Fighting for animal liberation and an end to speciesism
I came across this article in the Daily Mail today on my lunch break.
I couldn't really believe what this woman was saying.
Some of the highlights include "in terms of health and nutrition, fruit and veg have little to offer, and telling us to eat eight portions a day is compounding one of the worst health fallacies in recent history."
This is where she begins to lead on to the fact that animal products are better, finishing with her top 5 nutritious foodstuffs; "liver (good for all vitamins and packed with minerals), sardines (for vitamin D and calcium), eggs (all-round super-food with vitamins A, B, D, E and K, iron, zinc, calcium and more), sunflower seeds (magnesium, vitamin E and zinc) and dark-green vegetables such as broccoli or spinach (for vitamins C, K and iron)"
Slightly confusing when she suggested fruit and veg had little to offer, yet dark-green vegetables are in her top 5.
At one point in the article she says "What we should not do is to make the usual bad science leap from association to causation and say ‘eating more fruit and veg lowers the risk of dying from heart disease’."
I do not know if this is commonly published, but I've never been told fruit and veg lowers the risk of heart disease. There is no mention in this article about one of the bigger causes of heart disease - animal products.
The woman seems intent on slandering the name of fruit and veg. She goes on with
She mentions she was a vegetarian for 20 years but changed her views after doing research for her PhD in nutrition.
It even seems she goes to suggest that there is no need to bother eating fruits and veg as a source of antioxidants but rather focus on not putting oxidants in our skin. What's wrong with doing both? Surely it's not one or the other.
"According to a recent survey, the British people are deficient in vitamins A, D, E — all of which are fat-soluble. If we added a dollop of butter to our portion of vegetables, they would be better for us — not worse."
I think that is looking at it in a fairly isolated way. There's no mention of the British peoples eating habits anyway, or the health risks of butter.
&the only natural fats she mentions are those in eggs, meat and fish with no mention of the fats from nuts and seeds.
I am not to worried about this article, I think it got published because it's controversial and eye catching. There aren't any downsides to eating 5 a day I'm aware of, and this woman seems to suggest we'd be better off without them and focus on eating liver and eggs in butter with a glass of milk and a few spinach leaves with sunflower seeds on the side.
I thought I'd share it because it shocked me quite a bit that it seemed like she was trying to rob fruit aswell as veg of it's good name whilst ignoring the defects in animal products.
Please share your thoughts and I'd especially like to hear comments on her claims which I bullet pointed. I'm no nutritionist (and I don't think she's much of one either) but if plants are so low in vitamins and minerals, where do the animals get them from? To me it doesn't make much sense.
Add a Comment