat beans, tomatoes, cucumbers, pumpkins, and the like, but will refuse to eat potatoes or spinach. It is disputed whether it is possible to avoid malnutrition with a fruitarian diet, which is rarer than other types of vegetarian or vegan diet.[citation needed]
   The following similarly named diets are not considered full vegetarianism:

   Pesco/pollo vegetarianism (semi-vegetarianism, poultratarianism) — Some people choose to avoid certain types of meat for many of the same reasons that others choose vegetarianism: health, enviroment, ethical beliefs, etc. For example, some people will not eat "red meat" (mammal meat – beef, lamb, pork, etc.) while still consuming respectively seafood and/or poultry. It may also be used as an interim diet by individuals who are on a path to becoming fully vegetarian or non-vegetarian.
   Flexitarianism — Flexitarians adhere to a diet that is mostly vegetarian but occasionally consume meat. Some, for instance, may regard the suffering of animals in factory farm conditions as their sole reason for avoiding meat or meat-based foods and will eat meat or meat products from animals raised under more humane and sustainable conditions, or hunted in the wild.
   Freeganism — Freegans practice a lifestyle based on concerns about the exploitation of animals, the earth, and human beings in the production of consumer goods. Many tend towards veganism, but this is not an inherent practice. Those that eat meat generally support the arguments for vegetarianism, but as freeganism is concerned about waste, freegans prefer to make use of discarded commodities than to allow them to go to waste and consume landfill space.
   [edit]
   Vegetarian cuisine
   Main article: Vegetarian cuisine
   This generally means food which excludes ingredients under which an animal must have died, such as meat, meat broth, cheeses that use animal rennet, gelatin (from animal skin and connective tissue), and for the strictest, even some sugars that are whitened with bone char (e.g. cane sugar, but not beet sugar) and alcohol clarified with gelatin or crushed shellfish and sturgeon.

   [edit]
   History
   Vegetarianism has been common in the Indian subcontinent, since possibly the 2nd millennium BC. Hinduism preaches that it is the ideal diet for spiritual progress and Jainism enjoins all its followers to be vegetarian.

   Vegetarians in Europe used to be called "Pythagoreans"[3][4], after the philosopher Pythagoras and his followers, who abstained from meat in the 6th century BC. These people followed a vegetarian diet for nutritional and ethical reasons. According to the Roman poet Ovid, Pythagoras said: "As long as Man continues to be the ruthless destroyer of lower living beings he will never know health or peace. For as long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other. Indeed, he who sows the seed of murder and pain cannot reap joy and love." [5][6]

   In looking for parallels in Jewish and Christian antiquity for these practices, some Christian vegetarians feel a kinship with Nazirite, Essene, and Ebionite practices. Buddhist monks of the Mahayana school (100CE) have also historically practiced vegetarianism.

   Many Hindu scriptures advocate vegetarian diet. The secular literature of Tirukural (circa. 100-300 AD) advocates vegetarainism. [7]

   In 1847, the first Vegetarian Society invented the term "vegetarian" — from the Latin vegetus "lively", and suggestive of the English word "vegetable" — was a person who refuses to consume flesh of any kind. Vegetarianism in the 19th century was associated with many cultural reform movements, such as temperance and anti-vivisection. Many "new women" feminists at the end of the century were vegetarians.

   Seventh-day Adventists and Rastafarians, denominations founded in the 19th and 20th centuries, are also frequently vegetarian.

   In the Western world, the popularity of vegetarianism steadily grew over the 20th century[citation needed] as a result of nutritional, ethical, and more recently, environmental and economic concerns.

   Today, Indian vegetarians, primarily Lacto-ovo vegetarians, are estimated to make up more than 70% of the world's vegetarians. They make up 20 to 30% of the population in India, while occasional meat-eaters make up another 30%. [8] Most Asian countries had a predominantly vegetarian diet until the past few decades, when increasing industrialization and westernization changed that.[citation needed]

   Surveys in the U.S. have found that roughly 1% to 2.8% of adults eat neither meat, poultry, nor fish.[9] [10] [11]

   [edit]
   Motivation
   [edit]
   Religious
   Main article: Vegetarianism and religion
   The majority of the world's vegetarians, according to the Society of Ethical and Religious Vegetarians, follow the practice for religious reasons. Many religions, including Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, the Bahá'í Faith, Sikhism, and Jainism teach that ideally life should always be valued and not willfully destroyed for unnecessary human gratification. Smaller denominations that prescribe the diet include the Seventh-day Adventist Church, the Hare Krishnas, Brahma Kumaris and the Rastafari movement.

