“Compassion is the best side effect of being vegan”(). A vegan diet contains no animal products. Going vegan is good for the mind, body, and soul. Adopting a vegan lifestyle is one of the best things an individual can do for themselves.
Becoming vegan benefits animals. Animal rights are often overlooked in the food industry. Their cries for help are unheard. Animals in slaughterhouses don’t have any space to run or be free. Pigs are in cages so small they can’t turn around (Why Farming). This practice is considered standard and acceptable in the food industry (Why Farming). Up to six chickens are kept in small cages with no room to move around (Why Farming). Chickens need their own personal space. When chickens are too crowded into the same cage frustrated (Why Farming). This frustration makes some chickens peck other chickens’ feathers off. To prevent pecking, the end of a chick’s beak is cut off after birth (Why Farming). This process is extremely painful for the chick. Chickens are not the only animal mistreated in the food industry. Perhaps the saddest practice in the food industry happens to female cows. The female cow is artificially inseminated, and immediately after birth, her calf is taken away. The milk she produced for the calf is robbed from her (Why Factory). When the cow stops producing the milk it is artificially inseminated again (Why Factory). This repeated process is very detrimental to the mother cow’s mental health. It is proven that cows have feelings, and when their calves are separated from them it causes the mother cow extreme anxiety (Bekoff). Going vegan would benefit all these animals who are suffering.
Another benefit of being vegan is improved mood. A healthy vegan diet consists of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, nuts and seeds. All of these foods are proven to improve mood. Eating more fruits and vegetables is linked with lower rates of depression (Davidson). Whole Grains are an essential food for maintaining blood sugar levels. Whole grains can help stabilize blood sugar, making people feel more full and energized (Whole Grains). Nuts and seeds are high in a nutrient called tryptophan, a chemical necessary for creating serotonin (Davidson). Serotonin is known to, “help regulate mood and social behavior, appetite, and digestion, sleep [and] memory” (McIntosh). A healthy vegan diet can greatly benefit an individual’s mood.
Becoming vegan also benefits the environment. Deforestation is a worldwide problem. It is estimated that about seven billion trees are cut down each year (Rainforest Action). Cattle ranching is responsible for 80% of the deforestation occurring in the Amazon (Unsustainable Cattle). Cattle ranching also starts many forest fires. Forest fires in Brazil are almost always started by a technique called the slash-and-burn. People cut down all the trees and burn away the rest of the remaining plants to make way for cattle (Unsustainable Cattle). These fires can easily get out of hand and have devastating effects on the areas they pass through. Cattle farming also releases tons of greenhouse gases (Edmond). Cattle are responsible for 14.5% of all greenhouse gases released by humans (Edmond). If humans stopped raising cattle, humans could cut down greenhouse gas emissions by a considerable amount. Raising cattle is very harmful to the environment for many reasons.
A vegan diet offers many health benefits. Some people believe the vegan diet does not offer enough nutrients and that meat is needed in order to be healthy. This could not be farther from the truth. When comparing one cup of conventional spinach to one cup of conventional raw ground beef, the cup of spinach has more protein, fiber, calcium, iron, potassium, zinc, and vitamin C (Campbell 104). A cup of ground beef has more fat, vitamin B12, fatty acids, and cholesterol (Campbell 104). The spinach clearly has more nutrients. In fact, the only nutrient exclusively found in meat is vitamin B12 (Campbell 30). “Humans require vitamin B12 in microscopic amounts”(Campell 30). Vegans can take a vitamin B12 supplement if desired (Campbell 30). All other vitamins can be found in plants. Some nutrients are “a thousand times more abundant” in plants than in any other food (Campbell 30). Humans don’t need animal products to meet important nutritional requirements.
Going vegan can also reduce the risk of developing chronic illness. Studies have linked dairy and cancer. Casein, the main protein in cow’s milk, was to promote early cancer growth (Campbell 5). In a study done by Loma Linda University, cow’s milk was shown to increase a woman’s chance of getting breast cancer (Pastrino). Research indicates that drinking one cup of milk a day can increase a woman’s chance of getting breast cancer by 50% (Pastrino). The average American drinks up to 118 gallons of milk a year (Evstatieva). While the amount of milk Americans drink has gone down since the 1970s, Americans are still guzzling down milk without thinking about future consequences. Going vegan can also reduce the risk of getting other chronic illnesses such as high blood pressure, heart disease, lung cancer, and Alzheimer’s disease. A vegan diet even reduces the risk of getting diabetes. A study done over 100 years showed that the populations who had lower rates of type 2 diabetes were those who were vegan (Campbell 7). Going vegan may even be able to reverse diabetes. In a study published 30 years ago 13 of 17 diabetic patients were able to discontinue using insulin after just 3 weeks of going vegan (Campbell 7). Going vegan can reverse and even cure some chronic illnesses.
In conclusion, becoming vegan is no easy task, but with it comes many benefits. This kind of diet can help the environment and save animals. It can even save lives by promoting health and preventing chronic illness. It’s never too late to go vegan!
You might think that there is no difference between being a vegan and a vegetarian. Some people even think that the term ‘vegan’ is just a newer and trendier version of or term for vegetarianism.
