Con Position Paper

TYPE SHORT TITLE IN ALL CAPS 2

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on

Con Position Paper

Just from $13/Page

Order Essay

Title in Upper and Lower Case

Your Name

Chamberlain College of Nursing

Course Number: Course Name

Term Month and Year

Running head: TYPE SHORT TITLE IN ALL CAPS 1

TYPE SHORT TITLE IN ALL CAPS 3

Title of your Paper in Upper and Lower Case (Centered, not Bold)

Type your introduction here and remove the instructions.. The introduction should begin with an attention grabber and end with your working thesis statement. Remember to employ an objective tone by applying only 3rd person point of view (no 1st: I, me, my, we, our, us, mine) or 2nd: you, your person point of view).

Context

Begin to type the body of your paper here. Use as many paragraphs as needed to cover the content appropriately. As noted in the Lecture’s outline, the context section should include potential qualifiers, and definitions. It is essentially background information that provides your audience with the context needed to understand your claim.

1st Con-Point

Begin with a topic sentence written in your own words that presents your grounds. Next, apply the evidence/warrant. Signal phrases are highly recommended to introduce new sources (ex: According to Dr. John Smith, head physician at the Mayo Clinic…). Cite your sources in APA format via parenthetical citations. Follow through with a few sentences examining the evidence and connecting it back to your main point. Strive for a minimum of 5 developed sentences in a college level paragraph. Remember to refer back to the outline in our Week 2 Lesson if you need to review the structure of the paper.

Repeat this process for your 2nd and 3rd Con-Points, dedicating a paragraph to each.

Conclusion

Papers should end with a conclusion. Unpack your thesis (do not copy/paste it) and apply a concluding technique. It should be concise and contain no new detail. No matter how much space remains on the page, the references always start on a separate page.

References (centered, not bold)

Type your references in alphabetical order here using hanging indents. See your APA Manual and the resources in your APA folder in Course Resources for reference formatting.

AStudy on the
relationship
between
orthorexia and
vegetarianism
using the BOT
(Bratman Test
for Orthorexia).
Transliterated Title:

Ocena związku
pomiędzy
ortoreksją a
wegetarianizmem
z użyciem BOT
(Bratman Test for
Orthorexia).

Authors:
Dittfeld A; Zakład i
Katedra Histologii i
Embriologii,
Wydział Lekarski z
Oddziałem
Dentystycznym w
Zabrzu, Śląski
Uniwersytet
Medyczny w
Katowicach.
Gwizdek K;
Katedra i Klinika
Rehabilitacji,
Wydział Nauk o
Zdrowiu w
Katowicach, Śląski
Uniwersytet
Medyczny w
Katowicach.

Jagielski P; Zakład
Żywienia
Człowieka,
Wydział Nauk o
Zdrowiu,
Uniwersytet
Jagielloński
Collegium
Medicum.
Brzęk J; Zakład
Kinezjologii,
Katedra
Fizjoterapii,
Wydział Nauk o
Zdrowiu w
Katowicach, Śląski
Uniwersytet
Medyczny w
Katowicach.
Ziora K; Katedra
Pediatrii w Zabrzu,
Wydział Lekarski z
Oddziałem
Dentystycznym w
Zabrzu, Śląski
Uniwersytet
Medyczny w
Katowicach.

Source:
Psychiatria Polska
[Psychiatr Pol]
2017 Dec 30; Vol.
51 (6), pp.
1133-1144. Date
of Electronic
Publication: 2017
Dec 30.

Publication Type:
Journal Article

Language:
English; Polish

Journal Info:
Publisher: Polish
Psychiatric
Association
Country of
Publication:
Poland NLM ID:

0103314
Publication Model:
Print-Electronic
Cited Medium:
Internet ISSN:
2391-5854
(Electronic) Linking
ISSN: 00332674
NLM ISO
Abbreviation:
Psychiatr. Pol.
Subsets:
MEDLINE

Imprint Name(s):
Publication: 1993-:
Krakow, Poland :
Polish Psychiatric
Association
Original
Publication:
Warszawa :
Panstwowy Zaklad
Wydawnictw
Lekarskich

MeSH Terms:
Health Behavior*
Nutritional Status*
Diet,
Vegetarian/*psych
ology
Feeding and
Eating
Disorders/*psychol
ogy
Healthy
Diet/*psychology
Adult ; Diet,
Vegetarian/statisti
cs & numerical
data ; Female ;
Health Status ;
Humans ; Male ;
Middle Aged ;
Surveys and
Questionnaires ;
Young Adult

Abstract:

Objectives: The
following article
presents the
relationship
between
vegetarianism
and orthorexia
nervosa (ON).
Vegetarianism is
an ideology and a
way of life that
aims at minimizing
animal
exploitation. A
vegetarian diet
excludes the
consumption of
meat together with
other animal
derived products.
According to
scientists,
orthorexia
nervosa is
considered to be a
new, yet
unclassified eating
disorder. It
involves
introducing dietary
restrictions by
individuals who
feel a desire to
improve their
health status by
healthy eating.
Methods: The
study involved
2,611 participants,
namely 1,346
vegetarians and
1,265
non-vegetarians.
The research
questionnaire
consisted of
general personal
and

anthropometric
characteristics, the
BOT(Bratman Test
for Orthorexia)
and questions
evaluating the
participants’
attitude towards
nutrition.
Results: Based on
the obtained
results, health food
fanaticism is more
specific to
vegetarians than
non-vegetarians.
The risk for
orthorexia
nervosa decreases
with age and diet
duration. The
biggest number of
health food
fanatics was found
in the group of
lacto-vegetarians,
a lower number
among
ovo-vegetarians
and
lacto-ovo-vegetaria
ns, and the
smallest number
was observed in
the vegan group.
Also, vegetarians
were reported to
have dietary
consultations as
frequently as
non-vegetarians.
Conclusions:
Very few studies
can be found on
the relationship
between
orthorexia
nervosa and

vegetarianism.
Some scientists
believe that
vegetarians are
particularly prone
to orthorexia
nervosa. In
addition, it has
been suggested by
other researchers
that
vegetarianism
can be used to
mask eating
disorders, as it
allows these
affected individuals
to avoid certain
products or
situations related
to food. The
direction of cause
and effect cannot
be determined.

Contributed Indexing:
Keywords: eating
disorders;
orthorexia;
vegetarianism

Entry Date(s):
Date Created:
20180213 Date
Completed:
20180906 Latest
Revision:
20180906

Update Code:
20181211

DOI:
10.12740/PP/7573
9

PMID:
29432508

Database:
MEDLINE
Complete

● Result List

● Refine Search

●
● Result
● 1 of 1

oogle Drive
dd to folder
rint
mail

ave
xport
reate Note
ermalink

Top of Page

● iPhone and Android apps
● EBSCO Connect
● Privacy Policy
● A/B Testing
● Terms of Use
● Copyright
● Cookie Policy
● Contact Us

● New Search
● Multimedia
● Publications
● Homepage
● Sign In
● Folder
● Preferences
● Language
● Ask-A-Librarian
● Help

https://eds-a-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=1&sid=bb27ee0f-bd5d-41eb-a06e-7cb2b51cded6%40sessionmgr4006&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#

https://connect-ebsco-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/

https://www-ebsco-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/company/privacy-policy

https://www-ebsco-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/conversion-testing-statement

https://www-ebsco-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/terms-of-use

https://www-ebsco-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/cookie-policy

https://support-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/contact/index.php

https://eds-a-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/Toolbar/DoRedirect?sid=bb27ee0f-bd5d-41eb-a06e-7cb2b51cded6@sessionmgr4006&vid=1&theDb=&theContentType=

https://eds-a-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/Toolbar/DoRedirect?sid=bb27ee0f-bd5d-41eb-a06e-7cb2b51cded6@sessionmgr4006&vid=1&theDb=imh%2cigh%2cfsv%2chvh%2cvih&theContentType=Multimedia

https://eds-a-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/search/basic?sid=bb27ee0f-bd5d-41eb-a06e-7cb2b51cded6@sessionmgr4006&vid=1&tid=3000EP&sdb=edspub

http://library.chamberlain.edu.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/

https://eds-a-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/Toolbar/SignInOut?sid=bb27ee0f-bd5d-41eb-a06e-7cb2b51cded6@sessionmgr4006&vid=1&ReturnUrl=%252feds%252fdetail%252fdetail%253fvid%253d1%2526sid%253dbb27ee0f-bd5d-41eb-a06e-7cb2b51cded6%252540sessionmgr4006%2526bdata%253dJnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%25253d%25253d

https://eds-a-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/Toolbar/OnRedirectLinkClick?sid=bb27ee0f-bd5d-41eb-a06e-7cb2b51cded6@sessionmgr4006&vid=1&theTarget=folder&ReturnUrl=%252feds%252fdetail%252fdetail%253fvid%253d1%2526sid%253dbb27ee0f-bd5d-41eb-a06e-7cb2b51cded6%252540sessionmgr4006%2526bdata%253dJnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%25253d%25253d

https://eds-a-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=1&sid=bb27ee0f-bd5d-41eb-a06e-7cb2b51cded6%40sessionmgr4006&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#

https://library-chamberlain-edu.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/askus

Week

4 Assignment: Con-Position Paper

Submit Assignment

● Due Sunday by 11:59pm
● Points 125
● Submitting a file upload

Required Resources

Read/review the following resources for this activity:

● Textbook: pp. 69-81
● Lesson
● Week 3 Assignment
● Link (Word doc): Con-Paper Template
● Minimum of 3 academic articles (from the Week 3 Assignment)

Apply the following writing resources to your posts:

● Link (multimedia presentation): Citing References in Text
● (Links to an external site.)
●
● Link (website): APA Citation and Writing
● (Links to an external site.)
●

Instructions

For this assignment, complete the following:

● Review the Toulmin-model outline (Week 2 Lesson) and your completed Week
3 Assignment (Con-Position Proposal). Assess any feedback provided by the
professor and/or your peers.

● Compose a position paper representing the con side of your new topic. (See
the Con-Paper Template). The paper should include approximately 6 developed
paragraphs:

○ Introduction (with thesis statement)
○ Context paragraph
○ 3 body paragraphs (focusing on 3 cons)

https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/60471/assignments/1871171?module_item_id=7734243#

https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/60471/files/6640722/download?wrap=1

http://apastylecentral.apa.org.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/learn/browse/QG-29

https://library.chamberlain.edu/c.php?g=928633&p=6690676

○ Conclusion
● Apply a formal tone appropriate for academic audiences, maintaining an

objective 3rd person point of view – no 1st person (I, me, my, we, our, us, mine)
or 2nd person (you, your). Avoid contractions, clichés, and slang terminology.

● Use the provided template to assist in formatting the title page and document.
● Incorporate at least 3 scholarly sources into the paper. Cite all sources in APA

format, both parenthetically and on a reference page.
● Before submission, proofread and edit carefully for spelling, punctuation, and

grammar. Not every error will be flagged automatically in word-processing
programs, and some that are flagged as errors are actually correct.

Writing Requirements (APA format)

● Length: 2-3 pages (not including the title or reference pages)
● 1-inch margins
● Double spaced
● 12-point Times New Roman font
● Title page
● References page (minimum of 3 academic articles)

Grading

This activity will be graded using the Con-Position Paper Grading Rubric.

Course Outcomes (CO): 3, 6

Due Date: By 11:59 p.m. MT on Sunday

Rubric

Position Paper Grading Rubric – 125 pts (2)

Criteria Ratings Pts

This
criterion
is linked
to a
Learning
Outcome

5.0 pts

Meets length
requirement

0.0 pts

Does not meet length
requirement

5.0
pts

Length

This
criterion
is linked
to a
Learning
Outcome

Point
Analysis

30.0 pts

The
central
idea is
develope
d and
expanded
with
depth of
critical
thought.

25.5
pts

The
central
idea is
discer
nible
and
develo
ped.

22.5 pts

The central
idea needs
more
developme
nt with
points
tying back
to the
thesis.

18.0 pts

The
central
idea is
not
develope
d, and the
analysis
lacks
critical
thought.

0.0
pts

No
effo
rt

30.0
pts

This
criterion
is linked
to a
Learning
Outcome

Support

30.0
pts

The
writin
g
suppo
rts
claim
s with
sever
al
detail
ed
and
persu
asive
exam
ples.

25.5 pts

The
writing
support
s
claims
with
exampl
es, but
addition
al
analysi
s or
exampl
es
could
strengt
hen the
argume
nt.

22.5 pts

The writing
supports
claims with
examples,
but the
examples are
not
well-develop
ed or
examined.
Additional
examples
and analysis
are needed
to make the
argument
more
persuasive.

18.0
pts

The
centr
al
idea
is not
well-
supp
orted
by
claim
s
and/o
r
exam
ples.

0.0
pts

No
eff
ort

30.0
pts

This
criterion
is linked
to a
Learning
Outcome

Organiza
tion

25.0
pts

Paper
is clear
and
cohesi
ve.
Introdu
ction
and
conclu
sion
suppor
t the
overall
flow of
the
paper.

21.25
pts

Paper
is
basica
lly
clear
and
well-o
rganiz
ed
with a
minim
um of
non-re
lated
materi
al
prese
nt.

18.75
pts

Paper
has
some
issues
with
clarity,
flow,
and
cohesi
on.
Paper
lacks
organi
zation.

15.0 pts

Paper
lacks
organiz
ation
and has
difficult
y
staying
on
track.
Central
themes
are
difficult
to
identify
.

0.
0
pt
s

N
o
eff
or
t

25.0
pts

This
criterion
is linked
to a
Learning
Outcome

Writing:
Mechani
cs &
Usage

10.0
pts

The
writin
g is
free
of
major
error
s in
gram
mar,
spelli
ng,
and
punct
uatio
n that

8.5
pts

The
writin
g
contai
ns a
few
major
errors
in
gram
mar,
spelli
ng,
and
punct
uation

7.5
pts

The
writin
g
contai
ns
some
major
errors
in
gram
mar,
spelli
ng,
and
punct
uation

6.0
pts

The
writin
g
conta
ins
sever
al
major
error
s in
gram
mar,
spelli
ng,
and
punct

0.
0
pt
s

N
o
ef
fo
rt

10.0
pts

woul
d
detra
ct
from
a
clear
readi
ng of
the
paper
.

, but
the
errors
do not
detrac
t from
a
clear
readin
g of
the
text.

that
need
to be
addre
ssed
for a
cleare
r
readin
g of
the
paper.

uatio
n that
impe
de a
clear
readi
ng of
the
paper
.

This
criterion
is linked
to a
Learning
Outcome

Clarity &
Flow

10.0
pts

The
writi
ng
cont
ains
stro
ng
wor
d
choi
ce
that
clari
fies
idea
s
and
mas
terfu
l
sent
ence
vari
ety
aids
with
the

8.5
pts

The
writi
ng
cont
ains
vari
ed
wor
d
choi
ce
and
sent
enc
e
stru
ctur
es
that
clari
fy
idea
s
and
aid
with
the

7.5
pts

The
writin
g
conta
ins
word
choic
e and
sente
nce
struc
tures
that
can
be
revis
ed
for
bette
r
clarifi
catio
n of
ideas
and
flow
of

6.0
pts

The
writi
ng
cont
ains
word
ing
and
sente
nce
struc
tures
that
are
awk
ward
and/
or
uncle
ar,
impe
ding
the
clarit
y and
flow
of

0
.
0
p
t
s

N
o
e
ff
o
rt

10.0
pts

flow
of
idea
s.

ideas
.

This
criterion
is linked
to a
Learning
Outcome

Voice

5.0
pts

The
writi
ng
mai
ntai
ns
thir
d-p
ers
on
poi
nt
of
vie
w/o
bjec
tive
voic
e
thro
ugh
out
the
enti
re
text.

4.25
pts

The
writi
ng
mai
ntai
ns
thir
d-p
ers
on
poi
nt
of
vie
w/o
bjec
tive
voic
e
thro
ugh
out
muc
h of
the
text.

3.75
pts

The
writi
ng
has
som
e
devi
atio
n
fro
m
thir
d-p
ers
on
poi
nt
of
vie
w/o
bjec
tive
voic
e
that
nee
ds
to
be
revi
sed
so
as
not
to

3.0
pts

The
writi
ng
devi
ates
sign
ifica
ntly
fro
m
thir
d-p
ers
on
poi
nt
of
vie
w/o
bjec
tive
voic
e
that
nee
ds
to
be
revi
sed
so
as
not
to
sou

0
.
0
p
t
s

N
o
e
f
f
o
r
t

5.0
pts

sou

nd
bias
ed
or
patr
oniz
ing.

This
criterion
is linked
to a
Learning
Outcome

APA
Format

10.
0
pts

All
sou
rce
s
are
pro
per
ly
inte
gra
ted
and
cite
d in
the
text
and
ref
ere
nce
s
pag
e
de
mo
nst
rati
ng
a
ma

8.5
pts

Mo
st
sou
rce
s
are
inte
gra
ted
and
cite
d in
the
text
and
ref
ere
nce
s
pag
e.
So
me
min
or
err
ors
ma
y
exi
st

7.
5
pt
s

M
os
t
so
ur
ce
s
ar
e
int
eg
rat
ed
an
d
cit
ed
in
th
e
te
xt
an
d
ref
er
en
ce
s

6.0
pts

Sou
rce
s
are
not
pro
perl
y
inte
grat
ed/c
ited
in
the
text
/ref
ere
nce
s
pag
e.
For
mat
ting
con
tain
s
sev
eral
erro
rs

0
.
0
p
t
s
N
o
e
f
f
o
r
t
10.0
pts

ste
ry
of
inte
gra
tin
g
res
our
ces
and
AP
A
for
mat
.

in
inte
gra
tio
n
and
/or
cita
tio
n,
but
it
doe
s
not
inte
rfer
e
wit
h
un
der
sta
ndi
ng
the
sou
rce
of
the
inf
or
mat
ion.

pa
ge
.
So
m
e
err
or
s
m
ay
ex
ist
in
int
eg
rat
io
n
an
d/
or
cit
ati
on
th
at
ne
ed
to
be
ad
dr
es
se
d
to
cl
ari
fy
th
e
so
ur
ce
of
inf

that
sug
ges
t a
lack
of
und
erst
and
ing
of
the
inte
grat
ion
of
res
our
ces
and
AP
A
for
mat
.

or
m
ati
on
.

