There has been a recent row over not only the safety of a strict vegan diet for children but also the ethics of one.
Children who are denied meat, milk and cheese early in life suffer mental and physical impairments that can cause permanent damage, said Lindsay Allen, Professor of International Nutrition at the University of California, Davis. .....
She was particularly critical of vegans who refuse to feed their children eggs and dairy products. “There’s absolutely no question that it’s unethical for parents to bring up their children as strict vegans,” she said.

link

Do you feel the enforcement by a parent of a vegan diet for a child is unethical?

I'm pretty sure that homo sapiens fall into the category known as omnivores. Omnivores eat both meat and vegetation.

This is obvious from our teeth and jaw structure. Herbivores, for example, do not have canine teeth.

The conclusion here is that humans require nutrients from both plants and animals.

For children on vegan diets, many nutrients are often lacking. It would take very careful planning for a child to be raised on a vegan diet.

Vegetarianism



Intentionally subjecting your children to malnutrition is unethical. The vegan diet, unless very carefully planned, will result in malnutrition.

In my opinion, parents should encourage children to have the healthiest diet possible. I don't know if a vegan diet does any harm, but if it's unhealthy then parents shouldn't force their children to stick to it.

I think Allen's statement is much too strong. There is no question that raising a child on a strictly vegan diet is a special challenge, but it can be done without risking the health of the child. Here's a long article by a professional dietician with a lot of hard facts behind it. (Take a look at the references at the end of the article.) Yes, this article is from a vegetarian organization, but I think it's valid.

Vegan Children



The bottom line:



I'm not promoting a vegan diet for everybody; I'm a lactovegetarian myself, and I think it is possible to consume dairy products and eggs without causing harm to animals. However, I have a lot of respect for vegans, and I think that the vast majority of vegan parents are people who are very careful about nutrition for their children.

Victoria Silverwolf
But according to most current studies a strict vegan diet is not safe...especially so for young children say under the age of 5. And the studies now claim that the damaged caused is irreversible.
Studies in the US and the Netherlands have also shown that a vegetarian or vegan diet holds back children’s development, and that the damage cannot be redressed by restoring meat or dairy products after the age of 16.
The only means to make a Vegan diet naturally sustaining and healthy is to take artificial supplements...like B12.
I feel that any parent that would adhere to such a strict diet for their child knowing what the risks are is in fact being neglectful..I do feel it is unethical.

I dont have the time to research this right now, but I wanted to say that Im with Victoria. A child with a vegan diet can be healthy.

Also, I take issue about Bucket's assertion that a vegan diet especially harms children under 5. What percentage of these children are fed with formula? Its recommended that we nurse children about 2-3 years (I read that in a book called Beyong Political Correctness), as breastmilk contains all the nutrients a healthy child needs while growing. So if one were to follow that procedure, a vegan diet would be of little issue until the child is about 4. After that I feel its totally unnatural to feed a child milk, what other mammal keeps drinking milk after being weaned? And from another animal, no less? And after that I think that if parents pay attention, they can raise a healthy child with a vegan diet.

How can it possibly be healthy to ingest all the chemicals that go into producing milk and meat? Why is it ethical to risk giving our children E. Coli, but its "unethical" to give them a vegan diet?

Well, if it is unhealthy for children under a certain age to follow a vegan diet, then it is unethical to force or let them follow one.

If it is not, then parents are responsible for teaching children morality and ethical behaviour. Therefore vegan parents who strongly believe in veganism should try their best to raise their children following their lifestyle, just as anyone would try to raise their children according to their own morality or ethical beliefs.

BTW am I using morality and ethics correctly? I remeber having the difference explained to me once, but I've forgotten!

This looks like one of those cases where nature and morality clash. It happens, but IMO in the case of children, the demands of nature (i.e. what they need to be healthy) outweighs the demands of morality. When they become adults, then they can choose.

In a way, it is similar to the refusal of Jehovah's witnesses to accept blood transfusions. Well and good for an adult, but should this refusal extend to minors who have been raised as Jehovah's witnesses?

I think that, to be more precise, is a WESTERN vegan diet okay for a kid? There are whole cultures that have vegan diets, some more or less strict than others- but they seem, when allowed access to all foodstuff (you know, when there is no famine or tsunami) do just fine.

During my own flirtation with Veganism, while being a back-packer round the world type, I noticed a distinct difference between the diet of say, a Hindu, and a German. I think the fact that the Hindus, and thier various sects with thier various strictures ON thier diet, have been doing it so long that they might have worked out some of the bugs (well okay, they don't eat bugs either! )

It is very fashionable these days to make broad pronouncement on different diets "don't eat carbs" "hey, that dont' eat carbs diet will kill you" etc, that it is very hard to make an informed decision. There is SOOOO much money in diet these days!

I think the pronouncement and links provided by bucket are dealing in a bit of hyperbole- though I also think it takes careful menu planning and shopping to have a healthy diet of veganism for the infant-toddler. It also depends on how long the mother breast feeds as well BTW- in many cultures, women breastfeed to nearly 4 or beyond - so a vegan diet is a supplement to the main diet for the child in those cultures!

Well it is not my assertion alone. Also B12 is not manufactured by the human body..so if the child is being nursed they still require for their mothers to obtain B12 from some source. What a mother eats and her diet when she is nursing is SO IMPORTANT. I have known women who oppose eating meat on moral grounds who have reluctantly made themselves eat meat while pregnant or nursing because the health of their baby is far more important to them. It said in another article I read on the matter.....He admitted that a vegan diet for children under the age of five might pose a risk of malnutrition if there was too much reliance on vegetables
link
The assumption here by those in support of such a strict diet for such a young and terribly vulnerable child is that the parents are somehow all knowing in nutrition and are being very careful and monitoring the very real deficiencies a diet like this has. I don't believe that at all.

Also by age two a nursing child is not reliant nor wishes to be reliant on breast milk alone.

There are organic milk and meat products readily available.

I believe vegan diet is nothing new. Many Hindus have been practicing it for thousands of years. There are a couple Hindu families I know quite well. Neither they or their children have any deficiencies that I can recognize. My guess is over thousands of years Hindus have developed a healthy diet that excludes meat.

The fact is a large percentage of us could do with eating a lot less meat. I have to confess to a strong meat addiction that I must constantly battle to control. I am sure meat eating is one of the leading causes of premature heart disease. I am betting that the typical vegan child lives a healthier life than the average meat eating child. Darn my parents for introducing me to barbequed ribs!

