Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Message Display

Dan et al,

I had quite a few posts, questions and comments. Dan got the militant
vegans and I got the militant flesh eaters. All is fair in love and
war<g>
This post strives to answer all the questions I received and responds to
a few of Dan’s assertions. While it is written in the context of Dan’s
discussion it is really more a general treatment of the issues as hand. 


Dan Volker wrote:

Americans eat very badly. Their diets make them fat and prone to many
maladies. . .  Attention to your
nutritional needs, whether its because you want to go vegan, or because
you just want to eat smarter than you did in the past, will make you
healthier. If you let this go as far as those who now have a heart
condition, or hardening of the arteries, 
>>>

Thanks Dan. I think that we can all learn something from discussions
like this and I find we agree on a lot of issues especially that
"Americans eat very badly". Truer words have rarely been spoken and some
vegetarians are also quite guilty. I have known a few that ate very
badly. Until you put in a little effort any diet can be bad for you. One
issue we have not addressed is the source of your food and what it
carries. One of the big health problems with meat is all the chemicals,
antibiotics and oddities (even concrete and insulation for meat density
in some cases) that come with its consumption. Fat is a storehouse for
the pollutants that the body can't remove often making meat a chemical
warehouse. We get 75% of our carcinogens from animal products and 16%
from vegetables (I will probably be sued for saying that<g>). I try to
avoid these chemicals with organic purchases as should we all. There are
similar possibilities with meat (free range etc.)although they are
fought tooth and nail by the meat industry. If you really want to be
healthy then you have to follow this route. This single issue alone is
probably one of the reasons meat eaters show such a positive correlation
for a range of cancers.

  My "argument for
> including lean meat in your diet, is because it will be better at healing
> your muscles after an intense workout.
> >>>
The healing is debatable. I see calories as more of a challenge but the
bottom line is that for the extreme athlete, supplements will probably
be desirable, if for no other reason than insurance. Blue-green algae is
a great recovery source and while meat only allows access to about 40%
of its protein with a minimum digestion time of about 5 hours the
blue-green algae, spirulina and pollen are almost immediately accessible
and contain protein that is nearly 100% useable. BTW they also contain
some of the other items people always get in a fuss about for
vegetarians such as B12. I understand where people are coming from and
have seen many of the items to which you people refer such as using the
egg as a reference standard for protein (I wonder who thought that
up<G>). Still, debate will rage. We could go on like this forever with
you showing me protein content, Terry, other athletes . . . .and my
showing you useable protein, still other athletes, protein ratios, amino
acid pools, damaged amino acids . . .

What about some general thoughts on the need for meet and strength>>
Who are the strongest animals on the planet? Elephants, oxen, horses,
water buffalo? How about a silverback gorilla which is 3 times our size
with 30 times our strength. They all eat fruits and vegetables. 
All nutritive material is found in the plant kingdom and there are no
"essential" amino acids in the flesh that the animal did not derive from
plants.

The bottom line is that I don't believe in the NEED for animal sources.
It is obvious from only a cursory study of the facts that this is
reasonable. I also believe that high end athletes can excel with this
diet while exercising similar supplementation and care found in a
responsible meat-based diet. 

Dan would say (I think) that the vegetarian diet is not optimal for
growth but possible. While we differ here it is really a moot point for
the type of discussion we started. On either diet, care must be taken to
avoid the associated pollutants that are carried with the food. Organic
diets are the best way to do this. However, be aware that the mega
agriculture companies are working very hard to distort this label.
Bottom line. Follow a diet low in fat and high in nutrient value and get
off you butt.

> 
> As I have said in other posts, if you have too much fat, and you want to
> start losing it, you want to add more muscle tissue to your body, because it
> will "use" many more calories
>>
Agreed and an excellent point. People in weight loss motivated fitness
programs should incorporate some weight training into their routine for
exactly the reason Dan mentions. Some anaerobic exercise can be
beneficial to everyone with bone growth, strength, support and caloric
use but MUST be augmented with an aerobic regime to really lose weight
and get fit. Maybe they can come on one of your rides, Dan<g>.

 
> >Dan Volker writes>>> 
If you have a sore throat--strep, take penicillan. If you are healthy,
DO NOT TAKE PENICILLAN! 

:-)
OK, but I would argue not to get "sick" in the first place. Which, by
the way, I have not since my diet switch years ago. Vegetarian diets are
not treatment per se (though they can be used that way by food abusers)
they are prevention, or more specifically cleaner carriers for the
essential nutrients. In diving terms, nitrogen is our common carrier for
oxygen. In many cases we are smart enough to realize that it is not very
good for deep diving so we use Helium to replace the reduced volume of
Nitrogen. Personally I like the use of liquid respiration which is doing
pretty well nowadays<g> In this case we will be able to deliver oxygen
to the tissue without the need for an inert gas- ergo no decompression.
This is similar to what I strive for in my diet. A clean source of
nutrient replenishment without the host of carcinogens and fat
associated with meat. This part is likely possible with a moderate meat
diet but requires effort and M-O-D-E-R-A-T-I-O-N. It does not mean meat
at every meal, as is the typical American custom. Whatever your diet
choices this is an important point for fitness and weight loss. Diets
don't work they are a fallacy and respond to our something for nothing
mentality. Fitness and health are lifestyles not pills or "lose 12
pounds in 10 day" diets. The diet industry, of course, wants you to
ignore this reality. Actually most food producers want you to ignore
this too. If people really understood what they were eating (I am
talking about refineed foods, sugars, chemicals etc)they might really
make a change.


