August 2, 2021
| John: In The Essence of Enlightenment, James makes some comments about non-violence being the core principle of the field of dharma—but rather than argue for this position (which do I understand is traditional and uncontroversial in Hindu thought), he actually does the opposite, acknowledging that there are many situations in which one’s svadharma might require violence in different contexts, such as a soldier in war. James then goes on to say, however, that “killing things” is an unacceptable activity for a karma yogi, and, albeit gently, recommends vegetarianism. Now, I have also read some articles in Shining World in which you refreshingly defend what I regard as a healthy diet: one including a full range of animal products, etc. I appreciate these contributions especially as so many dharma teachers have what I regard as ill-informed opinions about diet and nutrition and badly thought-out arguments to support their cultural prejudice in favour of vegetarianism. I would like to know more about how the views expressed by James and yourself, in different contexts, can be reconciled, or whether James has changed his opinion on what constitutes a dharmic diet. More than this, though, I find myself thinking through the whole concept of ahimsa in light of both James’ and your contributions. Ethically speaking, lacto-ovo-vegetarians are engaged in gross inconsistency, as their dairy and eggs cannot be produced independently of the meat industry and require surplus animals to be killed (or, as apparently occurs in India, released into the wild where they are preyed on by tigers, etc., or starve to death due to overpopulation as described in Jha’s study “The Myth of Holy Cow”). Which leaves only veganism as an alternative to omnivory. Given that somewhere well upwards of 50% of vegans suffer B12 and other deficiencies, I would argue that it is morally irresponsible to inflict a vegan diet, and many or perhaps all vegans could be said to be violating ahimsa with regard to their own bodies, which their unnatural diet clearly harms. Then there are issues as to the sustainability of vegan agriculture and the violence done to the Earth’s biome by plant agriculture, as explored in Lierre Keith’s The Vegetarian Myth, as you acknowledge in your informative articles on the subject. So it seems clear to me that vegetarianism should be regarded, like the caste system to which it is linked, as unrelated to the philosophy of Vedanta and as merely a cultural artifact of Hindu society. Sundari: Vegetarianism is an artifact of Hindu beliefs. In fact, James’ Guru, Swami Chinmaya famously said that ‘a vegetarian is a carnivore once removed’. There is no contradiction between what James teaches and what I teach, both are in accordance with the scripture from which we do not deviate nor insert our own opinions. He does promote vegetarianism and was one for decades, but he has not been a vegetarian for many years. The fact is, whatever one eats, something must die to feed us, even if it is ‘just’ plants. Scientific studies are showing quite clearly that plants have a kind of consciousness, they communicate with each other in co-operation as well as competition. All life depends on life. We must kill to eat, that is the way the field works. Your question has wider implications, that of ‘right and wrong’. There is no one answer for all situations. Vedanta is the logic of existence, it is not a religion nor constrained by any human thought or belief system. It is the irrefutable truth of the Self, the science of Consciousness. It may sound like the teachings of Vedanta contain contradictions, but they are only apparent contradictions that all dissolve upon investigation. It all depends on the context and the perspective from which the question arises. The perspective of the person is limited to the context of right and wrong, i.e., duality. The perspective of the Self regarding anything in the Field of Existence is nondual, that of the big picture, Isvara. For the non-dual Self, the creation is not real because in a non-dual reality there is nothing other than the Self. Real is defined as that which is always present and unchanging, which only applies to the ever-present unchanging knower of the Field, the Self/Consciousness. The creation has an apparent existence because we can experience it. Peace of mind all depends on who we think the ‘we’ is. The person or the knower of the person? However, Isvara’s creation, the dharmafield runs on certain laws or dharmas that cannot be contravened without consequence, and enlightened or not, the main value in life is non-injury in thought word, and deed, which must be contextualized. The universal laws or dharmas are built into the nature of the Field of Existence and the results of all actions, whether through appropriate action (dharma) or inappropriate action (adharma), are called karmas. Nothing exists without being subjugated to dharma, though breaking dharma only applies to the self-aware jiva. No other part of creation breaks dharma, ever. According to the Hindu religion, following dharm usually, but not always, entails vegetarianism. There are many Hindus who do eat meat and who practice live animal sacrifices in their rituals. For these Hindus, it is dharmic to eat meat and sacrifice animals, there is no contradiction nor moral conflict. I am in Bali, Indonesia at the moment, an island predominantly Hindu. We regularly see the locals holding rituals where they throw ducks or chickens into the ocean as offerings. They also sacrifice puppies and goats. This is right, for them. dharma is a very difficult topic because though non-injury is such an important universal moral law, this means different things to different people and in different situations. Such as killing to eat or worship, the butcher slaughtering meat for a living, or a soldier in war killing to fulfill his duty, as you mention further on. This is called situational or visesa dharma, more on this below. Although dharma is one, because reality is non-dual, it can be understood in three ways. 1: Samanya Dharma: Has two levels. 