The Hindu diet does not eliminate all dairy, to my knowledge. Even the Hare Krishnas use milk products in their food. Remember those commercials which tout the benefits of Hindu longevity due to yogurt? The Asian diet is very low in meat and dairy, but they eat fish and eggs (they obtain much of the calcium they need through small bones in very small fish). A diet that eliminates all dairy, eggs, and all types of meat (including fish) is extremely strict. I was a vegan, myself, for ten years (ages 16 through 26), so I know. I felt better when I relaxed the diet a bit...almost ironically, I stopped being a vegan when I went to Korea. This is the place I had always envisioned as having the most vegan-style diet. Compared to America, it does, but it isn't vegan...though comparatively very healthy.

I have mixed feelings on this issue. I had a friend who used to be extremely, almost militantly, vegan. She is now the mother of three and has completely relaxed her standards. Her first child was developmentally delayed and severely underweight for the first 3+ years of her life (in spite of breastfeeding). The pediatrician actually filed a legal intervention against the parents to modify the child's diet. The simple truth is, veganism is restrictive. An adult can do it healthily, but most children are relatively picky eaters. They can only eat so many combinations of rice and beans, and calcium-processed tofu, nuts and seeds. If the child can eat a varied enough diet, it can work, but it's difficult. If the child is not thriving, the parents should modify the diet. To not do so is irresponsible.

Yes, in the Zen Macrobiotic style of veganism- it is not about restriction but balance- the yin-yang of dieting! -

However, when in Australia, Indonesia there were a couple of Hindu guru type sects that were strict vegans- and thier children where healthy- perhaps this came from thier soy intake? Truly, I don't know.

I am not the best at this subject, I only tried it while traveling for about a year, because it was there and cheap, typically, I hunt my own food LOL

ALL diet is about balance in the end. Eating SOME chocolate cake is not bad for you, but having a strict diet of chocolate cake is not too good either LOL

I think, IMO, that a truly strict Vegan diet CAN be done "ethically" for children, but that it takes some very careful menu selection. To Mrs P and the rest of us raising children, isn't there enough to do in a day than plan meals for weeks at a time?

Hm, upon reading the article I find this whole thing even more suspect. While the Times article Bucket linked too only glanced over it, the BBC mentions that the children in the study were malnourished, and not only that, their diet consisted of "starchy, low-nutrition corn and bean staples lacking these micronutrients [b-12, zinc, iron]." I dont think this is really all that accurate of a portrayal of the vegan diet, since vegans tend to also eat vegetables and fruit (go figure). Also the BBC mentions that the study was funded by the National Cattleman's Beef Association. And I know that might not bother some people, but I definately suspect the motives behind the whole thing.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4282257.stm



Granted b-12 is not a vitamin that we can get from vegetables, but most commercial cereals are fortified with the vitamin, along with a few other products so I think the point is moot.



I would say that those who follow a vegan diet know more about nutrition than their meat-eating counterparts. You sort of have to, if you want to lead a healthy life. Im not vegan, Im vegetarian, but ever since I gave up meat, Ive had to pay attention to what kinds of food I eat and make sure Im getting the right things or else I'd end up anemic. And I would like to think that most parents, in general, are quite aware of what their children are eating. Why would it be any different for vegan parents? Do you think they are blind to the health risks of a vegan diet, after all these years?

this is an interesting study http://www.scienzavegetariana.it/rubriche/...nt_diet_en.html



and, while it talks about a vegetarian diet, it places more emphasis on plants http://www.pcrm.org/health/veginfo/veg_die...r_children.html

That's a really good link, kimpossible. Of course, raising kids only on corn and beans will stunt their growth. In other news...

...researchers have discovered that eating celery kills. After feeding rats only celery for months, the rats eventually died....

Now back to your regularly scheduled programming...

I don't think the point is moot at all. When I made my original comment or opinion on the debate known I did define that a strict vegan diet was what I had objections to. There are many varieties or forms of veganism..such as the Hallelujah diet or the live food / raw food movement. It is quite possible that many vegans do not even consume the "commercial cereals" you claim they do.
I found a very interesting article written about the dangerous and the very real problem of B12 deficiency in the vegan community written by a vegan no less. In it he says..
Consistent research over the last decade has shown that vegans and live food people of all ages and sexes have a much higher risk of becoming B-12 deficient. This does not mean that everyone becomes B-12 deficient. This deficiency is particularly true with newborn babies, especially babies of vegan live-food nursing mothers who are not using B-12 supplementation.
The Importance of B12
He goes on to site study after study in which some deficiencies in vegan groups being tested are as high as 92%
He also explains how many plant based foods much like spirulina or sea vegetables that were thought to be..and widely taught to be in the vegan community as sources of B12 are in fact not. Also that there are newer more accurate means of testing individuals for B12 deficiency and that it is possible that the accepted B12 level is set too low. He writes all of this in order to educate fellow vegans of the very real need for B12 supplementation.
So I disagree I think that many of those we would consider to be following a very strict form of a vegan diet do not supplement or eat many foods with added supplementation.


That is quite the assumption to make. Food is my life. I am a member of the slow food movement. I think it is ridiculous to assume that someone who eats milk, meat or eggs somehow cares less or does not take pride in or is less involved or conscience of how they nourish themselves or their family.


Yes although I would not say blind..perhaps ill informed or not aware. I think when you see data that on average shows that close to 80% of vegans are B-12 deficient that apparently the nutritional information they have is wrong or they are not taking the needed steps to ensure the safety of their food choices.

The information you provided which I don't understand how it is less tainted than the study you questioned earlier. Claimed... As you will see, with the exception of vitamin B12 and calcium, the intake of essential nutrients was similar or greater in the vegan children than those reared on mixed diets. I just don't understand how this is suppose to be reassuring..only "with the exception of B12." This is exactly the reason I am highlighting strict vegan diets..because of a B12 deficiency and your own data reinforces this concern.

I have seen some pretty strict vegetarians, though all but the absoluetly most strict would allow milk- or milk products, especially yogurt.

Don't you think that the pronouncment on the title of your source though implies that the vegan diet- NOT the "strict Vegan diet" you imply- or could be implied reading the story very closely?-

Malnourishing your kid is unethical, without a doubt- but a concentious parent could probably come pretty close to your "strict vegatarian" diet and raise a healthy child.

That granted, children who partake in Veganism have considerably higher IQ points than those not partaking in Veganism, the last fact sheet I read stated 1-5 points.

Bucket, your initial question asked whether or not a VEGAN diet was unethical.



I stated it was not, and provided information and now you're changing this into a "strict" vegan diet. How convienent. But what is a vegan diet, if not strict vegetarianism? How can you get any more strict than vegan?

