I’m doing this because I want to be a vegan but I have a lot of contradiction about pro’s and con’s.In the market you can’t sure about what will be good for you because we live in the advertorials world and we can’t sure about nothing. Big brands has authority on us and they orient us. We only see how food looking when its cooked but we don’t know how they come to us and how they prepare. Because of these reasons I’m thinking vegan diet can be better to us these days. Navin Ramankutty and Jeanine Rhemtulla thinks differently about this topic. They think biodiversity is the key for health and health of nature and the intensive farming decrase the biodiversity because when you make intensive farming you use genetically modified foods for your animals. This foods not grown in nature and this is decrase the biodiversity which is similiar to new flow “Parma-Culutur farming”.
Ade ‘le Mennerat Frank Nilsen Dieter Ebert Arne Skorping thinks that intensive farming increaese the immune system to parasites and pathogens. This makes a host to pathogens and parasites which are grown in the farms and we eat them. Yes our immune system get used to eat those parasites but this is cant’t change the truth we live with those pathogens and parasites and when we have a problem with our immune system parasites show theirselves to us. David A.Snowdon and Roland L. Philllips made a research which is “Does a vegeterian diet reduce the occurence of diabete”. They analyze a lot of researchs and they find results of diabetic people who are vegetarian and who are not vegetarian death ratio and results show us who are 109+ kilos diabetic people affected good from meat but under 109 kilos diabetic people affected bad from meat. Every other tables shows us diabetic people affected bad from vegeterian diet because of this every other tables according to average weight and average ages. In the famous newspaper which is “Guardian” Felicity Lawrence made a research “Spending: Hidden costs behind the checkout prices: Cheaper food from intensive farming brings other problems”. She said that In 1960 almost one-third of the average household budget was spent on food. Today the figure is less than one-fifth but we miss some real problems like Britain also has some of the highest figures for heart disease and cancer in the western world, diseases that have many causes but have been strongly linked to a poor quality diet. I think this poor quality diet is the meat based diets. Farmers made mass produce and this mass produce flow make meat poor quality. Chris Butler made a research which is “ANTIMICROBIALS: Is intensive farming fuelling a health crisis?” and this research about people get used to bacterias because with intensive farming people feed animals with antibiotics and people must make drug resistant animals for higher eficiency but we eat those animals.
Tony Travawavas made a research about can organic farming superior to the intensive farming and he say different things than everyone. He say we forget about toxins from contaminating fungi (which can be controlled by specific fungicides) and its contribute to European cancer rates - fumonisin and patulin are both reported to be higher in organic products, and failure to use effective fungicides has led to organic farms acting as repositories of disease. He defend the conventional farming is more sustainable and its more healthier for children. He find results about cancer rates for people who eat natural things and he observe this decrease the being stomach cancer rates %50-60. I think this is incredible rate.
Chris Rundle make me thing very different things with his “İntensive FarmingTo Intensive Care ” article like ”With intensive farming can we ultra care to our cleaning and this can be decrease our immune system?” Because with intensive farming we eat antibotics directly(because we eat what animal eat) and we getting resistant to antibiotics but in the other side we can getting sick easier with our low resistant immune system. When we sick antibiotics can’t fix us because we have high resistance to antibiotics. Paul Brown see the situation from animal’s eyes too. Yes if we think superficial it can be in sight out topic but I said this in my previous paragraphs “We eat what animal eat too.” Because of this we must look from this window too.I must add what he wrote: “Hormones: used to promote animal growth. Some scientists feared that these may cause sexual abnormalities and cancer. Their use had been banned in the EU but residues were frequently found in meat, suggesting widespread illegal use; Antibiotics: to treat, prevent and reduce diseases in animals and also as a growth promoter. Some antibiotic residues in food may be toxic and cause some people to become hypersensitive to antibiotics. They could also make bacteria resistant to antibiotics. A number of bacteria, including salmonella and E coli, were becoming resistant to more than one antibiotic; Pesticides: protected crops against insects and increased production. They could also impair the human immune system and resistance to cancer. Increasingly, residues were found deep inside fruit and vegetables; Nitrates: used to enrich the soil and increase yields. High levels had been linked to “blue babies” - infants who had insufficient oxygen in their blood - and to stomach cancer in adults. “Maximum safe” levels in vegetables and drinking water were being exceeded; Genetic modification: transfering genes from one plant or animal to another to improve flavour, reduce rot, or increase resistance to disease, pesticides, or herbicides. The risks were largely unknown but there were fears that modified genes could migrate into other species.” We can see from these definitions yes this methods and materials can help for animals growing but with this speed remove what we take from animals positive.
In USA Today Magazine database there is one article for being alternative which is “Calcium sources for non-milk drinkers”. In this article there is very important information: “People who between 11-24 ages need 1200 miligrams calcium.” Yes intensive farming products can be dangerous but if we can’t take what we need for our body we can’t talk about health. The situtation is not very dark for us because in this article shows us there is s lot of alternative solutions. For example: Spinach, with 122 milligrams of calcium per half-cup serving. So we can replace our intensive farming products with equilvalent value vegan products.
In the end of my article I selected a interview about “Can Athletes Benefits From A Vegan Diet” because athletes needs a lot of energy and Im curious about can athletes confine onself with vegan products. This interview between David Niemen, Nancy Clark and Gretchen Reynolds. In the beginning Nancy Clark made this research for there is not enough sources to know how vegetarian – let alone vegan – diets affect athletes. First they say B12 only found in meat and its important for endurance athletes but after these words they say many cereals and soy milks are fortified with B12 now, or you can take supplements. Actually I’m against to supplements because for me health comes first and I don’t think they are very healthy. They say you can take enough protein from vegan diet and its very important for athletes and vegetarians tend to weigh 6 to 10 pounds less than meat eater.This interview is very informative for me.
If we sum up there is a lot of different opinions in health sector. In this article there is a lot of researchs and we see only vegan diet isn’t healthy on the other hand eating intensive farming products isn’t healthy too because our body needs animal based products too but in our time we can find animal based products only from intensive farming. Yes, I still defend my opinion which is “intensive farming products are unhealthy” but we still need animal based products because of this we must create balanced diet with animal based products and vegan products.