1) Universal moral laws governing the Field of Existence that apply to everyone no matter what religious or non-religious views one has, such as fairness, justice, honesty–basically, non-injury, an expectation we all hold which if contravened, means we feel unpleasant effects, as do others. It is our experience that “as you sow, so shall you reap.” 2) The macrocosmic laws of physics, like gravity and thermodynamics, etc. 2: Visesa Dharma or Situational Ethics: How the individual interprets the universal rules, which includes everything: lifestyle, diet, money, work, family, sex, marriage, relationships, the environment, etc. Visesa dharma is tricky because non-injury must be contextualized according to our nature and life situation; there is no simple right or wrong, as explained above. 3: Svadharma with a small “s”: Our individual conditioning. This is the nature or predisposition with which each person is born, and our karma, life situation. To be happy (and healthy) we must act in accordance with both, or we will not be following dharma. If it is in accordance with our belief system or nutritional needs to include animal products in our diet, we are not breaking dharma. If not, not. All dharmas are based on common sense and logic. More on diet below. Morally, it is possible that on the personal level in order to be true to our svadharma, we must sometimes take actions that cause agitation and distress to ourselves or “others”. For instance, we may have to end relationships with others that do not want to end them with us. Our lives have to conform to the truth, or we will not have peace of mind, so if we are in a situation and faced with such choices, following the truth will always work out for the best. It is far more damaging to all concerned to make choices that contradict dharma because we are afraid to face the consequences of making the choices that are right for us. John: But where does this leave us with regard to ahimsa and the field of dharma? It seems to me that Ishvara quite obviously, as James puts it in his book, “needs killers”. And human society, I would argue, needs butchers and abattoir workers more than it needs soldiers, at the very least! Furthermore, it is worth considering that animals reared on a well-run farm probably have a more comfortable life and death than their wild equivalents would do. And then, how about killing vermin? What do vegans imagine happens on farms in that regard? And when I squash a spider might I not be said to be saving the lives of all the flies it would have eaten had it lived? When I refrain from swatting a mosquito out of “reverence for life”, but instead use repellent spray, am I not denying my fellow-creature its necessary sustenance? The tendency of such considerations is to undermine the whole notion of ahimsa, in my opinion. Non-violence is not possible or, within the world as it exists, desirable. We need rather think intelligently about what violence to commit (e.g. killing an animal for its meat) and what to refrain from (e.g. denying a child proper nutrition). So, would you be prepared to say that an abattoir worker or a pest exterminator could be a karma yogi? Would you be prepared to revise your adherence to traditional Vedanta if it were to turn out that non-violence is an incoherent doctrine? Throw out the bad and keep the good? Or would this be heresy? I am not trying to change your mind, only to seek clarification and an end to my cognitive dissonance and rajasic mental chatter about these issues! I look forward to your response. Sundari: I had to smile about your comments on changing my mind! I cannot ‘revise my adherence to Vedanta’ because it is not a doctrine or belief system, which you seem to think it is. Vedanta is me, the Self. There is no ‘cognitive dissonance about anything, ever, from the Self’s point of view. The Self is dharma with a big “D’. Though as a person I am not exempt from following dharma, so do not break it because I value peace of mind above all and, there is no benefit to doing so. All is me. Right and wrong do not apply to the Self for the simple reason that they are dualistic concepts, nothing more. I am unborn and undying, and so is everything else because there is nothing but me. Nothing dies, ever. Here is a quote from one of the greatest Mahtamas in Vedanta, Swami Dayanand on the topic of dharma: “There is no good and no evil. In every concrete situation, there is only the necessary and the unnecessary. The needful is right, the needless is wrong. The situation decides. Every situation is a challenge that demands the right response. When the response is right, the challenge is met and the problem ceases. If the response is wrong, the challenge is not met and the problem remains unsolved. Your unsolved problems – that is what constitutes your karma. Solve them rightly and be free.” Yes, the topic of