I didnt say that there weren't any problems with a vegan diet. And yes, the studies I cited concluded that there was a lack of some vitamins and minerals. No one is saying that an improperly followed diet is healthy. Ive been saying that a vegan diet is ethical, if done properly . And studies back up my point that if properly monitered, vegan kids are healthy and perhaps healthier than their omnivirous counterparts. I dont see what youre not getting. My sources cite the exact opposite results of what yours did, so how is it confusing to you? And again, the study you are referring to is not actually a vegan diet, but a diet of starchy foods. How is this the same as my information? Mine talk about feeding kids fruits and vegetables, or are they part of the "strict" vegan diet youre against?




I dont think its ridiculous at all. Im not saying that everyone is like that, but Ive met FAR too many meat eaters that think meat is a staple in every meal, who dont want to hear about the health risks involved with meat (especially factory farmed), those who think that free range products are "too-expensive", who think its acceptable to make fun of my vegetarianism, who could never give up meat because it "tastes too good".

Im sorry but people who ignore the health risks of factory farming are people who dont care about nutrition. Not to mention obesity is rampant in our society, so I dont think its too grand of an assumption to say that most people dont care about nutrition.

With all of the pesticides being used, and hormone-injected meat I
wouldn't be so sure that anyone (aside from those who eat organically grown
vegetables and meats that are not hormone-treated) is getting proper nutrition.
In fact, most people simply are not. That's the truth. That is why heart disease,
diabetes and all the other famous illnesses are on the rise.

I'd be curious to learn what the average meat/dairy consumer is giving his
kids. What's the average day? It seems like the idea is that as long as the
child is eating meat and diary, he's going to be just fine (whether it's a
McDonald's Happy Meal or home-cooked beef roast).



kimpossible, I completely agree with you. It is so interesting the
amount of disdain people seem to have for vegetarians (never mind vegans).
It's unwarranted and unfair.

How often do most people eat raw vegetables and fruits? Never mind if they are
vegetarian or not? The real travesty is that we have become reliant on fast foods
and garbage as sustenance. When individuals take the time to inform
themselves about nutrition and what it really means to the body, they are
criticized by others who haven't taken the time to research what they are
talking about.

Many people do not know this: if you more than lighlty steam your
vegatables you destroy the vitamins and minerals you are trying to get in the
first place. If you cook your broccoli until it's limp and expect it will give you
a "serving's" worth of vitamins, you're mistaken. And, ingesting vegetables
that have been treated with pesticides (which is what the majority of
America does) defeats the whole purpose of eating vegetables in the first place.
You might as well spray a little ant killer on your food. Organically grown
produce costs a lot more than conventionally grown produce. Those who
understand the health risks associated with consuming products that have been
chemically treated will opt for the higher priced organically grown produce.
Most people aren't informed about it, so they buy the pretty looking tomatoes
that have been treated, and the organic ones (with gnats flying around them)
get chosen less often. Well, I've never heard of a gnat causing someone to
develop Parkinson's Disease.

There are health-conscious people who eat animal products. But, there are
more people out there who consider a hamburger and french fries to be a solid
nutritional meal. There is so much valuable information out there about nutrition
if people would take the time to research it. Two books filled with valuable
information: Survival into the 21 Century and Composition and Facts
About Foods.



I do not judge a person by the meat they eat (or don't eat), but I do feel very
strongly that most people are misled when it comes to nutrition, and I would also
say that many folks simply don't want to know the truth because then they would
have to give up their McDonald's Happy Meals and their diet cokes. The truth is a
person feels better when they put raw, fresh fruits and vegetables in their bodies,
as opposed to meats and processed foods.

"Is it child abuse to subject children to the health risks associated with the
consumption of highly processed foods?" That's what many parents do when
they opt for the drive-thru meals. It's also what they'll find on the shelves of the
average supermarket. Just look at the ingredients. If there are words you
don't understand, and if the ingredient list is the the length of newspaper article,
think twice about buying it.

I will agree. I have lately been trying to go a little more veggie and cut way down on the processed foods. For me white flower seems to really be the devil. In not eating as much of it and I have noticed a different feel to my day. However i couldn't give up meat.
Yes I do like the taste and definetly notice when I don't eat it.
As far as the veggies go, well I really don't enjoy them all that much. It just is not satisfying. I have found a few recipes that are alright but for the most part just do not like the taste of most vegatables. Eggplant makes me gag and I seem to be only able to tolerate beans, snap peas--well most peas--peppers and a few others. I can eat most vegatbles raw or at most lightly steamed--there is something just rancid about cooked veggies Sweet potatos of course--plain, no sugar or butter, But I would still live on mostly meat if I could. I have the most energy and vitality when i do. I avoid milk--lactose problems from hell. but do eat a lot of yogurt. A pleasant suprise has been hummis

In the case of my children we are trying to raise them with a healthier eating habit than we ever had. Minimal sugar--happily my son genuinely prefers apples and grapes to any sweets except for whipped cream. I would estimate half his dietary intake since he could take solid foods has been banannas--and his growth rate is phenominal--people don't believe he is only 2. Hello Hurricanes
My son was having problems with the formula we first tried and we tried soy at the urging of her veggie friends and my son was flat out miserable. Colicky and he smelled bad. We switched to enfamil with DHA and ARA and lactose free with as much breast milk as my wife could pump. BOOM the growth spurt was on. For the most part his only unhealthy food is chicken nuggets on Father Son Foolin Around Day and occasionally Alfredo--which is like tossin chum to sharks. Overall Happy healthy and very active--I doubt you could find a kid who laughs more than he does.

My daughter will be induced into this world tuesday morning and we will probably follow the same proceedure for her. Although we may try the soy again. A friend of ours has one of each and her experience with soy and her son mirrored our own--kid was miserable--but her daughter thrived on it. We'll see.


As for the vegan or vegetarian thing. As I mentioned my son is now growing at a rapid rate. He never had the chubby body fat I have seen on all other children but has almost been lean and muscular--as much muscle as small children have anyways. He doesn't eat meat except for the nuggets--and those are rare--once a month.
He doesn't really eat vegatables much and as mentioned eats LOTS of fruit and milk and yogurt.
so while not exactly a vegetarian he is doing very well so i don't think it could be a problem for children. My only real concern would be is it really fair for you to set your child up to not eat meat if they someday choose to/ I am under the understanding that once one goes without meat for a period of time one begins to not be able to digest it properly.

My Wife and i now shop at Sprouts. We try to stay away from pesticides and hormones and artificial sweeteners and colorings and etc...............
It is more expensive and harder on the budget at times. But even the small changes I have made in reducing my processed foods intake has been beneficial. I won't ever go vegetarian but have enjoyed the increase of what i do eat now--mostly uncooked.

First I should disclose that I'm a vegetarian (7 years), that I was vegan for about a year (in 2002ish) and that I stopped because it took up a lot of time. Currently, I've found a middleground by being vegan on wednesdays. It requires me to be conscious about what goes in my body without as much work.

