Why are so many runners VEGAN?

Straw M Thoroughman wrote:

Umm no wrote:

This is horrible flawed logic. Monkeys and gorillas have longer intestines and vastly different digestion processes that allow them to survive on an all plant based diet. They also eat all day long.

Yet their protein intake each day is probably a lot less than ours. The point still stands that we eat far more animal protein than we need. And we can probably all achieve optimal health while vegan.

This is so stupid I can't even begin to argue with you. Ask kiprop if he's vegan. Ask rupp. Ask souleiman. Ask them what they eat to recover from workouts. They would more than likely eat your heart over eating grass with salad dressing.

I don't think there is too much inherently wrong with veganism - certainly, our knowledge of human metabolism is comparatively poor and in much the same way people can indeed survive on a diet of grilled cheese and cereal, people can survive on a diet with no animal protein. The evidence is all around us.

But as to whether it's healthy... I've been very overweight before, and lost it through transforming my diet. My sample size is n=1, but one thing that came through strongly in all my research is too much of any one thing is ill-advised. Similarly, too little of any one thing is ill-advised. Humans are omnivores, I'm not sure how much more evidence is needed there.

So, "eat food, not too much, mostly plants". This one quote is deceptively simple but encodes profound truths. Any diet - low-carb, paleo, veganism - which excludes entire food groups or types of food, is to me perhaps overhtinking. I can definitely see people who take diets to the far ends of the spectrum tend to be defensive, and are obviously reaching slightly in debates, linking old studies or relying on anecdotal evidence.

When all I know about a person is that he or she is vegan, based on my experience, the probability that the following things also apply rise by anywhere from 35% to 1,200%:

--> He or she is gluten-free/HFCS-free/cage-free and therefore a fad-following lemming

--> He or she spends more than he or she can reasonably afford on supplements that do absolutely nothing but enrich scammers in the nutriceutical industry

--> He or she is trying to compensate for a guilty conscience about wronging someone

--> He or she is physically unattractive

--> He or she has a bland and stupid sense of humor

--> He or she distorts the facts of nutritional science, be it intentionally or out of ignorance

--> He or she is insufferable to listen to, spend time around or otherwise engage with in any way

--> He or she has foul body odor, which he or she makes even less effort to mitigate than the typical (less odorous) person

--> He or she will need to shit in the next 23 minutes, and it may clog your toilet

Usually these things don't occur all at once, but you're fortunate if only two or three do.

The Poultry Strangler wrote:

When all I know about a person is that he or she is vegan, based on my experience, the probability that the following things also apply rise by anywhere from 35% to 1,200%:

Obviously you are trying to be funny (key word: trying), and sure, some of what you wrote is slightly true in some cases, but let me address a couple pointsn (and no, I am not a vegan) -

"--> He or she is gluten-free/HFCS-free/cage-free and therefore a fad-following lemming"

The high majority of people that I know or read about who are going "gluten free or HFCS free" are paleo type folks who are DEFINITELY NOT vegan. And many are also the "grass fed" beef types (not sure about "cage free" eggs(. So.....these types maybe "fad followers", but usually not vegan, very often big time meat eaters. You had that one a bit backwards. (in fact, you messed up : a vegan, by definition, can't be "cage free", unless they consider a greenhouse a cage)

"

--> He or she spends more than he or she can reasonably afford on supplements that do absolutely nothing but enrich scammers in the nutriceutical industry"

I don't think vegans are more likely to eat supplements over non-vegans. Other than a multi-vitamin with sufficient B-12 and iron, there isn't usually a reason for a vegan to go with supplements more than a non-vegan. Most meat-head (pun intended) non-vegan weight lifting guys are the ones most assuredly on some sort of supplement. Vegans are often the types not to trust something that comes in a powder. So again, you're probably wrong here.

"--> He or she distorts the facts of nutritional science, be it intentionally or out of ignorance"

Yes, I've seen vegans do this. But no more than other "special diet" types (see: Paleo, Atkins, etc). In fact, I would say the non-vegans do it more. Most people who are REALLY INTO THEIR DIET AND MUST TALK ABOUT HOW AWESOME IT IS AND HOW IT HAS CHANGED THEIR LIVES IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE often do this "distorting of nutrition science" you speak of. But again, vegans no more than non-vegans.

"--> He or she is insufferable to listen to, spend time around or otherwise engage with in any way"

Some are, I agree. But you also just described your average paleo-X-Fitter. Definitely not vegans.

The rest of what you wrote is kinda silly, but whatever.

As far as being "unattractive," I've met some hot vegan women. You might want to re-think that.

This is the hottest vegan woman:

Really?

veganrunner22 wrote:

The Poultry Strangler wrote:

This is the hottest vegan woman:

http://1000funnypictures.com/wp-content/uploads/Ugly-Women-10.jpg

Really?

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/04/10/article-2601633-1CFF8BED00000578-843_638x624.jpg

Yes really:

"Healthier" makes me LOL. I've been in groups at restaurants with vegans and it's sooooo annoying to hear them order, like "none of this, without this, what kind of stuff is this," etc.) and then they'll complain that their order is wrong when it arrives. I'd personally never be able to date a vegan woman. I don't have a prejudice, like do what you want, but I certainly don't agree with being vegan.

Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:

...paleo type folks...

I see you take issue with the paleo lifestyle, and as with any philosophy, there will be idiots in the mix.

But what is wrong with simply:

1) Keeping your food as non-processed as practically possible.