This is easy to understand when you think about the fact that the well-known common trait for both vegans and vegetarians is that neither eats meat.
Vegan vs vegetarian
But there may be some similarities and differences that you aren’t aware of yet, and these often affect whether a person chooses to be vegan or vegetarian. Vegan and Vegetarian are both different and separate lifestyle and diet choices.
So let’s explore the similarities and differences, and find out why people choose one.
Why Do People Choose Not To Eat Meat?
As I have said, both vegans and vegetarians choose not to eat meat, although there are some vegetarians who do still occasionally include fish in their diet.
There can be a number of different reasons that a person chooses not to include meat in their diet, and this reason usually boils down to personal preference, beliefs, health or lifestyle choices, and sometimes even a sense of identity or belonging to a community.
The most obvious reason that many people choose not to eat meat is that they don’t want to support animal cruelty.
Cutting out meat from your diet means that you are not contributing to fund the meat industry where unspeakable things happen to the animals that end up on our plates. All you have to do is a quick search on YouTube to put you off fully enjoying your next meat feast or milkshake.
People also choose to avoid meat for health reasons. They may feel that more nutrition can be had from eating fruits, vegetables, legumes, etc.
Certain health conditions may also define a diet that must reduce the consumption of meat, for example, Type 2 Diabetes, Liver disease, various types of Cancer, and even Depression.
Some people were simply not brought up eating meat and had their vegan or vegetarian diets imposed on them as young children because this was the way their whole family cooked and ate together. Adults may not enjoy the taste or texture of meat if they have not been used to eating it their whole lives.
Vegan
Nowadays it is common for young people to follow ‘Veganism’ as a trendy lifestyle choice. There are countless YouTubers that rave about being a vegan, or even a ‘raw vegan’ or ‘fruitarian’ at the extreme end, and this fun online content can have a massive impact on other young people who may be impressionable and want to be just like their online role models.
There are even people who follow diets on the more extreme end of the spectrum due to suffering from an eating disorder, though they may not be aware of it.
Restricting what you eat can feel like a way to impose an element of control over something in your life. It can also dramatically change your body shape, which may appeal to people who have an unhealthy relationship with food.
How Is Veganism Different From Vegetarianism?
I suppose you could say that Veganism is a more extreme version of Vegetarianism, in that it follows similar rules and sentiments to the vegetarian diet, but goes one step further to eliminate animal products altogether.
What this means is that while you can have a vegetarian who is still comfortable eating eggs and consuming milk, for example, a pure vegan will choose not to eat anything that comes from an animal. This includes eggs, all dairy products, and supplements that contain anything animal related.
This fundamental difference changes the diet significantly because suddenly the restrictions are a lot higher, and the person will find that they have to be much more conscious about checking labels to find out what exactly is going into any packaged food that they purchase.
It’s amazing how dairy and eggs manage to slip into so much of what we eat.
Often vegans will turn to vegan versions of common foods like cheeses, yogurt, and milk so that they can mimic a lot of the recipes that would otherwise be unavailable to them.
But to make life easier and healthier many vegans opt for simple diets containing whole foods, like fruits, vegetables, grains, and legumes.
Eating veggies
Vegans also have to be more conscious of where they are getting certain nutrients from and that they are consuming enough of them because they have taken out so much out of their diet.
To ensure that nutritional needs are met there are a variety of different supplements in the form of powders that vegans can add to their meals and smoothies so that they don’t have to worry about any nutrient deficiencies.
Although if the person is more health and food-savvy then these supplements aren’t necessary and all the right nutrients can still be found in a vegan diet from eating whole foods, it may just take some extra time and planning.
Another key difference between veganism and vegetarianism is that vegans are often more conscious of the products they choose to buy or use outside of their food shopping.
Anything that has been tested on animals is a big no-no, which means that vegans often opt for special vegan brands of make-up, toiletries, and household products. They are also more conscious of what clothing they buy and would rarely feel comfortable purchasing anything made of real leather or other animal products.
Which Diet Should You Choose?
The answer to this question is a really personal one. It comes down to so many factors, which only you can answer for yourself.
But here are 5 questions you may want to consider if you are trying to choose a healthy diet that is just right for you.
What do you truly believe in? Not everybody is aware of or feels strongly about animal cruelty. I think this is a journey of self-discovery and perhaps the more you learn about where your food is coming from the more you may be inclined to alter your food choices. There are many people who do choose to continue to eat meat even though they don’t believe in animal cruelty, because the meat they source is from cruelty-free sources like true free-range farms and doesn’t support the big industries that are causing all of the problems. You don’t have to be a strict vegan to care about animals or the planet.
Are you concerned about your health? Figure out exactly what concerns you by doing your own research and speaking to your doctor or a health and nutrition professional to come up with a personalized diet that suits you as an individual. You don’t need to put a label on your diet or restrict yourself unnecessarily. Diets should be personal choices that are made because they are right for you, not just because you have decided to ‘be a vegan’ and so you’re ‘not allowed’ to eat certain things on that diet. There is no need to put yourself in a boxed category if it isn’t right for you.
What is your lifestyle like? If you eat out a lot with friends, having a restrictive diet can make that difficult for both you and your friends to enjoy spending time eating out together. There are a lot more cafes and restaurants that are now catering to vegans due to the popularity of the diet increases, but if you live in a smaller town or village you may find that a vegan or vegetarian diet limits you and your activities, and you will have to decide what is more important for you personally.