That said, I think it is not unethical to raise children or tots (those <5ish) on a vegan diet. Since there are numerous examples of successful vegan diets for underaged children both in the United States and internationally we know it isn't necessarily dangerous. It is then an issue of variable methodology. I think this is true for most dietary considerations and in general unhealthy vs. healthy is a more helpful dichotomy than vegan vs meat eater.

Ms. Pigpen cited an example above where a pediatrician took legal action against someone who was unethically feeding their child which I absolutely support. I would also support similar actions against parents whose children are clinically obese.

As for the B-12 issue...there is a large variety of supplements that can easily be integrated into any diet.

For anyone who is curious I found this chart showing b12 intake per day for kiddies. (1000 µg = 1mg)

Age RNI
0 to 6 months ---- 0.3 µg
7 to 12 months --- 0.4 µg
1 to 3 yrs --------- 0.5 µg
4 to 6 yrs --------- 0.8 µg
7 to 10 yrs -------- 1.0 µg
11 to 14 yrs -------1.2 µg
15 + yrs ---------- 1.5 µg
Breast
feeding women ----2.0 µg

Also, news to me and maybe you too, RNI is recommended nutritional intake. It replaced RDA (recommended daily amount) and applies to the nutritional needs for around 97% of the population. src here.

---

I will join KimPossible in saying that veggies on average are probably more cognizant of what goes into their bodies. Bucket is obviously not an average example. The decision to become a veg is usally done with some sort of knowledge about the nastiness or dangers of eating meat and requires the breaking of a habit. Meat eaters are on average following a commonly socialized habit.


Only as aware as what they are themselves eating and based on the common American diet, that is not very much.

I have to say I think that enforcing a vegan diet on kids that are so young is not a good idea. I only rarely eat meat myself and my daughter did not eat meat before at least the age of 6. But she did eat alot of dairy and drank organic milk. I think "vegan" is much too difficult to follow in a way that kids get the nutrition they need. Also, with this study it sounds like the vegan diet will usually be harmful for kids. Kids are so picky with what they eat, I can't imagine restricting it to vegan and still being able to get the proper nutrients in them!

It is not convenience it is my opinion. The article and the woman quoted in the article seems to take issue or focus on veganism and even vegetarianism as a whole. This is how my opinion differs from hers. And I have also defined already to you what I considered a strict vegan diet..raw food/ live food...and I also feel these types of diets have become increasingly more popular over the years.

That was not the only information I have provided..did you read the last source I posted? Where it shows on avg 80% of vegans tested were B12 deficient?

Please anyone show us evidence that somehow states a B12 deficiency..especially in a young nursing child or pregnant woman ..is safer or less of a concern or even of equal danger as to the hormones used in some meats or dairy products..or the pesticides used on fruit and vegetables..because I am at a complete loss to why anybody would compare these risks as interchangeable.


And I have met plenty of vegetarians who have no idea about healthy eating too. Who eat mac n chz who don't by organics..who are overweight and are unhealthy and who really take no pleasure and have no concept of the pleasures food has to give. That is not an exclusive trait of omnivores.


First we don't eat Mcdonald's and because my kids have been raised with full knowledge of all foods and a great appreciation of food they don't even like Mcdonald's and would not eat it if it was offered.
I am an omnivore..that means I eat meat, milk, cheese, vegetables, fruit, nuts, legumes, grains...It does not mean you eat exclusively dairy and meat that is silly.


The truth is if a person is only to eat raw fruits and vegetables they will becomes B12 deficient. ..among other things. If that person is breast feeding a child then that child can become very very ill. Babies have even died as a result of taking this belief of what is "healthy" to the extreme.


If it is to the point where they deprive their child much needed vitamins or minerals where their child suffers permanent neurological damage then yes it is.

It is so sad to see this happen to children who are not living in Africa off of a diet of only corn mush but instead to children in a rich nation whose parent's own ideas on food and diet are so strict they malnourish their kids purposefully..not out of necessity but by choice.

I think it is important to educate people of this health concern..as even kimpossible who claims she is more knowledgable than most on nutrition said."Its recommended that we nurse children about 2-3 years (I read that in a book called Beyong Political Correctness), as breastmilk contains all the nutrients a healthy child needs while growing. So if one were to follow that procedure, a vegan diet would be of little issue until the child is about 4." And yet It is exactly this age that nursing children are most vulnerable to their parents diets and the harm these deficiencies of their diets cause.

Bucket, the point Im trying to make about your use of "strict vegan diet" and a "vegan diet" is that there is no difference. How does a vegan diet differ from a strict vegan diet? A vegan diet is already defined as a diet with NO animal products, ie no eggs, no meat, no milk, no cheese, etc. The only way that can become stricter (is that a word?) is if you stop eating honey and white sugar (and some vegans are that strict). Youre basically saying that you have an issue with a vegan diet.



Well if you're doing to say that, why not be all inclusive and say that a B-12 deficiency is a danger for all people and not just young children. But while it's an obvious concern when one chooses to go vegan, it's easy to remedy. While you might think that B-12 supplements are not enough, they are. From the aritcle you cited about B-12 (http://www.fredericpatenaude.com/b12.html):



Even non-vegan mothers are counselled to take B-12 supplements...Hmm....

Or what about this:



Bucket:


Actually the aritcle says that about 80% runs the risk of being deficient. The direct quote is:


Obviously, you're reading this differently than me. But Im not reading that 80% of vegans are B-12 deficient, but that they might one day, maybe...And guess what the author's solution is for all of this?



Again, no one is disputing that B-12 deficienies aren't a problem. But apparently it's a problem for everyone not just vegans. And vegans can live healthy lives as long as they pay attention to their diets. Gee...Just like Ive been saying. Even the article you provided says the same thing as the information I have previously provided: a vegan diet is healthy, but you have to take B-12 supplements, and watch your intake of other minerals (calcium, zinc and iron for instance). Are you suggesting that its unhealthy to take supplements?

And while I agree with you that B-12 deficiency is a health concern (for everyone according to youre own resources), I think that obesity and the "american" ideals of healthy eating are a bigger concern, but I dont see anyone starting threads about that. I guess its those evil vegans and their killer diets we really need to be watching out for.

I already defined this for you twice..this is now three times. I take issue with strict vegan diets like raw food live food diets. This is where the person will only eat food that has not been cooked or processed in any manner. So I must disagree with you again I think a vegan's diet can get a lot stricter then just avoiding meat, dairy, eggs, honey etc... They can just avoid cooking or processing their food entirely too.


