The protein myth

AlterNet has a short article today by Kathy Freston about the "protein myth". For most vegans, the question "But where do you get your protein?" always seems a bit perplexing as it comes up again and again (and again). It's as if by eschewing that ol' ribeye steak or yogurt cup, vegans face some sort of inevitable and well-known nutritional deficiency purportedly common to their ilk, even though most of the folks like me who live in North America live in a world where most diseases have to do with excessive consumption.

Freston points out that only 10 percent of most people's daily caloric intake needs to be protein-derived and that it's almost impossible to not meet this requirement by simply eating a varied plant-based diet. She discusses Dr. Dean Ornish's article that links common cancers, heart disease and other illnesses to high protein -- and especially animal-derived -- foods (she's right that his article is well-worth the read) . She also mentions T. Colin Campbell's famous The China Study, which also links cancer to excessive animal protein consumption.

The Vegetarian Resource Group (VRG) has a well-researched section on its website about daily protein requirements and vegan sources of protein. It also addresses the still widely-perpetuated myth (kick-started -- and long-since repudiated -- by France Moore Lappé in her famous work Diet for a Small Planet) of the supposed need to combine different types of protein to get a "complete" protein. PCRM also has an informative article on protein for vegans and breaks down protein requirements by body weight (as well as throwing in a couple of protein-rich recipes to boot). It's almost embarrassing how ridiculously easy it is to get the minimum amount of protein you need day to day.

Andrew Weil and animal-derived supplements for vegans

So, I just read an article by Dr. Andrew Weil, the portly quasi-Santa-lookalike nutritional guru. It's called ''Becoming a Vegan''. In it, Weil perpetuates some iffy information that more or less amounts to saying that you cannot thrive on a completely vegan diet. He brings up two instances where, in his opinion, animal products are necessary. First, with regards to Vitamin D, he writes the following:

I recommend a daily supplement of 1,000 IU of vitamin D3 -- cholecalciferol -- for everyone (vegan or not).

He asserts that your body can produce enough Vitamin D from exposure to sunlight, but states that most people don't go outside enough, hence the need for a supplement. The thing is that cholecalciferol (D3) is generally derived from sheep's wool -- definitely not vegan. Oddly, he makes no mention at all of Vitamin D2, which isn't derived from animals and which is commonly used in vegan vitamins.

Then, with reference to omega-3s, he writes:

Be aware that the vegetarian sources of omega-3s are not as good as oily fish. Consider taking a fish oil supplement or, at least, an algae-derived supplement of DHA.

Why would someone write an article about becoming a vegan and recommend taking an animal-based supplement as an option? The article seems mistitled. It would be more accurate for it to maybe refer to issues Weil finds inherent in a vegan diet; it's not about how to adopt a vegan diet if he suggests -- twice -- consuming animal products as necessary? I mean, is the definition of veganism now purportedly open to tweaking. too? (OK, my crankiness is showing, I'll admit...)

According to the Physician's Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM), fish-derived sources of omega-3 are at the very least unnecessary, and on top of that, that

omega-3s in fish oils are highly unstable molecules that tend to decompose and, in the process, unleash dangerous free radicals. Research has shown that omega-3s are found in a more stable form in vegetables, fruits, and beans. (See referenced text here.)

With regards to Vitamin D, the Vegan Society has information on animal-free ways to meet your daily requirement. The Vegetarian Resource Group (VRG) has a blurb on the differences between Vitamin D2 and D3. Both are used to fortify milk and other dairy products and Vitamin D3 isn't always animal-derived (but usually is). I haven't seen anything to indicate that one form is superior to the other, really. I'll see if I can dig up some more information about this in my copy of Joanne Stepaniak's Vegan Sourcebook, but it seems to me that Dr. Weil's opinion left some pretty serious blanks to fill and that since he writes as an authority on nutrition, most reading his article wouldn't even think to second-guess what he says. Thankfully, groups like PCRM and VRG exist to set the record straight.

A sausage a day increases your cancer risk by 20%

A recent British study has shown that consuming 50 g of processed meat a day -- a sausage or around three strips of bacon -- can raise the likelihood that you'll develop cancer by 20%. The cancer in question is bowel cancer and according to the study, any processed meats preserved with salt or chemical additives will increase your risk. It's not just a question of cutting back; one of the researchers involved has stated that processed meats should be avoided completely.

Vegetarian teens in the news...

The Hagerstown Morning Herald has a brief article for parents dealing with a teenager's recent decision to become a vegetarian. My beef with it -- if you'll pardon my use of the word -- is that it brings up the completely non-vegetarian notion of ''semi-vegetarianism''. From what I've seen in online vegetarian communities, it's tricky enough for teenagers to explain their reasons for eschewing the consumption of meat to their parents without articles suggesting that that certain types of meat eating could indeed fall under the definition of vegetarianism. (''But little Johnny, chicken is vegetarian! Now you're just being difficult!'') That being said, the article does raise the importance of educating oneself about healthier eating habits (i.e. whether or not you're a vegetarian), and it is fairly positive overall, even though it is rather fluffy and spotty reading.

Syracuse's News 10's website also included an article on dealing with a teen switching over to vegetarianism. There's a bit more information about nutrition -- the importance of eating a variety of items and ensuring that certain vitamins (e.g. B12) and minerals (e.g. iron, calcium and zinc) aren't missed. Unfortunately, when discussing iron, the writer asserts that you can get ''a whole lot of iron from eggs'' when the truth is that the iron content of an egg can be found in around 1/4 cup of cooked spinach, 1/8 cup of almonds and less than 1/4 cup of raisin bran. Eggs aren't really high in iron, so presenting them as a good part of a vegetarian diet to provide iron is misleading.

The Baltimore Sun features an article on the increase in girls (and young women) becoming vegetarian (and vegan) and is definitely the most informative and well-rounded piece of the three articles on the topic. It's entertaining and hip. It really gets into the ethical reasons that some may choose to stop consuming animal products, and, most importantly -- the writer of the piece actually interviewed three younger women who'd become vegetarians at an earlier age to get their input into the matter. In doing so, it addresses the pressure younger vegetarians can face from their peers because of their dietary choices. Thumbs up to the Baltimore Sun for a decent article!