How many people do you cook for? If you live with your partner or if you have a large family, it may not be realistic to expect everybody in your household to want to go along with your diet choices and be vegetarian or vegan too. Are you prepared to buy and handle meat to cook meals for your whole family if they don’t agree with your new diet choice? It is important to consider how many people your decisions will affect and work out whether you feel strongly enough about your choices to make it work, or whether this is a short-term whim that may cause more conflict than good in your home. Think about how strongly you feel about your new diet and how realistic it is.
How much time and money do you have? Depending on how restrictive your diet becomes it can be more expensive to buy food and make your meals if you aren’t clever about it. Many vegetarians and vegans like to buy high-quality organic fruit and vegetables to maximize the health benefits and make sure they are getting the nutrients they need, which can end up being much more expensive. If you are able to be organized and cook or prepare food in advance to store in your fridge or freezer you may be able to cut costs by buying in bulk.
Do you know how many animals are being killed this year for food in the United States so far? 5,542,850,346 and counting. (accessed on Feb 7, number changes by second) This connects to our water supplies. 1,800 gallons (6,800 liters) of water is used to produce one pound of beef. This matches 7 years of our drinking water for the average person, but instead, this water is being wasted for beef. Becoming a vegan is one of the best and healthiest choices you can do to improve your health, the environment, and our animals.
Health
Plenty of amounts of people are looking for a crazy new diet that will help with weight loss. The one diet many people turn to is becoming vegan. Plenty of observational studies have shown that vegans tend to become “thinner,’ have lower body mass indexes, have lower serum cholesterol, and lower blood pressure, which can reduce the risk of heart disease. Humans also don’t necessarily need to survive by eating meat, eggs, or dairy. All of our dietary needs can totally be fulfilled by going vegan.
Environment
A new study suggests that eating a vegan diet can be the most the easiest thing you can do to reduce your environmental impact on the earth. The effect of animal agriculture on greenhouse gas emissions goes a whole lot further than cows producing methane gas. Meat production needs countless amounts of energy. It’s not just having. to grow crops to feed the animals, but also the impact of fossil fuels are also burnt in the raising, slaughtering, and transportation of animals. In fact, livestock and their by-products go for 51% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. The best positive impact you can do to help our world one step at a time, is to go vegan. Not just for our love of animals, but for our environment. According to the University of Oxford, researchers have found that completely cutting out meat and dairy from your diet could potentially reduce one person’s carbon footprint from their food by up to 73%. If all of the earth’s population, 7.7 billion people, stopped eating meat and dairy products, they found that global farmland use could possibly be reduced by 75%. That area would be equivalent to the size of China, the US, Australia, and the EU all combined. This result would significantly drop greenhouse gas emissions, and would also free up the agricultural wildland that was lost, which in fact is one of the main causes of the mass wildfire extinction. The findings from the new study that is published in the journal Science, reveal that meat and dairy production is mainly responsible for 60% of agriculture’s greenhouse gas emissions, meanwhile, these products themselves provide just 18% of calories and 35% of the Earth’s protein levels from around the world. By changing to a vegan diet, the vegan diet’s environmental impact is up to 84 percent less than the regular meat and dairy diet.
All the poorly managed animal waste products from meat industries are now making their way to pollute our environment and destroy habitats. Tons of pollutant waste products will eventually be washed up into our own water systems. Both nitrogen and phosphorus which have been found in animal waste, will cause algae to grow on the water and also starve our fish of oxygen. Animal diets also have impacts on our land. Producing plenty of meat products means large quantities of our land are taken, just to raise the animals before killing them. Many areas equal to a football field are cleared to rear and graze animals. There’s been an estimated number of 1lb of beef is equivalent to 200 square feet of destroyed rainforest, and it has also been estimated that eating meat needs three times more of the land than needed for a vegan diet. All this wasted land could be used for crops, habitats for animals, and many more uses.
Animal
Cows, pigs, chickens, and all the animals used for food are raised on factory farms and live in miserable pain and cruelty. Mercy for Animals investigations has discovered daily abuse, and torture at these factories. The abuse is devastating. It includes cows being kicked, punched, and dragged by their necks. Pigs get their tails cut off with dull blades and are kicked around. Chickens are stabbed and stomped until death, and many other animals experience the same things and worse. You may think eating eggs and drinking milk won’t harm or kill the animals. False. The commercials and images you see of happy cows and kind farmers milking them and peaceful hens laying their eggs, aren’t true. The dairy and egg industry will spend more money on advertising to inform the public that it doesn’t harm them. The truth is, dairy and eggs are a part of the meat industry. This is the devastating reason vegans don’t eat eggs or consume dairy.
