Unfortunately people are under the impression that if you are a vegetarian you are healthier than a meat eater. While health concerns have driven many people to become vegetarians and many others are so because of their belief that no animal should be harmed, being a vegetarian doesn’t assure good health.
Many people, vegetarians or not don’t read ingredient labels in packaged foods, many vegetarians don’t eat organic and many just eat junk food to overcome their cravings for sweets. Understanding what to eat and getting ourselves educated on what harms our body will go a long way towards maintaining good health whether one is a vegetarian or a meat eater.
If you look at the ingredients label for a processed, packaged food, there is a very good possibility that you won’t have a clue what some of the ingredients are.
That’s because many of the ingredients in there aren’t actual food… they are artificial chemicals that are added to the food for longevity, better taste, addictive qualities, and visual gratification. So if you can’t understand the labels, don’t the food!!!
Many variables come into play when we decide what foods are good for us or how much we should eat. Those variables include sugar, additives, preservatives, coloring, bleach, chemicals and last but not least quantity of food eaten.
The following is taken from an article about the discussion of health and vegetarianism, Marc Stewart Wilson, Ann Weatherall. (Ann Weatherall Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand) First Published July 1, 2004
Article Information:
Typically, research on vegetarianism has sought to identify the psychological characteristics that distinguish vegetarians from meat-eaters. Health concerns have been identified as a motivation for meat abstention. In this article, rhetorical analysis of Internet discussions about health and vegetarianism highlights the argumentative orientation of explanations for meat consumption, with the various constructions of health serving a rhetorical function.
We show the dilemmatic nature of arguments about the relationship between food and health: food can promote health and cause ill-health and suggest that meat-eating as a dominant practice is supported by the rhetorical use of notions of ‘balance’, implying moderation, inclusion and rationality. This rhetorical approach represents a radical critique of past work that assumes opinions given in response to questions about vegetarian practices represent ‘causes’ of dietary practice
- Adams, C. (1990). The sexual politics of meat. Cambridge: Polity Press.
- Allen, M. W. Wilson, M. S. , Dunne, M. , & Ng, S. H. (2000). Values and beliefs of vegetarians and omnivores. Journal of Social Psychology, 140, 405-422.
- Amato, P. R. & Partridge, S. A. (1989). The new vegetarians: Promoting health and protecting life. New York: Plenum Press.
© Copyright – Hector Sectzer