dharma is difficult and confusing from the point of view of the individual, as clarified above. But are you an individual stuck in samsara, duality, or are you the unlimited Self? As a person following dharma means respecting Isvara’s Universal laws according to your nature and situation, which includes the needs of the body. You are probably familiar with the broader topic of the Vegan Myth, but here is the long answer regarding diet anyway. It is the condensed version of the subject from my book, Enlightened LIfestyles, still in the process of being finished. The Vegan Myth There is no one moral law regarding what we eat. Morality, aside, while there are certain immutable laws in the field of nutrition that apply to everyone all the time, there are also factors influencing health that are determined by our individual genetic profile. To make a wise choice, the trick is to know which is which. We are best served by choosing what works best for us based on tried and tested knowledge, not on emotion. These days there is much in the nutritional field that passes as wisdom that is far from it, and there are many labels we can identify with that serve nobody. However, there is one nutritional label that does work for everyone, and that is ‘nutrivore’. It means getting all the nutrients we need to be healthy from food that comes from farming methods that honor our body and the earth. No matter your moral views about what you eat the best nutritional advice is to eat mostly real, unprocessed ‘live’ food. There is a fundamental connection between the logic of nature, the logic of human industry, and the health of the individual. Nothing ever works in isolation as everything is connected to everything else. There are now many so-called experts that will tell you their way is the way. It is quite amazing how hard it is for many to revise their ideas about what they eat, and more importantly, to make the connection between their health and what they eat. I am often astounded by the misinformation and downright manipulation of nutritional information by the media, particularly social media. Most people don’t know what to believe anymore. Unfortunately, because there is so much ignorance on the topic of diet, confusion and polarization are inevitable. Until relatively recently, nutrition has not been a subject of study, and certainly, not an identity issue. Though food has always been a major factor, for most of human history we ate what was available to us for survival. Villages sprang up as a result of agriculture and the sharing and cooking of food led to social bonding, culture, and civilization as we know it today. With the advent of the industrial agricultural age, the “food issue” has become complicated, political, and polarized. We have lost touch with nature and our part in the natural cycles of life. As a result, we have lost touch with much of the traditional wisdom forming the basis of culture leading to the rampant destruction of wild areas. In addition to the denaturing of food and soil with chemicals by the industrialized farming of plants and animals, these factors have put us all at grave risk of illness. With all the conflicting research and information that abounds, it is quite clear that anyone could promote almost any view about anything, especially on social media. For every hypothesis that nutritional science constructs, an alternative, or opposite theory are possible, seemingly with all the research to prove it. There was a time when there was agreement on scientific conclusions, and that agreement relied on evidence-based and peer-reviewed research. These days it seems anyone can claim to have a scientific validation for their chosen hypothesis. Many now believe that the only way forward both for the optimum health of our bodies and the planet is to ‘go vegan’. While this may be commendable from an emotional standpoint, it is also unfortunately also deluded, more on this below. There is no one perfect diet for everyone, and it is possible to be healthy as a vegan. But veganism more so than any other diet requires considerable knowledge about nutrition if you want to be healthy. It can be a dangerous diet without the application of correct knowledge. The main problem with veganism is it requires a fanatical point of view. When someone is strongly invested in certain beliefs they tend to avoid or fail to investigate sound scientific findings that challenge their view. A good example is the beliefs held as gospel by vegans, established by their high priest, Colin Campbell, and his much-touted China study. When I first read the China Study, I bought into it as I did not have a way to validate it other than trying it out. I was a vegetarian at the time, mostly for moral reasons. I wanted to believe it was a healthier way to live and it was my nutritional bible, for a while. After a few years, that lifestyle was clearly not working for me health-wise, so I started investigating cutting-edge nutritional science. What I found in many peer-reviewed, bona fide studies was that they were not only much more rigorous than the China study, but they challenged Campbell’s claims, disproving some of his most firmly held findings. What also became clear is that Campbell, like so many well-meaning researchers, had confirmation bias. He was guilty of academic hubris, and thus flawed research. However, he brandished his quite considerable academic credentials to great effect, and the vegan cult it spawned grows by the