Countless investigations from Mercy For Animals have found and documented that many scared hens are left to suffer from excruciating infections, open wounds, and serious injuries that aren’t checked out and haven’t had proper veterinary care. The poor hens are kept in extremely small battery cages, leaving each hopeless bird with the tiniest floor space, that’s a span smaller than the surface area of a pan iPad. Although not every company might not torture the hens and cows, from the documentation of Mercy for Animals, most do. Other than dairy and eggs, we are all in the meat industry. Animals raised for human consumption suffer tremendously in today’s factory farms. These animals are bred, fed, confined, and possibly drugged to lay more eggs. They also produce more offspring and die sooner with more meat on their bones at the expense of their health, well-being, and social development. For dairy, many people don’t understand what it takes to produce milk. Female cows have to be pregnant or have just given birth to produce milk. Usually, their milk is to feed their newborn calves, but farmers take it instead. After the newborns are born, they are taken away from their mothers within hours of the birth. Dairy cows always have to be pregnant to give milk, so they are forced into impregnation, which is a painful process for the female cow. Since males cannot produce milk, they are sent to be killed for veal. It doesn’t stop there. For cows in the dairy process, there’s a long cycle of abuse that can last up to 5 years, until they are then called “spent” and later are sent to be violently harmed at the slaughterhouse
Gone are the days when veganism was a mocked subculture where activists championed animal rights against wearing fur and testing products on animals. Today, veganism has permeated to the masses and is often painted as an aesthetically pleasing canvas on Instagram. Lifestyle social media influencers have also jumped onto the bandwagon to worship and advocate this lifestyle as part of their personal branding. Searches for “veganism” and “Instagram” have gradually risen to prominence since 2012, creating a positive correlation relationship between the two.
But veganism has challenged societal norms and is questioned by its legitimacy of the “prestige” lifestyle. Vegaphobia is described as an aversion towards vegetarianism and veganism. The PR overhaul on Instagram, unfortunately, fails to outweigh the heavy media play created by major newspaper publishing companies. Such exposure causes threats and hostility towards vegans, forcing them to react differently among non-vegans (talking about veganism only when asked, constantly distancing themselves from elements of vegan stigma). This forces people to feel self-conscious about a moral issue and act within social barriers, straining relationships between vegans and non-vegans.
The U.S. has seen a 600% increase in people self-reporting as vegans in the last three years. Major U.S. cities like Los Angeles and New York City have a higher concentration of vegan-friendly restaurants which are heavily patronized by customers who are likely to be fresh college graduates or from the upper class. As a lifestyle for the young, vega phobia is relatively less common among people under 30 years old, women, and the higher educated. The segregation between status quo causes omnivores to harbor guilt as they are unable to fully comprehend and feel inferior.
If vegans are already stigmatized as a minority group, how negatively viewed are they compared to other minority groups such as Blacks and Homosexuals? A recent study focusing on whether vegans are targets of systematic bias by omnivores revealed that more negative attitudes were displayed towards vegans than the other minority groups.
So why do people hate vegans? Research shows that veganism causes non-vegans to get self-conscious, as it implies a failure of them to participate in a moral issue. Out of guilt, non-vegans may then develop a sense of hatred and displeasure towards vegans. Unresolved guilt plays out along a continuum stretching from framing one’s own non-vegan practices as “moderate” (such as “I don’t eat that much meat”) to actual anger and hostile behavior towards vegans. Some may also feel that adopting veganism is a form of food deviance, thus triggering more stigma and criticism. Food practices are socially powerful markers of social and cultural identity, making it difficult for many to accept any deviation from what is deemed as a socially appropriate diet. Meat-eating in particular has been closely implicated in the construction of masculine identity, where there is a subtle appeal as to why men eat meat despite being aware of veganism benefits — it makes them feel like a man. This brings about a snowball effect when people engage in veg-phobic behavior or conversations in fear of getting ostracised or stigmatized.
Anti-vegan media hostility has also been on the rise, as seen in a majority of the UK national newspapers representing veganism in a bad light. The media plays a significant role in the shaping and spreading of cultural ideas, and in this case, can heavily influence the social perception and acceptance of veganism. In the articles, veganism has been perceived as ridiculous, self-abstinent, difficult and impossible to sustain, a fashionable phenomenon, hypersensitive, or even hostile. As such, the reason for vega phobia can be strongly traced back to media reports who take on a negative stance on veganism.
Vegans themselves may also trigger vega phobia! This is the case when they conduct extreme behaviors, one clear example being an advertisement from PETA where they suggested that feeding meat to children is child abuse. Although it is effective in catching the audience’s attention, the usage of guilt appeal (moral reproach) may backfire, triggering discontentment from non-vegans, and creating more hate towards veganism.
Lastly, vega phobia differs culturally, mainly between Western and Asia regions, with the former experiencing a higher proportion of vega phobia mindset. This is due to the different eating habits in different cultures — western countries adopt a more meat-eating culture as compared to Asian countries where adopting plant-based diets such as veganism may be more of a norm. As such, adopting a vegan lifestyle would be more accepted in Asian countries than it would be in Western countries, so vega phobia is less prominent in the former as well.
All these causes leading up to feelings of hatred and prejudice towards vegans do have significantly damaging repercussions. Strong feelings of dislike, as well as negative perceptions towards the vegan community, can eventually escalate into hostile action and discrimination. In 2018, William Sitwell, a magazine editor, had to quit his job after spewing criticism about vegans, even terrorizing them with death threats, by asking his fellow colleague, “How about a series on killing vegans, one by one?”. Portraying vegans in a bad light has adverse effects that may even affect basic human rights. In 2017, a vegan in Switzerland had her citizenship revoked because her neighbors have been overwhelmed by her advocation for veganism. Many vegans have also reported that whenever they voice out their identity as vegans, they are often faced with malevolence.
