287568 Sun Sep 02 13:53:03 -0700 2001 24 27 General Chowhounding Topics 0 1547678 A philosophic question--can somebody who is a vegetarian for health reasons--not for ethical or religious ones--truly be said to qualify as a Chowhound? Sun Sep 02 13:53:03 -0700 2001 0 Reid Mitchell 1 1547679 Excuse me. I'm new to the board and now having looked at the archievs of this section see that this topic probably doesn't fit into this section and given the likelihood of offending people perhaps shouldn't be raised on Chowhounds at all. Mea culpa. Sun Sep 02 13:59:59 -0700 2001 1547678 0 Reid Mitchell 1 1547680 Reid, Hold on there --you're drawin' the mea culpa card too soon! No problem asking the veg/chowhound question--it's a good one and certainly approriate for our discussion here. Sure, there are veg chowhounds--they even post here. As long as they quest after deliciousness, they're 'hounds! And welcome to the boards--we hope you'll post often. Sun Sep 02 16:05:58 -0700 2001 1547678 0 berkleybabe 1 1547681 Emphatic yes! Being chowhoundly is not about eating (or liking) EVERYTHING. It's about being discerning and passionate within whatever realms your personal parameters permit. If you eat only Corn Flakes, at least find really good milk to pour on 'em. And get the milk/flake proportion just right. And post notes if you decide to change either. ciao Sun Sep 02 16:15:52 -0700 2001 1547678 0 Jim Leff 1 1547682 Why on earth not? Are you questioning the idea that someone can adhere to a healthy diet and eat delicious food at the same time? Sun Sep 02 16:51:39 -0700 2001 1547678 0 Pan 2 1547695 Hold it here for a second. I don't mean to be confrontational, but I do have a question. Since when has it been proven that vegetarianism is somehow healthier? I understand that current excessive consumption of meats and fatty foods leads to obesity and associated health problems. But I have seen no evidence whatsoever that it is somehow less healthy to have a few ounces of roast chicken, or a salmon filet, or even (god forbid) a steak when combined with a diet centered around eating a wide range of fruits, vegetables, grains, and legumes. I have no problem with folks who wish to eat whatever they want--whether it's fast food burgers or a strict vegan diet. What I do object to is the idea that religiously avoiding fish and meats is somehow better for you than consuming such tasty things in moderation. Mon Sep 03 12:01:18 -0700 2001 1547682 0 e.d. 3 1547697 Ed and Pan-- We've done this fight before. Both times it erupted into ugly brawls, and the vegetarians, the carnivores, and the omnivores all remained convinced their respective ways were better and healthier. Minds--not surprisingly--were not changed, little or no useful information was exchanged, and lots of otherwise friendly and gracious hounds wound up ticked off at each other. If someone has something interesting to add to all this, great! If it's going to erupt into an indignant doctrinaire confrontation....well, I'd kinda rather we didn't. Maybe look at it this way: there are different "takes" on healthiness. What's healthy for some people is not for others. And we ALL could likely use a healthier diet, whether it means getting a bit more protein or eliminating a bit of cholesterolic meat fat. Some people prefer to eat at a more extreme end of the spectrum, and that works for them and their health is good. And that's Good. Can we agree on that? ciao Mon Sep 03 12:46:17 -0700 2001 1547695 0 Jim Leff 4 1547698 Also, please see my posting, linked below, which was an attempt (a very personal attempt, since it's all about my diet, and what *I* try to do to find a healthy balance between my natural extremes) to bridge the two sides. One good thing about that thread is that it invites carnivores and vegetarians to dialog CONSTRUCTIVELY re: strategies for uniting the best of both perspectives. ciao Link: http://www.chowhound.com/topics/show/287527#1546997 Mon Sep 03 12:54:46 -0700 2001 1547697 0 Jim Leff 4 1547709 Jim: Perhaps you now see that I wasn't expressing a view about the healthiness of vegetarian and non-vegetarian diets. I was just reacting to what I perceived as an illogical opposition between chowhound-ness and restricting one's diet for perceived reasons of health. And I stand by my comments, on that basis. Mon Sep 03 17:43:34 -0700 2001 1547697 0 Pan 5 1547735 michael, yep, I understand, but I was really addressing my comments toward the bleachers.   Nothing personal; I'm just trying to hold chaos and bad feeling at bay amid a seriously HUGE amount of traffic! I'm not picking on people, just trying to keep things running smoothly!   