day. My discoveries led me to be more open-minded and balanced about what constitutes ‘good’ nutrition and trustworthy science which made me overturn many of my own ideas about diet. I have since come to very different conclusion regarding the moral imperative. All the same, psychological-spiritual factors are as important as a balanced healthy diet that works for you, this cannot be denied. If not eating animals is a deeply held moral value and you are healthy, that is what counts. I agree with vegans that the moral perspective of a Vegetarian/Vegan diet is comforting, no doubt about that. But sadly, it is illusory because one cannot avoid ‘killing’ to survive, that is just a fact. We must eat life to live, that is the way life works. There is no way out of the system, which is why we refer to it as ‘the food chain’. There is no moral high ground. The uncomfortable truth is that no matter what we eat, we are part of an interdependent cycle of producers, consumers, and degraders. All life is created, sustained, and destroyed. If you are alive something is dying to feed you, even if it’s just the insects and animals that live on and in the habitat of the plants you eat. Are insects not alive? Is a plant less conscious than an animal, or an insect? A plant is alive, it communicates with its environment and does not want to be eaten. Without insects, most of our plant crops would fail. Why are we killing most of them with our farming methods, not just with pesticides but the enormous tracts of land cleared for industrial-scale animal farming and mono-crops, such as soy, maize, and other grains? Is that any worse than land cleared for grazing animals? Biodiversity is still sacrificed, topsoil destroyed, water sources depleted. Millions of animals die through habitat loss and in the harvesting process. What about the serious depletion of water sources for industrial-scale soy and almond farming so that every vegan can indulge in their fashionable soy or almond milk café latte? Or the slave labour and drug-cartel like wars being fought over avocado farming so that vegans can have their go-to ‘avo on toast’? The same with quinoa, among other vegan staples. The local people who used to rely on these foods as part of their traditional diets can no longer afford them, and they are paid a pittance to farm them. Vegetarians and more so vegans tend to have a blinkered view and to turn their dietary choices into a self-righteous militant cult-like ideology, which may seem to offer peace of mind but does not serve their health or the planet. The truth is that all farming methods, whether for plant or animal sources need to change to environmentally friendly, regenerative, sustainable, and chemical-free farming methods for anyone to be healthy. We must find healthier ways to feed the earth’s population because the extractive methods we have in place are not only making us sick but destroying the very sources we depend on to live. We need to bring the whole food system into balance with mother nature or the whole system will collapse. There is no doubt that industrial animal slaughter and dairy farming are indefensible, cruel, and insanely unhealthy for us and the planet. We are asking for trouble if we keep this up. But while we must cut down on eating meat and treat animals with the respect they deserve, it is nonetheless an indisputable fact that there are some vital nutrients for humans found only in animals. Though some of these nutrients are found in plants, they are not of the equal nutritional value as those from animal sources. If we were not supposed to eat animals, why has mother nature set it up this way? Vegan studies ignore any inconvenient facts that do not fit their core beliefs and are even happy to sacrifice their health to feel virtuous. What about non-injury to oneself? Colin Campbell’s study included only healthy vegetarian populations in China. Why did he leave out healthy meat-eating populations in China, like the Tuoli? Because they did not fit with and challenged his view. He also ignored unhealthy plant-eating groups for the same reason. But as with the Tuoli of China, there are still indigenous cultures around the globe who are healthy on a predominantly meat-eating diet. A few examples are the Innuit, the Maasai, or the Herero people – among others. Whereas Weston Price, the famous early 20th-century dentist turned nutritional researcher studied the eating habits of many diverse people across the globe. He found that while there were common aspects to most diets, we all have different requirements due to any number of factors and variables that are constantly in a state of flux. However, he did not find even one indigenous group of people in his years crisscrossing the furthest regions of the globe that were vegan. All groups ate some form of animal products if they could. That is because, at that time, there were no vegans on the planet; pure veganism is a recent development. (Ancient and strict religious sects practicing non-injury, like Hindus, Buddhists, and Jains among others are all lacto-vegetarian). Price did not claim any particular diet was superior, he was not invested in any ideology other than to study the effects of diet on dentition. In doing so, he concluded that the cause of bad teeth was the same as what he coined ‘the diseases of civilization’: the effect of our modern Western diet with its preponderance of processed food, sugar, and transfats on our health. Without fail all the indigenous