   Hinduism and Jainism hold vegetarianism as the ideal. This is for spiritual reasons, such as ahimsa (nonviolence), to avoid indulgences (as meat was considered an indulgence), and to reduce bad karmic influences. They believe that food shapes the personality, mood and mind. Meat is said to promote aggressiveness and a mental state of turmoil known as "Rajas" while a vegetarian diet is considered to promote Satvic qualities, calm the mind, and be essential for spiritual progress. They believe that animals have souls and killing animals have karmic repercussions that are bound to be reaped later by oneself. Also, the principle of Ahimsa (non-violence) compels one to refrain from injuring any living creature, physically, mentally or emotionally without good reason. Most of the secular motivations for vegetarianism such as ethical considerations and nutrition apply to Hindu & Jain motivations as well.

   Different schools of Buddhism have differing opinions on vegetarianism: Chinese Mahayana Buddhists oppose the consumption of meat, and Chinese Mahayana monks observe vegetarianism. The Mahayana schools of Tibetan and Japanese Buddhism do not consider a vegetarian diet to be essential, nor do Theravadin Buddhists, although Theravadin Buddhists will refuse meat if the animal has been killed specifically for them. (See Vegetarianism in Buddhism)

   While vegetarianism is not common in Christian thought, some Christian leaders, such as the Reverend Andrew Linzey, have supported the view that Jesus was a vegetarian. A heretical text known as the Gospel of the Ebionites, emphasises that Jesus advocated vegetarianism, abolished the Jewish meat sacrifice system, and never ate meat. Islam explicitly permits the eating of some kinds of meat, but does not make it compulsory. There are several quotes attributed to Muhammad that support a vegetarian lifestyle and recommend kindness to animals rather than eating them. "Masih (the Messiah, Jesus) said, 'Flesh eating flesh? How offensive an act!'" (Al-Raghib al-Isfahani (early fifth century AH/early eleventh century CE), Mahadarat al-Udaba', 1:610.) According to Karen Armstrong in her book A History of God, "The Koran does permit meat-eating, but it also encourages healthful foods (which, many Muslims conclude, does not include animal products). Given these traditions, many Shi'ite Muslims and the Islamic mystics, such as the Sufis, see vegetarianism as the Islamic ideal and choose this diet."

   Many adherents of Rastafarianism are vegetarian for religious reasons. African Hebrew Israelites only eat an organic vegetarian diet that also excludes dairy products such as milk.

   Sikhism: Followers of the Sikh religion are divided in their opinion on whether their religion opposes meat consumption for non-Khalsa Sikhs (non-baptized). Although many non-Khalsa Sikhs eat meat and drink alcohol, the Sikh Scriptures appears to oppose the consumption of both. In the case of meat, the Sikh Gurus have indicated their preference for a simple vegetarian diet. Guru Angad Dev, the second Sikh Guru say in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib the following: "They do not place their feet in sin, but do good deeds and live righteously in Dharma. They burn away the bonds of the world, and eat a simple diet of grain and water." (SGGS page 467). Further, Bhagat Kabir expands on this by saying: "Kabeer, they oppress living beings and kill them, and call it proper. When the Lord calls for their account, what will their condition be? (199)" (SGGS page 1375)

   Also see Sikh Diet and Sikhism on meat

   [edit]
   Nutritional
   Main article: Vegetarian nutrition

   A fruit stall in BarcelonaThe American Dietetic Association, the largest organization of nutrition professionals, states on its website "Vegetarian diets offer a number of nutritional benefits, including lower levels of saturated fat, cholesterol, and animal protein as well as higher levels of carbohydrates, fiber, magnesium, potassium, folate, and antioxidants such as vitamins C and E and phytochemicals."

