Plant based diet good for skiing?

[So_I_Ski]

@Luzz so you're suggesting that vegetables are somehow NOT good for our bodies?? Now that's one that I have never heard before. As for the "evidence of striking damage that a vegan diet does during early developmental years", please back up that alarming statement with a link to an scientifically peer reviewed article.

 

@jayski, this discussion started by asking if a plant based diet was a good choice so with regard to meeting the needs of all of society that's a completely different discussion although it warrants mentioning that the land currently being used and subsidized in the US for the production of corn and soy for cattle feed, if converted to vegetables and fruit, could apparently feed the entire planet.

 

As for most of the people on this forum, if they can afford to participate in this rather expensive pastime, I would guess that they could also easily afford to buy locally raised organic fruits and veggies or perhaps even grow some food on their own property if they simply replaced their grass with a garden. I chose to do that 14 years ago rather than waste all the water on grass so I have a nice big garden that is 25' x 90'. Most people wouldn't believe what a real garden grown tomato actually tastes like.

 

 

[ski6jones]

@So_I_Ski Did you watch video at the link @Luzz posted? Plenty of well documented rebuttals there.

[Luzz]

@So_I_Ski I have never suggested that. I am suggesting that a vegan diet has nutritional deficiencies like a carnivore diet does, and that a balanced omnivore diet makes it far less likely to have such deficiencies. Now, what "balanced" is could be argued for ages, depends on a lot of factors, and I am not a nutrition expert, so I won't expand on the point.

In terms of vegan diets for kids, admittedly, the evidence I had in mind is more in the form of news about malnourished kids on vegan diets, such as this one.

To my surprise, there is a lack of studies on vegan diets in children, primarily observational studies, with no meta-analyses or systematic reviews on the topic. You could make the argument that this is enough to advise against it, but if that wasn't enough, several groups (example and example) are suggesting that the nutritional deficiencies of a vegan diet are evident. To me, that is enough evidence. IMHO, supplementation should be in place when diet does not make it realistic or possible to obtain the necessary macro and micronutrients. If I have to give supplements to my child because of a restricting diet I am imposing on him/her, then the diet is wrong.

[So_I_Ski]

@ski6jones no I did not for a couple of reasons. I started to watch it but noticed that it was almost 3 hours long. Then I looked up his bio and found out that he is an "acupuncturist". So he simply does not have the background as a researcher. I won't listen to someone that has not conducted the research themselves because I don't know where they got their information and who has funded the research. Furthermore Kresser is promoting the paleo diet for personal gain.

 

Unless you are the person actually conducting the research in the final analysis it comes down to who you believe when there are so many contradicting opinions particularly when it comes to diet. For that answer we should all have our own criteria to follow. I won't bore you with my whole list other than to say some of my most important are their qualifications as a researcher, who is funding their research, how do they stand to gain financially from what they are promoting and how credible do they appear to be.

 

Now, I will ask you if you have watched Forks over Knives. In a nutshell the two authors did not set out to promote a particular diet. They were both interested in determining the causes of illness. Campbell is an American biochemist and Professor Emeritus of Nutritional Biochemistry at Cornell University who specializes in the effect of nutrition on long-term health. His China Study is regarded as the single most comprehensive study ever undertaken. Dr. Esselstyn is an American heart surgeon. Both of these gentlemen had successful careers and were nearing retirement when they collaborated on their research that they had begun independently. So one could surmise that they weren't in it for the money and they certainly weren't being funded by some giant vegetable producers conglomerate if one even exists in the US. Lastly, I found them both to be extremely credible father figures simply presenting their findings. If you watched that entire interview by Joe Rogan you owe it to yourself to watch Forks Over Knives and the sequel which is Plant Pure Nation.

[skispray]

Everyone that thinks their opinion is informed but also has not read The China Study is fooling themselves.

[ski6jones]

@So_I_Ski I don't really have a dog in this fight, rather was pointing out that Luzz had already provided extensive support for his position. That you decided it was not valid without even watching says a lot. Here is a time saving synopsis of the video including an extensive list of peer reviewed references. Here is a peer reviewed article supporting Luzz statement (taken from the above link).

[jayski]

American Institute for Cancer Research's take on Diet and The China Study and Forks over Knives

 

https://www.aicr.org/about/advocacy/the-china-study.html

[skispray]

@ski6jones thanks. I watched The Game changers and I’m not sure it’s going to be helpful to veganism. It’s certainly brought awareness but it seems to be more pompous than most other claims about veganism.