tribes he studied had good teeth and were healthy if they had minimal contact with civilization and the industrial food machine. Though many critics claim Prices’ conclusions to be unscientific, there have been many scientific studies too numerous to mention since then that undeniably proved Price was right. In particular, that we need good fats and some animal sources to be healthy. However, this was ignored by the food and nutritional industry for the last sixty years. It demonized saturated fats and animal meats, promoting carbohydrates and transfats instead. That said, there are some conclusions in the China Study I still agree with, such as that fresh plant sources should constitute most of our food intake. Nobody denies that plants are good for us and essential in our diets. But as many more people switch to a vegan diet, there is a growing industry catering to them with all kinds of meat-replacement foods and highly processed food-like substances, loaded with unhealthy additives, sugar, and hydrogenated vegetable oils (transfats), which are the real killers! Vegans tend not to care because veganism is less about diet and more about an ideological identity, a religion based on emotions, not knowledge. The amount of pontificating, false propaganda, and downright lies spread by vegans in documentaries, online, and in the media has created a cult of fanatical shamers who will stop at nothing to prove they are right and have the moral high ground. At this point, it’s really important that we distinguish between vegetarianism and veganism. Vegetarianism has a long and honorable history. It goes back at least 2,500 years to Greece, and much further than that in the Indus Valley, India, and that part of the world. It has proven itself to be a viable diet because it includes some animal products such as eggs and dairy. Most religious Hindus are vegetarians who eat eggs and dairy, but in the Northern parts of India, the Kashmir regions, they eat meat because the climate is so different, they need meat to survive. However, veganism is a non-historical diet. Its health benefits are not verified. There probably were scattered enclaves of religious people living cloistered lives who may have followed a vegan diet out of choice or necessity, but none that have been well documented as they were very tiny populations, and we have no idea if they were healthy or how long they lived. The roots of veganism go back to England, when in 1944, Donald Watson coined the term “vegan.” Watson’s primary argument for veganism was ethical, not nutritional. At the age of 14, he’d witnessed the slaughter of a pig, which left him horrified. He decided to stop eating meat and went on to campaign for the whole world to follow suit, despite never having any training in nutrition. There is what is called the ‘Vegan Honeymoon’ a period when people switch to a vegan diet from an unhealthy diet. By unhealthy I mean eating too much protein from animal sources, too much sugar, too little healthy fat, and too many processed food-like substances. So, when people switch from that to a purely plant-based diet, they tend to feel much better, for a while. The body can supplement the nutrients it needs and does not get on a pure plant diet from three to maximum of seven years. But then when it runs out, the body starts to break down and suffer. We know of many unhealthy vegans who have done permanent damage to their health as a result of their fanatical views about diet. Unfortunately, vegans tend to have little knowledge about how to properly prepare certain plant foods to minimize their bad side effects, how to balance the right foods to get all the nutrients they need, or supplementing the nutrients they do not get on a vegan diet. For the sake of convenience and the desire to feel virtuous, the tendency is to put blinkers on and take the easy route. Apart from highly processed carbs and fats, vegetarians and more so vegans rely heavily on bread, rice, cereals, soy, grains, and legumes—which are loaded with plant poisons such as lectins, among others. More on this below. If we want to be healthy and to live in a sustainable, kinder world, first we must examine our values based on unemotional, unbiased, and irrefutable knowledge. Only from this platform can we question the principles behind the foundational myths of our culture in a way that serves us all, which is difficult for most people. The emotional struggle inherent in doing the ‘right’ or noble thing is compounded by our dependence on civilization, our individual feeling of helplessness to change it, and our divided views as to how to go about it. One thing is sure: human nature is immensely resourceful and ingenious, but it must pay attention to its environment to come up with sustainable solutions to the many problems we face globally. The Science: Nutrients Lacking in a Purely Vegan Diet Vitamin B12 Obviously, we are not going to eat dirt or drink ‘dirty’ water to get our Vitamin B12, if that were even possible, which it is not. It is true that most people, both vegans, and meat-eaters, are not getting enough B12. In my article, I stress that the only meat products that are not only morally defensible but healthy to eat are those from organically farmed sources because healthy animals do not need to be fed supplements or antibiotics. The animals are healthy. Whereas industrially farmed animals are sick. The Vit B12 they make themselves is destroyed by antibiotics. In addition, if the