   Studies show that a vegetarian mother's breast milk has significantly lower levels of pesticide residue than a non-vegetarian's.[12]

   Some vegetable protein sources lack in one or more essential amino acids. While everyone should eat a variety of foods to ensure a balanced nutrition, the body's requirement for essential amino acids now appears to be less important than researchers once believed.[citation needed] Vegetarians taken broadly do not suffer malnutrition, and so must receive at least most of the protein and amino acids important to humans from eating a variety of incomplete complementary plant proteins. If ideal nutrition is possible, intake of such foods must be larger since the protein percentages in these foods are comparatively lower than in a similar serving of meat. Attaining sufficient protein intake is rarely a problem in developed countries, and vegetarianism advocates have alleged that possible lower protein intake of vegetarians may cause some of the health benefits below.

   A vegetarian diet does not include fish – a major source of Omega 3, though some plant-based sources of it exist such as soy, walnuts, pumpkin seeds, canola oil and, especially, hempseed and flaxseed.

   Some suggest that vegetarians have higher rates of deficiencies in those nutrients which are found in high concentrations in meat. However, studies endorsed by the ADA found that this was not the case for either iron or calcium. Vitamin B12 and zinc from vegetarian sources other than dairy products and eggs are not readily absorbed by the body and a vegan diet usually needs supplements. [13] Nonetheless, these nutrients are now commonly supplemented in milks and cereals in the western world, and are not necessarily a problem in a vegetarian diet.

   [edit]
   Ethical
   Main article: Ethics of vegetarianism
   Many vegetarians consider the production, subsequent slaughtering and consumption of meat or animal products as unethical. Reasons for believing this are varied, and may include a belief in animal rights, or an aversion to inflicting pain or harm on other living creatures. The belief also exists among vegetarians that other lives should not have to end in order for theirs to continue. In developed countries, ethical vegetarianism has become popular particularly after the spread of factory farming, which has reduced the sense of husbandry that used to exist in farming and led to animals being treated as commodities. Many believe that the treatment which animals undergo in the production of meat and animal products obliges them to never eat meat or use animal products, this could perhaps be summed up in the phrase "Not in my name".

   [edit]
   Environmental
   Main article: Environmental vegetarianism
   Environmental vegetarianism is the belief that the production of meat and animal products at current and likely future levels is environmentally unsustainable. Industrialization has lead to intensive farming practices and diets high in animal protein, primarily in developed nations and mainly the United States. According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) "Most of the world's population today subsists on vegetarian or near-vegetarian diets for reasons that are economic, philosophical, religious, cultural, or ecological." [14] Thus, the main protest of environmental vegetarians is primarily of intensive farming in developed nations.

   According to the United Nations Population Fund "Each U.S. citizen consumes an average of 260 lb. of meat per year, the world's highest rate. That is about 1.5 times the industrial world average, three times the East Asian average, and 40 times the average in Bangladesh." [15]

   All modern, intensive farming practices consume large amounts of fossil fuel and water resources and lead to emissions of harmful gases and chemicals. The habitat for wildlife provided by large industrial monoculture farms is very poor, and modern industrial agriculture is a threat to biodiversity compared with farming practices such as organic farming, permaculture, arable, pastoral, and rainfed agriculture.

   Animals fed on grain, and also those which rely on grazing, need far more water than grain crops [16]. According to the USDA growing the crops necessary to feed farmed animals requires nearly half of the United States' water supply and 80% of its agricultural land. Additionally, animals raised for food in the U.S. consume 90% of the soy crop, 80% of the corn crop, and a total of 70% of its grain. [17]. In tracking food animal production from the feed trough to the dinner table, the inefficiencies of meat, milk and egg production range from 4:1 energy input to protein output ratio up to 54:1. [18] The result is that producing animal based food is typically much less efficient than the harvesting of grains, vegetables, legumes, seeds and fruits. This criticism could not be applied to animals that are grazed rather than fed, especially those grazed on land that could not be used for other purposes. However, this type of grazing is becoming less common worldwide, being substituted with intense farming, and in some cases leads to topsoil loss.