 

The nutrition researchers that @So_I_Ski mentions advocate for a Whole Foods, plant based diet on the grounds that it is the best diet for promoting overall health and reducing the risk of chronic diseases, like heart disease, diabetes, and some cancers. They have mountains of peer-reviewed medical research to back this up. The results come from the lab as well as the field, have been demonstrated to be repeatable, and as far as I can tell their opinions and their research is not controversial within the nutrition research community.

 

However, the Game changers makes a bolder claim than I have seen made elsewhere, which is that a plant based diet is the optimal diet for optimizing athletic performance. That is a very different claim than the one I believe is made in works like The China Study and Forks Over Knives. It also seems to be the one that Kresser is disputing. I haven’t seen evidence that a vegan diet is superior to other diets for athletic performance, but we are seeing more anecdotal evidence that it at least may not be detrimental. That being said, for most of us it makes sense to eat a diet that is optimal for long-term health and find other ways to optimize athletic performance.

[thager]

Oh Lordy. Is it spring yet?

[skiboyny]

Any diet that can not supply the proper caloric intake and reasonable macro split on a daily basis forever is useless. Not everyone can follow Keto or vegetarians. It takes a big commitment and frankly both are slightly outside the box of American culture. If you can, you will get good and healthy results. What is most healthy is finding out the "correct" way to eat and maintaining it forever. That means you will have to be able to enjoy what you eat and fit it in to all of your life situations. That will be the best and most healthy for You.

[So_I_Ski]

@ski6jones, you may not have a dog in the fight but you certainly have developed quite a liking for Luzz's dog. I'll make you a perfectly fair deal. You watch Forks Over Knives as well as Plant Pure Nation and I will watch Joe Rogan's entire interview even though my stated reasons for not watching it still hold.

 

As for @Luzz, that article that was the basis for your statement " the striking damage that a vegan diet does during early developmental years," was pure tabloid and you really should not be referencing it in a meaningful discussion but you sound like a smart man so I think you know that.

 

Personally and just for the record I am not a vegan. For that matter I am not even a strict vegetarian. But I do believe objectively that choosing a whole food plant based diet or moving towards that objective is the healthiest approach to dramatically reduce susceptibility to disease and illness.

 

Because of the pesticides used to grow the feed for animals, and the hormones, steroids and antibiotics administered to super size them in record time frames, to believe that consuming them daily is good for your health is truly wishful thinking. Unless you have access to organically raised beef, chicken, pork and dairy products you are playing Russian roulette.

 

[NikolG]

Highly recommend Game Changers.

[mmskiboat]

I will add this book and research that I found interesting when I was looking for a better way to eat. The interesting point I found was this "Select ingredients among those discussed in this book that your ancestors would have eaten." so one diet is not ideal for all people.

 

The clinically tested diet program, based on decades of research, to fight disease, maintain an ideal weight, and live a longer and healthier life.

https://valterlongo.com/the-longevity-diet/

 

Coles Notes:

Longevity Diet for Adults

Eat mostly vegan, plus a little fish, limiting meals with fish to a maximum of two or three per week. Choose fish, crustaceans, and mollusks with a high omega-3, omega-6, and vitamin B12 content (salmon, anchovies, sardines, cod, sea bream, trout, clams, shrimp. Pay attention to the quality of the fish, choosing those with low levels of mercury.

If you are below the age of 65, keep protein intake low (0.31 to 0.36 grams per pound of body weight). That comes to 40 to 47 grams of proteins per day for a person weighing 130 pounds, and 60 to 70 grams of protein per day for someone weighing 200 to 220 pounds. Over age 65, you should slightly increase protein intake but also increase consumption of fish, eggs, white meat, and products derived from goats and sheep to preserve muscle mass. Consume beans, chickpeas, green peas, and other legumes as your main source of protein.

Minimize saturated fats from animal and vegetable sources (meat, cheese) and sugar, and maximize good fats and complex carbs. Eat whole grains and high quantities of vegetables (tomatoes, broccoli, carrots, legumes, etc.) with generous amounts of olive oil (3 tablespoons per day) and nuts (1 ounce per day).

Follow a diet with high vitamin and mineral content, supplemented with a multivitamin buffer every three days.

Select ingredients among those discussed in this book that your ancestors would have eaten.