These are instances of the harsh reality of unjust treatment that vegans would have to put up with constantly, further demonstrating how a group of people can be so unfairly treated just because they do not adhere to the social food norms of meat-eating.
Relationship-wise, groups of vegans and avid meat-eaters can grow apart as a result of vegaphobia. Meat-eaters who are engraved in the belief of vegaphobia may have negative perceptions that are so strong they despise and avoid vegans, through social distancing. Social distancing (the act of physically distancing themselves from vegans) not only allows non-vegans to refrain from a courtesy stigma, but it also reinforces food norms on meat-eating. Humiliating and distancing socially from vegans will only emphasize how these norms are acceptable and appropriate. This convinces society to adhere to the normal behavior of meat-eating, strengthening identification between non-stigmatized and stigmatized groups.
Social distancing becomes more personal when intimate relationships are jeopardized. For example, the presence of a vegan family member can be problematic. Family food traditions may get disrupted when someone in the household changes their diet to veganism, as the vegan family member no longer (fully) participates in family food traditions, which are highly emotionally valued. Vegans find themselves engaging in meals (with friends and family) less for various reasons — either they do not want to be seen as a liability, or they did not get invited for meals by other meat-eaters. In the case that they do engage in meals with other meat-eaters, they often receive antagonistic questioning from omnivores, including family and friends. Interrogations are often followed by open ridicule and discrediting of veganism as unwarranted or merely a temporary phase. This act of ridicule and discrediting of vegans creates an explicit bias toward them. This explicit bias that has been formed then becomes the base of subsequent vegan ridicule, creating a cycle of prejudice towards vegans. Eventually, this leads vegans to experience tensions in social relationships with non-vegans.
Strain in relationships may result in lost friendships, reduced contact, or even exclusion from social activities, portraying the high social costs of veganism. A recent survey in 2018 found that 92 percent of respondents experience vega phobia from family and friends, further proving the point above. The example of social distancing in a familial context suggests how intimate relationships can be harmed due to beliefs and practices that lie outside social barriers.
The reputation of vegans can deteriorate further as lesser people are interested in adopting vegan diets. Vegaphobia may prevent individuals from reducing their meat intake as they anticipate the stigma that would follow from food deviance and they want to avoid experiencing the same negative treatment as vegans. Individuals anticipate that if they were to reduce consumption of meat products—hence adopting the ways in which deviant, plant-based people behave, such as vegans—they would be subject to similar stigmatizing treatment for their food choices, hence choosing not to adopt such diets in fear of being ostracized.
All in all, we need to be conscious of our diet and consume responsibly. Other than educating non-vegans on the benefits of veganism, the introduction of reductionism (gradual reduction in consumption) and flexitarianism (consuming plant-based foods with the occasional inclusion of meat and animal by-products) has helped to build bridges for non-vegans to gradually understand veganism as an alternative dietary lifestyle. Although we can never fully eliminate prejudice against veganism, we need to note that any effort, no matter how small, are crucial to reducing vega phobia.
After trying several different diets, we decided to try a ketogenic diet. Low carb high-fat diet seems most convenient for us. We don’t have to starve; we can eat in moderation. It’s only you need to limit the intake of carbohydrates in your body. We studied this diet very carefully and also tried to gather as much as possible the recipe. From our experience, the challenge of the diet is the limitation of the menu of the food that we can eat, and then become bored, and end up stopping the diet.
Ketogenic offers many health benefits. Besides it can help you lose weight, also it improves your health. The principle is almost similar to low-carb diets, also Paleo and Atkins diets. Limitation in intake of carbohydrates, no sugar, and high fat. Fat will replace carbohydrates as a source of energy. When the body uses fat as a source of energy, it will release ketone, and the condition of the body becomes ketosis.
Ketosis is a condition in which the human liver produces ketone to be used as fuel or energy used throughout the body, especially the brain. Ketosis occurs when the body no longer has carbohydrate (glucose) intake as a food source to be processed into energy. The ketogenic diet is high in fat, medium protein, low carbohydrate diet, with a target of 75 percent of daily calories from fat, 5 to 10 percent from carbohydrates, and the rest from protein. Generally limiting carbohydrates to a maximum of 50 grams, or sometimes, in the beginning, only 30 grams!
The target ketogenic diet is to make the body become ketosis, as a fat burner as energy. Many who consider ketogenic tend to be stricter in their diet, compared to other low carbs. For dieters to lose weight more motivated because the beginning of this diet is run definitely weight loss will be significant. Carbohydrates will use a lot of water in metabolism, so when stopping the carbo force, of course, the water content in the body decreases.
This results in drastic weight loss. Some people who are accustomed to using glucose as an energy source will certainly experience challenging adaptations. Feeling hungry, exhausted, or sometimes emotional. Some people are able to face a ‘critical period’ well and get extraordinary results, especially in loose significant body weight when the body is in ketosis.