Where did I say supplementation was not enough? I question whether many do in fact routinely supplement..and I doubt they do. The evidence seems to reinforce this. Also it has been proven that when a child who is so young and only has his mother's own supply of B12 to meet their needed amount that they will become B12 deficient very quickly as they do not have a stored amount of B12 like adults do. It is very difficult to diagnose such a young child as having this deficiency and the effects of such a deficiency on a child so young whose brain is in it's early stages of development are very damaging and are not easy to remedy.


Yes and most mainstream mothers take supplements when pregnant and breast feeding. Yet we are speaking of a group who feels that processing of food at any level is a danger or is unhealthy or toxic so somehow I think prenatal vitamins might be considered "bad" too.


Well look at my direct quote too then please..I said..Where it shows on avg 80% of vegans tested were B12 deficient?
I averaged the test results of the studies he quoted..one group was at 92%, one was at 81% and another was at 66%..averaged that is 79.666% I assumed this is where the man who authored the article also got the magic number 80%


Right apparently people with crohn's disease or who have had chemotherapy or elderly people who sustain themselves on tea and toast are also..along with vegans..high risk groups for B12 deficiency.
Again I perfectly understand that this is a non-issue if you supplement I just don't believe that many do regularly or are aware that many plant sources they believe provide them with B12 in fact do not. I said all of this already. You seem to be ignoring my actual argument and attempting to portray my debate as something it is not.
I feel that any "diet" that requires you to supplement so much in order to sustain your health might in fact not be all that healthy. I also feel that any person who wishes to eat this way and not take the precautions to ensure their diets deficiencies are addressed when they are pregnant or nursing is acting immorally.
I see plenty of information, articles, publications and concern for the great obesity epidemic. Even the government spends billions of dollars trying to better educate and inform the public about healthy eating. I think perhaps obese people are probably a far more common target of the health patrol in this country than vegans are.

Bucket, your original question asked if it was unethical to feed kids a vegan diet, end of story. You later defined your idea of a "vegan" diet, although what you think is a vegan diet and what actually is a vegan diet are a little different. Im not going to concede that a raw food diet is any more strict than a vegan diet, since cooking vegetables tends to destroy their nutrients. But Ill stop pestering you about it.

With all the supporting evidence, I have said quite a few times that a vegan diet is not unethical. The only reason you seem to have a problem with it, is because people could possibly, maybe, perhaps become deficient by following these diets (and some people have). You even agreed that its a non-issue when people take supplements. OK. I feel it's unfair to deem a whole diet unethical, simply because it runs a risk of a B-12 deficiency. As the evidence you provided shows, it seems that a B-12 deficiency isn't just a problem for vegans, but a problem for most people. So why are you singling out the vegan diet in particular? I guess that would be where I take issue with this. Its not just a vegan diet that is possibly unhealthy, but ALL diets vegan or not. Let's face it, most people don't know squat about nutrition. Or if they do, they ignore it.



I apologize for not understanding where you were getting your numbers from.



Er, not quite. Im not ignoring your argument, you keep changing it. At least that's the way it seems to me. In the beginning of the thread you said:



I could have been reading that wrong, and if I did, I apologize. But I take that to mean that you dont think that supplements are sufficient, and anyone who follows a diet that involves B-12 supplements is being "neglectful" and that it's "unethical", irregardless of whether or not they are following a healthy nutritious diet. But then later on, you say it's a "non-issue" if someone takes B-12 supplements....?

And also, from the above quote, I take it to mean that parents that decide take risks with a vegan diet are also "unethical", which infers that parents who decide to take risks with e.coli are not. Eating involves risks, having a child involves risks, etc. It seems silly to say that just because there are "risks" involved with something, that we shouldn't do them. And that is what Im gathering from what you've written. If I misinterpreted, then please, clarify.

And I agree that if a child is not responding to a vegan diet, then he should be taken off of it. No doubt, a vegan diet is not for everyone, and people react differently to different things. But I still say that a vegan diet is not unethical.

To consider:
1. When was the last time anybody here saw a human being stalk a wild animal, dig its sharp claws into its flesh, suck its blood, and eat the animal? I'm not sure if our stomachs would take this very well.
2. "A natural carnivore's bowel is relatively short (2-3 times the length of its torso) and smooth inside, a human's bowel is 12 times the length of the torso and deeply twisted and puckered. The carnivore has much stronger digestive acids. In the long convoluted human digestive tract, meat putrifies and becomes toxic to the body." http://planetaryrenewal.org/ipr/vegetarian.html
3. Meat becomes toxic to the body and causes the body's pH to become acidic, which is a precurser to disease and cell degeneration.
4. The risks of innumerable cancers are reduced to very small numbers without the entry of animal products in the human body (prostate, cervix, breast, many more).
5. "Over a hundred million of tons of grain go to animals while only 5 million tons of grain could adequately feed the 15 million children throughout the world who starve to death every year." http://planetaryrenewal.org/ipr/vegetarian.html
6. Innumerable moral reasons.
7. Find one non-animal food that contains cholesterol.
8. Animal foods are often high in saturated fat.
9. Compare the protein that a meat-eater receives to the amount that a nutritionist actually recommends (search around for a good amount). It's all too often, especially for meat-eaters, much too much. And for vegans/vegetarians, watch your soy intake and research that, too. Keep in mind that there was tons of lobbying by companies, and with that, tons of reasoned opposition to the newly added "25 grams of soy may blah blah blah..." on food labels.
10. Look for yourself, theres lots of reasons to be a vegetarian.
I will not reveal my own diet preference.