Based on your weight, age, and abdominal circumference, decide whether to have two or three meals per day. If you are overweight or tend to gain weight easily, consume two meals a day: breakfast and either lunch or dinner, plus two low-sugar (less than 5 grams) snacks with fewer than 100 calories each. If you are already at a normal weight, or if you tend to lose weight easily or are over 65 and of normal weight, eat three meals a day and one low-sugar (less than 3 to 5 grams) snack with fewer than 100 calories.

Confine all eating to within a twelve-hour period; for example, start after 8 a.m. and end before 8 p.m. Don’t eat anything within three to four hours of bedtime.

 

 

 

[6balls]

Or you could exercise regularly and consume in moderation the things that you enjoy. Have some meat, some fish, some veggies, some eggs, some fruit...maybe even a beer or two.

Life is short, you only live once, your physicality in life is mostly front-loaded...live accordingly.

3 preventable self-induced problems drive the majority of disease; obesity, tobacco, alcohol.

[PUoldmaid]

Are we training for the Pan-Ams here? Eat some meat and hit a ramp after M3 - it’s good for you.

[braindamage]

I subscribe to a few axioms:

 

1) everything in moderation, including moderation. There is a time to feast and a time to fast.

2) don’t eat it unless your great grandparents would recognize it as food.

3) Eat according to the “calorie to fun” ratio.

4) exercise regularly to build muscle, heart strength, and ability to process H2O.

5) stay within +/-10% of your “ideal” body weight. Weigh yourself every day and adjust accordingly.

6) Don’t do stupid things that are highly likely to kill you. (Smoking, playing on train tracks, etc)

7) everyone is different. What works for me might not work for others.

 

Lastly, while going to coffee a few weeks back my friend yelled (in a positive way)the following as I was approaching the door:

 

Love More

Eat Better

Move More

Stress Less

 

I think these are all good principles.

[ozski]

Forks over knives is certainly worth warching.

[wilecoyote]

I haven't see the game changers, but I did watch forks over knives a ways back. I'm afraid I'd have to watch it again to give specifics, but several times the movie misrepresented what studies actually said, and drew conclusions to support the thesis of the movie that should not have been drawn based on the data. The one that does spring to mind is the casein study in rats that grossly misrepresented the takeaway for the dangers of consuming all milk products. There appeared to be some good content in the movie, but frankly, once I catch a film maker pulling these kind of manipulations to make a point, I throw away the whole thing. It is clearly an agenda based production (to be fair most docs are) and I would caution anyone taking the claims made at face value.

[ToddF]

Food and diet is one topic where everyone has an opinion and they don't mind telling everyone else how right they are, and how wrong everyone else is.

 

This is one of the fun "there is too much ice on top of the water to ski" topics.

[So_I_Ski]

@wilecoyote, I would respectfully suggest that you watch that section again on the study conducted by Campbell regarding the casein study in rats. I just did and that section is very brief. It can be found between 24:48 and 26:30. It clearly does NOT misrepresent the dangers of consuming ALL milk products. Like the ethical scientist that he is, Campbell merely states what his research found which is that in rats he could literally turn cancer on and off by varying the amount of CASEIN (the protein component in milk products) the rats were fed between 5 and 20 percent of their diet. He even varied the diet of the rats over 3 week intervals and found that at 20 percent, tumor growth exploded but at 5 percent not only was there no cancer growth but a there was a reduction in tumor size.

 

There is NO statement that grossly misrepresents the dangers of HUMANS consuming ALL milk products. The listener is left to draw his own conclusions from a scientific finding. On the other hand, your statement clearly misrepresents what is accurately conveyed in the movie.

[skispray]

@Luzz

 

In case you want a different take on the Joe Rogan/Chris Kresser podcast:

 

 

[So_I_Ski]

@skispray, thanks for posting this evisceration of Kresser, the "acupuncturist". As I noted earlier, if you don't get your information directly from the horse's mouth, which in this case is the scientist / researcher, then you risk putting too much credence in the validity of the claims without knowing who is really behind them. Mike does an excellent job of exposing how the corporate food industry is behind many of the questionable studies referenced by Kresser.