Total Points: 125.0

PreviousNext

https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/60471/modules/items/7734242

https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/60471/modules/items/7734245

●Result List Refine Search Prev 3

of 32 Next

●

Title:

● Why I am not a vegetarian.
● Authors:
● Jarvis, William T.
● Source:
● Nutrition & Health Forum.

Nov/Dec96, Vol.

13 Issue 6, p57.
8p.

● Document Type:
● Article
● Subjects:
● VEGETARIANISM
● HEALTH
● Abstract:
● Focuses on the health benefits

of vegetarianism. Different types
of vegetarians; Practice of
vegetarianism influenced by
Seventh-Day Adventist
environment; Reasons for
adopting vegetarianism;
Examples of ideologic vegetarian
extremism; Entrenched beliefs
about vegetarianism.

● Lexile:
● 1290
● Full Text Word Count:
● 6708
● ISSN:
● 1091-2428
● Accession Number:
● 9709121898
● Database:
● MasterFILE Premier
●

● WHY I AM NOT A

VEGETARIAN
●

Contents

●

Dog Day Afternoon?

●

North by Northwest

●

Ideologic Vegetarianism

●

Eating by the Book?

●

East of Eden

●

Odorless Doo-doo?

● Heavy “PETAing”

●

Disclosure

●

One Less “Ism”

●

References

●

Readers’ Forum

●

Full Text

● Vegetarianism has taken on a

“political correctness”
comparable to the respectability
it had in the last century, when
many social and scientific
progressives advocated it.
Today, crusaders extol meatless
eating not only as healthful but
also as a solution to world
hunger and as a safeguard of
“Mother Earth.” The Physicians
Committee for Responsible
Medicine (PCRM) aggressively
attacks the use of animal foods
and has proposed its own
food-groups model, which
excludes all animal products.
Several scientific conferences
have focused on vegetarian
health. And nutrition
policymakers have urgently
recommended that people eat
more fruits and vegetables.

●
● I disclaimed vegetarianism after

many years of observance.
Although the arguments in favor
of it appear compelling, I have
learned to be suspicious, and to
search for hidden agendas,
when I evaluate claims of the
benefits of vegetarianism.
Vegetarianism is fiddled with
delusional thinking from which
even scientists and medical
professionals are not immune.

●
● Don’t get me wrong: I know that

meatless diets can be healthful,
even desirable, for some people.
For example: (a) Men with an
iron-loading gene are better off
without red meat, because it

contains heme iron, which is
highly absorbable and can
increase their risk of heart
disease. (b) Because vegetarian
diets are likely to contain less
saturated fat than nonvegetarian
diets, they may be preferable for
persons with familial
hypercholesterolemia. (c)
Vegetables contain
phytochemicals that appear
protective against colorectal
cancer. (d) Homocysteinemia
(elevated plasma homocysteine)
approximately doubles the risk of
coronary artery disease. Several
congenital and nutritional
disorders, including deficiencies
of vitamins B6 and B12 and folic
acid, can cause this condition.
Since folic acid occurs mostly in
vegetables, low intakes of the
vitamin are less likely among
vegetarians than among
nonvegetarians. (e) Some
people find that being a
vegetarian helps to control their
weight. Vegetarianism tends to
facilitate weight control because
it is a form of food restriction;
and in our overfed society, food
restriction is a plus unless it
entails a deficit of some essential
nutrient.

●
● However, one need not eliminate

meat from one’s diet for any of
the foregoing reasons.
Apparently, it is ample
consumption of fruits and
vegetables, not the exclusion of
meat, that makes vegetarianism
healthful.

●
● Dog Day Afternoon?
● The term “vegetarian” is

misleading, for it is not a name
for people who favor vegetable

consumption, but a code word
for those who disfavor or protest
the consumption of animal foods.
The neologism anticarnivorist
better characterizes the majority
of those who call themselves
vegetarians. I call myself a
“vegetable enthusiast,” because
I strongly encourage eating lots
of vegetables, including
legumes, whole grains, and
fruits. I believe that these foods
are desirable not only because
of their high nutrient density and
low caloric density, but also
because of aesthetic and
gustatory factors. Being a
vegetable enthusiast doesn’t
entail rejecting the use of meat
or animal products.

●
● Most people who categorize

vegetarians identify at least five
different kinds, based on which
types of animal food they
consume: Semivegetarians
consume dairy products, eggs,
fish, and chicken;
pesco-vegetarians consume
dairy products, eggs, and fish;
lacto-ovo-vegetarians, dairy
products and eggs;
ovo-vegetarians, eggs; and
vegans, no animal foods except
honey. From a behavioral
standpoint, I categorize
vegetarians as either pragmatic
or ideologic. A pragmatic
vegetarian is one whose dietary
behavior stems from objective
health considerations
(e.g.,hypercholesterolemia or
obesity). Pragmatic vegetarians
are rational, rather than
emotional, in their approach to
making lifestyle decisions. In
contrast, vegetarianism is a
“matter of principle” for ideologic

vegetarians; its appropriateness
is a given.

●
● One can spot ideologic

vegetarians by their
exaggerations of the benefits of
vegetarianism, their lack of
skepticism, and their failure to
recognize (or their glossing over
of) the potential risks even of
extreme vegetarian diets.
Ideologic vegetarians make a
pretense of being scientific, but
they approach the subject of
vegetarianism more like lawyers
than scientists. Promoters of
vegetarianism gather dam
selectively and gear their
arguments toward discrediting
information that is contrary to
their dogma. This approach to
defending a position is suitable
for a debate, but it cannot
engender scientific
understanding.

●
● Because of the influence of my

Seventh-day Adventist (SDA)
environment, I practiced
vegetarianism for many years.
My wife and I even tried to give
up consuming all animal
products, but this didn’t work. We
sometimes muse aloud about
the morning we put soymilk on
our breakfast cereal. We ended
up eating the cereal with a fork
because we found the mixture
repulsive. We had another
unforgettable experience when
we ate with a group of
vegetarian hippies in the Oregon
woods. We were there at their
request to advise them on
vegetarian eating. They had
already prepared the
worst-looking vegetarian stew I
have ever seen or tasted. It

consisted of raw peanuts and a
variety of half-cooked
vegetables. After eating it, I had
heartburn for hours.

●
● Digestive distress is legendary

among SDAs. The heroic
attempts by the faithful to chow
down on experimental meat
substitutes were, to me, a major
tip-off that health was not the
thrust of their vegetarianism.

●
● Reasons for adopting

vegetarianism can be very
personal. Some years ago I
shared a podium for several
days with a vegetarian. It
became clear from our informal
conversations that he was not
religious; so I asked him why he
had opted for vegetarianism. He
told me a touching story about
having been a lonely boy whose
closest companion was his pet
dog. He said that, one day, as he
peered into the dog’s eyes, he
had come to see the animal as a
fellow being. Soon he had
applied this view to all animals,
and since he could not bear the
thought of eating his dog, he
could no longer eat other
animals.

●
● North by Northwest
● Darla Erhardt, R.D., M.P.H.,

listed five vegetarian postulates:
( 1) All forms of life are sacred,
and all creatures have a right to
live out their natural lives. ( 2) It
is anatomically clear that God
did not design humans to eat
meat. ( 3) Slaughter is repugnant
and degrading. ( 4) Raising
animals for meat is inefficient
and misuses available land. ( 5)
Animal flesh is unhealthful

because it contains toxins,
virulent bacteria, uric acid,
impure fluids, and the wrong
kinds of nutrients. [ 1]

●
●

I find all of these axioms flawed:

●
● ( 1) The belief that all life is

sacred can lead to absurdities
such as allowing mosquitoes to
spread malaria, or vipers to run
loose on one’s premises.
Inherent in the idea that all life is
sacred is the supposition that all
forms of life have equal value.
The natural world reveals
hierarchies in the food chain, the
dominance of certain species
over others. And most creatures
in the wild die (usually the victim
of a predator) long before they
have reached the genetic limit on
their longevity.

●
● ( 2) The multifarious dietary

practices of human populations
belie the notion that humans are
designed to be vegetarians
rather than omnivores. For
example, Australian aborigines
consume insect larvae and
reptiles, Eskimos eat raw meat,
and traditional Hindus are
vegetarians.

●
● The first SDA physician, John

Harvey Kellogg (1852-1943),
was a vegetarian zealot. Alonzo
Baker, Ph.D., his former private
secretary, told me of an incident
that occurred circa 1939: Kellogg
awakened him in the middle of
the night and ordered him to
board the morning wain for
Cleveland. There, Weston Price,
D.D.S. [see NF 13:22, 1996],
who had just returned from the
mysterious high north, was to

give a report on Eskimo dietary
habits. When Baker returned, he
informed Kellogg of Price’s
finding that Eskimos ate raw
meat almost exclusively (eskimo
literally means “raw meat eater”).
Kellogg accused Price of lying.

●
● Perhaps Kellogg disbelieved

Price partly because it was
widely known that the 1898
Yukon gold rushers had suffered
extensively from scurvy. People
generally believed that Eskimos
derived their vitamin C from
berries the snow had preserved.
In fact, Eskimos derive vitamin C
from the raw meat of animals
who synthesize ascorbic acid. If
they had cooked their meat, they
would have developed scurvy
like the gold rushers. (When I
visited Northwest Territories,
Canada, in 1973, a Franciscan
monk who raised beautiful
vegetables in a greenhouse in
Pelly Bay told me that the Inuits
[North American Eskimos] didn’t
like their taste and wouldn’t eat
them.)

●
● ( 3) Whether something is

repugnant is highly individual.
Hindus who will not eat animal
foods readily drink their own
urine for the sake of health. And
what is repugnant–for example,
chores such as changing a
baby’s diaper or caring for sick
people–is not necessarily wrong.
Whether such activities are
degrading is a matter of opinion.
That most prey are eaten while
they are still alive testifies to the
heartlessness of nature
compared to slaughterhouses,
where death is generally quick
and painless.

●
● ( 4) The idea that animal-raising

is an inefficient way to produce
food is half-baked. Animals pull
their weight when it comes to
land-use and food-production
efficiency: They graze on lands
unsuitable for crop-growing, eat
those portions of plants that are
considered inedible (e.g., corn
stalks and husks), and provide
byproducts and services that
ease human burdens[ 2] Many
nomadic populations survive on
lands that lack farming potential
by feeding on animals whose
nourishment is coarse vegetation
humans can’t digest.

●
● ( 5) The postulate that toxins

render meat unfit as food also
lacks merit. Plants also contain
naturally occurring toxicants,
many of which are far more
deadly than those of animal
flesh.3 Vegetarian evangelists
who revel in portraying animal
foods as unhealthful disregard
the fact that those societies that
consume the most animal
products enjoy record longevity.
They also overlook the reality
that the animals they brand as
diseased are herbivores whose
diet consists entirely of raw
vegetation. These animals
develop many diseases “despite”
becoming vegans after weaning.

●
● Ideologic Vegetarianism
● Much of my professional life has

been spent studying health
fraud, quackery, and related
misinformation, and their impact
on people’s lives. Aware that
one’s personal philosophy can
be a powerful determinant of
health, I have tried to understand

the psychosocial dynamics of the
suffering and death that people
impose on themselves and their
children. I have been struck by
how often vegetarianism has
been a part of such situations,
and I have discerned a recurrent
sequence of behaviors: First, the
concerned person eliminates
reportedly unhealthful foods from
his or her diet, beginning with
foods that society considers “bad
for you” (e.g., sugar, coffee, and
white bread). Next, if concerns
about food safety grow to
neurotic proportions, the person
scrutinizes labels and worries
about ingredients indicated by
terms he doesn’t understand.
Then he may patronize health
food stores, where clerks and
publications can feed his
phobias. He may treat modem
foods as poisonous. Finally, if he
deems vegetarianism not
restrictive enough, the “health
foodist” may turn to veganism
[see NF 13:34-36, 1996]. In my
opinion, it is at this point that
vegetarianism becomes
hazardous, especially for
children.

●
● The case of Sonja and

Khachadour Atikian illustrates
what can happen to those
seduced by ideologic
vegetarianism. The Atikians
were emigres from Lebanon
who–because of unrelenting
media barrages focusing on
environmental pollution, diet, and
health–became overly
concerned about the safety and
healthfulness of modem foods.
Sonja Atikian began shopping at
health food stores instead of
supermarkets. Gerhardt

Hanswille, a self-styled herbalist
from Germany, taught classes in
the rear of a health food store
she patronized. Although
Hanswille was not licensed to
practice medicine, he saw 40 to
45 “patients” day. He treated Ms.
Atikian for a sore knee, and she
took some of his comes.
Hanswille taught that: (a) people
should not kill animals, nor
consume animal products; (b)
God intended cow’s milk to be
food for calves, not human
babies; (c) eating eggs deprives
hens of fulfilling their divinely
intended role as mothers; (d)
people should not poison
themselves or the earth with the
unnatural products of modern
living; (e) using herbs both as
food and as medicine is God’s
way; and (f) the medicines of
doctors are poisons. “Choose
whom you will believe,” said
Hanswille, “me or the doctors.
You can’t have it both ways.”

●
● Ms. Atikian chose poorly. Except

for eating fish occasionally, she
followed the herbalist’s advice
during pregnancy. She delivered
a healthy 8.2-lb girl named
Loreie. Hanswille convinced the
Atikians that the newborn would
become a superbaby if they
gave her a vegetarian diet of
raw, organic foods. He
dissuaded them from having the
infant immunized and from
continuing to see a pediatrician.
And he induced them to rely on
him for healthcare advice.

●
● Four and a half months after her

birth, Loreie’s weight was still at
the 75th percentile, but when
she was 11 months old,

breast-feeding–her sole source
of animal food–discontinued.
Fed only fruits, vegetables, and
rice, she eventually stopped
growing, slept more and more,
and had more and more
infections. As the baby’s health
spiraled downward, Hanswille
assured the parents that her
decline was merely “the poisons
coming out of her body” and that
she would eventually become
the superbaby they desired. In
1987, 17-month-old Loreie died
of bronchial pneumonia
complicated by severe
malnutrition. She weighed 11 1/4
lbs. The Atikians were charged
with failing to provide their
daughter with the “necessaries
of life.” Their defense was that
they had truly believed they had
been providing the “necessaries
of life” when they followed
Hanswille’s advice. The judge
acquitted them after the
discovery that the prosecution
had failed to provide important
information supporting the
couple’s story.

●
● Let’s run through some other

examples of ideologic vegetarian
extremism:

●
● It caused mental and growth

retardation in two boys under-fed
from birth to ages 3 and 5. Their
mother had become a
vegetarian, later eliminated
sugar and dairy products from
her diet, and eventually adopted
a macrobiotic diet.[ 4]

● Ten cases of nutritional rickets
were reported among infants
(most of whom were breast-fed)
of strict-vegetarian mothers who
had not sought medical counsel

during pregnancy but had
obtained advice from health food
stores.[ 5]

● Scurvy and rickets occurred in
two boys, 1 1/2 and 2 1/2 years
old, whose parents were
adherents of the Zen Macrobiotic
diet [see NF 7:17-21, 1990].[ 6]

● A 36-year-old former college
professor who was a follower of
the Temple Beautiful diet died of
malnutrition attempting to
become a “breatharian” — one
who supposedly feeds on air
alone. First he became a
vegetarian, then a fruitarian, then
a “liquidarian” (consuming juices
only), and finally, a would-be
breatharian.[ 7]

● A 2-month-old boy died because
his mother, following the invalid
recommendation for colic in
Adelle Davis’s Let’s Have
Healthy Children, overdosed him
with potassium.[ 8] In a television
interview, the mother said that,
as she became increasingly
estranged toward conventional
medicine, she had adopted
vegetarianism and then
veganism.

● A 24-year-old woman who was
head of San Jose State
University’s student art program
died after taking an extract of
pennyroyal to induce an
abortion. She was described as
“a strict vegetarian who was
involved in holistic medicine.”[ 9]

● A review of the literature
includes reports of cases in
which vegetarian zealotry played
a role in harm to a child.[ 10]

●
● For the ideologist, vegetarianism

is a hygienic religion. It enables
believers to practice self-denial.
As a religion, vegetarianism

attracts the guilt-ridden. It
attracts masochists because it
gives guilt a boost. And it
seduces the unskeptical by
causing guilt and/or by instilling
false guilt. Guilt leads to
self-denial, even asceticism. The
belief that salvation is attainable
by eschewing worldly pleasures
marked the asceticism of early
Christian zealots. Similarly,
health neurotics with medical
problems seem to believe that
the more they restrict their
alimentary pleasures, the more
their health will improve. Fasting,
austere diets, enemas, and the
ingestion of bitter herbs are
consistent with the psychological
needs of health neurotics, many
of whom shun those voices of
conventional medicine and
public health that might
disenchant them.

●
● Of course, I don’t blame

ideologic vegetarianism per se
entirely for tragedies such as
those outlined above. Mental or
emotional disorders apparently
figure in many instances. In such
cases, extremism is more to
blame. However, this doesn’t
take ideologic vegetarianism off
the hook, for it is a potential fuel
for, and a potential igniter of,
psychological problems.

●
● Eating by the Book?
● SDA vegetarianism is rooted in

the Bible, according to which for
food God gave humans “all
plants that bear seed
everywhere on earth, and every
tree bearing fruit that yields
seed” (Genesis 1:29). Meat is
said to have become a part of
the human diet after the Flood,

when all plant life had been
destroyed: “Every creature that
lives and moves shall be food for
you” (Genesis 9:3). Adventists
are taught that the introduction of
meat into the human diet at that
time decreased the human life
span from the more than 900
years of the first humans to
today’s “three-score and ten.”

