On lower risk of disease than vegetarians, make their way in some studies and in almost all books and Web sites against the vegetarian comforting thesis that the benefits would be indirect, that is due not so much and only to food, but to a greater overall awareness of food . We are vegetarians, that is, we would, we are more careful about what we eat than omnivores. And this alone, researchers and advisers argue anti-vegetarian is good, brings health benefits. .
.
.
Questo è vero, siamo più attenti. Alcuni di noi, poi, sono addirittura maniaci , il che, però – diciamolo a tutte lettere – è un difetto che può portare a problemi ulteriori.
E con ciò? Questa maggiore attenzione, che spesso – non sempre, però: vedi più avanti – si sostanzia in una migliore educazione nutrizionale (perché non lo dicono?), non conduce anche ad una scelta di alimenti diversi? O è una attenzione teorica, vaga, una fantasticheria ossessiva?
No, la maggiore attenzione veg si traduce in pietanze differenti da quelle comuni. Per esempio, molti vegetariani – non tutti purtroppo – usano cereali integrali , quasi tutti mangiano molti legumi e molte porzioni di verdura e frutta al giorno. Tutti obiettivi che la scienza ha proposto, ma che gli onnivori non raggiungono mai in nessun Paese del mondo. Insomma, il paradosso è che solo noi vegetariani, per lo meno molti di noi, mettono in pratica le indicazioni della Scienza moderna sulla dieta protettiva antiossidante e sul controllo del peso. E vi sembra niente? Eppure questo "particolare" fondamentale non c’è in certi siti anti-vegetariani o nelle conclusioni di alcuni studies: they keep talking about "mindset." In short, we would be "fixed." They even invented a new word which they say should be psychopathological in short, a syndrome: "orthorexia" or mania right food, proper, healthy. A subspecies of anorexia, suggests the similarity.
Ah, but the Lords of the Court, if this "fix" leads to respect the parameters of science, it means it's good, good. So why does not "fix" a bit 'on healthy food and even natural omnivores, and even become vegetarians?
Let's see how two such diverse research studies anti-veg, but interesting. The first is titled: "Relative Weight, Weight Loss Efforts and Nutrient Intakes Among Health-Conscious Vegetarian, vegetarian meals and Nonvegetarian Women Ages 18 to 50" . Here, indeed, it is concluded that the veg are less likely because of their increased risk " health consciousness."
But the experience of everyday life tells us that everything is relative. Indeed, I am very critical of some vegetarians (we do not many vegan ...) very shabby and anti-scientific.
However, the novelty of the working hypothesis of the study is this: that for the first time were compared with non-vegetarians and omnivores generic (where we we will always be better), but vegetarian and "conscious omnivores " health and nutrition. If you choose subjects similar things change, the columnist argued, with evident satisfaction that the study says.
It 's true, but then falls along the lines wrong, or rather insignificant.
The working hypothesis of the study is that the health-consciousness and health consciousness is similar in special groups of women non-veg and veg, and there are no differences in weight, body mass index, weight loss and values nutrition (except for vitamins B12 and D), as the work of Susan Barr and colleagues cited in the dossier Journal of the American Clinical Nutrition.
Okay, but health and prevention not only lose weight , as is assumed in the study. It 'a lot, but now the medication with food has made great strides. We think just the abysmal difference that exists between two similar diets as calories, of which the first low in vegetables and rich in whole grains, while the second is rich. This escapes the study. In fact in the study of Barr was evaluated only the ability to lose weight and not much else.
But it is not true in all cases that there is this big difference in lifestyle. How many vegetarians know that walk fast and long all day, or making excursions into nature? Very few, if any. In fact, I will tell you, I'm trying to organize them with their long walks. But almost all vegetarians refuse to play sports, especially in Nature. Absurd!
So, it seems more founded a second study , again, it seems, researchers "anti-veg" or non-veg-oriented. He has the title: " Risk of death from cancer and ischaemic heart disease in meat and non-meat eaters" , published in the British Medical Journal M Thorogood and colleagues from years ago (BMJ 1994, 308:1667-1670, 25 June). In
diatribe meat, meat no, continue to win vegetarians. Have less risk. But not only the lack of meat per se, or the awareness of food, or for the "lifestyle" as repeat all, even the doctors of the ASL.
... but read the conclusions: "The reduced mortality from cancer among those who do not eat meat is not explained by risk factors related to lifestyle, which have a low prevalence among vegetarians. A firm conclusion can not be taken even on deaths from ischemic heart disease. These data do not justify the view of excluding meat from the diet, since there many elements of a vegetarian diet, besides not eating meat, which can reduce the risk .
Here, only the last line, floating the real reason for the superiority of vegetarian : those many elements that distinguish more than omnivorous, which are nothing more than the thousands of antioxidants, nutrients or antimutritive (polyphenols from the fibers) that are missing in a typical omnivorous diet, and lack of a lifetime. From this it follows also that it would be really stupid to do Vegetarians eat no whole grains and legumes, in addition to generous portions of vegetables and fruits. Yet there are those who can not.
Fortunately sono migliaia gli studi seri sugli effetti preventivi e di riduzione del rischio cardiocircolatorio, infiammatorio e tumorale da parte di queste sostanze che finora hanno poco interessato i nutrizionisti (perché… molte di esse non nutrono), che sono assenti dalla tavola degli onnivori, e largamente presenti sulle tavole vegetariane e naturiste. Ma degli antiossidanti parleremo in un altro articolo.
0 comments:
Post a Comment