   Environmental vegetarianism can be compared with economic vegetarianism. An economic vegetarian is someone who practises vegetarianism from either the philosophical viewpoint concerning issues such as public health and curbing world starvation, the belief that the consumption of meat is economically unsound, part of a conscious simple living strategy or just out of necessity. According to the WorldWatch Institute "Massive reductions in meat consumption in industrial nations will ease the health care burden while improving public health; declining livestock herds will take pressure off of rangelands and grainlands, allowing the agricultural resource base to rejuvenate. As populations grow, lowering meat consumption worldwide will allow more efficient use of declining per capita land and water resources, while at the same time making grain more affordable to the world's chronically hungry." [19]

   [edit]
   Physiological
   There is considerable debate over whether humans are physiologically better suited to a herbivore, omnivore, or carnivore diet. However, the existence of parasites such as Taenia saginata and Taenia solium, which rely on humans as their unique end host and can only be transmitted through eating meat indicates that human beings and their ancestors have consumed meat through important lengths of their evolution (i.e. millions of years).

   Some, such as Albert Einstein, regard an evolution to a vegetarian diet as part of our human evolution, with each new generation moving slowly away from the necessity of eating meat. Others study statistical information, such as comparing life expectancy with regional areas and local diets. Examples include looking within countries themselves. For instance, life expectancy is considerably greater in southern France where a semi-vegetarian Mediterranean diet is common (fresh fruit, vegetables, olive oil, goats cheese and fish), than northern France where an omnivore diet is more common (also including pork, beef, butter, cows cheese and cream) [20]. It must be noted that many other influences come into life expectancy, such as clean water, sunshine, pollution, genetics, exercise and lifestyle (alcohol, smoking, stress etc), making it difficult to scientifically prove any correlation between regional diets and life expectancy. These comparisons assume food is available and no malnutrition, an overriding life expectancy influence in some parts of the world.

   Some vegetarian beliefs (such as Hare Krishna) suggest that human beings have evolved to consume vegetable matter rather than meat. The reasons they cite are mainly associated with the differences between predators and plant-eating animals. Predators usually have sharp teeth or claws to tear fresh meat. Dogs, cats or lions are examples, while plant-eating animals (such as horse and deer) have no sharp teeth or claws to tear meat. Humans occupy a middle ground between the two having no claws and mostly blunt teeth (molars) but also a pair of sharp canine teeth designed for tearing which would be useless in a purely herbiverous animal.

   The intestines of predators are relatively short compared with those of plant-eating animals. Since meat is more easily digested than plant matter, the elaborate digestive system found in plant eaters in unnecessary. Herbivores need a much longer intestine to allow sufficient time for the digestion of vegetable fibers.

   The way in which predators and plant eating mammals drink is another reason that is suggested. Predators like dogs, cats or lions use their tongue to drink water as digesting meat does not consume as much water compared with digesting vegetables. Plant-eating animals like horses, deer or sheep, suck water as do humans. However, many people fail to see the relavance between the water drinking habit and diet.

   According to The Straight Dope,[21] humans have evolved to be omnivores. Human intestinal length is, taken as a ratio, half way between carnivores (such as cats and dogs) and herbivores (such as cows and horses).

   [edit]
   Psychological
   Many vegetarians choose to be so in part because they find meat and meat products aesthetically unappetizing. Proponents assert that human beings are not instinctively attracted to eating live or dead meat in nature. For example, the carcass of a cow lying in a forest would attract a real carnivore like a wolf or leopard, but would disgust most human beings. The metaphor by Douglas Dunn is that if one gives a young child an apple and a live chicken, the child would instinctively play with the chicken and eat the apple, whereas if a cat was presented with the same choices, its natural impulse would be the opposite. [22] In a similar assertion, Scott Adams once humorously wrote that a human, presented with a live cow, would more likely try to moo at it than attempt to eat its backside.

   Moreover, research on the psychology of meat consumption suggests that consumers of meat may need to use defense mechansims such as psychic numbing to distance themselves from the notion that they are eating animals. See: http://www.vegfamily.com/articles/carnism.htm

   [edit]
   Food safety
   Various animal food safety scares over recent years have led people towards semi-vegetarianism or vegetarianism. These scares have included BSE in cows, foot-and-mouth in sheep, PCBs in farmed salmon and high dioxin levels in animal products. For many these dietary changes are only temporary though, returning to their original diets once the health scare has subsided.[citation needed] This temporary change has been seen in non-meat consumption due to health issues caused by tainted vegetables and fruits that have caused illness.