From our experience, in the first 4 weeks, we lost our weight very significantly. Of course, because in that time, our body lost the water. My husband measured his weight and the size of his body. He measured his waistline, arm line, and thigh line. We also do some sports, to help the body burn fat. Some people just leave this activity, but for us that having a goal to be healthier, not only losing weight but doing sport, is a must. After 4 weeks, the losing weight becomes slower. It is still continuing but not drastic as before.
The ketogenic diet actually is not only a diet, but it is a lifestyle since you need to keep and maintain your diet not only for a while but forever if possible. Maybe you can just take a break, have a cheat day, and the next day, go back to this lifestyle.
Usually, when we have a lunch invitation, we will bring a very simple food, that is small and easy to prepare, a boiled egg! For me two and also for my husband. If at a party or meeting we can’t find something to eat, boiled eggs can save our hunger.
We have a funny story about that. We were traveling to Berlin, and we had a river cruise tour along the canal. We were so hungry after walking around Potsdamer Platz, in the center of Berlin. Our children had their lunch at the Indian restaurant near the Madame Tussaud Museum. We had also, actually, but we only eat butter chicken and palak paneer. The portion is so small. We were still hungry, but if we order again, it would take time. We didn’t want to spend the time waiting for the food. The children besides having their chicken biryani, also had their favorites naan, with some daals and butter chicken. Although the aroma of the cheese naan was very tempting, we tried not to touch the rice from biryani, or naan. We were just like a warrior, that try to stay on the path and had to defend ourselves from so many food temptations.
When we left the restaurant, we succeeded and didn’t touch any carbohydrates, but later in our next tour, cruising Berlin’s canal, we felt so hungry. Finally, my husband took out the eggs from the Tupper that we brought, and keep inside the bag. He offered me two boiled eggs, and he too two eggs for himself.
Inside the river cruise that was covered with glasses, suddenly full with the smell of egg that was strong enough to smell from a two or three-meter distance, and oops, it was a little bit annoying. The children were upset because of the aroma, and they started to complain. They said that it was embarrassing. We only hoped that it didn’t bother other passengers. Finally, the boiled eggs saved us from cheating!
In today’s world, diet has become an important part of one’s life. Food is related to a person’s well-being. High or low levels of specific macronutrients can lead to different types of problems. Different diets have different impacts on different bodies.
Gluten is a part of protein family called prolamins (glutenin and gliadin) which are the storage parts of protein in the starchy endosperm of many grains like wheat, barley and rye. A gluten-free diet as the name suggests is a diet containing no gluten in it. It refers to removal of all the grains which contain gluten in them.
Gluten-free diet has gained a large amount of popularity amongst general population. The consumption of gluten-free foods has increased over the last thirty years. People with coeliac disease have an intolerance to these grains. The intake of gluten by people with coeliac disease results into inflammation in the gut and pain. It is a global disease and the only available treatment for it is gluten-free diet. The avoidance of gluten has also made people believe that it can bring health benefits to them. Any restrictive diet results in nutritional inadequacy amongst people who do not have any problems. Consumption of a gluten-free diet primarily affects the grain intake. It can possibly result into nutritional deficiencies like fiber, folate, iron and some other micronutrients or nutrient excess like saturated fats.
This study aims to find the effects of a two-week gluten-free diet on number of serves of different food groups consumed by second year nutrition science university students. The data was self-reported by referring to the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating recommended serves list.
Methods
A randomized control trial was performed to see effects of a two-week gluten-free diet on 84 university students from NUT2002 unit of second year of Bachelor of Nutrition Science course at Monash, Clayton campus. Participants were randomly assigned to either intervention or control group, based on their student ID numbers picked out of a hat to reduce the risk of bias. Participants who had personal reasons contacted the unit coordinator to get allocated in their preferred group but everyone else was randomly allocated to the study groups.
Ethical Approval
This study was approved by Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee. All the participants were explained about a written consent form before participating in the study. It was compulsory for all the participants to sign up the consent form before getting involved in the study.
Study Design
The participants following both the diets were asked to report their demographic information like age, living arrangements and disposable income at the start of the study and were made to report their intake of food intake including vegetable and legumes, fruits, grains, meat, poultry, fish, dairy and discretionary foods based on the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating recommended serves at baseline and follow up. Also, participants had to record their weight at baseline and after two weeks to report the weight and BMI change. All of this data was self-reported by the participants by adding in their collected information on google docs to share it with the cohort.
Diet
Participants in the intervention group were given knowledge about which foods they can or cannot eat in the form of a lecture and a guided group discussion was held on the diet. The control group was instructed to follow up their regular diet as normal.
Outcomes Measured
The data was analyzed by using IBM SPSS. It was tested for normality and based on it either parametric T-test or nonparametric (the Wilcoxon rank sum test) was going to be used for data analysis. All p-values in the analysis were two tailed and under 0.05 (p £ 0.05) which were considered as statistically significant. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to analyze the data of one variable on two events (baseline and follow-up).
Results
The study sample consisted of 84 students out of which only 73, 35 from control and 38 from gluten-free diet, reported the complete data. The study was conducted for two weeks.
