The notes below were recently submitted to the SF-LiFE newsletter.
At present I don't know when (or whether) the notes will appear in
the newsletter.
As the material below touches on topics in recent threads here,
I remind readers that the material below are notes from a talk, and
do not necessarily reflect my views. If you follow up on this material,
1) do NOT attribute the views to me,
2) do NOT ask me to reply to your post - I won't.
You are free to discuss the material here, but please be aware that I
will not get involved in such discussions. Also, please note the
copyright below. If you want to crosspost the material, you must
get specific permission from me.
PS The above is all common sense. But nearly every time I post notes,
someone challenges me to defend the speaker, either via posts or
e-mail. Some folks simply don't read carefully... :-(
Tom Billings
=====================================================================
VEGETARIANISM NEEDS GOOD SCIENCE
NOTES FROM A TALK BY CARL V. PHILLIPS, PHD
Notes from a talk given Saturday, 13 February 1999, at a
meeting of the San Francisco Vegetarian Society
Notes taken by: Tom Billings
Copyright 1999 by Thomas E. Billings; all rights reserved. Contact
copyright holder for permission to republish in any manner.
Important disclaimer:
I have tried to accurately reflect the views of the speaker. However,
mistakes and/or misinterpretations are possible. A copy of these notes was
e-mailed to the speaker, but he did not reply. Hence the notes have not
been "approved" by the speaker.
NOTES.
The greatest moral ill in our society is the continuing abuse of animals.
Vegetarian diets have great advantages - better for health (i.e., better than
the SAD diet), better for the environment, and so on. However, vegetarianism
is not "catching on," so our promotional efforts are clearly not working.
There are more ex-veggies than veggies. There is no clear opposition to
the vegetarian movement, other than limited opposition from the meat and
dairy industries.
What's going wrong in the vegetarian movement? Answer: we don't have our
scientific facts straight. This undermines the entire vegetarian movement (i.e.,
reduces credibility). One does not have to look far to find overblown,
inaccurate claims in the vegetarian movement, e.g., claims about the
nutritional sufficiency of an un-supplemented vegan diet, claims about
the environmental impact of animal products, etc. Concern for the impact
of such unsupported claims, was one of the major factors that motivated
the formation of sci-veg, an Internet e-mail list for scientifically-
oriented vegetarians.
Carl discussed the "sci-veg project," which is expanding to include
a small web site, and plans to start an e-mail newsletter. There are
two pamphlets available now on vegan nutrition, with a pamphlet on
environmentalism (re: veganism) in the works.
Side note: Carl mentioned that he has been talking about the need for
good science in the vegetarian community for years. Only recently
has he detected a "sea change" which suggests that others in the
veggie community are starting to agree (that better science is needed).
Why And How To Get Our Facts Straight
Why? Three reasons:
1. It's the right thing to do.
2. It's the only effective thing to do.
3. It's enough (adequate).
Consider reason 1. This reason is not logical; it's emotional. However, to
mislead others is not good. A prime example of misleading veggie
propaganda is "Realities for the '90s," which was put out by EarthSave.
It is loaded with bad information, and the leaders of EarthSave were
told repeatedly that it contained bad (invalid/incorrect) information.
Think: if you can't "sell" your idea with good information, then maybe
your "good" ideas are not as good as you think they are?
Consider reason 2. "Diet for a New America" is sort of the veggie "bible."
However, 1/10 to 1/5 of the (allegedly) factual claims therein are
false or misleading. The result of this ridiculous situation is a major
loss of credibility for the entire veggie movement.
The Beef Council Internet website (URL below) has a long point-by-point
debunking of many of the claims made in "Diet for a New America." Further,
the scientific criticisms made on the Beef Council website, are probably
90% correct!
The effect of such "dueling hyperbole" in the area of diets is that inertia
determines the result: the status quo. (Why change if there is so much
disagreement among the "experts"?). Veggies are a minority, and we are
under more scrutiny. Unreliable, incorrect claims hurt the vegetarian
cause, due to guilt by association.
Carl told the story of a friend (an M.D.) who went to hear John Robbins speak
in Minnestota. Robbins claimed as scientific, medical fact something that
was totally wrong. The M.D. noticed it, and Robbins lost all credibility.
Another example of hyperbole is provided by the vegan activists who
claim that cow milk leaches calcium out of bones and promotes osteoporosis.
This is ludicrous; cow milk is a good source of bio-available calcium,
and promotes strong bones (i.e., for those who can digest it). The vegan
activists who make false claims about cow milk, create a weak point for the
pro-dairy groups to attack and discredit veganism.
There are many good reasons to not consume dairy. However, by mixing 1 bad
reason (the claim that cow milk causes calcium loss) in with the good ones,
the end result is that the one bad argument kills the entire case. (Vegans
can get calcium from supplemented orange juice and/or (supplemented) soy
milk).
Another ridiculous example is the claim by John Robbins that 1 pound of
beef requires 2500 gallons of water. Look up the reference for this
in Robbins, and you will find an unpublished paper that no one seems to
have or be able to find. The beef industry admits to 400-500 gallons
of water for 1 pound of beef. Why can't we use the 400-500 gallon
figure instead? The emotional impact on the public will be the same,
2500 vs 400-500 gallons. It is best that we not traffic in dubious
information.
How To Get Our Facts Straight
"Vegetarian Journal" (magazine) and the planned sci-veg newsletter are good
sources. An article is in the works for both of these sources, on the topic
of how to read the scientific literature critically. A few points on
this topic are as follows.
* Don't believe everything you read - especially if it is on mailing lists,
Internet web sites.
* To understand the scientific journals, it may be necessary to have some
knowledge of the field.
* Given the huge variety of studies done, with enough effort you can
find a study that supports nearly any point of view.
* The big question is: WHO to believe? In this regard, you can look
for networks of people (e.g., sci-veg).
* Due to informational entropy, trying to debunk all the nonsense
in the veggie community is a losing battle. Instead, the goal is to
lay a foundation, where most of the information is right (e.g.,
the example of M.D.'s - good image despite a few quacks).
Conclusions
Vegetarianism is being defeated by the vegetarian advocates who use bad
science. We must begin to stick to the truth; the truth is adequate to
make our case.
Appendix:
Internet address (URL) for the critique of "Diet for a New America:"
http://www.beef.org/librfacts/mythfact/mythfact_diet.html
Note that the above report was paid for by cattle ranchers. Still, readers
can review the material and evaluate it for themselves.
About the speaker:
Carl V. Phillips is an assistant professor of environmental health at the
University of Minnesota School of Public Health. He is the director and e-mail
list moderator of Sci-Veg, an Internet e-mail list for science-oriented
vegetarians. You can join the sci-veg e-mail list, or access the list
archives at: http://www.sci-veg.org. Also see http://www.ca4a.org for the
vegan nutrition pamphlets mentioned above.
About the note-taker:
Tom Billings is a long-time vegetarian, and is active on Internet and in
raw-food circles. Tom is one of the site editors of the new website,
"Beyond Vegetarianism," http.www.beyondveg.com, a site that features
scientific and real-world investigations of topics related to raw and
vegan/vegetarian diets. Readers are cautioned that Beyond Veg does not
promote the "party line." Check it out!
|
