Fish is very beneficial to the brain. If you like it, eat it without any guilt. I love both chicken and fish and I find it suits me the best. I have a harder time digesting red meats so I limit to a nibble here and there. Eat what you feel is right for YOU.
2007-12-21 20:51:11
·
answer #1
·
answered by Margastar 6
·
3⤊
2⤋
I'd have to agree with Ms. Drusilla ... The research was done in 1980. A lot has changed in India since then. Make sure you alway check for the most current data on any subject.
Also, you can't be sure the methodology used produced statisticaly valid results. Personally, and I'm not a statistician, but from my travels to India, I can see how a number of religio-socio-economic factors could skew the results.
Just stick with the white meats remembering that you don't need much. You might want to research flexitarian diets in the Journal of Applied Nutrition. Set your search parameters to the past 4 years.
2007-12-21 22:59:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by FlexiVegan 2
·
3⤊
2⤋
Firstly, protein isn't even really that large a percentage of average daily requirements for a healthy diet. Most people require less than 10g/day and you can get that in a glass of soy milk and a handful of nuts.
Secondly, there are so many plant sources of protein that it's ridiculous to automatically assume that a meat free diet is going to be low in protein.
Lastly-any diet can be deficient in nutrients-most of the omnivores I know eat terrible diets and have very poor health.
2007-12-21 20:59:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by barbara 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
in the adventure that your weight loss plan is correct balanced mutually as a vegetarian, then you would be healthy. there is not something in meat that would not be won from a vegetarian source. Is having protein greater effectual? there is protein in a vegetarian weight loss plan. Protein is in very very nearly each and every nutrients, so until eventually you're ravenous your self, you need to be getting sufficient protein. you need to make the alternative for your self. the main to any healthy weight loss plan is stability. you need to get the right quantities of nutrients, climate you devour meat or not. while you're ingesting a balanced vegetarian weight loss plan, than you mustn't be lacking something, and there is not any reason to devour meat in case you do not want to. even although, in case you want to devour meat, than that's your decision.
2016-10-02 05:58:33
·
answer #4
·
answered by doble 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
First, I wouldn't base your nutritional choices on a study done nearly thirty years ago, when India was still a third world country. That's doing your body a disservice. If you're going to do your own primary research, try reading recent nutritional journals.
Now, if you are trying to limit your meat consumption, just do what most people do - stick with white meats and fish.
2007-12-21 15:34:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by drusillaslittleboot 6
·
7⤊
0⤋
you are an adult so you pretty much can figure out which foods to eat and in what proportion. Even grilled lean beef is healthier than skin on deep fried chicken. Some fish like tuna are very high in fat (though the good kind). About 20% of total dietary intake seems to be the acceptable healthy standard fo meat consumption. And is definetley healtheir than a "strict vegetarian" diet that is unbalanced (malnutrition refers to both inadequate AND/OR over consumption of important nutrients). Keep in mind that even in this forum, many "strict vegetarians" admit to being oveerwegiht despite years of "strict vegetarian" diets.
I wouldn't base any diet on India, a country with one of the lowest male life expectancies and one ofthe highest infant mortality rates in the world.
2007-12-22 02:14:21
·
answer #6
·
answered by exsft 7
·
0⤊
3⤋
I wouldn't discount vegetarianism based on two studies conducted by the same author in the early 1980s. More recent research shows that strict vegetarianism helps to prevent serious health conditions such as cancer, heart disease, and diabetes.
In 2003, the American Dietetic Association (one of the leading nutrition and health experts in the U.S.) stated: "...appropriately planned vegetarian diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate and provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases.... Vegetarians have been reported to have lower body mass indices than nonvegetarians, as well as lower rates of death from ischemic heart disease; vegetarians also show lower blood cholesterol levels; lower blood pressure; and lower rates of hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and prostate and colon cancer."
2007-12-21 19:41:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by Julie 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
Hmm, then don't eat a diet that is "very high in carbohydrates and low in protein and fat".
It shouldn't be that hard for a functioning adult to figure this out.
If you start taking nutritional advice in regards to vegetarian diets from a common South Indian person, I don't think that you can be helped.
2007-12-21 17:14:09
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋
Wow, what a slimy little liar you are. When you ask a question, why don't you provide proper facts?
1. The average lifespan of an Indian is 62, which although not high, is typical, even slightly above average for that expected from a developing country with 35% below the poverty line.
2. The Indian diet is not low in fat or calories. It IS high in refined starches, especially in the south. The North consumes more whole grains like whole wheat flour. Both regions consume a fair bit of dairy fat.
3. My Indian friends tell me that vegetable and fruit consumption per capita is not significantly higher than it is in Canada (go back to point #1). (EDIT: The WHO statistics show that developed nations consume far more fruits/veggies).
4. I hope you know that excess consumption of full fat dairy products is even worse for cardiovascular health than meat.
There are some who do eat healthy, balanced vegan diets with fruits, veggies, beans and only whole grains, and they live long life spans.
To others who are interested - check this out:
India/United States
% male smokers 42/24
per capita veg and fruit consumption(lbs/yr) 192/705
http://www.who.int/nutrition/topics/3_foodconsumption/en/index5.html
http://postharvest.ucdavis.edu/datastorefiles/234-66.pdf
The data speaks for itself.
2007-12-21 17:39:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
7⤊
5⤋
0% of white meet is needed in a diet to stay healthy and there is no reliable evidence that you need it and can not get everything from them from vegetable sources.
To know if you are doing yourself dreadful physical harm is imposible to know always. all that fish will be giveing you a unhealthy amount of mercury probably aswell as a few other toxins.
Go by how you feal and see a doctor reguarly and get some bloods done they will be able to look and see if your levels are in the correct range to be "healthy"
Look into a newer paper there are plenty out there preferbly one comparing 'westerners' if you are from a so called weastern country. There are slight difences in genetics between races.
Flexitarians rearly should not fall themself vegetarian at all. You are not a flexitarian vegetarian you are just a flexitarian. if you want to use the word vegetarian in the discribtion of what you call yourself a more acuate would be fake vegatarian or semi vegatarian although i would argue there is no such thing
2007-12-21 15:53:53
·
answer #10
·
answered by PJsmith 4
·
7⤊
6⤋