   Advocates such as Howard Lyman and groups such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals have promoted vegetarianism in response to cases of E.coli infection and BSE, believed to be transmitted to humans through beef. According to various organisations, vCJD is strongly linked with exposure to the BSE agent [23]. However, E.coli can be acquired from any excrement-contaminated food or human commensal bacteria.

   [edit]
   Social
   Some people are vegetarian because they were raised in a vegetarian household. Others may have become vegetarians because of a vegetarian partner, family member, or friend. Some people live in a predominantly vegetarian society (such as India), and so adopt this practice to avoid ostracism, or for the difficulty of buying meat in such a society.[citation needed]

   [edit]
   Spiritual
   Some adherents of Eastern religions, such as Mahatma Gandhi, claim that spiritual awareness and experiences are greatly enhanced on a vegetarian diet. In the Western world there are also individuals like James Redfield who, independent from any specific religious beliefs, share the same sentiment. In the West this Spirituality motivation is regarded by many as a New Age reason for being vegetarian.

   These people believe that vegetarianism helps an individual to explore deeper levels of consciousness, find inner peace and establish a connection with the Divine, through such practices as meditation, yoga or whirling.

   Even in the West, numerous social justice leaders, such as Cesar Chavez, have adopted a vegan/vegetarian diet in order to communicate an agenda of social harmony and fellowship.

   [edit]
   Medical
   Sometimes patients of Alternative medicine are advised to adhere to a vegetarian diet as prescribed by the practitioners of such unconventional medical treatments. These patients are either asked to continue such a diet either for the course of the treatment or for longer durations. Ayurveda and Siddha medicine are examples of medical treatments that prescribe such a vegetarian diet. In such cases, the patient either follows vegetarianism for the defined period or sometimes continues long after the treatment is over.

   [edit]
   Vegetarian clothing

   Vegetarian Chelsea bootsSome vegetarians will choose not to wear leather; however, this can prove difficult in the workplace where it is expected that people wear footwear made of leather. There are specialist suppliers such as Vegetarian Shoes in the UK that supply belts, shoes, safety boots and jackets that share the appearance of leather but are in fact made of synthetic materials. High fashion designer Stella McCartney is famed for her refusal to use leather, fur or other animal products in her range of clothes and accessories and is thus popular with wealthier vegetarians.

   [edit]
   Vegetarian societies
   Vegetarian societies (apart from India) were first formed in majority meat eating European countries both as a means to promote the diet and to gather together vegetarians for mutual support. By 2000, most western and developing nations had functioning vegetarian societies. The countries that were first to establish societies are still the ones most likely to have the greatest proportion of vegetarians within their populations.

   The International Vegetarian Union, a union of all the national societies, was founded in 1908.

   The following vegetarian societies also have articles:

   Vegetarian Society
   Boston Vegetarian Society
   Catholic Vegetarian Society
   Society of Ethical and Religious Vegetarians
   [edit]
   Country specific information

   Labeling used in India to distinguish vegetarian products from non-vegetarian ones.
   Vegetarian restaurant buffet, Taipei, Taiwan.In India vegetarianism is usually synonymous with lacto vegetarianism, although lacto-ovo vegetarianism is practiced as well. Vegetarian restaurants (almost always lacto vegetarian) abound, and usually many vegetarian (Shakahari (~plant-eater) in Hindi) options available in all restaurants ('hidden' meat ingredients such as lard, gelatin, meat stock are not used in the traditional cuisine). According to a 2006 the Hindu-CNN-IBN State of the Nation Survey, 31% of Indians are vegetarians, while 9% of the vegetarian population consumes eggs. Vegetarianism amongst Brahmins stood at the highest at 55%, while it was lowest among Muslims and Christians at 3% and 8% respectively. Vegetarianism was least prevalent in coastal states like Kerala (2%), Andhra Pradesh (4%), and Tamil Nadu (8%), while it is most prevalent in northern and western landlocked states like Rajasthan (63%), Haryana (62%), and Punjab (48%).[24]

   India has devised a system (since 2000???) of marking any edible product with a green dot in a green square to signify that only vegetarian ingredients were used and that no 'hidden' meat ingredients were used. A red dot in a red square is meant to convey that one or more ingredients used are of non-vegetarian content or 'hidden' meat ingredients like gelatin, lard, or meat stock may have been used.