person has a bad diet, whether vegan or meat-eater, they are going to have a very unhealthy gut microbiome. Absorption of Vit B12 requires an intact and functioning stomach, pancreas, sufficient quantities of intrinsic factor, and most importantly, healthy small bowel function. Problems with any one of these organs make a vitamin B12 deficiency possible. For people who have problems absorbing B12 through their digestive system, which is more prevalent as we age, supplemental injections can be given. The problem with fanatical vegans is that most Vit B12 supplements are made from animal sources, so they won’t take them. Although Vitamin B12 is found in some plants, it is not in the form that the body can use. Or, it requires certain other co-factors to be present to be useful to the body. Vit B12 stored in your liver will be completely exhausted after 3 – 7 years, at which point you may start to experience serious neurodegenerative diseases. There are many documented cases of blindness from B12 deficiency, as well as other neurological disorders. Vitamin B12 works together with folate in the synthesis of DNA and red blood cells. It’s also involved in the production of the myelin sheath around the nerves, and the conduction of nerve impulses. In the peer-reviewed published research, the only plant food that has been tested for improving B12 status in humans using the gold standard of lowering methylmalonic acid (MMA) levels is nori, which contrary to what many want to believe, does not improve vitamin B12 status. A number of foods, arguably, warrant further attention but unless these foods are shown consistently to correct B12 deficiency, vegans should not rely on them for vitamin B12. A common myth amongst vegetarians and vegans is that it’s possible to get B12 from plant sources like seaweed, fermented soy, spirulina, and brewer’s yeast. But plant foods said to contain B12 actually contain B12 analogs called cobamides that not only block the intake of but also increase the need for true B12. Omega 3’s: Vegans believe they will convert short-chain omega-3 fats into long-chain omega-3 fats. They absolutely and positively cannot. Our brain is about 70 percent fat; 50 percent of that fat is DHA. There are beautiful longitudinal studies showing people with the highest omega-3 index have the largest brains as they age, and the largest areas of memory in the hippocampus. People with the lowest levels of omega-3 index have the most shrunken brains and the smallest areas of memory. Research confirms that to optimize health, seafood is one of the healthiest foods on the planet, primarily because of its docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) content — a 22-carbon omega-3 fat that is absolutely essential for your health, as it’s a structural component of your cell membranes. If you have low DHA levels, it’s almost physiologically impossible to be healthy because it’s such an important part of energy generation at the molecular level. You need DHA, which is only found in fatty fish and certain other marine animals like krill. Granted, water pollution is a major concern today, so you must eat really low on the food chain. Anchovies, sardines, herring, wild Alaskan salmon, fish roe, and krill are all good choices as they’re high in omega-3’s while being low in mercury and other pollutants. Like It or Not, You Need Marine-Based DHA If you exclude these foods, you’re just not going to be healthy. And contrary to popular belief, you simply cannot obtain all the DHA you need from plant sources. Plant-based omega-3 (alpha-linolenic acid or ALA) has 18 carbons whereas marine-based omega-3s (DHA and eicosapentaenoic acid or EPA) have 22 and 20 respectively. The difference in the length of the carbon chain makes a significant difference in terms of functionality. ALA functions as a source of fuel (food), whereas EPA and DHA are structural elements. More than 90 percent of the omega-3 fat found in your brain tissue is DHA, which suggests how important it is for healthy neurological function, for example. The problem is that, although your body can convert some of the ALA found in plants to the DHA found in marine oils, it is very rare for it to be more than 5 percent — the typical conversion rate is 1 to 3 percent, or even less. This simply isn’t enough to have any significant benefit. What is as important is the proportion omega 3’s and 6’s ingested. In excess omega 6’s cause widespread inflammation. The perfect 1 to 1 proportion of omega 3’s and 6’s is optimal for health. In many plant sources, the ratio between omega 3’s and 6’s is out of proportion. Fat-soluble vitamins: A and D: Perhaps the biggest problem with vegetarian and vegan diets is their near-total lack of two fat-soluble vitamins: A and D. Fat-soluble vitamins play numerous and critical roles in human health. Vitamin A promotes healthy immune function, fertility, eyesight, normal cell division, bone remodeling, the formation of enamel on teeth during their development in childhood, and skin health. Vitamin D regulates calcium metabolism, regulates immune function, reduces inflammation, and protects against some forms of cancer. These important fat-soluble vitamins are concentrated, and in some cases found almost exclusively, in animal foods: primarily seafood, organ meats, eggs, and dairy products. Some obscure species of mushrooms can provide large amounts of vitamin D, but these mushrooms are rarely consumed and often difficult to obtain. (This explains