> There is HUGE money in pro sports. Elite athletes try EVERY nutritional aid
> they can find, in the quest to out compete others.  Someone like Terry
> Giles, gets paid over $20,000 a piece, by pro athletes

Definitely true. There is also HUGE money in tobacco, meat and dairy
production. These entities have everything to gain by our single focus
on the need for their products. There was even a time when doctors
recommended smoking. Now we have a multimillion dollar campaign
(actually $140 mill plus) from the dairy industry (which sees the
writing on the wall just like the tobacco industry) and strives to
convince us that we HAVE to consume their products. A product that, by
the way, is subsidized with tax payer dollars to the tune of 3 billion
dollars a year to buy excess supplies that sit and rot. Meanwhile we
have a huge pollution problem from the dairies we already have and an
irresponsible attempt to convince us to consume even more. Few
industries have proven themselves so irresponsible.

The idea that we have to consume milk to be healthy is utterly
ridiculous. What other species NEEDS the nutrient produced for another
species' offspring? The idea that we NEED to suckle a cows teat to be
healthy is a myth propagated by the dairy industry. Osteoporosis is
about too much protein not lack of calcium in the diet. Ask yourself why
our country (the highest consumers of dairy in the world) have the
highest levels of osteoporosis???? My point here is that these
industries are huge businesses and it is in their best interest to have
us buy their product and they are VERY well funded to insure just that. 

Milk- It does a body good<g>

Or does it just do somebody's wallet a lot of good?


 He will NOT
> even train a vegan bodybuilder, because it is too much of a liability---he
> does not have time to train people he thinks have no shot at winning---
>>
That is unfortunate. I think your point here proves what I am trying to
say (though I am sure you did not intend that <g>). Slightly less than
10% of the population is vegetarian which is amazing with the
aforementioned advertising campaigns (when was the last time you saw a
vegetarian commercial- OOPS no 3 billion in subsidies for them). What if
Bill Pearl, a three time Mr. Olympia had asked Terry for help? Would he
have been refused?

Here is what Bill has to say about the plant and animal controversy>
>>
"Proteins containing all of the essential amino acids can be found in
both animals or plants. One source is no
better than another. Usually considered the best protein foods are meat,
cheese, milk, and eggs. It should be
noted that in the beef we eat today there are over 258 different
chemicals that are feed to the animals before
it hits the super market. Of these chemicals, 48 are known to be
carcinogenic. Other important sources are
beans, peas, and soybeans."

Here is his little promo for those interested:
<<>>
With over 55 years training experience and competitive career, Bill
Pearl is the most knowledgeable
bodybuilding champion in the world. He has designed and supervised
training and nutritional programs for
World and Olympic Champions and more bodybuilding stars than any other
man in history! Over 200,000
people have had their fitness and nutritional programs individually
designed by Bill.
>>>


Bill Pearl is listed as a vegetarian


My point here is not to say Terry or you do not know what you are
talking about. On the contrary I think you are both very knowledgeable.
I am merely trying to point out that the meat supplement system can be
made to work effectively as can the plant based system. Without plants
it is all over. Meat has essentially no energy (no carbs). Try to live
without the products of plants. Furthermore, I am trying to say that
overcoming the stereotypes well established by billions of dollars in
promotion is very difficult. This is perhaps nowhere more obvious than
with cigarettes. What rational person would even consider such a habit
without the associated myths, image and addiction? I agree that to
become the kind of elite athlete you are talking about special
supplementation may be needed, but I would argue that that this may be
desirable on any diet and may take other forms than meat based. There is
quite a lot of evidence that supports this contention. 


> I can already hear people out on the list saying, " bodybuilders---they are
> on steroids...that's why they are big--not the diet.."  The reality is, of
> course they are on steroids


> >I have to admit that I gave up the quest for big muscles long ago. I used to
go in for that but I really don't see it as a truly healthy approach. They can
look impressive but leave many people totally inflexible with some bodybuilders
so inflexible and aerobically unfit they can barely do anything. Try to take
them diving and see what happens<g> Several people have mailed me to ask if
I think you could build a competitive body on a plant based diet. The answer
is, yes, I do. But first I would question the need or desire to do such a
thing. I spent most of my life in athletic competition and when I played
football up into college I carried extra weight. I do not think this was
healthy but neither is the sport itself. Bodybuilders (serious types) build up
there bodies to the exclusion of most everything else. They typically make
choices that are not good for them like steroid use. Their choice - their body.
Many of them are probably happy with it. However, this is not what !
we need to discuss as "healthy". I read that part of Arnold Swartzenegger's
contract for movies was dialysis machines for his degenerated kidneys.
Healthy is being fit with a lower bodyfat good cholesterol etc. not
being able to lift 500 pounds. That is competition and fine in its own
world- separate from pure "health" concerns. I commend both your and
Terry’s position on steroid use.