   Even medicines are marked similarly: a well-known Omega-3 capsule contains Omega-3 fatty acids made from flax seeds. But it is marked with a red dot as the capsule uses non-vegetarian ingredients.

   In the United States, vegetarianism is usually synonymous with ovo-lacto vegetarianism. However, vegetarians are sometimes wrongly assumed to be pesco/pollo vegetarians who will tolerate some meat. Many restaurants and caterers provide vegetarian options to patrons, often explicitly indicated as such. It is also possible to order a vegetarian meal and be served meat. Polls find that 2.8% of Americans are vegetarian as of 2004 [25]. In addition, vegetarianism in the United States generally reflects regional cultural differences. It is more difficult to find vegetarian options in rural restaurants than in urban ones. The same applies to Midwestern city restaurants compared to West Coast restaurants. This seems to be slowly changing as vegetarian market innovations (such as veggie burgers) attain wider acceptance, demand, and distribution.

   In the United Kingdom, voluntary labelling of vegetarian foods is widespread, but far from universal. Many manufacturers will label food as "suitable for vegetarians", but until recently, no universally agreed definition existed. The Food Standards Agency issued guidance on the labeling of foods as suitable for vegetarians in 2006, which includes the following definition "The term "vegetarian" should not be applied to foods that are, or are made from or with the aid of products derived from animals that have died, have been slaughtered, or animals that die as a result of being eaten. Animals means farmed, wild or domestic animals, including for example, livestock poultry, game, fish, shellfish, crustacea, amphibians, tunicates, echinoderms, molluscs and insects." [26] In addition, the Vegetarian Society operates a scheme where foods that meet its strict criteria can be labelled as "Vegetarian Society-approved". Cheese is often labelled as well, making it possible to identify cheeses that have been made with non-animal rennet. Flavourings in ingredients lists do not need to specify if they come from animal origin, which can make identifying vegetarian foods difficult if they are not otherwise labelled as such. The British Vegetarian Society regards a product as vegetarian if it is free of meat, fowl, fish, shellfish, meat or bone stock, animal or carcass fats, gelatin, aspic, or any other ingredient resulting from slaughter, such as rennet.[27]

   In Ireland, food labelling is in place.

   In Spain, most vegetarian meals will be served with egg, or even tuna. Stock is normally used in vegetable soups and many sauces.

   In France the situation is similar to that in Spain, but is slightly less unfavourable.

   In Germany, the confusion of vegetarianism with pesco/pollo vegetarianism is also common. There is no food labelling in place, and buying only vegetarian foods can involve having to read the fine printed ingredients list ("Zutaten") on many food products. However widespread Wholefood emporia provide sources for vegetarian foods in even remote areas.

   In Australia the same conditions apply as in Germany. Some manufacturers who target the vegetarian market will label their foods, however except for foods intended for export to the UK, this labelling can be inconsistent. Flavourings in ingredients lists do not need to specify if they come from animal origin. As such, natural flavour could be derived from either plant or animal sources.

   In Norway, conditions are similar to Germany, except pollo-vegetarianism is largely unknown and organic foods stores are less wide spread. Ovo-lacto-vegetarians make out 1-2% of the population, and food targeted for vegetarians is sold mainly in health food stores and supermarkets that focus on selection. Most restaurants will have one or two vegetarian entries on the menu, or at least produce something on request.

   In Israel, practicing ovo-lacto-vegetarianism is relatively easy, due to Jewish dietary laws, or kosher laws. Kosher food cannot contain pork or shellfish, and meat and dairy cannot be combined in any way. As a result, most kosher restaurants serve either only dairy or only meat, along with bread, vegetables, fruits, etc. Please note that fish is not considered to be meat under Jewish laws, so it may be served in "dairy" restaurants. Nonetheless, the "dairy" restaurants are usually a very safe bet for ovo-lacto-vegetarians. For vegans, falafel, hummus, and other plant-based Mediterranean foods are a good option. They can be easily found almost anywhere in Israel, and are very popular among Israelis.