●
● However, the Bible warns

against confusing dietary
practices with moral behavior:

●
● For the kingdom of God is not

food and drink but righteousness
and peace. (Romans 14:17)

●
● Let no one pass judgment on

you in questions of food and
drink. (Colossians 2:16)

●
● One believes he may eat

anything, while the weak man
eats only vegetables, let not him
who eats despise him who
abstains, and let not him who
abstains pass judgment on him
who eats. (Romans 14:2-4)

●
● It also seems to condemn

vegetarianism:
●
● The Holy Spirit tells us clearly

that in the last times some in the
church will turn away from Christ
and become eager followers of
teachers with devil inspired
ideas. These teachers will tell
lies with straight faces and do it
so often that their consciences
won’t even bother them. They
will say that it is wrong to be
married and wrong to eat meat,
even though God gave these
things to well-taught Christians
to enjoy and be thankful for. For

everything God made is good,
and we may eat it gladly if we
are thankful for it. (I Timothy
4:1-4, Living Bible)

●
● SDA Church pioneer Ellen G.

White (1827-1915) was a
proponent of vegetarianism even
though she did not practice it
herself. Like the Grahamites of
her time, she taught that
gradually the earth would
become more corrupted,
diseases and calamities worse,
and the food–particularly animal
foods–unsafe. In 1902 she wrote
that the time might come when
the use of milk should be
discontinued. Although White
was an advocate of science and
chiefly responsible for making
SDA healthcare a science-based
enterprise, clearly she did not
anticipate twentieth-century
advances in public health and
medical science. Despite the
record longevity now enjoyed by
people in the developed nations,
vegetarian zealots within the
church caught up in the
doomsday hysteria of the 1990s
have decided that the time has
come to give up all animal foods
and are fervidly preaching
veganism.

●
● East of Eden
● It is now widely recognized that it

is possible to provide all
essential nutrients except
vitamin B12 without using animal
foods. It is noteworthy, however,
that it is possible to provide all
essential nutrients with a diet
composed only of meat.
Personal dietary
appropriateness–including the
value of a diet as a source of

essential nutrients and its value
as a preventative–for oneself
and one’s significant others is
the foremost dietary
consideration of pragmatic
vegetarians. In contrast, the
overriding dietary consideration
of ideologic vegetarians varies
with the particular ideology,
Typically, their motivation is a
blend of physical, psychosocial,
societal, and moral, often
religious, concerns.

●
● A continual problem for SDAs

who espouse the “back to Eden”
ideology is the absence of a
non-animal food source of
vitamin B12. A Registered
Dietitian, a vegetarian who wrote
a column for a church periodical,
asked me if I thought vegans
could derive vitamin B12 from
organic vegetables that were
unwashed before ingestion. I
opined that it would be better to
eat animal foods than fecal
residues. She agreed.

●
● A perennial assumption among

vegetarians is that vegetarianism
increases longevity. In the last
century, Grahamites–devotees
of the Christian “hygienic”
philosophy of Sylvester Graham
(1794-1851)–taught that
adherence to the Garden of
Eden lifestyle would eventuate in
humankind’s reclamation of the
potential for superlongevity, such
as that ascribed to Adam (930
years) or Methuselah (969
years). I discussed this matter 25
years ago with an SDA physician
who was dean of the Loma Linda
University (LLU) School of
Health. Although he admitted
that lifelong SDA vegetarians

had not exhibited spectacular
longevity, he professed that
longevity of the antediluvian sort
might become possible over
several generations of
vegetarianism. SDA periodicals
publicize centenarians and often
attribute their longevity to the
SDA lifestyle. However, of 1200
people who reached the century
mark between 1932 and 1952,
only four were vegetarians.[ 11]
continue to ask: Where on Earth
is there an exceptionally
longevous population of
vegetarians? Hindus have
practiced vegetarianism for
many generations but have not
set longevity records.

●
● At best, the whole of scientific

data from nutrition-related
research supports vegetarianism
only tentatively. The incidence of
colorectal cancer among
nonvegetarian Mormons is lower
than that of SDAs.12 A review of
populations at low risk for cancer
showed that World War I
veterans who never smoked had
the lowest risk of all.13 As data
accumulate, optimism that diet is
a significant factor in cancer
appears to be diminishing. An
analysis of 13 case-control
studies of colorectal cancer and
dietary fiber showed that, for the
studies with the best research
methods, risk estimates for
dietary fiber and colorectal
cancer were closer to zero.14 A
pooled analysis of studies of fat
intake and the risk of breast
cancer that included SDA data
showed no association.[ 15]

●
● A meatless diet can facilitate

weight control because it is a

form of food restriction. But one
need not eliminate meat to
maintain a healthy weight, and
there are many overweight
vegetarians. Surely prudence
and selectivity overshadow mere
abstinence from animal
products.

●
● In an interview on the school’s

Christian radio station in the
mid-1970s, an LLU nutrition
graduate student (who was not
an SDA) claimed that
vegetarianism produced superior
intellects. To make her case, she
stated:

●
● Linus Pauling says that vitamin

C improves intelligence.
Vegetarians get more vitamin C
in their diets than meat-eaters.
The probable reason why
George Bernard Shaw and Leo
Tolstoy were brilliant was
because they were vegetarians.

●
● The interviewer agreed, extolling

the health and intellect of
vegetarians. That Adolf Hitler
was a vegetarian went
unmentioned during the
interview. Also unmentioned was
that Jesus Christ, Mohammed,
and other eminent moralists
were not vegetarians. Animal
behavioral scientists have noted
that, to survive, meat-eating
predators must outsmart their
vegetarian prey. However, I
believe that all such theories
break down because of the
difficulty of defining intelligence.

●
● Among the claims of vegetarian

superiority that SDAs have made
again and again is that most
beasts of burden are

herbivorous. They note that
meat-eating predators such as
wolves and lions have
tremendous speed but lack
endurance. However, Arctic sled
dogs that run the 1200-mile
Ididarod cover more than a
hundred miles per day–a feat no
horse, mule or ox can
accomplish.

●
● The idea that vegetarians have

superior physical endurance was
reinforced in 1974 when a group
of male vegetarian runners
called “the vegetarian seven” set
a 24-hour distance record. This
inspired an undergraduate
dietetics major to seek me out as
a coach for a group of seven
female vegetarian long-distance
runners. I asked her what their
motivations were–something
every coach needs to know. She
said they wanted to demonstrate
the superiority of a vegetarian
diet. I asked who would be
representing the meat-eaters.
She said that, because the event
would not be a standard
competition, no one would
represent the meat-eaters. I
revealed to her that three of the
male runners had not been
vegetarians until training for the
record-setting event but merely
had pledged to become so. I
also told her: that genetic
factors, principally the capacity
for oxygen uptake, determine
distance-running ability; that
whether a diet is vegetarian is
inconsequential to
distance-running ability; and that
a 24-hour run is a perilous way
to try proving vegetarian
superiority. “What will you do,” I
inquired, “if seven meat-eating,

beer-drinking atheists who are
worldclass runners decide to
beat your record?” She got the
point. And although she became
an accomplished amateur
runner, she didn’t use her
success to propagandize for
vegetarianism.

●
● John Harvey Kellogg sought to

prove that vegetarians were
physically superior by fielding a
Battle Creek College football
team, which he personally
coached. According to a former
player, “Brother” Wright,
whenever Kellogg’s players lost,
he railed at them for cheating on
their diets and held them captive
until one would say he had
broken training rules and eaten
meat. Wright stated that
sometimes a player would
eventually lie that he had eaten
meat just to get the team
released. He described Kellogg’s
efforts as “a crusade to prove the
superiority of vegetarianism.”
Ellen G. White’s condemnation
of this approach to proving SDA
superiority led to a policy
restricting interscholastic sports
by Adventist schools.

●
● Odorless Doo-doo?
● The John Harvey Kellogg

character in the film Road to
Wellville stated that his feces
had no more odor than that of
“freshly baked biscuits.” One
evening I offered a ride home
from the university to an elderly
colleague, an avid vegetarian.
Upon entering my car, he
declared: “When I drink carrot
juice, my bowel movements
have no odor.” Before I could
respond, he said: “Rabbits eat

lots of carrots, and their feces
have no odor.” The thought of
someone running around sniffing
little piles of rabbit doo-doo
almost made me laugh, but I
didn’t want to be disrespectful.
His idea that rabbits eat many
carrots intrigued me. I had raised
them in my boyhood and
discovered that, despite the
passion for carrots shown by
Bugs Bunny, real bunnies are
not particularly fond of carrots.
Furthermore, wild rabbits seldom
would have an opportunity to eat
carrots. Luckily the ride was
short.

●
● The late Pulitzer Prize-winning

anthropologist Ernest Becker
argued that defecation is most
closely associated with
humankind’s animality and
mortality. [ 16] During a Bible
class at an SDA school, I was
taught that people did not
defecate in the Garden of Eden
but utilized the food they
ingested in its entirety.
Apparently, foul odors did not
befit Paradise. (Perhaps the
persistence of the miasmatic
theory of disease–the theory that
diseases are due to foul-smelling
emanations from the earth–well
into the nineteenth century,
when SDA beliefs were
developed, reinforced the idea of
a poopless Paradise.) I was also
taught that roughage became
part of the human diet after the
Fall. Allegedly, this broadening
of the diet to include “the herb of
the field” (Genesis 3:18, King
James version) occurred
because humans were now
under the “death sentence”
caused by original sin. Whether

this reportedly was a voluntary
dietary change or part of the
curse of being ousted from
Paradise is debatable. Some
versions of the Bible imply that
“the herb of the field” merely
meant “wild foods” (New English
Version), not a new source of
food.

●
●

Heavy “PETAing”

● In the last century, the pacifist

movement was vegetarian
because of the belief that
meat-eating animals were fierce
and vegetarian animals were
docile. The British poet Percy
Bysshe Shelley claimed that the
French revolution had been
bloody and the English
revolution bloodless because the
French ate more meat than the
English.[ 17] Such invalid notions
have been discredited, but not
abandoned. Some boxers still
eat raw meat or drink blood
before a fight to increase their
aggressiveness.

●
● People who fancy themselves

morally superior often have a
mission to convert humanity to
their worldview. The most violent
ideologic vegetarians are the
animal-rights activists, who have
destroyed animal research
facilities and threatened
researchers’ lives. Animal-rights
groups such as People for the
Ethical Treatment of Animals
(PETA) consider animals on par
with humans. On April 24, 1996,
PETA’s Ingrid Newkirk appeared
on the television newsmagazine
Day & Date opposing sport
fishing. She began her argument
by seeking commiseration for
suffocating fish. Then she said

that fish were unhealthful food
because they contained mercury
and other environmental
contaminants. The solution,
according to Newkirk, was
vegetarianism. Her opponent, a
TV talk-show host, pressed her
into acknowledging the PETA
creed. The talk-show host
described an on-air encounter
she had had with another PETA
representative. A scenario had
been presented in which the
representative’s daughter
needed a vital organ from a
beloved household pet in order
to survive. The ethical question
had been whether the child’s life
was worth more than the pet’s.
The PETA representative had
held that the child had no more
value than the pet. Newkirk did
not contest the assertion that
PETA considers the life of a child
no more valuable than that of a
pet.

●
● When an LLU medical team

transplanted a baboon’s heart
into an infant whose pseudonym
was “Baby Fae,” animal-rights
activists picketed the medical
center. They seemed
disillusioned with SDAs, who
have no qualms about prioritizing
humans over animals. In
October 1992, after a pig’s liver
had been transplanted into a
30-year-old woman to enable her
to survive until a human liver
was secured, a representative of
PCRM engaged in a televised
debate with one of the
physicians who had performed
the transplant. The
representative lamented that the
pig’s consent had not been
obtained.

●
● PCRM appears to be largely a

personal forum for its leader,
Neal Barnard, M.D., and is said
to be substantially funded by
PETA. (In fiscal year 1994,
donations and grants to PCRM
reportedly totaled more than a
million dollars.[ 18]) Barnard
extols the longevity value of
vegetarianism. He has claimed:
“It’s not genetics or fate that
gives people long, healthy lives
and cuts other people short; for
those who want to take care of
themselves, it all comes down to
diet.” The surgeon argued that
pigs were killed daily for meat,
including their livers. The PCRM
doctor retorted that the
consumption of animal fat (which
is highly saturated) was
responsible for most deaths in
modem society. He cited a study
conducted by Colin Campbell in
China. Campbell had focused on
the relative morbidity for certain
diseases without pointing out
that life expectancy in China (66
years) is lower that that in the
United States (75 years).[ 19]

●
● Because they consider

themselves morally superior,
many vegetarians exhibit no
reservations against using
mind-control techniques or
terrorism to actualize their
agenda. Mind control includes
using information selectively to
“educate” people about the
alleged superiority of
vegetarianism. It may also
include traumatizing people
emotionally to condition them
against the use of animal foods.
Early in my teaching experience,
I attended a meeting of SDA

secondary school health
teachers where many said that
they converted students to
vegetarianism by taking them on
field trips to slaughterhouses to
witness the bloodshed. This
strategy offended me even
though I was a practicing
vegetarian at the time. Having
studied for years how people
have been manipulated by cults
and quacks, it is now clear to me
that the slaughterhouse tactic is
a form of mind control–that it is
as unethical as discouraging little
girls from having sex by inducing
them to watch a difficult
childbirth.

●
● Terrorism involves trying to

coerce people to behave in ways
the perpetrators desire. In
December 1994, to keep people
from having turkey for Christmas
dinner, self-described
animal-rights terrorists claimed
they had injected rat poison into
supermarket turkeys in
Vancouver, British Columbia.
The scare caused the
destruction of more than $1
million in turkeys. Apparently, the
activists had not foreseen the
ensuing slaughter of turkeys as
replacements.

●
● Disclosure
● Research into vegetarianism by

vegetarians always involves at
least unconscious bias. All
humans have entrenched
beliefs–beliefs whose
rootedness makes doing related
scientific research unwise.
Kenneth J. Rothman, Dr.P.H.,
referred to SDAs in a recent
discussion of conflicts of interest
in research:

●
● We might expect conflict of

interest concerns to be raised,
for example, about Seventh Day
Adventists who are studying the
health effects of the
comparatively abstemious
lifestyle of their fellow Adventists.
Whereas policies at [the Journal
of the American Medical
Association] and The New
England Journal of Medicine
emphasize financial conflicts,
Science asks authors to divulge
“any relationships that they
believe could be construed as
causing a conflict of interest,
whether or not the individual
believes that is actually so.” In
other words, to comply with
disclosure policies at Science,
authors might need to disclose to
editors their religion and sexual
orientation along with their
financial portfolio.[ 20]

●
● Although Rothman argues for

letting work standing on its own
merit rather than judging
cynically any possible
connection to a funding source,
his example makes the point that
motivations more powerful than
money can distort data. Science
fraud can be extremely difficult to
detect, because the perpetrators
control the information. Mark
Twain observed: “Figures don’t
lie, but liars figure!”

●
● I don’t believe that all research

done by vegetarians is
untrustworthy. My experience
with the ongoing Seventh-day
Adventist Health Study
(SDAHS), a series of studies
conducted from LLU School of
Public Health, has been largely

positive. Its chief researcher, the
late Roland Phillips, M.D.,
Dr.P.H., was an outstanding
scientist in whose objectivity I
had the utmost confidence. He
recognized the problem of the
influence of social expectations
on SDAs responding to
questions about their lifestyle.
Adventist group think makes it
likely that SDAs will underreport
activities disfavored by the
church community (e.g.,
meat-eating, coffee drinking, and
imbibing) and over-report those
that are approved (e.g., dining
meatlessly and exercising).
Phillips seemed to feel that the
benefits of vegetarianism per se
were limited, and that one must
take account of heredity,
socioeconomic status, and the
total SDA lifestyle. Abstinence
from tobacco, access to
state-of-the-art healthcare, and
strong social support probably
are responsible for most of the
health benefits SDAs enjoy. The
main problem with SDA
vegetarian science is how the
scientific information is used. To
paraphrase an old Pennsylvania
Dutch saying: Among SDAs,
when the news about
vegetarianism and health is
good, “we hear it ever”; when the
news is not good, “we hear it
never.”

●
● I have received numerous

reports from SDA health
professionals, and have personal
knowledge of other cases, in
which church members’
overconfidence in vegetarianism
prevented them from obtaining
effective medical care. Some
reports have involved true

believers in vegetarianism who
were members of physicians’
families. Some denied
symptoms, and their denial kept
them from seeking effective
intervention in time. Others
rejected medical care for “natural
remedies” that emphasized diet.
The attitudes evidenced are
consistent with those identified in
cancer patients who had turned
to quackery because they
believed they had brought the
disease upon themselves and
could cure it by “natural”
practices.21 The SDA Church
has bent over backward to
document the benefits of the
SDA lifestyle and to persuade
members to adopt vegetarian
diets. I would like to see the
church seek earnestly to expose
the harm that its vegetarian
teachings have caused its
members. Alas, there’s the rub
with ideologic vegetarianism:
Objectivity always takes a back
seat to proselytism.

●
● The data suggest that most

SDAs are reasonable in their
approach to vegetarianism. In
the 1970s, the SDAHS revealed
that only one percent were
vegans.22 This may change as
vegetarianism becomes more
popular in the general
population. SDAs tend to be
overachievers. If we regard
something as “good,” we strive
to adopt it completely. If we
consider something “bad,” we
avoid it completely. SDA
vegetarian evangelists have
become more aggressive in
recent years because of the
widespread belief in the SDA

community that doomsday is
nigh.

●
● I recall an SDA church leader’s

reply to the question of whether
he ate meat: “I eat just enough to
keep me from becoming a
fanatic!” This impresses me as
good advice for body, mind, and
society.

●
● One Less “Ism”
● I gave up vegetarianism because

I found that commitment thereto
meant surrendering the
objectivity that is essential to the
personal and professional
integrity of a scientist. As a
health educator, I feel I have an
obligation to endeavor to stick to
whatever unvarnished facts
scientific research uncovers. I
can support pragmatic
vegetarianism, but I believe that
crusading vegetarian ideologues
are a danger to themselves and
to society.