[wilecoyote]

Fair enough, but casein is a large component of all milk products, and the movie is about using a plant based diet to combat disease. Watching this scene, one could be excused for drawing the conclusion that milk promotes cancer. It certainly left that impression with me, so much so that I read a couple of papers on the topic of casein and cancer. And what I found was that it wasn't something I really needed to concern myself with as there was no real convincing evidence to the point. As for Campbell being an "ethical scientist" I'm sorry but that too is in question. What is not presented in the movie that comes from Campbell's rat study is that the high casein( HP) population actually lived longer than the low casein(LP) rats. The LP group developed liver disease that wasn't cancer and it killed them. In all, 30 of the HP rats lived for more than a year and and only 12 of the LP rats survived past a year. If only that part of the study had been presented the conclusion would be very different. Since it was his study, the omission of this fact, in this context, disqualifies him as a scientist, let alone an ethical one.

[So_I_Ski]

@wilecoyote, so just as I asked Luzz, what is the source for your claim about the rats dying from liver disease? Please provide.

 

Regardless, there is a problem with your argument. Since we know that milk is not normally a part of a rat's diet, by feeding them casein all that has been proven is that it kills them one way or the other. Low amounts of casein kills them because they develop liver disease faster than they develop cancer. In part, likely because they weren't getting enough protein from any other source such as something they would naturally consume. However, on a high casein diet, their livers continued to function long enough for the cancer to kill them. I don't see this as a good news story in either case.

 

One might easily conclude the answer is to simply not consume casein. After all, why are humans consuming milk, a supercharged growth food, designed to add weight and strength to a calf in a shortened time frame? We're not cows and our nutrient needs are drastically different from theirs.

[thager]

I'm right. You're wrong. Blah...blah...blah. Boring! Just give the damn veggies to the dog.

[Jetsetr]

My dog won’t eat them.....

[ozski]

Yeah I don't agree that its a boring conversation but people have to live with their own choices so I'm glad this topic has surfaced here for debate. At the pointy end of most sports competitors are looking for an edge so I think you should be open to testing things, if it works for you then great if not then move on. To me the case for the plants as presented looks solid so going meat free is a bit of a no brainer, so far so good. To each their own and good luck to them, if you ever spot a vegan at a BBQ don't be afraid to approach and say hello, the ones I know don't bite.

[skispray]

@wilecoyote either Campbell is a massive, massive fraud that could easily be fact-checked and yet is still esteemed in his field or you might have gotten the results backwards. Here’s Campbell:

 

“Rats generally live for about two years; thus the study was 100 weeks in length. All animals that were administered aflatoxin and fed the regular 20% levels of casein either were dead or near death from liver tumors at 100 weeks. All animals administered the same level of aflatoxin but fed the low 5% protein diet were alive and active.”

 

This is from pg. 52 of Campbell’s The China Study (2nd edition) and references the following published study:

 

Youngman LD, and Campbell, TC. Carcinogenesis (1992) (I’m omitting the studies name because it’s super wonky).

 

In other words, at least in the study I reference above, which sounds identical to the one you reference, what Campbell is reporting is the opposite of what you said.

 

 

[MuskokaKy]

Interesting off season topic that i enjoy reading the past few weeks.

 

Most Brain and Heart doctors i know and encounter through work have almost all recommended the "Mediterranean Diet". I'm not a diet expert by any means but I would be interested in hearing if anyone is either;

 

on the Mediterranean diet

or

they have a comparison to the vegan diet.

 

[Spineofgoo]

Long time reader first time poster,this plant based fad in my opinion is kind of knee jerk.Born and raised on a farm.Drank whole milk straight out of the tank,eggs,beef,lots of veggies.Went from milking them to cutting them,64 years old cycle,lift,run,ski,everyday.Was into body building in the 90s,the plant based diets seem to lack the essential amino acid profile needs in the long run.Just my 2 cents worth.

[wilecoyote]

@skispray, you're right, my mistake. The study I referenced was the one that was referenced in the movie which was done in Inda in '65. Campbell then reproduced that study in different iterations, and the one you quoted above (done in '92) contradicts what was in the Indian study (with respect to the lifespan of the rats). The LP rats in the Indian study appear to have been killed by their susceptibility to aflatoxin and when Campbell reproduced the study in '92 using a different rat model the LP rats didn't die.

 

I think it would be an egregious error to say that Campbell was a fraud, far from it, from what I've read, his work with the rat/cancer studies has produced a lot of quality data. What I said initially, was that the casein study as it was presented in the movie, by Campbell, was misleading. The inferred conclusion that consuming milk products, (and they even went so far as to extend this out to animal protein) promoted cancer was deeply flawed.