ciao Tue Sep 04 03:31:12 -0700 2001 1547709 0 Jim Leff 3 1547707 "Hold it here for a second. I don't mean to be confrontational, but I do have a question. Since when has it been proven that vegetarianism is somehow healthier?" This is not my issue. For the record, I am not a vegetarian, either. The way you phrased your original question was: "[C]an somebody who is a vegetarian for health reasons...truly be said to qualify as a Chowhound?" The issue there is not whether it's scientifically proven that vegetarianism is better for one's health, but whether someone who believes it is and acts on that basis can be a chowhound. It seems to me that there is no relationship between being a chowhound and deciding what to eat or not to eat on the basis of health - whether or not one's criteria of what's healthy or not are scientifically proven. In effect, I reacted to your original question as if it were a non-sequitur, which is what I believe it was. That, and not some desire for confrontation, was the reason for my response. Mon Sep 03 17:41:15 -0700 2001 1547695 0 Pan 4 1547711 I just realized that I confused Reid and e.d. in my last reply. Sorry about that. Otherwise, my comments stand. Mon Sep 03 17:45:59 -0700 2001 1547707 0 Pan 5 1547712 Pan, Sorry, I didn't want to start a whole riot on these boards--I was merely responding to your view of vegetarianism as automatically "healthy." I'm all in favor of vegetarian chowhounds. I really enjoyed Jim's posting recently about trying to eat a more balanced diet, and I gleefully wrote down all sorts of vegetarian recipes. I'm glad to have Reid aboard and posting comments--we need more voices on this board. And you are probably right that I am a bit defensive as I know I (like a lot of folks) should eat a diet lower in meats and fat and richer in fruits and veggies. But sometimes I suspect that some vegetarians whom I know are really just puritans. The less pleasure they get from food, the better they assume it is for them. All I was advocating was balance and moderation. Chowhounding can be healthy--can't it? Mon Sep 03 18:01:03 -0700 2001 1547711 0 e.d. 6 1547733 Chowhounding CAN be healthy, but it requires lots of care in the off-days and a very rigorous gym schedule......unless you're blessed with an amazing metabolism or are under 30 or work with a pneumatic drill all day. yoga helps, too. Shoulder stand followed by fish position. But take care with shoulder stand or you'll hurt yourself as badly as I once did. ciao Tue Sep 04 01:21:26 -0700 2001 1547712 0 Jim Leff 6 1547736 "Sorry, I didn't want to start a whole riot on these boards--I was merely responding to your view of vegetarianism as automatically `healthy.`" You still don't understand my views. My view is that people who restrict their diet because THEY THINK it is more healthful to do so can be chowhounds: I.e., that restricting one's diets for _perceived_ health reasons is not incompatible with chowhounding. I _never_ took a position on whether vegetarianism is more healthful than eating a combination of vegetables and foods from the Animal Kingdom, though I suppose my original response could reasonably be seen as having implied at a minimum that vegetarianism can be healthy - and it certainly can be, if done judiciously. To be quite honest, though, I'm not that interested in taking a view on the healthfulness or lack of healthfulness of vegetarianism generally; that's someone else's argument. Tue Sep 04 03:45:13 -0700 2001 1547712 0 Pan 7 1547741 Let me just apologize. As I thought further about Reid's original message and your response, Pan, neither of you claimed that vegetarianism is uniquely healthy or that other diets would be unhealthy. So forgive me for overreacting. Sometimes I type first and think later. Sorry. And as I hinted in my last post, I would like to see more vegetarian/healthy recipes posted at this site. It's easy to make barbecued ribs taste good, but some of the healthier meals I've tried to cook have been less successful. Also it has occured to me that a vegetarian would be more capable of avoiding some of the dietary excesses that the rest of us are faced with when we dine socially. If everyone else wants to go to the burger joint or the all you can eat buffet where one gets to choose between a main course of deep fried catfish or sliced ham, it might be nice to say "sorry, I can't go there, I'm a vegetarian." Otherwise you're forced to say something to the effect that you don't like the junk your friends eat. Tue Sep 04 10:47:29 -0700 2001 1547736 0 e.d. 8 1547747 Don't feel bad about it. You've been misled by the legions of vegetarian non-chowhounds. I've found there are many vegetarians who were picky eaters before, and are now pickier eaters. They may honestly believe that all vegetarians eat a more varied diet than any meat-eaters, even though to all appearances, they subsist on only three or four foods. Tue Sep 04 12:01:20 -0700 2001 1547741 0 ironmom 8 1552662 THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO KINDS OF MEAT EATERS;THE KIND WHO LOVES MEAT AND THE KIND WHO HATES HIS VEGGIES. LET'S CONCENTRATE ON THE LATTER FOR MOMENT. THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO SUBGROUPS OF VEGGIE HATERS ;THOSE WHO HAVE A VERY STRONG PREFERENCE NOT TO HEAD FOR THE SALAD BAR AND THOSE WHO HAVE A TRUE FOOD AVERSION .. SPINACH ALWAYS MADE THEM GAG AND STILL DOES. BEANS AND PEAS LITERALLY TURN THEIR STOMACH. NOW THAT WE HAVE MENTIONED FOOD AVERSIONS LET'S CONSIDER SOME REASONS FOR VEGETARIANISM 1) HEALTH 2} PREFERENCE(TASTE) 3)ANIMAL RIGHTS 4) AND THOSE WITH AN AVERSION TO FISH AND/OR MEAT.... ( A LITTLE THOUGHT ON VEGETARIAN RIGHTS,THEY ARE JUST AS ENTITLED TO A RESPECTFUL AVERSION TO MEAT AS A MEAT EATER IS TO HIS/HER WORST NIGHTMARE OF A SQAUSH AND BRUSSELS SPROUTS SOUFLE. Tue Dec 11 16:52:53 -0800 2001 1547741 0 r eisman 9 1552677 Rich, stop screaming! You gotta turn off your caps lock key. Anywhere on the Internet, people who post