   [edit]
   Criticism
   There are three main criticisms of vegetarianism, based on health, environment, and mortality.

   [edit]
   Vegetarian diet and longevity
   Life expectancy is arguably the most objective and quantifiable measure of health.

   In "Mortality in vegetarians and nonvegetarians: detailed findings from a collaborative analysis of 5 prospective studies" [28], six major studies (three in Britain, one in Germany, one in U.S and one in Italy) of this kind were cross examined. It was found that the mortality ratio was the lowest in fish eaters (0.82) followed by occasional meat eaters (0.84) and vegetarians (0.84) which was then followed by regular meat eaters (1.0) and vegans (1.0). In "Mortality in British vegetarians" [29], it was concluded that "British vegetarians have low mortality compared with the general population. Their death rates are similar to those of comparable non-vegetarians, suggesting that much of this benefit may be attributed to non-dietary lifestyle factors such as a low prevalence of smoking and a generally high socio-economic status, or to aspects of the diet other than the avoidance of meat and fish."

   [edit]
   Health
   It is already long established in science that a number of lifestyle choices such as smoking, exercise and alcohol influence health and longevity. However, scientific studies so far fail to show that the decision to forgo meat contributes independently to people's life expectancy.

   Another claim repeatedly made by vegetarian advocacy groups is that vegetarians suffer less from heart problems. Studies which include the above, consistently confirm that vegetarians suffer less mortality from ischemic heart disease. Since there is no evidence that a vegetarian diet causes longer overall life expectancy, one cannot equate decreased mortality rate from ischemic heart disease to overall decrease in mortality or overall health.[30] Moreover, occasional meat eaters also achieve statistically similar mortality rates indicating that this does not relate to the decision to exclude meat completely. Yet, both vegetarian and vegan advocacy groups invariably promote their diet as healthy while claiming that the diet which includes meat and/or fish is inherently unhealthy. Critics argue that these groups are engaging in scientific misrepresentation in direct opposition to public interest by diverting people's attention from already scientifically proven health factors. These include moderate exercise, moderate alcohol intake, not smoking and sufficient intake of fruits and green vegetables.

   Some point to research demonstrating a vegetarian diet, or higher phytoestrogen intake, may be linked to genital defects, although stating "The role of maternal nutrition has received little investigation".[31] However the original authors of the research have distanced themselves from those alarmist news reports.[32] An argument is also made that most vegetarians do not have a balanced diet, which has led to nutritional deficiencies and immunity-linked disorders.[33] This is a criticism of vegetarians who follow an unbalanced diet, although a balanced vegetarian diet is possible. There is also concern that on the average, vegetarian children tend to grow and develop more slowly than non-vegetarian children, and vegetarians adults tend to have slightly smaller body sizes than non-vegetarian adults, although faster growth and a larger body structure do not necessarily mean better health and longevity.[34] There are also some anecdotal reports that vegetarianism results in greater flatulence, especially when people switch over to a vegetarian diet.[35]

   [edit]
   Resources
   Some question the assumption that food given to livestock could instead be used to feed humans. In developing countries particularly, such food is usually of poor quality and not fit for human consumption. Cornell scientists have advised that the U.S. could feed 800 million people with grain that livestock eat [36]. However, diverting this grain away from livestock would not resolve the economic causes that prevent starving (poor) people from buying food [37].

   Also, there exist some types of terrain (such as mountains, desert fringes, and regions with very poor soil) that are suitable for grazing animals, but not suitable as farmland. Environmentalists counter that these "marginal lands" should not be used at all, and that grazing livestock on these lands exerts more pressure than they can carry and/or directly competes with native wild animal species which would graze the same land.[citation needed] However, how letting such lands lay fallow for use by species not of use to humans would increase the environment's ability to provide for the dietary needs of humans is nonobvious.