●
● References
● 1. D. Erhardt, “The New

Vegetarians, Part
One—Vegetarianism and its
Medical Consequences,”
Nutrition Today,
November/December, 1973.

●
● 2. R. Spitzer. No Need For

Hunger. Danville, Ill.: Interstate
Printers and Publishers, 1981.

●
● 3. National Academy of

Sciences. Toxicants Occurring
Naturally In Foods. Washington,
D.C.: National Academy Press,
1973.

●
● 4. J. Wood. “Mother of Starved

Children Asks Permission to

Give Birth Again,” San Francisco
Sunday Examiner & Chronicle,
March 27, 1983, p. A5.

●
● 5. Journal of Nutrition Education

1981; 13:26.
●
● 6. Newsweek, September 18,

1972, p. 71.
●
● 7. “Temple Beautiful Diet–Death

for David Blume,” (AP) San
Bernardino Sun, October 15,
1979, p. A-3.

●
● 8. C.V. Wetli and J.H. Davis.

JAMA 1978; 240:1339.
●
● 9. San Jose Mercury News,

August 20, 1994.
●
● 10. Committee on Nutrition,

American Academy of
Pediatrics, “Nutritional Aspects
of Vegetarianism, Health Foods
and Fad Diets,” Pediatrics 1977;
59:460-4.

●
● 11. O. Segerberg. Living to Be

100:1200 Who Did and How
They Did It. New York: Charles
Scribner’s Sons, 1982.

●
● 12. J.L. Lyon, M.R. Klauber, J.W.

Gardner, and C.R. Smart,
“Cancer Incidence in Mormons
and Non-Mormons in Utah,
1966-70,” N Engl J Med 1976;
294:129-133 (p.132).

●
● 13. J.E. Enstrom. “Cancer

Mortality among Low-Risk
Populations,” CA–A Cancer
Journal for Clinicians 1979;
29:352-61.

●
● 14. C.M. Friedenreich, R.F.

Brant, and E. Riboli. “Influence of

Methodological Factors in a
Pooled Analysis of 13
Case-Control Studies of
Colorectal Cancer and Dietary
Fiber,” Epidemiology 1994;
5:66-79.

●
● 15. D.J. Hunter et al. “Cohort

Studies of Fat Intake and the
Risk of Breast Cancer–A Pooled
Analysis,” New Engl J Med 1996;
334:356-61.

●
● 16. E. Becker. The Denial of

Death. New York: Macmillan
Publishing Co., Inc., 1973.

●
● 17. J. Whorton. “Tempest in a

Flesh-Pot: Development of a
Physiological Rationale for
Vegetarianism,”Journal of the
History of Medicine, April 1977,
pp. 119-120.

●
● 18. Good Medicine, Spring 1995.
●
● 19. The Population Reference

Bureau, Inc., Washington, D.C.,
1988.

●
● 20. K. Rothman. “Conflict of

Interest: The New McCarthyism
in Science,” JAMA 1993; 269
(21):2782-4.

●
● 21. B. Cassileth et al.

“Contemporary Treatments in
Cancer Medicine,” Annals
Internal Med 1984; 101:105-12.

●
● 22. “Researchers Release

Adventist Health Study Results,”
Pacific Union Recorder, March
12, 1979.

●
● Readers’ Forum
●

Dear Mr. Raso,

●

● I would like to comment on the
letter from Ruth Rosevear that
appeared in the May/June 1996
issue of NF. I am very sorry
about the tragedy of her
daughter’s lifelong impairment
and untimely death, and I have
no doubt that it resulted from Ms.
Rosevear’s inadequate vegan
diet during pregnancy. I believe
that it takes careful planning to
make an all-plant diet adequate
during pregnancy, and there
would certainly be a need to
supplement with vitamin B 12,
and perhaps also with vitamin D,
calcium, iron, and zinc. It seems
that virtually all obstetricians
today require their pregnant
patients to take a prenatal
vitamin/mineral supplement
(whether or not they are
vegetarian). I don’t know what
the practice was in 1942, but
consider that vitamin B12 was
not even discovered until 1951.
Therefore, in 1942, it was
impossible to make any regan
diet adequate during pregnancy.

●
● There certainly are regan women

today who have given birth to
normal, healthy babies. Much
documentation exists pertaining
to a vegan community in
Tennessee called”The Farm.”
Medical records have
demonstrated not only normal
births, but also normal, healthy
development for these vegan
children, and normal percentiles
for height and weight and other
variables. At The Farm, they
make ample use of highly
digestible soy protein products,
whole grains, and vegetables,
and they supplement with
vitamin B12. However, I am still

of the opinion that if a woman is
not fully adapted to a vegan diet,
it is unwise for her to switch to it
radically at the time of
pregnancy.

●
● But the most important thing I

have to say is that there is ample
evidence that low-fat regan diets
have benefited nonpregnant
adults who have suffered from
hypertension, cardiovascular
disease, rheumatoid arthritis,
gout, adult-onset diabetes, and a
host of other chronic diseases. It
would be a shame, as you
suggested, if Ms. Rosevear’s
letter fostered “a blanket
condemnation of veganism.”

●
●

Ralph C. Cinque, D.C.

●

Buda, Texas

● While I do not regard voluntary

veganism as condemnable
across the board, I do consider it
an unnecessary extreme. The
Farm, by the way, gave us
spiritual midwifery [see NT
12:30, 1995]. –J.R.