The age was presented as 1 labelled as 25 years and under and 2 labelled as over 25 years. ‘1’ was used as living with family, ‘2’ living on campus, ‘3’ living alone and ‘4’ others was presented in numbers mentioning about the participant’s living arrangements. Disposable income was presented as ‘1’ for income above $50 or more per week and ‘2’ for less than $50 per week. Weight and BMI change was noted at baseline and follow up and only the change between the two was reported in the data. The demographics data was non normally distributed because of which median and interquartile ranges are presented. The outcome of evaluating the weight and BMI change after following the diet was to see if following gluten-free diet would result in reduction or addition in weight of the participants. Participants following gluten-free diet gained some weight and had a little increased BMI. Whereas there was no change seen in control group.
Both the study groups reported data on the number of serves consumed following the gluten-free or the control diet. The intake of number of serves of different food groups including vegetable and legumes, fruit, grains, meat, poultry and fish, milk, cheese, yoghurt and discretionary food items was noted by the participants at baseline (day 1) and follow up (day 14) of the diet. The data was non normally distributed as to why medians and interquartile ranges are displayed. Also, to compare the variable’s value on two different events which was baseline and follow-up, the Wilcoxon rank test was used to get p-value. The vegetable intake for control and gluten-free diet evaluated that the p-value was 0.03 for both the groups, meaning that there is some significant difference and the null hypothesis is rejected. Also, the intake of grains for both the study groups show p-value 0.05, which means that there is no statistical significant difference between these variables. The medians of both study groups in baseline and follow up show similar results. The results for both the study groups were quite similar to each other except the grain intake.
Discussion
This study aimed to find the effects of a two week gluten-free diet on number of serves of different food groups consumed by second year nutrition science university students. During this two weeks of study, thirty eight university students who followed the intervention diet, i.e. gluten-free diet consumed an adequate amount of vegetables and legumes ranging from 4-5 serves. The intake of fruits met the daily recommended number of serves. The consumption of grains dropped down considering that six serves should be consumed according to the Australian Guide to Healthy eating. The intake of meat was adequate, meeting the recommendations. The dairy intake was near to the recommended serves and discretionary serves were quite adequate.
Thirty eight participants reported that they consumed about two to four serves of grains which did not meet the daily requirements.. In 2011-12, it was surveyed in Australia that the population largely consumed grains by eating foods like variety of breads, ready to eat cereals, cookies, doughnuts, pasta, flours used for baking etc. These food items contain gluten in them which people avoiding gluten cannot consume. T.Thompson et al. in her study estimated the intake of grains and different nutrients from a three day food record and she concluded that grains which contain gluten in them are a good source of dietary fibre, folate, iron, niacin, riboflavin and thiamine and reduction in grain intake in people following a gluten-free diet can result in low levels of folate, iron, dietary fibre and many more nutrients in the body. The consumption of grains that do not contain gluten in them helps to meet up the recommended serves of grain intake but it does not provide with the exact same amount of nutrients that are present in gluten containing products. Also in a study of S.J Shepherd et al., they looked into a seven day food intake and Giorgia Vici et al. aimed to evaluate the nutritional quality of gluten-free diet, both these studies found that the gluten-free food items like ready to eat cereals or breads do not contain enough amount of dietary fibre as during the process of making these foods, the grain’s outer layer is removed which contains the highest amount of fibre and only the starchy inside part is used. In addition, a paper in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association reported that these food items are not enriched or fortified because of which people consuming gluten-free food suffer with low levels of folic acid, iron and B-vitamins in their body.
The study of university students showed an adequate amount of vegetable, legumes and fruits consumed in both study groups. In 2014-15, it was found that almost half population (49.8%) above the age of 18 years in Australia consumed their recommended serves of fruit whereas only 7% of the population met the vegetable guidelines. Vegetables and fruits are naturally gluten-free foods, an increased intake was expected to see in this food group as these foods provide a good amount of fibre and other vitamins and minerals. Since, the grain intake was less, higher intake of fruits and vegetables would help to meet the dietary fibre requirements as the recommendations are set if a person is consuming enough of all other food groups and since the grain intake is low which supplies a good amount of dietary fibre, the fruits and vegetables intake could have increased in participants following gluten-free diet to meet their fibre requirements. In addition, the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics reported that consumption of fruits and vegetables when following a gluten-free diet helps to reduce sodium intake and the urge to drink sugar sweetened beverages helping them to maintain their energy levels. This is helpful as a lot of processed gluten-free foods available in the market are high in sugar content so consumption of fruits would help in avoiding the additional sugar content from the drinks.
The intake of meat, poultry and fish was adequate in both the diets. But it is hard to say if the participants following the gluten-free diet met their recommended protein intake as the servings consumed were similar comparing both the study groups and the recommended serves are set keeping in mind about the other food groups role in providing the adequate amount of nutrients as according to J. Miranda et al. gluten is present in the primary protein of wheat flour and its removal from the diet would result in low amounts of protein content in the body. The protein content that people following gluten-free diet cannot consume from grains should consume from increasing their meat, fish and poultry intake a little as to supply their body with adequate amounts of protein.
The consumption of dairy products met the recommended serves approximately. But according to a study it was found that people following a gluten-free diet tend to consume less dairy products resulting in deficiency of calcium and vitamin D which further results in high risk of osteoporosis found by two studies.