why vitamin D levels are 58% lower in vegetarians and 74% lower in vegans than in omnivores.) The idea that plant foods contain vitamin A is a common misconception. Plants contain beta-carotene, the precursor to active vitamin A (retinol). While beta-carotene is converted into vitamin A in humans, the conversion is inefficient. Even healthy adults can’t do this efficiently, and the young and the old may not be able to do it at all. For example, a single serving of liver per week would meet the RDA of 3,000 IU. To get the same amount from plant foods, you’d have to eat 2 cups of carrots, one cup of sweet potatoes or 2 cups of kale every day. Moreover, traditional cultures consumed up to 10 times the RDA for vitamin A. It would be nearly impossible to get this amount of vitamin A from plant foods without juicing or taking supplements. Essential Amino Acids/Proteins: While animal protein has traditionally been regarded as higher quality and superior to plant-based protein, plant protein has been getting a major reputation boost recently, both as isolated products (hemp protein, pea protein, brown rice protein, and so on) and in whole-food form (ever see the “broccoli has more protein than beef” meme that occasionally pops up on Facebook?). This has led some people to believe that plants are just as good as animals (if not better!) when it comes to supplying protein. When we look at the evidence, though, it becomes clear that plants are great sources of plenty of important things, but protein isn’t one of them. Plant protein takes a back seat to animal protein in terms of quality, digestibility, and density. Here’s why. Understanding Protein Protein is made of long chains of amino acids (organic compounds that contain a carboxyl and amino group). Even though we’ve identified about 500 different amino acids, only 20 are used to build the proteins in our bodies, and only nine of those are considered essential (meaning we can’t synthesize them from other amino acids and have to get them from food). The essential amino acids are: · Tryptophan · Threonine · Isoleucine · Leucine · Lysine · Methionine · Phenylalanine · Valine · Histidine When we talk about food being a “complete protein,” it means that the food contains an adequate proportion of all nine of the essential amino acids. In general, animal foods supply complete protein, whereas plant foods tend to be low in at least one essential amino acid. That’s why we see advice for vegetarian foods to be paired together (or at least eaten within the same day) to fill in each other’s gaps (such as the classic combination of rice and beans: beans are low in methionine but high in lysine, whereas rice is low in lysine but high in methionine). The small number of plant foods that contain all or most of the essential amino acids necessary to build complete proteins are notably spirulina, chlorella, moringa, quinoa, buckwheat, hempseeds, chia seeds, pumpkin seeds, cashew nuts among a few others. However, seeds like chia must be soaked first for the nutrients to be bio-available, and quinoa contains saponins, which are lectins (like gluten), making quinoa very problematic to digest for many. To obtain the full complement of amino acids Vegans and Vegetarians need to eat a variety of plants, soak, ferment, and combine plants intelligently, which takes knowledge, diligence, and effort. But, even the idea of complete protein can be misleading. Some amino acids become essential during times of illness or stress (arginine, cysteine, glutamine, tyrosine, glycine, ornithine, proline, and serine). And, even non-essential amino acids are important to consume in our diet, both because the process of synthesizing them can be inefficient and because many of them play roles in the body that go beyond protein synthesis. Carnosine, carnitine, taurine, conjugated linoleic acid are all lacking in vegetarian and especially vegan diets which may lead to mitochondrial dysfunction. Sadly, the vegetarian myth that plant protein is superior to animal protein is untrue. How well a protein is absorbed is determined by its amino acid profile. Animal proteins are much more digestible than those of plant sources because animal-based proteins are more similar to our proteins than plant proteins and are thus assimilated more readily. Some animal proteins have around 90-99% digestibility, whereas plants have at best a digestibility range from 70-90%. Calcium: On paper, calcium intake is similar in vegetarians and omnivores (probably because both eat dairy products), but is much lower in vegans, who are often deficient. We know of many ex-vegans who suffered serious, sometimes permanent, skeletal problems due to calcium deficiency. Calcium bioavailability from plant foods is affected by their levels of oxalate and phytate, which are inhibitors of calcium absorption and thus decrease the amount of calcium the body can extract from plant foods. So, while leafy greens like spinach and kale have a relatively high calcium content, the calcium is not efficiently absorbed during digestion. One study suggests that it would take 16 servings of spinach to get the same amount of absorbable calcium as an 8-ounce glass of milk. That would be 33 cups of baby spinach or around 5-6 cups of cooked spinach. There are a few vegetables listed in this paper that have higher levels of bioavailable calcium, but it’s important to note that all the vegetables tested required multiple servings to achieve the same amount of usable calcium