●
●

~~~~~~~~

●
●

By William T. Jarvis

●
● William T. Jarvis, Ph.D., is a

professor of public health and
preventive medicine at Loma
Linda University and founder and
president of The National
Council Against Health Fraud.

●
● Copyright of Nutrition & Health

Forum is the property of
Prometheus Books and its
content may not be copied or
emailed to multiple sites or
posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder’s express

written permission. However,
users may print, download, or
email articles for individual use.

●
● Result List Refine Search Prev 3

of 32 Next
● Document Viewing Options:
● Detailed Record
● HTML Full Text
● Find Similar Results
● using SmartText Searching.
●
● Tools
● Google Drive
● Add to folder
● Print
● E-mail
● Save
● Export
● Create Note
● Permalink
●

Listen

● Translate
●
●

Top of Page

● iPhone and Android apps

EBSCO Connect Privacy Policy
A/B Testing Terms of Use
Copyright Cookie Policy Contact
Us

Title:

Why I am not a
vegetarian.
Authors:

Jarvis, William T.
Source:

Nutrition & Health
Forum.
Nov/Dec96, Vol.

13 Issue 6, p57.
8p.

Document Type:
Article

Subjects:
VEGETARIANISM
HEALTH

Abstract:
Focuses on the
health benefits of
vegetarianism.
Different types of
vegetarians;
Practice of
vegetarianism
influenced by
Seventh-Day
Adventist
environment;
Reasons for
adopting
vegetarianism;
Examples of
ideologic
vegetarian
extremism;
Entrenched beliefs
about
vegetarianism.

Lexile:
1290

Full Text Word Count:
6708

ISSN:
1091-2428

Accession Number:
9709121898

Database:
MasterFILE
Premier

IndonesiaInglese/Italiano英語/日本語
영어/한국어Engelsk/Norskانگلیسی/فارسی
angielski/polskiInglés/PortuguêsEnglish/
PashtoEngleză/românăАнглийский/
РусскийInglés/EspañolEnglish/
SerbianAngleški/SlovenskiAngličtina/
SlovenčinaEngelska/svenskaอังกฤษ/
ไทยİngilizce/TürkАнглійська/Українська
انگریزی/اردو
WHY I AM NOT A VEGETARIAN

Contents

1. Dog Day Afternoon?

2. North by Northwest

3. Ideologic Vegetarianism

4. Eating by the Book?

5. East of Eden

6. Odorless Doo-doo?

7. Heavy “PETAing”

8. Disclosure

9. One Less “Ism”

10. References

11. Readers’ Forum

Full Text
Listen

American Accent Australian
Accent British Accent

Vegetarianism has taken on a “political
correctness” comparable to the
respectability it had in the last century,
when many social and scientific

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN9709121898-2

https://app-na-readspeaker-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/cgi-bin/rsent?customerid=5845&lang=en_us&readid=rs_full_text_container_title&url=https%3A%2F%2Feds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org%2Feds%2Fdetail%2Fdetail%3Fvid%3D24%26sid%3D8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%2540pdc-v-sessmgr06%26bdata%3DJnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%253d%253d&speedValue=medium&download=true&audiofilename=WhyIamnota-JarvisWilliamT-19961101

progressives advocated it. Today,
crusaders extol meatless eating not only
as healthful but also as a solution to
world hunger and as a safeguard of
“Mother Earth.” The Physicians
Committee for Responsible Medicine
(PCRM) aggressively attacks the use of
animal foods and has proposed its own
food-groups model, which excludes all
animal products. Several scientific
conferences have focused on vegetarian
health. And nutrition policymakers have
urgently recommended that people eat
more fruits and vegetables.

I disclaimed vegetarianism after many
years of observance. Although the
arguments in favor of it appear
compelling, I have learned to be
suspicious, and to search for hidden
agendas, when I evaluate claims of the
benefits of vegetarianism. Vegetarianism
is fiddled with delusional thinking from
which even scientists and medical
professionals are not immune.

Don’t get me wrong: I know that
meatless diets can be healthful, even
desirable, for some people. For example:
(a) Men with an iron-loading gene are
better off without red meat, because it
contains heme iron, which is highly
absorbable and can increase their risk of
heart disease. (b) Because vegetarian
diets are likely to contain less saturated
fat than nonvegetarian diets, they may
be preferable for persons with familial
hypercholesterolemia. (c) Vegetables
contain phytochemicals that appear
protective against colorectal cancer. (d)
Homocysteinemia (elevated plasma
homocysteine) approximately doubles
the risk of coronary artery disease.
Several congenital and nutritional
disorders, including deficiencies of
vitamins B6 and B12 and folic acid, can

cause this condition. Since folic acid
occurs mostly in vegetables, low intakes
of the vitamin are less likely among
vegetarians than among nonvegetarians.
(e) Some people find that being a
vegetarian helps to control their weight.
Vegetarianism tends to facilitate weight
control because it is a form of food
restriction; and in our overfed society,
food restriction is a plus unless it entails
a deficit of some essential nutrient.

However, one need not eliminate meat
from one’s diet for any of the foregoing
reasons. Apparently, it is ample
consumption of fruits and vegetables, not
the exclusion of meat, that makes
vegetarianism healthful.

Dog Day Afternoon?

The term “vegetarian” is misleading, for it
is not a name for people who favor
vegetable consumption, but a code word
for those who disfavor or protest the
consumption of animal foods. The
neologism anticarnivorist better
characterizes the majority of those who
call themselves vegetarians. I call myself
a “vegetable enthusiast,” because I
strongly encourage eating lots of
vegetables, including legumes, whole
grains, and fruits. I believe that these
foods are desirable not only because of
their high nutrient density and low caloric
density, but also because of aesthetic
and gustatory factors. Being a vegetable
enthusiast doesn’t entail rejecting the
use of meat or animal products.

Most people who categorize vegetarians
identify at least five different kinds, based
on which types of animal food they

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#toc

consume: Semivegetarians consume
dairy products, eggs, fish, and chicken;
pesco-vegetarians consume dairy
products, eggs, and fish;
lacto-ovo-vegetarians, dairy products
and eggs; ovo-vegetarians, eggs; and
vegans, no animal foods except honey.
From a behavioral standpoint, I
categorize vegetarians as either
pragmatic or ideologic. A pragmatic
vegetarian is one whose dietary behavior
stems from objective health
considerations
(e.g.,hypercholesterolemia or obesity).
Pragmatic vegetarians are rational,
rather than emotional, in their approach
to making lifestyle decisions. In contrast,
vegetarianism is a “matter of principle”
for ideologic vegetarians; its
appropriateness is a given.

One can spot ideologic vegetarians by
their exaggerations of the benefits of
vegetarianism, their lack of skepticism,
and their failure to recognize (or their
glossing over of) the potential risks even
of extreme vegetarian diets. Ideologic
vegetarians make a pretense of being
scientific, but they approach the subject
of vegetarianism more like lawyers than
scientists. Promoters of vegetarianism
gather dam selectively and gear their
arguments toward discrediting
information that is contrary to their
dogma. This approach to defending a
position is suitable for a debate, but it
cannot engender scientific
understanding.

Because of the influence of my
Seventh-day Adventist (SDA)
environment, I practiced vegetarianism
for many years. My wife and I even tried
to give up consuming all animal
products, but this didn’t work. We
sometimes muse aloud about the

morning we put soymilk on our breakfast
cereal. We ended up eating the cereal
with a fork because we found the mixture
repulsive. We had another unforgettable
experience when we ate with a group of
vegetarian hippies in the Oregon woods.
We were there at their request to advise
them on vegetarian eating. They had
already prepared the worst-looking
vegetarian stew I have ever seen or
tasted. It consisted of raw peanuts and a
variety of half-cooked vegetables. After
eating it, I had heartburn for hours.

Digestive distress is legendary among
SDAs. The heroic attempts by the faithful
to chow down on experimental meat
substitutes were, to me, a major tip-off
that health was not the thrust of their
vegetarianism.

Reasons for adopting vegetarianism can
be very personal. Some years ago I
shared a podium for several days with a
vegetarian. It became clear from our
informal conversations that he was not
religious; so I asked him why he had
opted for vegetarianism. He told me a
touching story about having been a
lonely boy whose closest companion was
his pet dog. He said that, one day, as he
peered into the dog’s eyes, he had come
to see the animal as a fellow being. Soon
he had applied this view to all animals,
and since he could not bear the thought
of eating his dog, he could no longer eat
other animals.

North by Northwest

Darla Erhardt, R.D., M.P.H., listed five
vegetarian postulates: ( 1) All forms of
life are sacred, and all creatures have a

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#toc

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib1

right to live out their natural lives. ( 2) It is
anatomically clear that God did not
design humans to eat meat. ( 3)
Slaughter is repugnant and degrading. (
4) Raising animals for meat is inefficient
and misuses available land. ( 5) Animal
flesh is unhealthful because it contains
toxins, virulent bacteria, uric acid, impure
fluids, and the wrong kinds of nutrients. [
1]

I find all of these axioms flawed:

( 1) The belief that all life is sacred can
lead to absurdities such as allowing
mosquitoes to spread malaria, or vipers
to run loose on one’s premises. Inherent
in the idea that all life is sacred is the
supposition that all forms of life have
equal value. The natural world reveals
hierarchies in the food chain, the
dominance of certain species over
others. And most creatures in the wild
die (usually the victim of a predator) long
before they have reached the genetic
limit on their longevity.

( 2) The multifarious dietary practices of
human populations belie the notion that
humans are designed to be vegetarians
rather than omnivores. For example,
Australian aborigines consume insect
larvae and reptiles, Eskimos eat raw
meat, and traditional Hindus are
vegetarians.

The first SDA physician, John Harvey
Kellogg (1852-1943), was a vegetarian
zealot. Alonzo Baker, Ph.D., his former
private secretary, told me of an incident
that occurred circa 1939: Kellogg
awakened him in the middle of the night
and ordered him to board the morning
wain for Cleveland. There, Weston Price,
D.D.S. [see NF 13:22, 1996], who had

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib2

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib3

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib4

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib5

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib1

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib2

just returned from the mysterious high
north, was to give a report on Eskimo
dietary habits. When Baker returned, he
informed Kellogg of Price’s finding that
Eskimos ate raw meat almost exclusively
(eskimo literally means “raw meat
eater”). Kellogg accused Price of lying.

Perhaps Kellogg disbelieved Price partly
because it was widely known that the
1898 Yukon gold rushers had suffered
extensively from scurvy. People
generally believed that Eskimos derived
their vitamin C from berries the snow had
preserved. In fact, Eskimos derive
vitamin C from the raw meat of animals
who synthesize ascorbic acid. If they had
cooked their meat, they would have
developed scurvy like the gold rushers.
(When I visited Northwest Territories,
Canada, in 1973, a Franciscan monk
who raised beautiful vegetables in a
greenhouse in Pelly Bay told me that the
Inuits [North American Eskimos] didn’t
like their taste and wouldn’t eat them.)

( 3) Whether something is repugnant is
highly individual. Hindus who will not eat
animal foods readily drink their own urine
for the sake of health. And what is
repugnant–for example, chores such as
changing a baby’s diaper or caring for
sick people–is not necessarily wrong.
Whether such activities are degrading is
a matter of opinion. That most prey are
eaten while they are still alive testifies to
the heartlessness of nature compared to
slaughterhouses, where death is
generally quick and painless.

( 4) The idea that animal-raising is an
inefficient way to produce food is
half-baked. Animals pull their weight
when it comes to land-use and
food-production efficiency: They graze

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib3

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib4

on lands unsuitable for crop-growing, eat
those portions of plants that are
considered inedible (e.g., corn stalks and
husks), and provide byproducts and
services that ease human burdens[ 2]
Many nomadic populations survive on
lands that lack farming potential by
feeding on animals whose nourishment
is coarse vegetation humans can’t
digest.

( 5) The postulate that toxins render
meat unfit as food also lacks merit.
Plants also contain naturally occurring
toxicants, many of which are far more
deadly than those of animal flesh.3
Vegetarian evangelists who revel in
portraying animal foods as unhealthful
disregard the fact that those societies
that consume the most animal products
enjoy record longevity. They also
overlook the reality that the animals they
brand as diseased are herbivores whose
diet consists entirely of raw vegetation.
These animals develop many diseases
“despite” becoming vegans after
weaning.

Ideologic Vegetarianism

Much of my professional life has been
spent studying health fraud, quackery,
and related misinformation, and their
impact on people’s lives. Aware that
one’s personal philosophy can be a
powerful determinant of health, I have
tried to understand the psychosocial
dynamics of the suffering and death that
people impose on themselves and their
children. I have been struck by how often
vegetarianism has been a part of such
situations, and I have discerned a
recurrent sequence of behaviors: First,
the concerned person eliminates

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib2

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib5

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#toc

reportedly unhealthful foods from his or
her diet, beginning with foods that
society considers “bad for you” (e.g.,
sugar, coffee, and white bread). Next, if
concerns about food safety grow to
neurotic proportions, the person
scrutinizes labels and worries about
ingredients indicated by terms he doesn’t
understand. Then he may patronize
health food stores, where clerks and
publications can feed his phobias. He
may treat modem foods as poisonous.
Finally, if he deems vegetarianism not
restrictive enough, the “health foodist”
may turn to veganism [see NF 13:34-36,
1996]. In my opinion, it is at this point
that vegetarianism becomes hazardous,
especially for children.

The case of Sonja and Khachadour
Atikian illustrates what can happen to
those seduced by ideologic
vegetarianism. The Atikians were
emigres from Lebanon who–because of
unrelenting media barrages focusing on
environmental pollution, diet, and
health–became overly concerned about
the safety and healthfulness of modem
foods. Sonja Atikian began shopping at
health food stores instead of
supermarkets. Gerhardt Hanswille, a
self-styled herbalist from Germany,
taught classes in the rear of a health
food store she patronized. Although
Hanswille was not licensed to practice
medicine, he saw 40 to 45 “patients” day.
He treated Ms. Atikian for a sore knee,
and she took some of his comes.
Hanswille taught that: (a) people should
not kill animals, nor consume animal
products; (b) God intended cow’s milk to
be food for calves, not human babies; (c)
eating eggs deprives hens of fulfilling
their divinely intended role as mothers;
(d) people should not poison themselves
or the earth with the unnatural products
of modern living; (e) using herbs both as

food and as medicine is God’s way; and
(f) the medicines of doctors are poisons.
“Choose whom you will believe,” said
Hanswille, “me or the doctors. You can’t
have it both ways.”

Ms. Atikian chose poorly. Except for
eating fish occasionally, she followed the
herbalist’s advice during pregnancy. She
delivered a healthy 8.2-lb girl named
Loreie. Hanswille convinced the Atikians
that the newborn would become a
superbaby if they gave her a vegetarian
diet of raw, organic foods. He dissuaded
them from having the infant immunized
and from continuing to see a pediatrician.
And he induced them to rely on him for
healthcare advice.

Four and a half months after her birth,
Loreie’s weight was still at the 75th
percentile, but when she was 11 months
old, breast-feeding–her sole source of
animal food–discontinued. Fed only
fruits, vegetables, and rice, she
eventually stopped growing, slept more
and more, and had more and more
infections. As the baby’s health spiraled
downward, Hanswille assured the
parents that her decline was merely “the
poisons coming out of her body” and that
she would eventually become the
superbaby they desired. In 1987,
17-month-old Loreie died of bronchial
pneumonia complicated by severe
malnutrition. She weighed 11 1/4 lbs.
The Atikians were charged with failing to
provide their daughter with the
“necessaries of life.” Their defense was
that they had truly believed they had
been providing the “necessaries of life”
when they followed Hanswille’s advice.
The judge acquitted them after the
discovery that the prosecution had failed
to provide important information
supporting the couple’s story.

Let’s run through some other examples
of ideologic vegetarian extremism:

● It caused mental and growth
retardation in two boys
under-fed from birth to ages 3
and 5. Their mother had
become a vegetarian, later
eliminated sugar and dairy
products from her diet, and
eventually adopted a
macrobiotic diet.[ 4]

● Ten cases of nutritional
rickets were reported among
infants (most of whom were
breast-fed) of strict-vegetarian
mothers who had not sought
medical counsel during
pregnancy but had obtained
advice from health food
stores.[ 5]

● Scurvy and rickets occurred in
two boys, 1 1/2 and 2 1/2
years old, whose parents
were adherents of the Zen
Macrobiotic diet [see NF
7:17-21, 1990].[ 6]

● A 36-year-old former college
professor who was a follower
of the Temple Beautiful diet
died of malnutrition attempting
to become a “breatharian” —
one who supposedly feeds on
air alone. First he became a
vegetarian, then a fruitarian,
then a “liquidarian”

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib4

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib5

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib6

(consuming juices only), and
finally, a would-be
breatharian.[ 7]

● A 2-month-old boy died
because his mother, following
the invalid recommendation
for colic in Adelle Davis’s Let’s
Have Healthy Children,
overdosed him with
potassium.[ 8] In a television
interview, the mother said
that, as she became
increasingly estranged toward
conventional medicine, she
had adopted vegetarianism
and then veganism.

● A 24-year-old woman who
was head of San Jose State
University’s student art
program died after taking an
extract of pennyroyal to
induce an abortion. She was
described as “a strict
vegetarian who was involved
in holistic medicine.”[ 9]

A review of the literature includes reports
of cases in which vegetarian zealotry
played a role in harm to a child.[ 10]

For the ideologist, vegetarianism is a
hygienic religion. It enables believers to
practice self-denial. As a religion,
vegetarianism attracts the guilt-ridden. It
attracts masochists because it gives guilt
a boost. And it seduces the unskeptical
by causing guilt and/or by instilling false
guilt. Guilt leads to self-denial, even
asceticism. The belief that salvation is
attainable by eschewing worldly
pleasures marked the asceticism of early

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib7

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib8

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib9

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib10

Christian zealots. Similarly, health
neurotics with medical problems seem to
believe that the more they restrict their
alimentary pleasures, the more their
health will improve. Fasting, austere
diets, enemas, and the ingestion of bitter
herbs are consistent with the
psychological needs of health neurotics,
many of whom shun those voices of
conventional medicine and public health
that might disenchant them.

Of course, I don’t blame ideologic
vegetarianism per se entirely for
tragedies such as those outlined above.
Mental or emotional disorders apparently
figure in many instances. In such cases,
extremism is more to blame. However,
this doesn’t take ideologic vegetarianism
off the hook, for it is a potential fuel for,
and a potential igniter of, psychological
problems.

Eating by the Book?

SDA vegetarianism is rooted in the Bible,
according to which for food God gave
humans “all plants that bear seed
everywhere on earth, and every tree
bearing fruit that yields seed” (Genesis
1:29). Meat is said to have become a
part of the human diet after the Flood,
when all plant life had been destroyed:
“Every creature that lives and moves
shall be food for you” (Genesis 9:3).
Adventists are taught that the
introduction of meat into the human diet
at that time decreased the human life
span from the more than 900 years of
the first humans to today’s “three-score
and ten.”

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#toc

However, the Bible warns against
confusing dietary practices with moral
behavior:

For the kingdom of God is not food and
drink but righteousness and peace.
(Romans 14:17)

Let no one pass judgment on you in
questions of food and drink. (Colossians
2:16)

One believes he may eat anything, while
the weak man eats only vegetables, let
not him who eats despise him who
abstains, and let not him who abstains
pass judgment on him who eats.
(Romans 14:2-4)

It also seems to condemn vegetarianism:

The Holy Spirit tells us clearly that in the
last times some in the church will turn
away from Christ and become eager
followers of teachers with devil inspired
ideas. These teachers will tell lies with
straight faces and do it so often that their
consciences won’t even bother them.
They will say that it is wrong to be
married and wrong to eat meat, even
though God gave these things to
well-taught Christians to enjoy and be
thankful for. For everything God made is
good, and we may eat it gladly if we are
thankful for it. (I Timothy 4:1-4, Living
Bible)

SDA Church pioneer Ellen G. White
(1827-1915) was a proponent of
vegetarianism even though she did not
practice it herself. Like the Grahamites of

her time, she taught that gradually the
earth would become more corrupted,
diseases and calamities worse, and the
food–particularly animal foods–unsafe.
In 1902 she wrote that the time might
come when the use of milk should be
discontinued. Although White was an
advocate of science and chiefly
responsible for making SDA healthcare a
science-based enterprise, clearly she did
not anticipate twentieth-century
advances in public health and medical
science. Despite the record longevity
now enjoyed by people in the developed
nations, vegetarian zealots within the
church caught up in the doomsday
hysteria of the 1990s have decided that
the time has come to give up all animal
foods and are fervidly preaching
veganism.

East of Eden

It is now widely recognized that it is
possible to provide all essential nutrients
except vitamin B12 without using animal
foods. It is noteworthy, however, that it is
possible to provide all essential nutrients
with a diet composed only of meat.
Personal dietary
appropriateness–including the value of a
diet as a source of essential nutrients
and its value as a preventative–for
oneself and one’s significant others is the
foremost dietary consideration of
pragmatic vegetarians. In contrast, the
overriding dietary consideration of
ideologic vegetarians varies with the
particular ideology, Typically, their
motivation is a blend of physical,
psychosocial, societal, and moral, often
religious, concerns.

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#toc

A continual problem for SDAs who
espouse the “back to Eden” ideology is
the absence of a non-animal food source
of vitamin B12. A Registered Dietitian, a
vegetarian who wrote a column for a
church periodical, asked me if I thought
vegans could derive vitamin B12 from
organic vegetables that were unwashed
before ingestion. I opined that it would be
better to eat animal foods than fecal
residues. She agreed.

A perennial assumption among
vegetarians is that vegetarianism
increases longevity. In the last century,
Grahamites–devotees of the Christian
“hygienic” philosophy of Sylvester
Graham (1794-1851)–taught that
adherence to the Garden of Eden
lifestyle would eventuate in humankind’s
reclamation of the potential for
superlongevity, such as that ascribed to
Adam (930 years) or Methuselah (969
years). I discussed this matter 25 years
ago with an SDA physician who was
dean of the Loma Linda University (LLU)
School of Health. Although he admitted
that lifelong SDA vegetarians had not
exhibited spectacular longevity, he
professed that longevity of the
antediluvian sort might become possible
over several generations of
vegetarianism. SDA periodicals publicize
centenarians and often attribute their
longevity to the SDA lifestyle. However,
of 1200 people who reached the century
mark between 1932 and 1952, only four
were vegetarians.[ 11] continue to ask:
Where on Earth is there an exceptionally
longevous population of vegetarians?
Hindus have practiced vegetarianism for
many generations but have not set
longevity records.

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib11

At best, the whole of scientific data from
nutrition-related research supports
vegetarianism only tentatively. The
incidence of colorectal cancer among
nonvegetarian Mormons is lower than
that of SDAs.12 A review of populations
at low risk for cancer showed that World
War I veterans who never smoked had
the lowest risk of all.13 As data
accumulate, optimism that diet is a
significant factor in cancer appears to be
diminishing. An analysis of 13
case-control studies of colorectal cancer
and dietary fiber showed that, for the
studies with the best research methods,
risk estimates for dietary fiber and
colorectal cancer were closer to zero.14
A pooled analysis of studies of fat intake
and the risk of breast cancer that
included SDA data showed no
association.[ 15]

A meatless diet can facilitate weight
control because it is a form of food
restriction. But one need not eliminate
meat to maintain a healthy weight, and
there are many overweight vegetarians.
Surely prudence and selectivity
overshadow mere abstinence from
animal products.

In an interview on the school’s Christian
radio station in the mid-1970s, an LLU
nutrition graduate student (who was not
an SDA) claimed that vegetarianism
produced superior intellects. To make
her case, she stated:

Linus Pauling says that vitamin C
improves intelligence. Vegetarians get
more vitamin C in their diets than
meat-eaters. The probable reason why
George Bernard Shaw and Leo Tolstoy

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib15

were brilliant was because they were
vegetarians.

The interviewer agreed, extolling the
health and intellect of vegetarians. That
Adolf Hitler was a vegetarian went
unmentioned during the interview. Also
unmentioned was that Jesus Christ,
Mohammed, and other eminent moralists
were not vegetarians. Animal behavioral
scientists have noted that, to survive,
meat-eating predators must outsmart
their vegetarian prey. However, I believe
that all such theories break down
because of the difficulty of defining
intelligence.

Among the claims of vegetarian
superiority that SDAs have made again
and again is that most beasts of burden
are herbivorous. They note that
meat-eating predators such as wolves
and lions have tremendous speed but
lack endurance. However, Arctic sled
dogs that run the 1200-mile Ididarod
cover more than a hundred miles per
day–a feat no horse, mule or ox can
accomplish.

The idea that vegetarians have superior
physical endurance was reinforced in
1974 when a group of male vegetarian
runners called “the vegetarian seven” set
a 24-hour distance record. This inspired
an undergraduate dietetics major to seek
me out as a coach for a group of seven
female vegetarian long-distance runners.
I asked her what their motivations
were–something every coach needs to
know. She said they wanted to
demonstrate the superiority of a
vegetarian diet. I asked who would be
representing the meat-eaters. She said
that, because the event would not be a
standard competition, no one would

represent the meat-eaters. I revealed to
her that three of the male runners had
not been vegetarians until training for the
record-setting event but merely had
pledged to become so. I also told her:
that genetic factors, principally the
capacity for oxygen uptake, determine
distance-running ability; that whether a
diet is vegetarian is inconsequential to
distance-running ability; and that a
24-hour run is a perilous way to try
proving vegetarian superiority. “What will
you do,” I inquired, “if seven meat-eating,
beer-drinking atheists who are
worldclass runners decide to beat your
record?” She got the point. And although
she became an accomplished amateur
runner, she didn’t use her success to
propagandize for vegetarianism.

John Harvey Kellogg sought to prove
that vegetarians were physically superior
by fielding a Battle Creek College football
team, which he personally coached.
According to a former player, “Brother”
Wright, whenever Kellogg’s players lost,
he railed at them for cheating on their
diets and held them captive until one
would say he had broken training rules
and eaten meat. Wright stated that
sometimes a player would eventually lie
that he had eaten meat just to get the
team released. He described Kellogg’s
efforts as “a crusade to prove the
superiority of vegetarianism.” Ellen G.
White’s condemnation of this approach
to proving SDA superiority led to a policy
restricting interscholastic sports by
Adventist schools.

Odorless Doo-doo?

The John Harvey Kellogg character in
the film Road to Wellville stated that his

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#toc

feces had no more odor than that of
“freshly baked biscuits.” One evening I
offered a ride home from the university to
an elderly colleague, an avid vegetarian.
Upon entering my car, he declared:
“When I drink carrot juice, my bowel
movements have no odor.” Before I
could respond, he said: “Rabbits eat lots
of carrots, and their feces have no odor.”
The thought of someone running around
sniffing little piles of rabbit doo-doo
almost made me laugh, but I didn’t want
to be disrespectful. His idea that rabbits
eat many carrots intrigued me. I had
raised them in my boyhood and
discovered that, despite the passion for
carrots shown by Bugs Bunny, real
bunnies are not particularly fond of
carrots. Furthermore, wild rabbits seldom
would have an opportunity to eat carrots.
Luckily the ride was short.

The late Pulitzer Prize-winning
anthropologist Ernest Becker argued that
defecation is most closely associated
with humankind’s animality and mortality.
[ 16] During a Bible class at an SDA
school, I was taught that people did not
defecate in the Garden of Eden but
utilized the food they ingested in its
entirety. Apparently, foul odors did not
befit Paradise. (Perhaps the persistence
of the miasmatic theory of disease–the
theory that diseases are due to
foul-smelling emanations from the
earth–well into the nineteenth century,
when SDA beliefs were developed,
reinforced the idea of a poopless
Paradise.) I was also taught that
roughage became part of the human diet
after the Fall. Allegedly, this broadening
of the diet to include “the herb of the
field” (Genesis 3:18, King James
version) occurred because humans were
now under the “death sentence” caused
by original sin. Whether this reportedly
was a voluntary dietary change or part of

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib16

the curse of being ousted from Paradise
is debatable. Some versions of the Bible
imply that “the herb of the field” merely
meant “wild foods” (New English
Version), not a new source of food.

Heavy “PETAing”

In the last century, the pacifist movement
was vegetarian because of the belief that
meat-eating animals were fierce and
vegetarian animals were docile. The
British poet Percy Bysshe Shelley
claimed that the French revolution had
been bloody and the English revolution
bloodless because the French ate more
meat than the English.[ 17] Such invalid
notions have been discredited, but not
abandoned. Some boxers still eat raw
meat or drink blood before a fight to
increase their aggressiveness.

People who fancy themselves morally
superior often have a mission to convert
humanity to their worldview. The most
violent ideologic vegetarians are the
animal-rights activists, who have
destroyed animal research facilities and
threatened researchers’ lives.
Animal-rights groups such as People for
the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA)
consider animals on par with humans.
On April 24, 1996, PETA’s Ingrid Newkirk
appeared on the television
newsmagazine Day & Date opposing
sport fishing. She began her argument
by seeking commiseration for suffocating
fish. Then she said that fish were
unhealthful food because they contained
mercury and other environmental
contaminants. The solution, according to
Newkirk, was vegetarianism. Her
opponent, a TV talk-show host, pressed
her into acknowledging the PETA creed.

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#toc

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib17

The talk-show host described an on-air
encounter she had had with another
PETA representative. A scenario had
been presented in which the
representative’s daughter needed a vital
organ from a beloved household pet in
order to survive. The ethical question
had been whether the child’s life was
worth more than the pet’s. The PETA
representative had held that the child
had no more value than the pet. Newkirk
did not contest the assertion that PETA
considers the life of a child no more
valuable than that of a pet.

When an LLU medical team transplanted
a baboon’s heart into an infant whose
pseudonym was “Baby Fae,”
animal-rights activists picketed the
medical center. They seemed
disillusioned with SDAs, who have no
qualms about prioritizing humans over
animals. In October 1992, after a pig’s
liver had been transplanted into a
30-year-old woman to enable her to
survive until a human liver was secured,
a representative of PCRM engaged in a
televised debate with one of the
physicians who had performed the
transplant. The representative lamented
that the pig’s consent had not been
obtained.

PCRM appears to be largely a personal
forum for its leader, Neal Barnard, M.D.,
and is said to be substantially funded by
PETA. (In fiscal year 1994, donations
and grants to PCRM reportedly totaled
more than a million dollars.[ 18]) Barnard
extols the longevity value of
vegetarianism. He has claimed: “It’s not
genetics or fate that gives people long,
healthy lives and cuts other people short;
for those who want to take care of
themselves, it all comes down to diet.”
The surgeon argued that pigs were killed

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib18

daily for meat, including their livers. The
PCRM doctor retorted that the
consumption of animal fat (which is
highly saturated) was responsible for
most deaths in modem society. He cited
a study conducted by Colin Campbell in
China. Campbell had focused on the
relative morbidity for certain diseases
without pointing out that life expectancy
in China (66 years) is lower that that in
the United States (75 years).[ 19]

Because they consider themselves
morally superior, many vegetarians
exhibit no reservations against using
mind-control techniques or terrorism to
actualize their agenda. Mind control
includes using information selectively to
“educate” people about the alleged
superiority of vegetarianism. It may also
include traumatizing people emotionally
to condition them against the use of
animal foods. Early in my teaching
experience, I attended a meeting of SDA
secondary school health teachers where
many said that they converted students
to vegetarianism by taking them on field
trips to slaughterhouses to witness the
bloodshed. This strategy offended me
even though I was a practicing
vegetarian at the time. Having studied for
years how people have been
manipulated by cults and quacks, it is
now clear to me that the slaughterhouse
tactic is a form of mind control–that it is
as unethical as discouraging little girls
from having sex by inducing them to
watch a difficult childbirth.

Terrorism involves trying to coerce
people to behave in ways the
perpetrators desire. In December 1994,
to keep people from having turkey for
Christmas dinner, self-described
animal-rights terrorists claimed they had
injected rat poison into supermarket

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib19

turkeys in Vancouver, British Columbia.
The scare caused the destruction of
more than $1 million in turkeys.
Apparently, the activists had not
foreseen the ensuing slaughter of
turkeys as replacements.

Disclosure

Research into vegetarianism by
vegetarians always involves at least
unconscious bias. All humans have
entrenched beliefs–beliefs whose
rootedness makes doing related
scientific research unwise. Kenneth J.
Rothman, Dr.P.H., referred to SDAs in a
recent discussion of conflicts of interest
in research:

We might expect conflict of interest
concerns to be raised, for example,
about Seventh Day Adventists who are
studying the health effects of the
comparatively abstemious lifestyle of
their fellow Adventists. Whereas policies
at [the Journal of the American Medical
Association] and The New England
Journal of Medicine emphasize financial
conflicts, Science asks authors to divulge
“any relationships that they believe could
be construed as causing a conflict of
interest, whether or not the individual
believes that is actually so.” In other
words, to comply with disclosure policies
at Science, authors might need to
disclose to editors their religion and
sexual orientation along with their
financial portfolio.[ 20]

Although Rothman argues for letting
work standing on its own merit rather
than judging cynically any possible
connection to a funding source, his

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#toc

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#bib20

example makes the point that
motivations more powerful than money
can distort data. Science fraud can be
extremely difficult to detect, because the
perpetrators control the information.
Mark Twain observed: “Figures don’t lie,
but liars figure!”

I don’t believe that all research done by
vegetarians is untrustworthy. My
experience with the ongoing
Seventh-day Adventist Health Study
(SDAHS), a series of studies conducted
from LLU School of Public Health, has
been largely positive. Its chief
researcher, the late Roland Phillips,
M.D., Dr.P.H., was an outstanding
scientist in whose objectivity I had the
utmost confidence. He recognized the
problem of the influence of social
expectations on SDAs responding to
questions about their lifestyle. Adventist
group think makes it likely that SDAs will
underreport activities disfavored by the
church community (e.g., meat-eating,
coffee drinking, and imbibing) and
over-report those that are approved (e.g.,
dining meatlessly and exercising).
Phillips seemed to feel that the benefits
of vegetarianism per se were limited, and
that one must take account of heredity,
socioeconomic status, and the total SDA
lifestyle. Abstinence from tobacco,
access to state-of-the-art healthcare, and
strong social support probably are
responsible for most of the health
benefits SDAs enjoy. The main problem
with SDA vegetarian science is how the
scientific information is used. To
paraphrase an old Pennsylvania Dutch
saying: Among SDAs, when the news
about vegetarianism and health is good,
“we hear it ever”; when the news is not
good, “we hear it never.”

I have received numerous reports from
SDA health professionals, and have
personal knowledge of other cases, in
which church members’ overconfidence
in vegetarianism prevented them from
obtaining effective medical care. Some
reports have involved true believers in
vegetarianism who were members of
physicians’ families. Some denied
symptoms, and their denial kept them
from seeking effective intervention in
time. Others rejected medical care for
“natural remedies” that emphasized diet.
The attitudes evidenced are consistent
with those identified in cancer patients
who had turned to quackery because
they believed they had brought the
disease upon themselves and could cure
it by “natural” practices.21 The SDA
Church has bent over backward to
document the benefits of the SDA
lifestyle and to persuade members to
adopt vegetarian diets. I would like to
see the church seek earnestly to expose
the harm that its vegetarian teachings
have caused its members. Alas, there’s
the rub with ideologic vegetarianism:
Objectivity always takes a back seat to
proselytism.

The data suggest that most SDAs are
reasonable in their approach to
vegetarianism. In the 1970s, the SDAHS
revealed that only one percent were
vegans.22 This may change as
vegetarianism becomes more popular in
the general population. SDAs tend to be
overachievers. If we regard something as
“good,” we strive to adopt it completely. If
we consider something “bad,” we avoid it
completely. SDA vegetarian evangelists
have become more aggressive in recent
years because of the widespread belief
in the SDA community that doomsday is
nigh.

I recall an SDA church leader’s reply to
the question of whether he ate meat: “I
eat just enough to keep me from
becoming a fanatic!” This impresses me
as good advice for body, mind, and
society.

One Less “Ism”

I gave up vegetarianism because I found
that commitment thereto meant
surrendering the objectivity that is
essential to the personal and
professional integrity of a scientist. As a
health educator, I feel I have an
obligation to endeavor to stick to
whatever unvarnished facts scientific
research uncovers. I can support
pragmatic vegetarianism, but I believe
that crusading vegetarian ideologues are
a danger to themselves and to society.

References

1. D. Erhardt, “The New Vegetarians,
Part One—Vegetarianism and its
Medical Consequences,” Nutrition
Today, November/December, 1973.

2. R. Spitzer. No Need For Hunger.
Danville, Ill.: Interstate Printers and
Publishers, 1981.

3. National Academy of Sciences.
Toxicants Occurring Naturally In Foods.
Washington, D.C.: National Academy
Press, 1973.

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#toc

4. J. Wood. “Mother of Starved Children
Asks Permission to Give Birth Again,”
San Francisco Sunday Examiner &
Chronicle, March 27, 1983, p. A5.

5. Journal of Nutrition Education 1981;
13:26.

6. Newsweek, September 18, 1972, p.
71.

7. “Temple Beautiful Diet–Death for
David Blume,” (AP) San Bernardino Sun,
October 15, 1979, p. A-3.

8. C.V. Wetli and J.H. Davis. JAMA
1978; 240:1339.

9. San Jose Mercury News, August 20,
1994.

10. Committee on Nutrition, American
Academy of Pediatrics, “Nutritional
Aspects of Vegetarianism, Health Foods
and Fad Diets,” Pediatrics 1977;
59:460-4.

11. O. Segerberg. Living to Be 100:1200
Who Did and How They Did It. New
York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1982.

12. J.L. Lyon, M.R. Klauber, J.W.
Gardner, and C.R. Smart, “Cancer
Incidence in Mormons and
Non-Mormons in Utah, 1966-70,” N Engl
J Med 1976; 294:129-133 (p.132).

13. J.E. Enstrom. “Cancer Mortality
among Low-Risk Populations,” CA–A

Cancer Journal for Clinicians 1979;
29:352-61.

14. C.M. Friedenreich, R.F. Brant, and E.
Riboli. “Influence of Methodological
Factors in a Pooled Analysis of 13
Case-Control Studies of Colorectal
Cancer and Dietary Fiber,” Epidemiology
1994; 5:66-79.

15. D.J. Hunter et al. “Cohort Studies of
Fat Intake and the Risk of Breast
Cancer–A Pooled Analysis,” New Engl J
Med 1996; 334:356-61.

16. E. Becker. The Denial of Death. New
York: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.,
1973.

17. J. Whorton. “Tempest in a Flesh-Pot:
Development of a Physiological
Rationale for Vegetarianism,”Journal of
the History of Medicine, April 1977, pp.
119-120.

18. Good Medicine, Spring 1995.

19. The Population Reference Bureau,
Inc., Washington, D.C., 1988.

20. K. Rothman. “Conflict of Interest: The
New McCarthyism in Science,” JAMA
1993; 269 (21):2782-4.

21. B. Cassileth et al. “Contemporary
Treatments in Cancer Medicine,” Annals
Internal Med 1984; 101:105-12.

22. “Researchers Release Adventist
Health Study Results,” Pacific Union
Recorder, March 12, 1979.

Readers’ Forum
Dear Mr. Raso,

I would like to comment on the letter from
Ruth Rosevear that appeared in the
May/June 1996 issue of NF. I am very
sorry about the tragedy of her daughter’s
lifelong impairment and untimely death,
and I have no doubt that it resulted from
Ms. Rosevear’s inadequate vegan diet
during pregnancy. I believe that it takes
careful planning to make an all-plant diet
adequate during pregnancy, and there
would certainly be a need to supplement
with vitamin B 12, and perhaps also with
vitamin D, calcium, iron, and zinc. It
seems that virtually all obstetricians
today require their pregnant patients to
take a prenatal vitamin/mineral
supplement (whether or not they are
vegetarian). I don’t know what the
practice was in 1942, but consider that
vitamin B12 was not even discovered
until 1951. Therefore, in 1942, it was
impossible to make any regan diet
adequate during pregnancy.

There certainly are regan women today
who have given birth to normal, healthy
babies. Much documentation exists
pertaining to a vegan community in
Tennessee called”The Farm.” Medical
records have demonstrated not only
normal births, but also normal, healthy
development for these vegan children,
and normal percentiles for height and
weight and other variables. At The Farm,

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#toc

they make ample use of highly digestible
soy protein products, whole grains, and
vegetables, and they supplement with
vitamin B12. However, I am still of the
opinion that if a woman is not fully
adapted to a vegan diet, it is unwise for
her to switch to it radically at the time of
pregnancy.

But the most important thing I have to
say is that there is ample evidence that
low-fat regan diets have benefited
nonpregnant adults who have suffered
from hypertension, cardiovascular
disease, rheumatoid arthritis, gout,
adult-onset diabetes, and a host of other
chronic diseases. It would be a shame,
as you suggested, if Ms. Rosevear’s
letter fostered “a blanket condemnation
of veganism.”

Ralph C. Cinque, D.C.
Buda, Texas

While I do not regard voluntary veganism
as condemnable across the board, I do
consider it an unnecessary extreme. The
Farm, by the way, gave us spiritual
midwifery [see NT 12:30, 1995]. –J.R.