A side transgression about supplements. There seems to be a real
popularity with whey. I am not sure I understand. Dan, can you help our
here? What I know about whey is mostly from the problems disposing of it
in the environment. Only about 10% of the milk used to make cheese
actually ends up as cheese. The rest separates out as vile-smelling,
vile-tasting whey. It is often fed to pigs and cows, especially with the
huge disposal problem created by the doubling of dairy production in the
early 80’s (more meat pollutants). Strict federal and state regulations
prohibit dumping raw whey down sewers, and most municipal sewage plants
can’t treat it adequately. Nobody could figure out a way to get rid of
this stuff. It was actually a joke for years and then reported in the LA
Times "the solution hit upon by both the industry and government is to
apply high technology and sophisticated marketing techniques and feed
the stuff to humans". Now everyone seems sold on its use. I understand
that you can triple filter and try to get all the chemical impurities
out but with only about 10% protein why bother? This is not better than
TOFU which contains none of the impurity risk. Is this the same stuff
being sold as a supplement? Education please.


> Cmon JJ,  we both know a bogus meat eating diet--what most people have, will
> not promote good performance. And it would be easy to find vegans who  ate
> so badly, that their horribly catabolized muscle tissue would allow them no
> substantial power output or endurance. Studies like this prove whatever the
> researcher wants to prove.
> 

Agreed a bogus meat eating diet has no carbs (or few of them) and is
prone to reduced ability. The point is two-fold. One if you are (like
most people) not in peak shape than a vegetarian diet can be healthier
on the whole. Secondly, the research indicates that a mixed diet is
still not as effective as a plant based one in the aforementioned ways.
I agree that the way you structure these will have a huge impact on
one's effectiveness, but I find it interesting that in random samples
(not hunting for the "catabolized vegan" or the slothful meat-eater)
vegetarians perform better. This seems to indicate that it is much less
challenging to be generally fit with a vegetarian diet. To be sure you
can be VERY fit with a meat based diet but I could argue that you are
fit DESPITE your diet. Sound familiar<g>


> > You write>>>>
> >Have you heard of Dave Scott?
> I have heard of him, in fact, he's one of the people Terry Giles has
> traied---unfortunately, Terry never talked to him about diet. . .

Unfortunately because he could shed more light if he had or unfortunate
because he never got the chance to talk him out of his diet<g>?


> the protein and nutrient density it would take to be a vegetarian in the
> Tour de France---you need to consume over 6000 calories per day---and even
> with this, by tour end, most riders are 10 to 20 pounds lighter at the end
> than they went in to it. And can you imagine trying to get this level of
> protein from beans
>

As I stated before. Any completely rigorous activity like you discuss
will need special care and maintenance to assure adequate nutritional
levels. You are eating meat to introduce those "supplements" and I would
argue that this extra protein demand can be reached in other less
potentially damaging ways. The calories would be a problem but they
would be also be a problem with meat. This would need some serious
supplementation. However, this is not even relevant for the audience
(although interesting and thought provoking). People have and will excel
with a vegetarian diet in the most rigorous activities. It is obvious
that normal people (completely removed from these concerns to begin
with) can easily get all the needed nutrients from a plant based diet
without the huge liability of a meat-based carrier. Given this
information it makes no sense to not at least reduce the flesh content
in the average diet.

All this ignores the many other compelling reasons to reduce or
eliminate meat from your diet. If you could care less about Elsie the
cow or Arnold the pig and the life they are subjected to then consider
the frightening environmental repercussions of our meat-centered diet.
Our species is the only truly obligatory management species in the
history of the planet. All other species will run out of range and
reduce their numbers. Men and women, however, have the ability go
EVERYWHERE and consume ALL resources. This is currently done in such an
incredibly irresponsible fashion that our current 6 billion population
(which will double in our lifetime) simply can't afford to continue in
this fashion. Unfortunately this is about even more than fitness. 

Rampant chemical use, genetic manipulation (hidden from the consumer),
attempts to alter the organic label thus rendering it meaningless, ever
increasing reliance on refined foods, damaging farming practices . . . . 

Open your minds and read a little about what is happening and you will
be shocked. If you are not shocked by what is going with the food we eat
then you are not paying attention. 

I am back on the road . . . traveling again. 

Thanks to all for the thought provoking discussion. Dan, I hope to see
you soon and to get into your VO2 test.


Take care and good diving,
JJ
--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]