as one single serving of milk, cheese, or yogurt. This suggests that trying to meet your daily calcium needs from plant foods alone (rather than dairy products or bone-in fish) might not be a great strategy. Many people are moving away from dairy products, for various reasons, so getting enough can be a problem. Iron: Vegetarians and omnivores have similar levels of serum iron, but levels of ferritin—the long-term storage form of iron—are lower in vegetarians/vegans than in omnivores. This is significant because ferritin depletion is the first stage of iron deficiency. Moreover, although vegetarians often have similar iron intakes to omnivores on paper, it is more common for vegetarians (and particularly vegans) to be iron deficient. For example, this study of 75 vegan women in Germany found that 40% of them were iron deficient, despite average iron intakes that were above the recommended daily allowance. Why would this be? As with calcium, the bioavailability of the iron in plant foods is much lower than in animal foods. Other commonly consumed substances also inhibit plant-based forms of iron, such as coffee, tea, dairy products, supplemental fiber, and supplemental calcium. This explains why vegetarian diets have been shown to reduce non-heme iron absorption by 70% and total iron absorption by 85%. Zinc: Overt zinc deficiency is not often seen in Western vegetarians, but their intake often falls below recommendations. This is another case where bioavailability is important; many plant foods that contain zinc also contain phytate, which inhibits zinc absorption. Vegetarian diets tend to reduce zinc absorption by about 35% compared with omnivorous diet. Thus, even when the diet meets or exceeds the RDA for zinc, deficiency may still occur. One study suggested that vegetarians may require up to 50% more zinc than omnivores for this reason. Glycation and Insulin Resistance: Many Vegetarians and Vegans are addicted to sweets, and because their diets rely so heavily on carbs, the likelihood of insulin-leptin resistance is great. Glycation is the binding of protein by glucose molecules making it unavailable for absorption. Hyperglycemia: This is literally too much sugar in the blood, causing extreme tiredness, constant hunger, urinating and thirst that “pure” vegans typically suffer, not to mention widespread inflammation and degenerative joint disease as a result of diets too reliant on carbohydrates. Plant Poisons Eating plants is undoubtedly very good for us but plants have a downside because many contain plant poisons—after all, many medicines are derived from them. As much as medicines can save lives, many also kill or have serious side effects. More than half of the world’s population still relies entirely on plants for medicines, and plants supply the active ingredients of most traditional medical products. Plants contain substances that are extremely bad for our health called anti-nutrients, or phytochemicals, such as phytates and lectins. If you are eating a healthy, whole food diet yet still struggle with weight gain and health problems, part of the problem might have to do with lectins. Apart from this, many plants either lack certain nutrients or contain them in inferior forms to animals. Plant Seduction Many plants know how to ensnare us, producing a perfect match with the pleasure centers in the human brain with substances called exorphins, which are opioids. These plant chemicals can be as addictive as opium, which is one of the reasons we are so hooked on those carbs! There is a global dependence on many of these plants, namely beans (pulses) and legumes, rice, soy, wheat, maize. If we were meant to depend on them, we would have a 4-chambered stomach, as ruminant animals do. Ruminants are able to break down the plants they eat because of this, and in fact, they live off the bacteria that help them to do so, not the plants themselves. So is a cow a vegetarian, really? For us, hard-to-digest or dangerous plant sources can become palatable up to a point by soaking, fermentation, and cooking methods, but not entirely. To minimize harmful effects, we need knowledge of what to eat and how to eat these plants. One of the plant kingdom’s self-defense systems is lectins, not to be confused with lecithin or leptin. Lectins are plant proteins sometimes called sticky proteins or glyca-binding proteins because they are sugar-binding, seek out and bind to certain sugar molecules on the surface of cells. These then bind to specific receptor sites on your intestinal mucosal cells and interfere with the absorption of nutrients across your intestinal wall. As such, they act as “anti-nutrients,” and can have a detrimental effect on your gut microbiome by shifting the balance of your bacterial flora and offering a way for molecules to stick together bypassing the immune system, which can influence inter-cell interaction— a common precursor to and strongly associated with autoimmune disorders of all kinds, including leaky gut. Other Plant Poisons: Blocking enzymes are molecules that bind to enzymes decreasing their activity. They prevent the seed from germinating until conditions are ideal for it, which is why soaking seeds de-activate these enzymes. It tricks them into believing they can germinate. Other harmful compounds are phytates and phytic acid, which bind to micronutrients in food blocking absorption and bioavailability. Goitrogens inhibit the body’s ability to use iodine affecting thyroid health. Om Sundari |