~~~~~~~~
By William T. Jarvis

William T. Jarvis, Ph.D., is a professor of
public health and preventive medicine at
Loma Linda University and founder and
president of The National Council
Against Health Fraud.

Copyright of Nutrition & Health Forum is
the property of Prometheus Books and
its content may not be copied or emailed
to multiple sites or posted to a listserv
without the copyright holder’s express
written permission. However, users may
print, download, or email articles for
individual use.

● Result List
● Refine Search
● 3 of 32

oogle Drive
dd to folder
rint
mail

ave
xport
reate Note
ermalink
sten
anslate

Top of Page

● iPhone and Android apps
● EBSCO Connect
● Privacy Policy
● A/B Testing
● Terms of Use
● Copyright

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=8d541d4e-b59e-48b1-abab-c19c053d10af%40pdc-v-sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#

https://connect-ebsco-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/

https://www-ebsco-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/company/privacy-policy

https://www-ebsco-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/conversion-testing-statement

https://www-ebsco-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/terms-of-use

● Cookie Policy
● Contact Us

https://www-ebsco-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/cookie-policy

https://support-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/contact/index.php

Counterpoint:

Vegetarianism is
an Unhealthy
Dietary Choice.
Authors:

Issitt, Micah
Carson-Dewitt,
Rosalyn

Source:
Points of View:
Vegetarianism.
3/1/2016, p3-3. 1p.

Document Type:
Article

Subjects:
VEGETARIANISM
VEGETARIANS
MALNUTRITION
DIET — United
States
LIFESTYLES

Geographic Terms:
UNITED States

Report
Available

Abstract:
The article argues
against the
promotion of
vegetarianism in
the U.S. It claims
that a vegetarian
lifestyle does not
provide sufficient
nutrition and has
false benefits in
terms of ecological
management and
environmental
conservation. It
adds that
vegetarians who

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?sid=89f6aa23-c1bb-4066-af50-4d100a5f61c7@sessionmgr103&vid=2&ss=AN+%2216492896%22&sl=rl

do not take milk,
honey and eggs
are at great risk of
malnutrition. The
article also notes
that eating meat
supports the
animal farming
industry.

Lexile:
1360

Full Text Word Count:
2133

ISBN:
9781429823319

Accession Number:
28675342

Database:
Points of View
Reference Center

Choose Languageاإلنجلیزیة/العربیة
английски език/български英语/简体中文
英語/繁體中文
angličtina/češtinaEngelsk/danskEngels/N
ederlandsAnglais/FrançaisEnglisch/Deut
schΑγγλικά/ΕλληνικάEnglish/Hausa
אנגלית/עברית
अ�ेंज़ी/�हदं�angol/magyarInggris/bahasa
IndonesiaInglese/Italiano英語/日本語
영어/한국어Engelsk/Norskانگلیسی/فارسی
angielski/polskiInglés/PortuguêsEnglish/
PashtoEngleză/românăАнглийский/
РусскийInglés/EspañolEnglish/
SerbianAngleški/SlovenskiAngličtina/
SlovenčinaEngelska/svenskaอังกฤษ/
ไทยİngilizce/TürkАнглійська/Українська
انگریزی/اردو
Counterpoint: Vegetarianism is an
Unhealthy Dietary Choice

Full Text

Listen

https://app-na-readspeaker-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/cgi-bin/rsent?customerid=5845&lang=en_us&readid=rs_full_text_container_title&url=https%3A%2F%2Feds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org%2Feds%2Fdetail%2Fdetail%3Fvid%3D2%26sid%3D89f6aa23-c1bb-4066-af50-4d100a5f61c7%2540sessionmgr103%26bdata%3DJnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%253d%253d&speedValue=medium&download=true&audiofilename=CounterpointVegetarianismisanUnhealthy-IssittMicah-20160301

American Accent Australian
Accent British Accent

Related Items

●
Vegetarianism: An Overview.

●
Point: Vegetarianism Promotes Both Human
and Planetary Health

●
Vegetarianism: Guide to Critical Analysis.

●
Vegetarian Meal

●
All We Can Eat?

●
Choose a Topic.

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?sid=89f6aa23-c1bb-4066-af50-4d100a5f61c7@sessionmgr103&vid=2&

●
Evaluate a Website.

●
Write a Topic Sentence.

●
How To Understand the Bias of a Publication

●
CURRICULUM STANDARDS–U.S.

Thesis: Vegetarianism does not provide
sufficient nutrition for a healthy lifestyle,
and has dubious benefits in terms of
conservation and ecological
management.

Summary: Vegetarians are often lacking
in certain important vitamins and
minerals that most people obtain from
animal products. Vegans, who reject all
animal products, including milk, eggs and
honey, place themselves at even greater
risk for malnutrition. Diets with an excess
of plant and vegetable matter can also
lead to digestive problems. Most
physicians and nutritionists agree that a
healthy diet should include meat as well
as vegetables, fruits and grains.

Eating meat supports the animal farming
industry, which provides a major source
of employment for millions of people
across the world. Trade in animal
products is an important part of
international commerce and supports the
economies of hundreds of nations. The
commercial agriculture industry is at
least as harmful to the environment as
commercial meat production. If the world
shifted toward a vegetarian system, the
need for more agricultural land would
lead to increased environmental
destruction. The best way to preserve
natural environments is to support a
variety of food production methods

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?sid=89f6aa23-c1bb-4066-af50-4d100a5f61c7@sessionmgr103&vid=2&

including ranching, animal breeding and
agriculture.

Introduction

Traditional hunter-gatherer societies
have existed in all parts of the world.
They are believed to represent the
original form of human culture, and their
reliance on meat as an essential source
of nutrition shows that meat-eating is
natural for humans and always has been.
While vegetarianism is an old tradition
in some cultures, such as certain sects of
Hinduism and Buddhism, it has usually
been resorted to by poverty-stricken
members of the lower classes, who could
not afford meat. Even within the Buddhist
and Hindu traditions, there are many
people who eat meat of one kind or
another.

The Health Myth

While some believe that vegetarianism
is a healthier dietary choice than eating
meat, many vegetarians suffer from
nutritional deficiencies. Though a
vegetarian diet can, in theory, be a
healthy alternative to a standard diet,
most that choose vegetarianism fail to
obtain the necessary vitamins and
minerals and may suffer from a variety of
physical ailments.

Nutritionists and physicians have long
held that a balanced diet is the healthiest
choice, which includes eating meat,
vegetables, fruits and grains. People
have relied on the vitamins and protein
present in meat since Paleolithic times,

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=89f6aa23-c1bb-4066-af50-4d100a5f61c7%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#toc

and eating meat is still the best and
easiest way to obtain them. While some
people over-indulge in meat products,
vegetarians fly to the opposite extreme,
and extreme diets often lead to eating
disorders and health problems.

Individuals with lower levels of protein,
sodium, iron, manganese and
phosphorus in their blood should be
especially wary of switching to a
vegetarian diet, as they are most at risk
of suffering from dietary imbalances. In
developing countries like India, where
vegetarianism is common, health care
professionals are familiar with the health
problems associated with vegetarianism
and are prepared to advise their patients
on the best way to supplement their
diets. In the United States and Western
Europe, where such problems are
uncommon, individuals who insist on
conforming to vegetarianism should
seek out nutritionists who specialize in
vegetarian issues.