2) Eating mainly plants with a little bit of animal protein added in.

3) 30% carb, 20% protein, 50% total fat (10% saturated fat).

4) Option to increase your carbohydrates if you are an endurance athlete.

love is a fist wrote:

Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:

...paleo type folks...

I see you take issue with the paleo lifestyle, and as with any philosophy, there will be idiots in the mix.

But what is wrong with simply:

1) Keeping your food as non-processed as practically possible.

2) Eating mainly plants with a little bit of animal protein added in.

3) 30% carb, 20% protein, 50% total fat (10% saturated fat).

4) Option to increase your carbohydrates if you are an endurance athlete.

Straw M Thoroughman wrote:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-t72-VH_qGbs/UoUy8YKhKWI/AAAAAAAAPxU/iDsGGiM2dyE/s640/16.JPG

The only thing more annoying than crossFit people are people who hate crossFit people.

oh do tell wrote:

Straw M Thoroughman wrote:http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-t72-VH_qGbs/UoUy8YKhKWI/AAAAAAAAPxU/iDsGGiM2dyE/s640/16.JPG

The only thing more annoying than crossFit people are people who hate crossFit people.

Straw M Thoroughman wrote:

oh do tell wrote:

The only thing more annoying than crossFit people are people who hate crossFit people.

http://beabondgrrl.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/1.10blog.jpg

Meh. You win.

The last two entries under my handle are not me, the original choker of chicken. But I'm not going to bother registering it because I don't have to, and if the admins want to maintain an operation where confusion and bullshit reign, I'm more than happy to contribute to this goal.

Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:

Obviously you are trying to be funny (key word: trying)

No, I was being sincere except for a couple of points, and if some of it struck you as funny, so be it. Deluded and righteous people are, in fact, funny, as long as you don't have to live with any. I once dated a vegan girl who is now a disgusting hog who, in addition to constantly preaching the vegan "lifestyle," can't get enough dick in her to satisfy even the most ambitious three-ton rabbit, so perhaps I am somewhat biased.

Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:

some of what you wrote is slightly true in some cases

Don't intend to threaten to almost bend over backward slightly in order to consider making a token concession or something that might be construed as one if interpreted a certain way.

love is a fist wrote:

Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:

...paleo type folks...

I see you take issue with the paleo lifestyle, and as with any philosophy, there will be idiots in the mix.

Here are my issues with the "Paleo" diet-

a) we really don't know for certain what the vast majority of humans were eating during this period in history

b) people were certainly eating different diets in different parts of the globe and during different seasons. (i.e., there was no ONE "paleo" diet)

c) Just because humans didn't eat a particular food (or eat it much) during a period of history doesn't mean eating it now will have negative effects

d) what we ate at that point in our history might have suited the lifestyle we had then. Our lifestyles are different now, so that same diet might not be ideal now

e) the goal/need then was to get as much dense nutrition as possible quickly (when available), or starve. If you didn't starve (or get killed), you might pass on your genes. That is not really a concern for most of western societies now. Nutrition is more than plentiful (and that's the problem). Passing on one's genes is fairly easy too. We now strive to live until 100 and not get cancer or heart disease. Most Paleo people died before reaching old age, and the degenerative diseases common to older ages.

f) many societies, over the last several centuries, have eaten non-paleo diets (included lots grains, sometimes dairy, and have eaten more carbs than fat) and have been very healthy. The connection Paleo people always try to make between the obesity epidemic and the agricultural revolutions is only many aeons off. It's a poor correlation.

That's it!

love is a fist wrote:

But what is wrong with simply:

1) Keeping your food as non-processed as practically possible.

2) Eating mainly plants with a little bit of animal protein added in.

3) 30% carb, 20% protein, 50% total fat (10% saturated fat).

4) Option to increase your carbohydrates if you are an endurance athlete.

There is nothing "wrong" with those tenets, and that could certainly be a healthy diet. However....

1) "eating non-processed" foods is not a paleo-only tenet. Lots of diet experts recommend that. Paleo shouldn't try to claim it as their own.

2) "eating mainly plants with a little animal protein" is SURELY not what most paleo-followers eat. They think LOTS of animal protein is the way to go. What you described could match any number of diets. Again, not Paleo for the most part.

3) I would think most paleo followers would have higher protein, higher sat fat, and possibly lower carbs than what you describe. The macronutrient ratio you list could be healthy if it is a Mediterranean style diet.

4) sure, why not.

In short, again, there is nothing wrong with the diet you described (if high in nuts, seeds, fish, olive oil, etc). But

a) I really don't think most "Paleo diet" followers eat that diet, and

b) that type of diet could be similar to many other diets that exist.

c) I don't think there is evidence that it is superior diet to a one higher in carbs (if the carbs are whole grains, fruit, legumes, and tubers), lower in fat, lower in sat fat. So the diet you describe is probably good, possibly very good, but certainly not necessarily superior to many other higher carb/lower fat diets.

It would be great actually if you could bend your back over.

The vegan girl you dated sounds like a whale. In my experience, that sort of vegan is the type that eats big macs when she thinks nobody is watching. Hence also the BO. In no way is she representative of vegans as a group. Your sample size as far as I can tell is 1.

On top of that she played you from what you're saying. I can't expect you to provide an unbiased description to this harsh message board under these circumstances. I'm sorry to point it out for everyone to see, but for the purposes of free and accurate discussion I felt it was necessary.

KTHNXBI

It's because dairy and meat give runners the trots...