   Critics also point that many farm animals in the developing world are hardly bred in the standards of factory farming as in the west but eat the by products of an agrarian economy. For instance cattle and small ruminants like sheep goat and chickens in a typical village in most of Asia/Africa and South America graze on the farmland and seldom fed produce grown exclusively for them. This is cited as an example of least environmental damage and if anything, makes efficient use of cultivation for mutual benefit.
3. sticknpuck82 says:

   June 13, 2009 at 4:39 pm

   uh…okay, so supposing you made it thru the first person's answer that was like 18 pages long…geez…I'm a vegetarian. No, I have no worry whatsoever over the long-term effect of taxing my fuel system. Granted, I also don't have kids so maybe the generational thing is different for me, but here ya go…there is a 10% energy transfer between most levels of the food chain, i.e. a cow has to eat 10 pounds of grass to produce 1 pound of edible flesh. Look to nature–who are the "workhorses" in the animal kingdom? Is it the carnivories, i.e. the lion? No. The lion is good for short speed bursts, but otherwise spends his entire day sleeping (not a bad life huh HAHA!). Herbivores, on the other hand, say, an ox…toils sunup to sundown, no problem. Our intestines are also built differently than other carnivores, such as a dog's. Their intestines are MUCH shorter because they cannot process food the way we can; with our much longer intestines we can get more of the nutrients from more fibrous sources. The only vitamin/mineral NOT found in abundance in a vegetarian diet is B-12 (which is in dairy & eggs, so if you're lacto-ovo, that's not an issue there either). But no, there should be no long-term energy issue unless there is a pre-existing medical condition or unless your diet is crappy. Yes, there are plenty of vegetarians with crappy diets (french fries are vegetarian, after all!!! LOL) just as there are carnivores with crappy diets. It's all about making good food choices from the foods avaiable to you and that you find acceptable in terms of morals/ethics, etc.
4. jenhockey24 says:

   June 13, 2009 at 4:39 pm

   no its fine and dont think it does anithing bad
5. Douglas R says:

   June 13, 2009 at 4:39 pm

   I think you are right we all need meat to live the veget.get animal fat in other forms if they go out of their house to eat the don't know what their food is cooked in if they drink milk eat cheese or eggs how can they say they are vegetarianism ,eat meat be happy.
6. ~Lady Knight~ says:

   June 13, 2009 at 4:39 pm

   being a vegan or vegatarian is actually healthier for you than if you eat meat. Your body absorbs more calcium, you are at less risk for some types of cancer and high colesterol… and it is good for the animals There is nothing wrong with the diet of a vegetarian or a vegan if they eat right. they are most likely to get all the vitamins and minerals ect from their food that people who eat meat.
7. Stupid Genius says:

   June 13, 2009 at 4:39 pm

   No, because we're not trying to eke out a mere existence from the land: we're not straining our digestive system to get enough energy from the plants, and if our behaviors did affect our genetics , it would take several hundred generations for any evolutionary difference to show up; probably longer than you all are going to be carrying on that vegetarian legacy.
8. victory says:

   June 13, 2009 at 4:39 pm

   Wow…I think Irina C swallowed an encyclopedia.

   Ok, my turn to pontificate: My honorable distant ancestors (who were likely yours, too!) didn't claw their way to the top of the food chain so that their distant great granddaughters (that's you & me) could eat wheatgrass and use a pocket calculator to see if they are getting enough protein.

   Do watch what you eat, but also have some fish, some beef and a little chicken! Our honorable distant progenetors will nod and smile on us!
9. rxyurameki says:

   June 13, 2009 at 4:39 pm

   People can survive off of milk and potatoes. It has everything that the body needs to survive, is it healthy hell no.

   Do vegetarians eat more than milk and potatoes, hell yes.

   Eating from the bottom of the food chain is healthier, does it make us weaker, no, its smarter. The lower you eat on the food chain the more energy and nutrients you absorb from that matter. Cultures have survived and thrived without meat. Why do we eat it, cause people like the taste, nothing more.
10. Katie says:

    June 13, 2009 at 4:39 pm

    A Vegan lifestyle is healthy. Meat is an ignorant craving
11. Di says:

    June 13, 2009 at 4:39 pm

    Meat was aquired through evolution, not required as once believed.

    http://www.all-creatures.org/articles/ar-aninsidelook.html

    http://www.brown.edu/Student_Services/Health_Services/Health_Education/nutrition/veg.htm