Vegetarians need to supplement their
diets with special vitamins, such as
vitamin B12, which is only present in
animal tissues and is almost impossible
to obtain from vegetarian sources. Young
children are especially prone to B12
deficiency, which can cause anemia,
spinal chord and brain injuries and
damage to the nerves of the eyes. There
have been cases of child abuse in which
parents forced their children to eat strictly
vegetarian diets, causing irreparable
damage. Adults who become
vegetarians need to take pills or
injections containing vitamin B12.

Strict veganism, which involves
abstaining from all animal products
including milk, eggs and honey, is not

found in nature. Even herbivorous
animals eat insects to obtain vitamins
that do not exist in plant matter. Humans
attempting to live on a strict vegetable
and fruit diet still rely on a variety of
microorganisms and bacteria to provide
certain essential vitamins.

Vegans may suffer from vitamin D
deficiencies, because most vitamin D
comes from dairy foods like milk and
cheese. Though some vegetarians,
known as ovo-lacto-vegetarians,
consume milk and other dairy products,
vegans may need vitamin D
supplements. Sunlight is an excellent
source of vitamin D, but people often
avoid direct exposure to the sun for fear
of skin cancer, so many individuals may
have difficulty absorbing sufficient levels
of D vitamins.

Iron deficiencies are another major
problem for many vegetarians because
the iron available from plant sources is
not as easily absorbable as that from
animal tissues. Iron supplements are
especially important for women and
children who are prone to anemia and
exhaustion and a number of common
skin ailments. Digestion and absorption
of iron is hindered by fiber, oxalates and
phytates, which are common in
vegetable and cereals, thereby making it
more difficult for some vegetarians to
absorb iron even from supplements.

A commonly cited reason for switching to
vegetarianism is to avoid the unhealthy
consumption of cholesterol from meat.
Though vegetarian diets are generally
credited with lowering cholesterol levels,
some who switch to vegetarian diets
experience a rise in overall cholesterol
due to high levels of fructose

consumption from increased fruit and
vegetable intake. In these cases, the
switch to a vegetarian diet may actually
be more damaging to a person’s health
than the decision to pursue a more
rounded diet.

Contrary to the message portrayed by
many vegetarian proponents,
vegetarianism is not a healthy
alternative to a rounded diet unless
special precautions are taken to avoid
dietary deficiencies. In addition to vitamin
deficiencies, vegetarians sometimes
have a difficult time obtaining basic
nutritional requirements because the
proteins and amino acids present in plant
matter are not as efficiently used by the
body as those in meat products. Children
raised on a vegetarian diet are more
likely to be undernourished and to
experience small size and low weight.
Though it is possible for adults to survive
for years on a vegetarian diet, the choice
to refuse meat must be considered with
caution and coupled with a conscious,
vigilant effort to make up for the
inadequacies of vegetarian food.

The Economics of Meat Production

The meat industry is one of the world’s
largest employers, providing jobs for
millions of workers and a better standard
of living for their families. A key source of
nutrition for people of all races and
ethnicities, meat production also pumps
billions of dollars a year into the global
economy, helping to lift developing
nations out of poverty.

Some communities are almost entirely
dependent on the meat industry for their

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=89f6aa23-c1bb-4066-af50-4d100a5f61c7%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#toc

survival. In Brazil, for instance, hundreds
of farmers and ranch assistants are
employed in raising zebu cattle for meat
and export products. The Brazilian
ranching communities in the Pantanal
are among the most ecologically
sensitive in the world, and the ranchers
themselves are involved in projects to
protect much of the native wildlife. If
significant numbers of people ever
switched to vegetarianism, not only the
large scale meat producers would suffer
but so would small, organic farms that
produce high quality meat in an
ecologically conscious way.

The Ecological Damage of Farming

Vegetarianism does not automatically
constitute a more ecologically friendly
alternative to eating meat. Agriculture
damages the environment when vast
tracts of habitat are cleared and replaced
by a monoculture of a single or very few
species.

The pesticides and insecticides used in
commercial farming are also hazardous.
The Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has identified contamination from
commercial farming as one of the
greatest threats to clean water. A switch
to vegetarianism merely shifts the
source of ecological damage from the
meat industry to the agriculture industry.

Creating a Better Food Industry

In order to create a more environmentally
friendly and ecologically sound society,
individuals should encourage more

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=89f6aa23-c1bb-4066-af50-4d100a5f61c7%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#toc

environmentally conscious forms of meat
production. Organic and sustainable
animal farming can be an
environmentally friendly form of food
production. Because livestock can be
raised in a natural environment, ranching
can be coupled with habitat preservation
and ranchers can be given subsidies in
return for allowing their property to be
preserved as an ecological zone.

Some feel that advocates of
vegetarianism raise legitimate questions
about issues involving the food industry,
the health and function of the human
body, the state of the global economy
and the ethics and morals of raising
animals for food and materials. It is
unfortunate however, that many accept
the propaganda surrounding
vegetarianism without examination.
Only by improvements in the production
and consumption of all food, including
both meat and vegetables, will we
eventually find the best options for
promoting health and preserving the
environment.

Ponder This

1. What types of nutritional deficiencies
does the author identify as being related
to vegetarianism? How would you
counter this aspect of his argument?

● 2. What suggestions does the
author give for creating a
healthy diet? Are they
realistic?

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=89f6aa23-c1bb-4066-af50-4d100a5f61c7%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#toc

● 3. What are some of the
non-nutritional arguments put
forth by the author in support
of eating meat? Can you think
of others?

● 4. Which of the author’s
arguments do you find most
convincing? Which is least
convincing?

Bibliography

Books

Ellis, Merle. “The Great American Meat
Book.” New York: Knopf, 1996.

Fearnley-Whittingstall, Hugh. “The River
Cottage Meat Book.” Berkeley, CA: Ten
Speed Press, 2007.

Iacabbo, Karen & Michael. “Vegetarians
and Vegans in America Today.” New
York: Praeger Publishers, 2006.

Pollan, Michael. “The Omnivore’s
Dilemma: A Natural History of Four
Meals.” New York: Penguin Press, 2007.

Pollan, Michael. “In Defense of Food: An
Eater’s Manifesto.” New York: Penguin
Press, 2008.

Sapontzis, Steve F. “Food for Thought:
The Debate Over Eating Meat.” New
York: Prometheus Books, 2004.

Periodicals

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=89f6aa23-c1bb-4066-af50-4d100a5f61c7%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#toc

Bardone-Cone, Anna M., et al. “The
Inter-Relationships between
Vegetarianism and Eating Disorders
among Females.” Journal of the
Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 112.8
(2012): 1247-1252. EBSCO Academic
Search Complete. 12 Mar. 2014.
http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlain
university.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=a9h&AN=77971327.

Barnard, Neal. “fixing FOOD MISTAKES
WE’VE ALL MADE.” Vegetarian Times
(Apr. 2005): 18-20. Academic Search
Premier. EBSCO. 3 Aug. 2009
http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlain
university.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=aph&AN=16263864&site=ehost
-live.

Chernus, Andrea. “Vegetarian Eating —
Is It For You?.” Dance Spirit 6.4 (Apr.
2002): 50-101. Academic Search
Premier. EBSCO. 3 Aug. 2009
http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlain
university.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=aph&AN=12713943&site=ehost
-live.

Farley, D. “Vegetarian diets: The pluses
and the pitfalls.” FDA Consumer 26.4
(May 1992): 20. Academic Search
Premier. EBSCO. 3 Aug. 2009
http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlain
university.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=aph&AN=9206292503&site=eh
ost-live.

Gilbody, Simon M., and Sara F. L. Kirk..
“Vegetarianism in Young Women:
Another Means of Weight Control?.”
International Journal of Eating Disorders
26.1 (July 1999): 87-90. Academic

Search Premier. EBSCO. 3 Aug. 2009
http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlain
university.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=aph&AN=1875850&site=ehost-l
ive.

Hammock, Delia. “`You know i don’t eat
meat!’.” Good Housekeeping 222.4 (Apr.
1996): 109. Academic Search Premier.
EBSCO. 3 Aug. 2009
http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlain
university.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=aph&AN=9603114474&site=eh
ost-live.

Inge, Karen. “Vegetarianism.” Nutridate
7.2 (May 1996): 1. Academic Search
Premier. EBSCO. 3 Aug. 2009
http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlain
university.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=aph&AN=9606212889&site=eh
ost-live.

Ingenbleek, Yves, and Kilmer S.
McCully. “Vegetarianism Produces
Subclinical Malnutrition,
Hyperhomocysteinemia and
Atherogenesis.” Nutrition 28.2 (2012):
148-53. EBSCO Academic Search
Complete. 12 Mar. 2014.
http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlain
university.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=a9h&AN=70157929.

Larsson, Christel. “Young vegetarians
and omnivores. Dietary habits and other
health-related aspects.” Scandinavian
Journal of Nutrition 46.1 (Mar. 2002):
48-49. Academic Search Premier.
EBSCO. 3 Aug. 2009
http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlain
university.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=aph&AN=10898340&site=ehost
-live.

Lindeman, Marjaana, Katariina Stark,
and Krista Latvala. “Vegetarianism and
Eating-Disordered Thinking.” Eating
Disorders8.2 (Summer2000 2000): 157.
Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 3
Aug. 2009
http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlain
university.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=aph&AN=6091174&site=ehost-l
ive.

Kissing, Steve. “Meat, I Miss You!”
Cincinnati 39.12 (Sept. 2006): 4p.
Online. EBSCO.
http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlain
university.idm.oclc.org.

Rammohan, Anu, Niyi Awofeso, and
Marie-Claire Robitaille. “Addressing
Female Iron-Deficiency Anaemia in India:
Is Vegetarianism the Major Obstacle?”
ISRN Public Health (2012): 1-8. EBSCO
Academic Search Complete. 12 Mar.
2014.
http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlain
university.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=a9h&AN=86883117.

Remer,T.; Neubert, A.; Manz, F.
“Increased risk of iodine deficiency with
vegetarian nutrition.” British Journal of
Nutrition. 81:1. (January 1999): 5p.

Robinson-O’Brien, R.; Perry, C.L.; Wall,
M.M.; Story, M.; Neumark-Sztainer, D.
“Adolescent and Young Adult
Vegetarianism: Better Dietary Intake
and Weight Outcomes but Increased
Risk of Disordered Eating Behaviors.”
Journal of the American Dietetic
Association. 109:4. (April 2009) 7p.

“Should You or Shouldn’t You?.” Harvard
Health Letter 24.10 (Aug. 1999): 7.
Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 3
Aug. 2009
http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlain
university.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=aph&AN=2156943&site=ehost-l
ive.

Szabo, Laura Brydges. “The health risks
of new-wave vegetarianism.” CMAJ:
Canadian Medical Association Journal
156.10 (15 May 1997): 1454-1455.
Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 3
Aug. 2009
http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlain
university.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=aph&AN=9706083986&site=eh
ost-live.

“vegetarian myth busting.” Vegetarian
Times (Mar. 2008): 13-13. Academic
Search Premier. EBSCO. 3 Aug. 2009
http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlain
university.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=aph&AN=28784323&site=ehost
-live.

