Most people are clueless about protein or calcium needed

[Floflomo]

I follow a vegan diet and the amount of people that go on about protein or calcium is ridiculous and just shows they are totally clueless.

The RDA for protein isn't that big at all, many veg contains protein so before even getting onto to nuts, seeds and pulses I've had half of the RDA just from veg.

Calcium is in way more foods than just dairy, I had figs in porridge for breakfast made with almond milk. For lunch I'm having a salad with lots of leafy greens with a dressing made from tahini, so I'm doing just great with calum and getting it from a variety of sources.

box I agree completely, however there's no point banging your head against the wall. No one on this thread who defend eating meat will allow themselves to see the truth about the meat industry.

But that's the issue.

Often eating other foods, especially ones flown thousands of miles is causing damage to the planet.

Personally I would rather eat local produce, which includes meat. Rather than have food flown thousands of miles to eat.

I find the phrase 'those defending eating meat' very odd. No one has to defend eating meat, why does it need defending?

I have never read anyone talking about 'getting enough' protein. I also have never read on here that protein shakes are good for you.

But 70g doesn't have to be a maximum. Eating more protein (as part of a sensible balanced diet) won't hurt and may make you fuller for longer/ eat fewer calories overall. If it doesn't work for you it doesn't.

Any thread about food on here goes bonkers.

I have seen protein shakes discussed here.

Usually in fitness or the weights room.

They serve a purpose. As a weight lifter I don't use them. However some people like them, for convenience, they enjoy them etc.

Protein is falling out of favour as the preferred post work out snack.

I have never discussed my protein in tale in RL though

LOL well I've never been in the fitness or weights room which will be why I've never seen that.....

I seem to be a rare species in danger of extinction... I eat food because I enjoy it, I love its flavour and the orgasm it gives my taste buds. I'd rather have full milk and put oil in my salad, and sugar in my coffee, than look for weird-named posh vegetarian/vegan/fruitarian/breatharian pseudofood (Stevia, soy milk - whoever saw a soy plant with teats??? - margarine, sugar-free shit, fat-free shit, flavour-free shit). When I put on a couple of kgs... I eat less the next couple of days... no need to pay hundreds/thousands to WW or buy 10 books about weird-sounding diets... I just eat less!. If I feel like something sweet, I go for chocolate cake and I enjoy it. Why would I put my body through Weight-Watchers sugar-free low-fat pseudochocolate cake when the real deal not only tastes 1000 times better, but actually hs the same number of calories???

Never in the history of humanity have we been surrounded by more everything-free, supposedly healthy foods, and never have there been so many fat people. And not only fat, but miserable, sad, lonely fat people who torment themselves every day feeling guilty for eating food that is not even real food. If you're going to be fat, at least bloody enjoy the food you eat!

But hey, people are too busy waiting for the next miracle food. Last year it was coconut oil, which supposedly cures everything from cold sores to Alzheimer's (surprisingly none of the ailments it is supposed to cure has reduced in any population). The previous year was bloody Stevia, which has not helped a single person lose any weight (because as saccharine, it just makes you hungrier than if you just had put a spoonfool of white sugar in your tea) but has removed the pleasure of real sweetness. Is the "quenoir" (snort) this year's one? And what the bloody hell is "amaranth"?

Fuck it, I'll have my steak, and my coffee with full milk and sugar, and my delicious fruit, and pasta, and loaf of bread, and my full-sugar and full-fat cake when I feel like it. And I will keep being happy when I have my meals.

I'm firmly in your camp, aurynne

aurynne abso bloody lutely.

I second the importance of vitamin B12. My sister was found to have extremely low levels of B12 after 20 years of being a vegetarian and, when she was diagnosed with cancer, it was actually the effects from the low levels of vitamin B12 that nearly killed, not the cancer or the chemo.

aurynne

Totally agree I need to loose weight but no longer am I cutting out food just cutting back and loosing weight as I am not obsessing about food

It's so easy to fall for all the marketing rubbish when you desperate to loose weight

Eating meat needs defending because it is brutality and killing. Isn't that obvious?
Eating food you think tastes nice at the expense of a creature painfully dying is completely immoral.

Eating food you think tastes nice at the expense of a creature painfully dying is completely immoral

Painfully? Slaughterhouses follow strict guidelines of animal welfare - I bet they receive better treatment there than a wild predator would give them.

Animals reared in a responsible manner have a much higher quality of life than wild animals, wherever possible being protected from disease and predators. In the wild their lives would most likely be short, stressful and brutal.

This thread is ridiculous. The OP wasn't sanctimonious or trying to convert anyone to be vegan. She was saying, correctly, that most people overestimate how much protein and calcium we need. That was it. Everybody getting defensive is reading things into it that weren't there.
This exactly. Every time someone mentions quinoa that guardian article is linked to and someone screams about air miles. None of these types of food are flown and plenty of places in the UK grow quinoa these days. People go on about the environmental impact of importing food, when air miles for food accounts for virtually nothing environmentally compared to meat and dairy production.

"Eating food you think tastes nice at the expense of a creature painfully dying is completely immoral."

Yeah, well, we will have to agree to disagree on your definition of morality

Another way to look at it is that morality has nothing to do our place in the food chain. Just like it has nothing to do with a lion's place in the food chain or that of a gazelle.

And another way of looking at it is that plants are also living beings, and we have no idea whether or not they suffer when we eat them (we only know they have very different physiology and anatomy from us, but that does not rule out that they suffer). So perhaps we should all eat stones.

So....what about all the small field animals that are killed as a result of arable production? Being crushed under the wheels of a combine harvester (or macerated in its blades) sounds like a fairly painful death to me. Much more so than that of a cow that is stunned before being killed.

Cote we have free will and don't act on instinct. Obviously different.

Thank heavens we have free will and can decide not to subsist on kale and aramanth.

Yes that is the only option. It's either blood or kale..

It could have been blood too, but bloody Edward chose Bella for his vampire bride and not me

No matter what you eat, something died to produce it. I accidentally put a trowel through a worm while weeding my garlic today, and I'm as organic as it gets.

No diet is cruelty-free.

Not to speak about all the poor weeds you kills in the process Circus...

*killed

It's about harm reduction. Some things are unavoidable. But killing for pleasure is wrong.

Does the lion kill the gazelle for pleasure?

We are part of the food chain, as well. The death of chicken or whatever is not a source of pleasure for me but their death is as unavoidable as those tasteless weeds you feel virtuous subsisting on.