messages make sure not to use all capital letters because they make an innocuous letter seem like a harangue. You can emphasize certain words by putting in -dashes- (like that) or by surrounding them with *asterisks* or by using ALL CAPS. The effect is the same each way. Other internet gimmicks include the :-) smiley face, or (g) which stands for "grin", meaning something said facetiously. These are just a few suggestions for net letter writing. There's a lot more info out there on the web if you search for internet manners, netiquette, etc. -Chris Wed Dec 12 11:31:34 -0800 2001 1552662 0 Chris Armstrong 3 1547710 Maybe not confrontational, but a trifle defensive, eh?It'll be a long time before we "know" what diet is best for you, and, in the meanwhile, Reid Mitchell merely sought information in the original post, having drawn personal conclusions about an appropriate diet, but certainly did not preach. Although I know a lot of vegetarians, I only know the "motivation" (ethical? health? religion?) of a few of them. I don't find that information at all important to people other than the eater, except for one thing: a "health" motivated vegetarian will not freak out if s/he learns there's, say, chicken stock in a dish. To that extent, the "health" motivated vegetarian may eat more adventurously. Mon Sep 03 17:44:48 -0700 2001 1547695 0 Janet 3 1552761 i still eat dairy, but it makes me noticeable physically ill. it doesn't debilitate me but it keeps me in the bathroom longer than i'd prefer. Tue Mar 19 11:57:17 -0800 2002 1547695 0 renee phillips 1 1547693 Since you stopped reading ingredients/nutrition labeling long enough to peruse the Board, you're a Chowhound. (This longtime vegetarian has stopped settling for foods which are merely healthy, and searches out what's great, so I would classify myself as a Chowhound). I'm new to the Board too, and in perusing it noticed a two-year-old post on the Kosher board suggesting a separate Vegetarian board. There's no doubt that we can be Chowhounds (see preceding posts) and that since finding deliciousness is harder the fewer things one eats (our experience here is similar to those who adhere to Kashruth) such a Board, on which we could compare notes, would be terrific! Mon Sep 03 08:54:41 -0700 2001 1547678 0 Janet 2 1547740 Janet writes: "There's no doubt that we can be Chowhounds ... and that since finding deliciousness is harder the fewer things one eats ... such a Board, on which we could compare notes, would be terrific!" I remember that thread, because I contributed to it, and as I recall it was finally agreed (amid resistance from Big Dog, who insisted, "Hey: chowhounds *love* vegetables!") that although a vegetarian board would be a great thing to have, it's not feasible right now to create a new board, simply because the message-board software we use is such a bear. So, my understanding was that discussions of vegetarianism would be tolerated on the existing boards, but I haven't been around for a few months so I don't know how that's being handled currently. Tue Sep 04 09:58:01 -0700 2001 1547693 0 Frank Language 3 1547752 vegetarians are totally welcome in ANY of our discussions. We're really into prediclections and restrictions here. If you need kid-friendly, are on the Atkins diet, hate loud noise, waiters with glasses or kitchens that put green peppers in the home fries, or if you simply need mashed potatoes with every meal, we are the people who Understand such things (well, we understand the pickiness, if not necessarily the preference itself). So if you're vegetarian...or anythingthing-else-ian, please feel free to interject into discussions and ask about options. You may not get an immediate info dump of your complete range of options, but ALL discussion here is piecemeal, that's how we work. ciao Tue Sep 04 13:07:55 -0700 2001 1547740 0 Jim Leff 2 1547762 Welcome to Chowhound, Janet. And what a sensible response. How do you tell a Chowhound? Simple: if you're obsessed enough to put up with all of our personalities in your hunt for deliciousness, you're one of us! I'm another (mostly) vegetarian 'hound. I didn't originally turn my back on meat for health reasons, but I have been known to keep to a healthy vegetarian diet for long periods of time. As you can see from Jim's healthy-eating thread, there's a plethora of ways to make that diet a delicious one, and I've employed every stratagem I could find. There's also a wide range of options for eating very unhealthily as a vegetarian (especially if you eat dairy products, but even a vegan can overdo the fats, sugars and refined carbs if so inclined). And this style of eating can be delicious or not, depending on the choices you make. These days I try to maintain a balance. I love my pizza AND my steamed spinach, as long as it's Santarpio's pizza and fresh organic spinach. These are the things that make me a Chowhound. If I hadn't been a Chowhound, I might have gone the "beige foods" route -- tofu, tempeh and brown rice all the way, unalleviated dreariness flavored only with self-satisfaction. So my answer to Reid is: Yes, it's possible to be both a health-oriented vegetarian and a Chowhound. It's just not guaranteed. There are lots of different ways to go, and the choice is yours. Tue Sep 04 17:22:08 -0700 2001 1547693 0 C. Fox