I'm going to have take these on out of order.
That's all well and good, but nobody has ever contested that Homo sapiens is not a carnivore, but rather, an omnivore. Because we don't exclusively eat meat, we need a different gastro-intestinal system from carnivores. We've also evolved to use tools to compensate for the lack of carnivore characteristics; we've substituted net, trap, knife, spear and bow (and later, gun) for tooth, fang and claw, and we've developed cooking techniques to deal with pathogens and make meat more digestible. Our ancestors didn't do this on a whim; they did it because they had to. Which brings me to:On the other hand, if you limited your diet to plants which were entirely natural, you wouldn't get anywhere near enough protein. Sure, certain cereals and legumes provide those nutrients which could otherwise only be derived from meat, but those are the results of generations of selective breeding by humans. Specifically by humans who, having adopted a sedentary, agriculture-based lifestyle rather than a nomadic, hunter-gatherer/herdsman one, needed to compensate for the lack of meat in their diet.
Nevertheless, "sufficient" does not equate to "ideal." At Gallipolli, the Turks were struck by the physical difference between the scrawny British troops, raised on diets with comparatively little meat, and the large, fit Australians and New Zealanders, raised on diets rich in beef and/or mutton.
And what do you mean by "search around for a good amount"? What is "a good amount"? An amount which most closely supports your argument? That shouldn't be too difficult; in my experience, you can find a nutritionist who will support just about any theory you have.
Isn't is amazing? A million years of human evolution, during all of which the lack of meat in the diet was practically an identifying characteristic of those not long for this world, and now it we're supposed to believe that meat is actually toxic to humans? This is too silly for words.
Yes, farming meat is a resource-intensive business. It has nothing to do, however, with depriving the developed world of the food its inhabitants require, as that (dubious) statistic rather shoddily implies. North America and western Europe alone produce significantly more grain than they need to feed their populations and their livestock. Five million tons of grain? French excess production alone probably covers that (France produces well over 600 million tons a year). The problem is that that grain is in France, not in Africa, and it would take a fair amount of effort and resources to ship it to where it was needed (especially if there were no storage facilities on-site, thus necessitating timed multiple deliveries).
Then there's the issue of cultural preferences. During the Vietnam war, USAID shipped massive amounts of bulgur wheat as food aid to South Vietnam. Bulgur wheat's brilliant stuff, with one of the highest protein contents found in a vegetable. Problem was, the Vietnamese didn't like it. They preferred rice, and disdained the bulgur, which usually ended up being dumped somewhere to rot, or in the hands of Communist troops, who could afford to be picky even less than the Vietnamese peasant.
"Innumerable"? Name five, and more specifically, name five with universal appeal.
The website you linked to earlier claims at the top of the page that "There was no slaughterhouse in the Garden of Eden..." For atheists such as myself, who do not believe the Garden of Eden actually existed, this is not exactly a compelling argument. Even for believers, it's obvious the Garden of Eden was a divinely operated place where normal Earthly rules don't apply. Let's face it, in real life, the only way the lion would lay down with the lamb was if the lion had recently eaten a hearty meal. And was, perhaps, keeping the lamb around as a snack for later.

Look, if being vegetarian works for you, more power to ya, but start pulling "moral superiority" rubbish and I'm going to have to call in Ted Nugent.

Erm, topic? Ah yes:
Do you feel the enforcement by a parent of a vegan diet for a child is unethical?
Not necessarily, but I think it takes an inordinate amount of caution to avoid inflicting malnutrition on the child. Despite all the assertions in this thread that vegans are more likely to understand human nutritional requirements, we still have types like Silva and Joseph Swinton, who were so vegan they considered breast milk to be an animal product and withheld it from their newborn baby. In New Zealand in 2002, Deborah and Roby Jan Moorhead, both vegans, each received five years for manslaughter after their baby died; the baby had received breast feeding, but the milk lacked vitamin B12 as a result of the mother's vegan diet. The Moorheads had tried to correct the problem by resorting to alternative medicine. Similarly, in 2000, Areni Manuelyan, daughter of Garabet and Hazmik Manuelyan of Staines, Surrey (UK), died of a chest infection brought on by malnutrition because her mother's breast milk lacked necessary nutrients. The Manuelyans were raw foodists. (The judge did not impose a prison sentence, arguing that "You have been punished and will continue to be punished by the consequences of your actions." The Manuelyans' other two children were taken into care.)

Now, I appreciate that these are exceptional cases--three court cases in as many years, literally worldwide, is hardly something to get overly concerned about--but they do occur, and clearly, vegans cannot afford to be complacent about the risks of attempting to nurture an infant on a vegan diet.

Just to add a bit to your excellent post here. Comparisons like this are often made between the digestive tracts of carnivores and humans, in an effort to place meat diets as clearly antithetical to our systems. It's a very common practice among the vegetarian community. What is left out is the comparison of discrepencies between a pure herbivore and man, which are even more pronounced. Humans don't ruminate, nor is there digestive flora in our stomachs. Our stomachs are acidic, and produce hydrochloric acid, like any other carnivores. Herbivores do not. Our bowel is long relative to a dog's, but a sheeps' bowel is 27 times the length of its body. Our stomachs have a capacity of 4 pints (approximately the same as a large dog), a sheep's stomach has an 8 and a half gallon capacity. Our colon anc caecums have no digestive activity, for herbivores they carry out vital digestive functions, ect. Our digestive systems are closer to the carnivores than herbivores, and we are clearly a cross between each by biology. Humans need the nutrients provided by animal products, especially when they are growing. If the diet lacks and the parents don't suppliment, their children will not thrive.

Thank you, Mrs. Pigpen.
Your points regarding lengths of digestive tracts reminds me of a point I forgot to make in my earlier post, which is concerns a notion prevalent among certain (though, I hasten to add, not all) vegetarians/vegans, which is that they can impose a non-meat diet on their carnivorous pets. Bad idea. For dogs, ehhhh, maybe, but for pure carnivores such as cats and ferrets, it's just not feasible; they're simply not built to handle vegetable matter unless it's been partially digested by their prey first (and that, by definition, requires killing and gutting the prey). If you can't stand the idea of your pet needing to eat meat, get a herbivore like a rabbit or a hamster.

Do you feel the enforcement by a parent of a vegan diet for a child is unethical?

Not specifically. As has been mentioned here, most vegans tend to be more aware of their diets anyway, and will often take precautions and/or mix their diets with sometimes exotic vegetable and pulses to supplement them.

While I don't see any ethical flaws, I do find some practical flaws with the notion of veganism itself - and also vegetarianism - though. I applaud their ethical consistency, and I support many if not most of their animal welfare goals. (If for no other reason than the fact that well-husbanded, low intensity, open-air raised livestock tastes a heck of a lot better than the factory-farmed junk that the food industry seems to think we want.)

Such as:

• What do vegans/vegetarians think will happen to all the domesticated livestock if we gave up on meat eating tomorrow? Would they be allowed to live to their dotage in gamboling pastoral bliss? Or would they be slaughtered and used for petfood, fertiliser, and landfill to make way for the huge mega-fields that work best for arable production? I'll give you a clue - one makes a profit for the farmers (albeit a small one) and the other doesn't.
• What will the world's pet carnivores, especially cats, eat? Most vegetarianism/veganism likes animals so much that they keep them as pets (or "animal companions") - though some is so militant that this practice would also disappear if they had their way. Dogs can survive on a carefull-constructed vegetable diet (though don't doubt that their instinct would take over if they are left alone with a rabbit for long). Cats, on the other hand, cannot. Do we condemn them to ekeing out a living on the local birds, reptiles, amphibians and small mammals that they already kill in their billions (but just for fun, as their are generally not hungry thanks to their canned farm animal). Often, vegan arguments against argicultural animal husbandry mentions the detrimental effects on the environment of farm animal behaviour - usually their methane production and the devastation caued by overgrazing. Hardly ever do we hear about the effects of ickle puddy tats munching the local rodents to extinction. But then, lots of vegans have feline friends sharing their living space, and very few have a pig or cow snoozing at the end of the bed. Ethically not consistent, if practically perfectly defensible, I think.
• Their is also a keenness to use the kind of pseudoscience that has already been put down here.