These essays and any opinions,
information or representations contained
therein are the creation of the particular
author and do not necessarily reflect the
opinion of EBSCO Information Services.

~~~~~~~~

By Micah Issitt

Co-Author: Rosalyn Carson-Dewitt

Rosalyn Carson-Dewitt received an MD
from Michigan State University in 1991.
She is a medical and scientific writer and
was editor-in-chief for “Drugs, Alcohol
and Tobacco: Learning About Addictive
Behavior” and “Encyclopedia of Drugs,
Alcohol and Addictive Behavior”
published by Macmillan Reference USA.
Carson-Dewitt also worked on the Merck
Manual of Diagnosis and Therapy, 18th
edition.

Copyright of Points of View:
Vegetarianism is the property of Great
Neck Publishing and its content may not
be copied or emailed to multiple sites or
posted to a listserv without the copyright
holder’s express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or
email articles for individual use.

● Result List
● Refine Search
● 2 of 29,432

oogle Drive
dd to folder
rint
mail

ave
xport
reate Note
ermalink
sten
anslate

Top of Page

● iPhone and Android apps
● EBSCO Connect
● Privacy Policy
● A/B Testing
● Terms of Use
● Copyright
● Cookie Policy
● Contact Us

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=89f6aa23-c1bb-4066-af50-4d100a5f61c7%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#

https://eds-b-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=89f6aa23-c1bb-4066-af50-4d100a5f61c7%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#TextToSpeech

https://connect-ebsco-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/

https://www-ebsco-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/company/privacy-policy

https://www-ebsco-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/conversion-testing-statement

https://www-ebsco-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/terms-of-use

https://www-ebsco-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/cookie-policy

https://support-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/contact/index.php

VIEWPOINT

The Contribution of Vegetarianism to
Ecosystem Health

Michael Allen Fox

Department of Philosophy, Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada

INTRODUCTION

Becoming a vegetarian has well-documented and
well-publicized health advantages (Chen 1990;
Barnard 1993; Melina

et al.

1994), and these per-
sonal benefits incline many to choose a nonmeat
diet. However, there are additional reasons for
adopting a vegetarian diet that are ethical, envi-
ronmental, sociopolitical, and spiritual in nature
(Fox 1999). In the text that follows our attention
will be directed toward some of the latter, with
the object of showing how they relate to the
theme of ecosystem health. For the purpose of
this discussion the labels “meat economy” and
“vegetarian economy” will be used to contrast two
alternative ways of producing food. While it may
be considered an exaggeration to refer to our
present agricultural system as a meat economy,
the vast resources that are committed to livestock
and poultry production demonstrate that this is a
meaningful characterization. As we shall see, tak-
ing the perspective of environmental health leads
to a fairly dramatic contrast between the negative
ecological impact of the meat economy that pre-
vails in North America and elsewhere and the rel-
ative advantages in this regard of an alternative
vegetarian economy.

THE MEAT ECONOMY

There are three principal ways in which meat pro-
duction exacts a heavy toll on nature. We shall ex-
amine these in turn.

RESOURCE AND ENERGY WASTE

In Canada, since the time of white settlement, ex-
panding agriculture has been the major factor in
an 85% reduction of wetlands (Government of
Canada 1991). Agricultural acreage has increased
four-fold since 1900, and the total area under irri-
gation more than doubled between 1970 and
1988 (Government of Canada 1991). It must be
inferred that the consumption of meat is a power-
ful force here, given that in North America some
95% of oats and 80% of corn produced ends up
as livestock feed (Animal Alliance of Canada
n.d.). David Pimentel, a scientist who has been
studying the environmental impact of modern
American agricultural methods for over two de-
cades, reports that 240 million tonnes (264.5 mil-
lion tons) of grain are fed to livestock in the
United States annually—enough to feed approxi-
mately 800 million people a vegetarian diet (Pi-
mentel 1997). Clearly the savings, in terms of
both energy input and available calories for hu-
man consumption, would be very great if we
weaned ourselves

completely

away from depen-
dence upon livestock. Finally, it is calculated that
100,000 liters (26,425 gallons) of water are required
in the overall process by which one kilogram (2.2
pounds) of beef is produced (Pimentel 1997); a
pound (0.45 kilogram) of wheat, by contrast, re-
quires only 254 liters (60 gallons) (Fiddes 1991).

Obviously not all of the environmentally hos-
tile effects of today’s unsound agricultural prac-
tices can be attributed to the production of ani-
mals for food. And it is clear that some of the
abuses could be mitigated by, for example, a
more dedicated approach to recycling animal ma-
nure (and human waste) into crop fertilizer,
greater reliance on natural means of pest control

Address correspondence to: Michael Allen Fox, Department
of Philosophy, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Can-
ada, K7L 3N6; E-mail maf@post.queensu.ca.

Fox: Vegetarianism and Ecosystem Health

instead of harmful chemicals, and the like. So
some maintain that the proper target of criticism
is not meat production per se, but rather the in-
tensive rearing methods used by contemporary
agribusiness. There is a point to this rejoinder,
and surely those who obtain their meat from their
own or others’ free-range operations dedicated to
organic methods of animal husbandry contribute
less than do others to the environmental toll on
the planet exacted by human life. But given the
appalling rate at which smaller-scale family farm-
ing businesses are being forced out of competi-
tion (and out of existence), to be replaced by
much larger operations (Strange 1988; Rifkin
1992; Noske 1997), the opportunities for obtain-
ing “environmentally friendly” meat are extremely
rare in practice. Only a tiny fraction of the popula-
tion could exercise this option, taking current agri-
cultural trends into account, and an even tinier
group desires to do so in the first place.

DEGRADATION OF THE BIOSPHERE

The eco-destructive side of the meat industry’s
operations has been summarized concisely, with
ample documentation from both government and
nongovernment sources, by many authors (Rob-
bins 1987; Fiddes 1991; Lappé 1992; Hill 1996;
Fox 1999). These effects include toxic chemical
residues in the food chain, pharmaceutical addi-
tives in animal feeds, polluting chemicals and ani-
mal wastes from feedlot runoff in waterways and
underground aquifers, topsoil loss caused by pat-
terns of relentless grazing, domestic and foreign
deforestation and desertification that results from
the clearing of land for grazing and for cultivat-
ing feed, threatened habitats of wild species of
plants and animals, intensive exploitation of wa-
ter and energy supplies, and ozone depletion ow-
ing to the extensive use of fossil fuels and to the
significant production of methane gas by cattle.
Sharon Bloyd-Peshkin sums up this sorry state of
affairs in these simple terms: “Meat production is
a major source of environmental damage” (Bloyd-
Peshkin 1991, p. 67).

In Canada alone, farm animals produce 322
million liters (85 million gallons) of manure

daily

,
an overwhelming proportion of which comes from
cattle. Each marketed kilogram (2.2 pounds) of
edible beef generates at least 40 kilograms (88
pounds) of manure, and each of pork 15 kilograms
(33 pounds). These wastes, the runoff of water
used to clean farm buildings and equipment, and
pesticide residues and other agricultural chemi-

cals, are often poorly handled and cause the con-
tamination of waterways and soil, as well as air pol-
lution (Government of Canada 1991).

This is a scenario for which there is little to be
said that is positive; while the meat economy
keeps some people employed and others fed, it
operates with total disregard for the ecological
consequences of the productive process.

REDUCTION OF SPECIES DIVERSITY

The foregoing issues are discussed in the media
and scholarly literature with relative frequency.
What has not been subjected to as much scrutiny
are the effects of the meat economy on planetary
biodiversity. There are, of course, many causes of
species extinction, both natural and human. And
with respect to human factors, no single activity
accounts totally for the sort of ecocide that under-
mines species viability. We should not expect
therefore that the process whereby the flesh of
animals appears on our tables by itself explains
why certain ecosystems and the life-forms they
support are either under threat or compromised
beyond recovery.

Evolutionary biologist Edward O. Wilson ob-
serves that “Biodiversity is our most valuable but
least appreciated resource” (Wilson 1993, p. 281).
And there is no doubt where most of this diversity
resides: 40–50% of the world’s plant and animal
species dwell in the rain forests (McKisson & Mac-
Rae-Campbell 1990). According to Wilson, who has
conducted one of the most detailed studies of the
problem, a “maximally optimistic” estimate of the
present rate of global species extinction is 27,000
per year (74 per day, 3 per hour) (Wilson 1993; p.
280). This horrendous pace of destruction stems
from several major sources, including the clearing
of foreign and domestic forests for agricultural
purposes and development, drainage and filling in
of wetlands, damming of rivers, use and abuse of
coral reefs, and relentless high-tech ocean fishing.
Among these, deforestation and overfishing are
the most evident areas in which a relationship be-
tween human diet and species extinction are to be
found. We shall concentrate here on rain forest
clear-cutting as an example of the former trend.

Rain forests are cleared by humans seeking
firewood, settlement space, farm plots, monocul-
ture plantation space, expanded land holdings,
oil, minerals, and pastureland for cattle. Hydro-
electric projects, roads, and other development
schemes also take their toll. Wilson maintains that
species extinctions for which humans are respon-

Ecosystem Health Vol. 5 No. 2 June 1999

sible within the earth’s rain forest regions occur
at between 1000 and 10,000 times the rate at
which they would occur naturally (Wilson 1993).
Given that there are numerous causes of rain for-
est decimation, it is difficult to establish a precise
correlation between animal agriculture and such
devastation. However, we can obtain a reasonable
approximation by considering the conversion of
tropical forest to pastureland for cattle, which has
proceeded at a remarkable pace in Central Amer-
ica since mid-century. Norman Myers contends
that not only in Central America, but from Mex-
ico to Brazil “The number one factor in elimina-
tion of Latin America’s tropical forests is cat-
tlegrazing” (Myers 1984, p. 127). Most of the beef
produced in this region is exported to the Ameri-
can market, though an increasing portion goes to
Western Europe and Japan (Myers 1984; Rifkin
1992). The United States contains only 5% of the
world’s population, yet it produces, imports, and
consumes more beef than any other country (My-
ers 1984). The beef imported from Latin Ameri-
can rain forest regions ends up as fast food burg-
ers, as we know from United States Vice President
Al Gore’s eyewitness testimony upon visiting the
Amazon (Gore 1993, p. 23). It also ends up as
processed meats and pet foods. Myers notes that
“Convenience foods . . . constitute the fastest-
growing part of the entire food industry in the
United States” (Myers 1984, p. 130); 50% of all
meals, he indicates, are now consumed in either
fast food or institutional settings. According to Ar-
nold Newman, for each North American fast-food
hamburger “the environmental cost is half a ton
of rainforest. . . . Expressed as forest area, the cost
is 67 square feet—more than 6.25 square meters
of forest—for every hamburger sold” (Newman
1990, p. 126). This pattern demonstrates force-
fully the connection between meat eating and
rain forest destruction—what Myers calls “the
‘hamburgerization’ of the forests” (Myers 1984, p.
142). As is well known, the inherent nature of
rain forests is such that when cleared, only poor
quality, unsustainable pastureland remains, and
this contributes to the dynamic of expanding de-
struction as new grazing areas are sought to re-
place older, exhausted areas (Collins 1990).

THE VEGETARIAN ECONOMY

By contrast, a vegetarian economy would enable
humans to live more lightly on the land. There
are several reasons for this.

CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES
AND ENERGY

As we have seen above, in terms of energy con-
sumption this alternative approach to producing
food is more efficient. In addition, the new econ-
omy would free up land and other natural re-
sources the world needs for greater food produc-
tivity. A vegetarian diet takes pressure off the
ecosystem by the simple expedient of permitting
humans to eat lower down on the food chain,
thus enabling us to take greater advantage of so-
lar energy and other resource inputs.

LESS ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE

A vegetarian economy, particularly if it employed
organic methods and respected indigenous plant
diversity, would yield lower levels of environmen-
tally degrading waste products. Most, if not all, of
the nonhumanly edible remains of vegetarian ag-
riculture are recyclable either as fertilizer or as
raw materials for the production of consumer
goods of various kinds.

REDUCTION OF IMPACT ON
SPECIES DIVERSITY

Vegetarian food production that avoided falling
into the trap of promoting exclusively nonindige-
nous monocultural agriculture would help rem-
edy the meat economy’s disastrous impact upon
species diversity. In terms of our example above,
rain forests would no longer be clear-cut to make
way for cattle grazing. The rain forests’ crucial
contribution to maintaining the regulative pro-
cesses of the biosphere, on which all life depends,
would continue unhindered. Furthermore, “Stud-
ies in Peru, the Brazilian Amazon, the Philippines
and Indonesia suggest that harvesting forest prod-
ucts sustainably is at least twice as profitable as
clearing them [i.e., the rain forests] for timber or
to provide land for agriculture” (Food and Agricul-
tural Organization of the United Nations 1995, p.
62). This shows that protecting species diversity
can also yield direct economic benefits for people.

CONTRIBUTION TO A BETTER
WORLD ORDER

By allowing for the possibility of feeding more
people adequately worldwide, a vegetarian econ-
omy could also contribute to a more just and
peaceful world order—which may be viewed as a

Fox: Vegetarianism and Ecosystem Health

contribution to ecosystem health if we are willing
to admit into our thinking a wider than usual con-
ception of “ecosystem,” namely, one that includes
the human community. Of course food distribu-
tion problems are only in part a function of the
system of food production that is in place; eco-
nomic and political issues are even more out-
standing. But at least vegetarianism would signify
a start in the right direction.

CONCLUSION

The foregoing, very compressed overview of a veg-
etarian economy is of course bound to be tenta-
tive and conjectural, since such a worldwide sys-
tem for producing food remains only a future
possibility. However, the negative environmental
impacts of the meat economy are palpable, of a
great order of magnitude, and are with us right
now. There are good reasons to infer that a vege-
tarian alternative would represent a major im-
provement upon this lamentable reality.

We also need to take account of the fact that
the global human population grows by 250,000
daily, and this represents additional stress and
strain on planetary resources, biodiversity, and ec-
osystem carrying capacities. Even a vegetarian ap-
proach to feeding everyone will have its toll. Nev-
ertheless, one estimate suggests that there are
already in the world today some 4 billion vegetari-
ans—about 2.3 billion in China and India alone
(Pimentel, personal communication 1999). Tak-
ing all factors into consideration, it appears evi-
dent that if there is to be a hope of feeding every-
one in the future, an even greater shift toward
herbivorous diets will be essential.

If we care about ecosystem health, we ought—
individually and collectively—to factor it into our
decisions leading to action and into our plans and
policies. One of the guiding ideals of ecologically
informed ethical thinking is that we ought to min-
imize our species’ harmful impact upon the bio-
sphere. Therefore we ought to make those life-
style choices that help achieve this objective, among
these being a shift to vegetarianism. A diet that re-
lies heavily on meat only appears affordable and
environmentally sustainable to those who are un-
aware of the larger ecological costs of meat produc-
tion, or assume that they don’t have to be weighed
into our choices and their consequences, or else be-
lieve that the costs can be passed on to others, nota-
bly those in developing nations and future per-
sons. We all have to eat, and some appreciable

negative repercussions for the planet as a whole
are inevitable as we pursue this natural end. But
we should aim to curtail the ecological stresses that
are under our species’ control. A commitment to
vegetarianism seems clearly to be the best way to
reduce the environmental harm and degradation
caused by humans’ quest for nourishment, and
should for this reason be made by all of us.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The author expresses gratitude to David Pimentel
for his comments on an earlier draft of this article.

REFERENCES

Animal Alliance of Canada (n.d.) Enviro facts about
livestock production. Compiled from Worldwatch
Paper No. 103 (Washington, D.C.: Worldwatch In-
stitute 1991); Government of Canada,

The State of
Canada’s Environment

(Ottawa, ON: Supply and Ser-
vices Canada 1991); and Agriculture and Agri-Food
Canada,

Livestock Market Review 1993

(Ottawa, ON:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 1993). Animal
Alliance of Canada, Toronto, Ontario.

Barnard, N. (1993)

Food for Life: How the New Four Food
Groups Can Save Your Life.

Harmony, New York.
Bloyd-Peshkin, S. (1991) Mumbling about meat.

Vege-
tarian Times

170

, 66–75.
Chen, J. (1990)

Diet, Lifestyle and Mortality in China: A
Study of 65 Chinese Counties

. Cornell University
Press, Ithaca, New York.

Collins M. (ed) (1990)

The Last Rain Forests: A World Con-
servation Atlas.

Oxford University Press, New York.
Fiddes, N. (1991)

Meat: A Natural Symbol.

Routledge,
London, U.K.

Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Na-
tions (1995)

Dimensions of Need: An Atlas of Food and
Agriculture.

ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara, California.
Fox, M.A. (1999)

Deep Vegetarianism.

Temple University
Press, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Gore, A. (1993)

Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Hu-
man Spirit.

Plume Books, New York.
Government of Canada (1991)

The State of Canada’s En-
vironment

. Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa,
Ontario.

Hill, J.L. (1996)

The Case for Vegetarianism: Philosophy for
a Small Planet.

Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham,
Maryland.

Lappé, F.M. (1992)

Diet for a Small Planet

, 20th ed. Bal-
lantine Books, New York.

McKisson, N. & MacRae-Campbell, L. (1990)

The Future
of Our Tropical Rainforests.

Zephyr Press, Tuscon,
Arizona.

Ecosystem Health Vol. 5 No. 2 June 1999

Melina, V., Davis, B., Harrison, V. (1994)

Becoming Vege-
tarian: The Complete Guide to Adopting a Healthy Vege-
tarian Diet.

Macmillan Canada, Toronto, Ontario.
Myers, N. (1984)

The Primary Source: Tropical Forests and
Our Future

. W.W. Norton, New York.
Newman, A. (1990)

Tropical Rainforest

. Facts On File,
New York.

Noske, B. (1997)

Beyond Boundaries: Humans and Ani-
mals.

Black Rose, Montreal, Quebec.
Pimentel, D. (1997) Livestock production: energy in-

puts and the environment. Scott, S.L. & Zho, X.
(eds).

Proceedings of the Canadian Society of Animal

Science, 47th Annual Meeting

(24–26 July 1997, Mon-
treal). pp. 16–26. Canadian Society of Animal Sci-
ence, Montreal, Quebec.

Rifkin, J. (1992)

Beyond Beef: The Rise and Fall of the Cattle
Culture

. E.P. Dutton, New York.
Robbins, J. (1987)

Diet for a New America.

Stillpoint, Wal-
pole, New Hampshire.

Strange, M. (1988)

Family Farming: A New Economic Vi-
sion

. Institute for Food and Development Policy,
San Francisco.

Wilson, E.O. (1993)

The Diversity of Life

. W.W. Norton,
New York.

Copyright of Ecosystem Health is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.

What Will You Get?

We provide professional writing services to help you score straight A’s by submitting custom written assignments that mirror your guidelines.

Premium Quality

Get result-oriented writing and never worry about grades anymore. We follow the highest quality standards to make sure that you get perfect assignments.

Experienced Writers

Our writers have experience in dealing with papers of every educational level. You can surely rely on the expertise of our qualified professionals.

On-Time Delivery

Your deadline is our threshold for success and we take it very seriously. We make sure you receive your papers before your predefined time.

24/7 Customer Support

Someone from our customer support team is always here to respond to your questions. So, hit us up if you have got any ambiguity or concern.

Complete Confidentiality

Sit back and relax while we help you out with writing your papers. We have an ultimate policy for keeping your personal and order-related details a secret.

Authentic Sources

We assure you that your document will be thoroughly checked for plagiarism and grammatical errors as we use highly authentic and licit sources.

Moneyback Guarantee

Still reluctant about placing an order? Our 100% Moneyback Guarantee backs you up on rare occasions where you aren’t satisfied with the writing.

Order Tracking

You don’t have to wait for an update for hours; you can track the progress of your order any time you want. We share the status after each step.

Order Now Talk to Us

Areas of Expertise

Although you can leverage our expertise for any writing task, we have a knack for creating flawless papers for the following document types.

Essay

Thesis

Presentation

Dissertation

Term Paper

Research Paper

Book Review

Assignment

Report

Case Study

Letter

Article

Coursework

Speech

Q & A

Critical Thinking

Areas of Expertise

Although you can leverage our expertise for any writing task, we have a knack for creating flawless papers for the following document types.

Essay

Thesis

Presentation

Dissertation

Term Paper

Research Paper

Book Review

Assignment

Report

Case Study

Letter

Article

Coursework

Speech

Q & A

Critical Thinking

Trusted Partner of 9650+ Students for Writing

From brainstorming your paper's outline to perfecting its grammar, we perform every step carefully to make your paper worthy of A grade.

Preferred Writer

Hire your preferred writer anytime. Simply specify if you want your preferred expert to write your paper and we’ll make that happen.

Grammar Check Report

Get an elaborate and authentic grammar check report with your work to have the grammar goodness sealed in your document.

One Page Summary

You can purchase this feature if you want our writers to sum up your paper in the form of a concise and well-articulated summary.

Plagiarism Report

You don’t have to worry about plagiarism anymore. Get a plagiarism report to certify the uniqueness of your work.

Free Features $66FREE

Most Qualified Writer $10FREE
Plagiarism Scan Report $10FREE
Unlimited Revisions $08FREE
Paper Formatting $05FREE
Cover Page $05FREE
Referencing & Bibliography $10FREE
Dedicated User Area $08FREE
24/7 Order Tracking $05FREE
Periodic Email Alerts $05FREE

Our Services

Join us for the best experience while seeking writing assistance in your college life. A good grade is all you need to boost up your academic excellence and we are all about it.

On-time Delivery
24/7 Order Tracking
Access to Authentic Sources

Academic Writing

We create perfect papers according to the guidelines.

Professional Editing

We seamlessly edit out errors from your papers.

Thorough Proofreading

We thoroughly read your final draft to identify errors.

Thorough Proofreading

We thoroughly read your final draft to identify errors.

Delegate Your Challenging Writing Tasks to Experienced Professionals

Work with ultimate peace of mind because we ensure that your academic work is our responsibility and your grades are a top concern for us!

Check Out Our Sample Work

Dedication. Quality. Commitment. Punctuality

It May Not Be Much, but It’s Honest Work!

Here is what we have achieved so far. These numbers are evidence that we go the extra mile to make your college journey successful.

0+

Happy Clients

0+

Words Written This Week

0+

Ongoing Orders

0%

Customer Satisfaction Rate

Process as Fine as Brewed Coffee

We have the most intuitive and minimalistic process so that you can easily place an order. Just follow a few steps to unlock success.

Call Us +1 (877) 657-8180 Discuss Order Details Now

See How We Helped 9000+ Students Achieve Success

We Analyze Your Problem and Offer Customized Writing

We understand your guidelines first before delivering any writing service. You can discuss your writing needs and we will have them evaluated by our dedicated team.

Clear elicitation of your requirements.
Customized writing as per your needs.

We Mirror Your Guidelines to Deliver Quality Services

We write your papers in a standardized way. We complete your work in such a way that it turns out to be a perfect description of your guidelines.

Proactive analysis of your writing.
Active communication to understand requirements.

We Handle Your Writing Tasks to Ensure Excellent Grades

We promise you excellent grades and academic excellence that you always longed for. Our writers stay in touch with you via email.

Thorough research and analysis for every order.
Deliverance of reliable writing service to improve your grades.

Place an Order Start Chat Now

Con Position Paper

What Will You Get?

Premium Quality

Experienced Writers

On-Time Delivery

24/7 Customer Support

Complete Confidentiality

Authentic Sources

Moneyback Guarantee

Order Tracking

Areas of Expertise

Essay

Thesis

Presentation

Dissertation

Term Paper

Research Paper

Book Review

Assignment

Report

Case Study

Letter

Article

Coursework

Speech

Q & A

Critical Thinking

Areas of Expertise

Essay

Thesis

Presentation

Dissertation

Term Paper

Research Paper

Book Review

Assignment

Report

Case Study

Letter

Article

Coursework

Speech

Q & A

Critical Thinking

Trusted Partner of 9650+ Students for Writing

Preferred Writer

Grammar Check Report

One Page Summary

Plagiarism Report

Free Features $66FREE

Our Services

Academic Writing

Professional Editing

Thorough Proofreading

Thorough Proofreading

Delegate Your Challenging Writing Tasks to Experienced Professionals

Check Out Our Sample Work

It May Not Be Much, but It’s Honest Work!

0+

Happy Clients

0+

Words Written This Week

0+

Ongoing Orders

0%

Customer Satisfaction Rate

Process as Fine as Brewed Coffee

Share Your Requirements

Place Order & Deposit Funds

Release Payment to Your Writer

See How We Helped 9000+ Students Achieve Success

We Analyze Your Problem and Offer Customized Writing

We Mirror Your Guidelines to Deliver Quality Services

We Handle Your Writing Tasks to Ensure Excellent Grades