Oh, by all mean it is unhealthy food. The nutritional labels are quite clear that they contain too much fat, sugar and calories.
But they are still plant-based and do not contain any animal products.
I eat a vegan diet for one single reason and that is to avoid voting with my wallet for the continuation of factory farming. I do not care about any other parts of the vegan philosophy and/or lifestyle.
Those items are plant-based products and do not claim anything else. I do agree that they are not part of a healthy plant-based diet but that is a different topic altogether.
> Really? All of the vegans I know care a lot
> about eating a balanced and healthy diet (at
> least, more than the average non-vegan).
Not necessarily. I know a number of vegans that don't necessarily eat that healthy.
The thing that irks me is when vegans proclaim that the 'vegan diet' will make everyone healthier, cure obesity, etc. There are plenty of unhealthy foods that are perfectly vegan. I say this as a vegan myself. I see these people as 'hurting the movement' because they are spreading un-truths, even if they are well-intentioned (and the messengers believe the false message).
[Edit]
Don't take this as a claim that the 'vegan diet' (I use quotes because it is such as broad term) is necessarily unhealthy. It's just that there are many foods that are completely vegan, yet unhealthy:
- Skittles (since they removed gelatin as an ingredient)
- Oreos
- Sugar
- Soda
- A lot of potato chip varieties
- Transfats (i.e. burned oils)
(note: That I can only confirm things like Skittles or Oreos in the US. I know that in different countries the formulas are different. Skittles may still have gelatin in Canada, for example)
[/Edit]
I'm absolutely willing to agree that vegan frosting is also bad for you, but I don't think anyone is saying "all vegan food is healthy". Hell, Oreo cookies are vegan, and they're terrible for you. Same goes for arsenic.
You are absolutely being misleading. The statement "Veganism is unhealthy" is objectively wrong in the sense that it implies that it cannot be done healthily. Practically any diet or activity in general is unhealthy if proper precautions are not taken. In the case of veganism, the proper precaution happens to be B12 supplementation. You clearly know this as indicated by your disclaimer about 'nuance'. You are making an equivalent statement to me saying "You are making asshole comments (but there is some nuance)" - there is an element of truth to the statement, but it is misleading and first and foremost designed to create an emotional reaction.
Edit: My last point is clearly demonstrated if the immediate downvote I received after posting this was from you.
Apologies, I failed to communicate my point correctly.
What I am trying to say is that vegans are trying to engineer a product. So this product the opposite of natural, so what is with the claims of health?
I don't know why I used the word "bad"
I find it frustrating as a person who only eats meat and vegetables to have to tolerate vegans who claim health benefits. Most vegans I've met are fat.
I think they were saying that, despite being vegan, they took a bit to cut them out after realizing they wouldn't help with weight loss, since they are still junk food.
I'm referring to the process of cooking it.
They don't separate the food and you get cross-contact with meat and dairy proteins - making it non-vegetarian and definately not vegan.
This is basically all marketing driven (which is fine) but its not animal-product free, which is what normal people think when they see "plant based" food.
“Poorly planned vegan diets” is key. Oreos are vegan. Being vegan doesn’t necessarily meant you eat a lot of fruit and vegetables and pulses and nuts and seeds.
As a “vegan” I prefer the term Whole Food, Plant Based, which at least avoids the Oreos and other manufactured crap that suffers from the same deficiencies as non-vegan manufactured crap.
It's basically abusing the single metric. You can put "Vegan" on your label if you follow very specific rules and anything outside of those rules is far game. The folks that consume these products have mostly that label and marketing to go by.
It's like orange juice advertised as "not from concentrate" which goes through a massive amount of processing just to satisfy that labeling even though it's unlikely any folks consuming the product really want that.
> No, the definition that is "very well agreed upon"
That's what you say. I'm a vegan for 7+ years and know many. One thing so great about veganism is that the mission/definition is very clear. Pls see Wikipedia, or one of the many introductions on YT.
> The logo on supermarket products that denotes the product as "good for vegans" is based purely on that lack of animal products, not on any ethical beliefs beyond that.
Supermarkt product dont hold ethical beliefs. They may fit with certain beliefs though. That's what's indicated with "suitable for vegetarians/vegans". They could be more "correct" or cater for a wider public by saying: "fits with a plant based diet".
Plant based is the word for the diet component of veganism.
> there are a considerable amount of people without qualms about using animal products in other spheres of life than food.
They are not vegan according to the definition.
> Veganism has set itself apart from vegetarianism because in common parlance the latter term covers diets that allow milk products.
And eggs. And honey. And the fact that veganism is more than a diet, hence vegans not going to zoos and not buying wool/fur/slik/leather.
No idea why you are being downvoted. This is dead on. Oreos are vegan, but it doesn’t make them healthy. I think the terms Vegetarian and Vegan are extremely misleading as most people assume that means healthy. I prefer “Whole Food, Plant Based” which would be hard to eat in an unhealthy manner.
>There's something unexpected about this aspect of veganism, which is often embraced by those wanting to lead a healthier lifestyle, resulting in the development of more and more advanced food processing technologies designed to synthesize the experience of foods being excluded from the diet.
not particularly - would love to see where you get those numbers. many vegans make the choice because it's one of the few things an individual can do to make a (very small) impact on factory farming and a complete waste of resources. in my experience, very few but the uninformed do it for "health reasons" (save for having health problems processing meat or dairy).
"processed foods" isn't always a bad thing. overprocessing certainly is, but adding nutrients to food that would otherwise be left out of a diet is pretty important. there are plenty of vegans with malnutrition and plenty that just "eat vegan" which happens to be a steady diet of oreos.
> In my mind it's just a bit of a surprising outcome and makes me wonder how folks who consume these products square that circle in their minds.
That's because your argument is that "vegan means healthy and not processed"
They're directly suggesting that food should have labels to let people know when foods are not wholly plant based. It seems they're really arguing that people should only rarely (if ever) eat non-plant-based foods and should avoid foods with animal products in them, because by default we should be eating plants not non-plants.
We didn't eat plants by default, we ate a mixture of plants and meats and other animal-derived products since we lived in caves.
But they are still plant-based and do not contain any animal products.
I eat a vegan diet for one single reason and that is to avoid voting with my wallet for the continuation of factory farming. I do not care about any other parts of the vegan philosophy and/or lifestyle.
Those items are plant-based products and do not claim anything else. I do agree that they are not part of a healthy plant-based diet but that is a different topic altogether.
reply