Overall, I think these (and other) logical quibbles mean that veganism and vegetarianism in the West (even Buddhist countries are not universally vegan, though their religion does encourage it), while they are rather more admirable and consistent positions than the mass-market three-meat-based-meals-a-day-at-the-lowest-possible-price-and-to-hell-with-the-taste-or-theanimal-welfare-implications crowd, are essentially luxuries that are only possible in a meat-centred food economy.

Personally, I am increasingly of the view that we consumers should be directing our money to small, low-intensity meat producers, and (as far as possible) rejecting the mass market for meat altogether. We should be eating meat the way our ancestors did - eating it a few times per month rather than a few times per day; demanding the highest quality raising, slaughtering and handling standards; taking the time to prepare it and using as much of the animal as possible to ensure zero waste. Indeed, even just taking the time to say grace at mealtimes might give at least some pause for thought, though I admire the older practice of thanking our brother or sister animal for giving up their lives to sustain ours rather more. There is a British cookery writer, Hugh Fearningly-Whittingstall, who describes this idea much better than I could. I recommend his book "Meat" to anyone. (Doubtless Amazon or one of the other good online booksellers can get you a copy.) Similalry I'd recommend "Fast Food Nation".

This would certainly be preferable to just shovelling shapeless minced beef, mass-produced steaks from hormonally deformed animals, and reformed MRM down our necks three times a day, never questioning how the animals were raised, what diseases they had when they were slaughtered, how their bowel content were sprayed over the decent meat because of the required speed of factory slaughtering, how the meat supply chain completely rejects hanging (which develops most of the flavour of any meat) because it takes too long and requires space (cutting into retailer profits), and so on ad nauseam (almost literally).

Thinking about these aspects of the modern Western meat industry, I find veganism and vegetarianism admirably ethical stances to take, even if I personally differ on their desirability and practicality. We must not carry on like we are now.

I'm seeing something rather obvious here, and a fact of humankind that's being completely ignored.

The rather obvious thing is that doing a vegan diet is harder than doing an omnivore diet. This indicates to me that the vegan diet is not the natural way we eat.

The completely ignored fact of humankind is that Inuits, before civilization came along, lived on nothing but meat -- raw at that.

Oh, one other thing about the comparison of digestive systems: How does a black bear's digestive system stack up? Those critters are just like us -- they'll eat anything available.

On the ethics issue, my sense is that balanced vegan diets for kids are probably no better or worse than any other balanced diet. Organic foods are usually better than non-organics -- meaning foods made out of rocks. That's a joke. Avoid the pesticide veggies, and you'll get your protein from the worms. That's another joke. This whole obsessive-compulsive thing about food is not a joke. That we worry about it so much seems just a tad ill to me.

So my conclusion about parents and how they raise their children comes down to it being unethical to transfer obsessive-compulsive behavior, if the parents are aware of the adult problem. Let the kids have some animal foods now and then, what the hey. Or make sure that the vegan diet is indeed balanced. Just don't give them your mental illnesses if possible. Most likely it isn't possible, but it would be ethical to try.

BTW, I tried being a vegetarian for two years. Man, did I ever get sick of beans and rice! A grilled porterhouse did me in, and I've been like a black bear ever since. We've found a market that handles local organic beef/pork/chix, and the prices aren't all that bad. They must give a discount for the mercury content?

Do you feel the enforcement by a parent of a vegan diet for a child is unethical?
This is one of the most ridiculous threads that I have ever seen. Of all the parents out there who have posted on this thread, could you possibly imagine someone telling you that the way you are raising your child is wrong and that you should change? If I discipline my child using corporal punishment, then that is how my child will be raised. If I want my child to be a Christian, it will be a Christian, If I want it to be a vegetarian, it will be a vegetarian, et cetera, et cetera. Back and forth, discussing the pros and cons of being a vegetarian, yet all the while missing the whole point of the rights of the parent. For the most part, there should not be anybody allowed to tell you how to raise your children and this is certainly not one of those extreme cases.

Do I believe that raising your child a vegan is unethical?

No, I do not.

I have been a vegetarian for more than 10 years. I am constantly reading and studying nutrition, and I've yet to see a credible scientific study that proves that veganism is in any way unhealthy other than the lack of B-12. When I mean credible, I mean one that a) wasn't sponsored either directly or indirectly by the powerfully rich meat industry or looked at diets by real life vegans/vegetarians, instead they focused on fringe groups or those that had a limited diet for some other reason.

I personally believe that a vegan diet is the most healthful way to eat. I, myself, have not made the transition to veganism from vegetarianism simply because I'm lazy (and I've been reluctant to give up my cheese addiction)-- but I am aware of the health benefits that I would receive if I gave it the effort.


That being said, I am not raising my children to be vegetarian necessarily, due to not wanting to go against their free will regarding their bodies. I won't cook them meat in the house, but I won't force them not to eat meat other places.

My oldest child is 10 years old, and chose of her own free will to be a full time vegetarian two years ago. She has no health, growth, or brain development problems from the two years of being vegetarian or the 8 years of being vegetarian only at home. My youngest is nearly 17 months and she too has none of those problems and she has not had any meat at all, and few milk/egg products. In fact she is rather advanced for her age in her mental abilities.

I have seen a lot of misperceptions regarding vegetarianism and veganism. Many are in the mainstream press. Even though there is plenty of information out there contradicting this information, some of the old myths still get repeated.

Rather than write a whole book on the subject, I'll just contradict one of the myths right here and now. Most vegetables have some protein, and current US standards for protein is over inflated for most peoples actual needs.

The first year of life, a child typically triples their weight and adds several inches to their height. It is the fastest growth spurt during a human life cycle -- yet all this growth can happen on breast milk exclusively. Breast milk has less than 10% of it's calories from protein. Yet many people here in the US get 30% or more of their calories from protein. We are OD-ing on protein here, and there are many diseases which can be caused or exacerbated by protein overconsumption, such as cancer, diabetes, and osteoporosis.

Vegetables, grains, and legumes (not to mention soy "meat products") all contain protein. There's only a handful of ways to NOT get enough protein which include being a fuitarian or being a junkfood vegetarian (refined carbs, low to no veggies, etc).

If we want to talk about ethics, its far more unethical to eat meat -- especially 3 meals a day of it -- if you look at the environmental impacts, animal treatment issues, and overall health of the child (since meat and milk consumption is tied to many diseases and health problems).

Come off it, NeoCon30. There are parents out there (not those on AD I trst) who think nothing of sexually or physically abusing, selling, or otherwise neglecting their kids. Your position that government has no business telling parents how to treat their kids would turn a blind eye to all such behaviour. Is that what you want?