 

Again this is misleading.

 

There is a very good breakdown of that research here;

 

https://www.westonaprice.org/the-curious-case-of-campbells-rats-does-protein-deficiency-prevent-cancer/

 

Also interesting, casein cancer studies have been done in monkeys with more reasonable doses of aflotixin and these do not support the conclusions in the movie, they more or less contradict it. http://repository.ias.ac.in/24650/1/314.pdf

 

All that being said, I wasn't trying to promote or disparage one type of diet over another,and I certainly wasn't intending on a full swing debate on what kind of scientist Campbell is. I was simply trying to point out that I felt the movie was agenda based and misleading. The only example I could come up with off the top of my head was the casein study. Now, being forced to do a bunch of reading to support my claim, I've found all kinds of examples that others (Denise Minger for one) have dug up regarding the movie, not the least of which how Campbell's conclusions in the China study are not supported by his own data. Intentional or not, from what I've read, Campbell has included a lot of confirmation bias in his research, and I'll say it once more, the movie is agenda based and misleading.

[aspski]

For those of you who are vegan/plant based, what are your go to meals/what do you eat on a daily basis?

I love beef, chicken, fish, pork etc so I would never consider cutting it out of my diet completely, but I'm not opposed to reducing it a little bit.

[skispray]

@wilecoyote thanks for the links, I'll check them out. I'm definitely learning from this discussion as well.

[So_I_Ski]

@wilecoyote , all documentaries are "agenda based" in so far as they are attempting to inform. That is a given. The real question is: are the authors or researchers promoting a particular agenda because they stand to personally benefit monetarily? And or, why would they be intentionally misleading the public in their presentation? There are many people making documentaries that are truly just trying to help the public by presenting information or research that will be beneficial or by drawing attention to an injustice such as the literal theft or water rights by a company like Nestle.

 

As I stated earlier, I found both Esselstyn and Campbell to be highly credible and I could not conceive of any significant financial benefit that would induce them to be misleading in their research or their presentation. The same would apply to all of those interviewed in the movie and to the producer of the movie since it was clearly never made to play to a mass audience.

 

As for Denise Menger, again like Kessler, she simply does not have the credentials to challenge Campbell although he graciously acknowledges her contributions. She is not a researcher and is neither an MD or has a PhD. She is a blogger. Here is a point by point response to her criticisms from another MD.

http://proteinaholic.com/a-response-to-denise-minger-part-1/

[skispray]

@aspski I'm in the same boat as you - technically I'm not a vegan. When I cook at home I follow a whole foods, plant based (WFPB) diet and when I eat out I typically eat differently. Sometimes it's sometimes healthy meat options like a chicken burrito bowl without dairy, and sometimes there is no regard (e.g. pizza and burgers).

 

In regards to eating WFPB at home, I don't like tofu or vegan food that's meant to be 'fake' or 'replacement' meat. Here's some of the stuff I've found.

 

https://www.rawtillwhenever.com/better-than-chipotle-vegan-burrito/

 

https://buildyourbite.com/vegan-chickpea-stirfry-bowl/

 

https://minimalistbaker.com/1-pot-red-lentil-chili/#_a5y_p=5130998

 

https://www.foodandwine.com/recipes/cauliflower-potato-and-pea-curry

 

https://runningonrealfood.com/chickpea-veggie-burgers/

 

http://www.tabsandtidbits.com/slow-cooker-split-pea-soup/

 

https://runningonrealfood.com/kale-and-cauliflower-soup/

 

https://thekitchengirl.com/vegan-thai-coconut-vegetable-curry/

 

https://www.thegardengrazer.com/2013/07/vegetable-lo-mein.html

 

https://www.tasteloveandnourish.com/vegetable-jambalaya/

 

https://veganyackattack.com/2014/01/22/quinoa-cauliflower-bowl-with-almond-sriracha-sauce/

 

https://www.liveeatlearn.com/slow-cooker-cauliflower-soup/

 

https://www.thissavoryvegan.com/spicy-potato-kale-bowls-with-mustard-tahini-dressing/?fbclid=IwAR1SDNAqe85A-1encCCWLvWGaaLglcSufzufnkHCzGvysh6ye0sHz2yqCm0

 

https://minimalistbaker.com/sweet-potato-chickpea-buddha-bowl/#_a5y_p=4808791