That's what I said. Far less succinctly, but it was the gist of what I was trying to say...

My experience with people who have chosen to be vegan are that they are very well educated about nutrition and health. I wish I had it in me to be vegan-- but I just don't have the time to think about it much! Kudos to them.

Given how much vegans tend to know about nutrition and health, I would be surprised if they did not make the necessary modifications (B12?) to insure that the diet is balanced. So, I guess, ultimately, I could not ever support that this type of diet is unethical. I wish my parents had raised me vegan-- then it would just be second nature.

Julian, what would you like me to 'Come off' of? The last sentence of my post started with a prepositional phrase that would shield me from the banal extremist responses. "FOR THE MOST PART" Abusive behavior is not the rule in parenting, it is the exception. It is in these extreme circumstances that I would support outside intervention. Good try though.

I agree it's kudos for those who suppliment their children appropriately, whose children are thriving. But I'll just pipe in here that growing up vegan isn't necessarily going to instill good eating habits for life. It might backfire also, if the parent is extremely controlling about food issues...and obtaining the appropriate nutrients in sufficient quantities is a lot harder than it sounds when you live that lifestyle. I can't imagine a young child doing it. For example, to obtain the one day recommended amount of calcium sufficient for bone development would take three entire bags of spinach. This is one of the most calcium rich vegetables. If the child loves tofu, it can work, but my oldest won't touch it. Sesame seeds have some calcium, also, but a person would have to eat an entire jar of tahini to obtain the necessary daily amount (trust me, you wouldn't want to try). Low protein diets are better for bones, so a child will likely not need as much calcium, but they will need a fair amount or the body will rob it from the bones to maintain homeostasis in the blood. Some vegan parents I know don't allow their children to take calcium supplements, because they sometimes come from animal sources.

A child who grows up in a strict vegan lifestyle cannot eat your average eggo waffle (contains milk), or eat you average slice of bread (even whole wheat contains milk usually), noodles (contain eggs), piece of cake, cookie...this diet is immensely restrictive and I'm not sure this is coming across effectively. I grew up in an organic-only-eating, basically vegan house. I was punished if I ate when I attended birthday parties, since I wasn't permitted to eat "junk" of any sort. The vegans I know with children follow this practice. Their children are not permitted to eat the things all the other children eat in front of them at playgroups and parties. Often (in my experience, they look emaciated as well. It really is a more difficult lifestyle than it sounds.

I definitely agree with the posters who indicate that meat is a resource-intensive way to eat. It is better for everyone to avoid eating a too much meat. I think when people eliminate all dairy, too, and start taking waffles, bread, ect, off of the list of foods their children can eat, the diet can become unbelievably restrictive. Just to give an example (this has happened to me, so it's anecdotal to illustrate), imagine you are sitting as a guest at a dinner. The host knows you are vegan, but mistakenly thinks this means vegetarian, so he/she doesn't serve meat but there is dairy. You can't eat the beens, because they have butter on them. You can't eat the dinner rolls, because they were made with milk. You can't eat the main course, because it contains some cheese, can't eat the pasta (contains eggs), no dessert, because it is made with butter or milk, ect. Now, imagine placing a three year old on this diet and telling them they can't eat with friends. It's difficult. I think it's best to relax a bit, and follow veganism loosely with young children.

Has anyone looked at the average cafeteria lunch? That is unethical. Its so full of processed white flour, artificial flavors and colors and saturated fat that its a wonder it is considered food at all.

My point is that thats what the government considers healthy and balanced for our children.

I think a vegan diet is pretty strict but Ive known kids to deal with it and prefer healthy foods over processed ones when given the choice , which is better than my two adopted who are having trouble getting weened off the constant diet of pizza, Macs and sugar they had previously. My nine year old does extra chores at school so he can get candy and soda. MacDonalds visited the school and gave them projects in order to get free meals. This drives me crazy and goes against everything Im trying to teach them. It should be against the law for Macdonalds to visit schools in my opinion. I think this is as unethical as it gets food wise.

Most kids eat and drink too much sugar and eat too much fat and processed foods. This is a bigger health problem than living from fresh/live foods. That acceptable diet one describes of so-called meat (hotdogs!) , fake cheese , cake and candies, all these things a child cannot eat when all the others are eating is just setting them up for a life of unhealthy adult eating, obesity and disease. Just because its the status quo does not make it ok.
Until more parents in the 'real' world start learning about bad foods, the healthy kids may just have to suffer not feeling like they 'belong' in this sense. Its like teaching your child not to smoke or do drugs just because the other kids are doing it.

Veganism may only be seen to be strict here in the US, because our cultural diet is so radically opposite. People around the world live on much more basic vegetable and legume/grain based diets without any question of ethics, meat eating is seen to be the unethical choice.

If a child is not thriving , Im sure any decent vegan parent would make the appropriate changes.
Not true, when it comes to the plethora of knowledge out there that burgers and fries and cokes are bad for kids and adults, fast food joints are still making a killing.

Edited to add: Id like to know who sponsored the Kenya study. It appears to me like so many others, often sponsored by the meat and dairy industries-as so much phony baloney, another 'meat' product favored by the industry.



400g is about a pound, after two years! Wow, thats quite a remarkable difference!

I am wondering who was withholding nutrition from 7 year olds for two years in Africa, as in the 'control group'. Most Africans are generally meat and milk eaters. How about that for ethics?

Of course if you take undernourished kids in poverty and give them more food they are going to do better in varying degrees, plus getting prominance and status of being the meat fed ones.

Why not use our own little fat kids to practice on? I bet the controlled group would be running around the playground alot faster after sloughing off some excess pounds and thinking alot quicker from losing all that sugar intake.

People who enjoy hunting can't get enough of the stuff. Believe me when I tell you that deer hunters actually enjoy the skinning. If you go fishing often enough, you get to enjoy pulling the guts out of fish.

I recall that many tropical fruits contain an enzyme that is important for the digestion of meats. Kiwi fruit is loaded with it, I've heard...My heart throbs for kiwi. I wonder if we have any wild relatives who enjoy tropical fruits?

Put more tropical fruit into your body, then!

A poorly-planned vegan diet can cause developmental problems in children. It's easier to just suck down lots of fruits and veggies to make sure the meat gets digested.

They can eat all the grain they please as far as I'm concerned. I'm the one who has to pay for it, so I'm the one who makes the decision on what to eat.

Expound.

High density lipoprotein is actually good for you in small amounts.

I've been holding steady at 185 #s for the past several years, 6'2"

Everything in proportion, though I have a terrible vice: shellfish. I can't get enough of it!

I eat food that I enjoy eating, and I don't like dietary restrictions.