The intake of discretionary foods was within the recommended range of serves inn both study groups. This was expected as the participants are Nutrition Science students of second year and they would consume a healthy diet. Whereas according to Mallika Marshall of Harvard Medical School, the variety of gluten-free foods in the market are made with a lot of sugar and fat to make them taste good. She also claimed that by consuming these products instead of other whole foods, nutritional deficiencies could arise resulting into more serious health problems which can be seen in people who consume convenient foods.
The limitation of this study is that there could have been some university students who followed gluten-free diet before participating in this study and got randomly allocated towards the control study group which would result in consuming a gluten-free diet but being a part of control group. Also, the participants studying nutrition science may likely consume more healthier options available and not consume the discretionary foods which are gluten-free as much as the normal population which would result in adequately meeting up with the recommended serves. Also, complete and correct collection of data could be improved. It resulted in elimination of some participants leading to a reduced sample size with only seventy three participants in total, thus leading to a reduced chance of a proper population representation. However, the focus on a specific group allows better and closer observation of a healthy population. The time duration for the study of two weeks may have influenced food choices of participants and they may require more time to give better results. Information about participant’s ethnicity would have helped to understand more about the food habits of the study group as university is a diverse place and university students participating in the study would consume different types of foods resulting in different aspects contributing to the number of serves consumed by a person. An example in context of this can be Asian people consume a lot of rice and since it doesn’t contain gluten, their grain intake would be higher whereas people from other backgrounds who don’t consume rice would have lower serves of grain.
Further, research is required to develop a strong believe that if consuming a gluten-free diet is beneficial for people who are not allergic to gluten. Improvements can be made to adjust the limitation of this study.
Conclusion
In summary, the results indicate that gluten-free diet resulted in decreased serves of grains but did not affect any other food group intake. This can lead to some nutritional risk factors. To achieve better results, the study should be done on a bigger set of people representing different ethnicities in future. It is better to consume gluten containing foods if a person does not have any allergies as they are enrich in nutrients that are very beneficial for our body.
After trying several different diets, we decided to try a ketogenic diet. Low carb high-fat diet seems most convenient for us. We don’t have to starve; we can eat in moderation. It’s only you need to limit the intake of carbohydrates in your body. We studied this diet very carefully and also tried to gather as much as possible the recipe. From our experience, the challenge of the diet is the limitation of the menu of the food that we can eat, and then become bored, and end up stopping the diet.
Ketogenic offers many health benefits. Besides it can help you lose weight, also it improves your health. The principle is almost similar to low-carb diets, also Paleo and Atkins diets. Limitation in intake of carbohydrates, no sugar, and high fat. Fat will replace carbohydrates as a source of energy. When the body uses fat as a source of energy, it will release ketone, and the condition of the body becomes ketosis.
Ketosis is a condition in which the human liver produces ketone to be used as fuel or energy used throughout the body, especially the brain. Ketosis occurs when the body no longer has carbohydrate (glucose) intake as a food source to be processed into energy. The ketogenic diet is high in fat, medium protein, low carbohydrate diet, with a target of 75 percent of daily calories from fat, 5 to 10 percent from carbohydrates, and the rest from protein. Generally limiting carbohydrates to a maximum of 50 grams, or sometimes, in the beginning, only 30 grams!
The target ketogenic diet is to make the body become ketosis, as a fat burner as energy. Many who consider ketogenic tend to be stricter in their diet, compared to other low carbs. For dieters to lose weight more motivated because the beginning of this diet is run definitely weight loss will be significant. Carbohydrates will use a lot of water in metabolism, so when stopping the carbo force, of course, the water content in the body decreases.
This results in drastic weight loss. Some people who are accustomed to using glucose as an energy source will certainly experience challenging adaptations. Feeling hungry, exhausted, or sometimes emotional. Some people are able to face a ‘critical period’ well and get extraordinary results, especially in loose significant body weight when the body is in ketosis.
From our experience, in the first 4 weeks, we lost our weight very significantly. Of course, because in that time, our body lost the water. My husband measured his weight and the size of his body. He measured his waistline, arm line, and thigh line. We also do some sports, to help the body burn fat. Some people just leave this activity, but for us that having a goal to be healthier, not only losing weight but doing sport, is a must. After 4 weeks, the losing weight becomes slower. It is still continuing but not drastic as before.
The ketogenic diet actually is not only a diet, but it is a lifestyle since you need to keep and maintain your diet not only for a while but forever if possible. Maybe you can just take a break, have a cheat day, and the next day, go back to this lifestyle.
Usually, when we have a lunch invitation, we will bring a very simple food, that is small and easy to prepare, a boiled egg! For me two and also for my husband. If at a party or meeting we can’t find something to eat, boiled eggs can save our hunger.
We have a funny story about that. We were traveling to Berlin, and we had a river cruise tour along the canal. We were so hungry after walking around Potsdamer Platz, in the center of Berlin. Our children had their lunch at the Indian restaurant near the Madame Tussaud Museum. We had also, actually, but we only eat butter chicken and palak paneer. The portion is so small. We were still hungry, but if we order again, it would take time. We didn’t want to spend the time waiting for the food. The children besides having their chicken biryani, also had their favorites naan, with some daals and butter chicken. Although the aroma of the cheese naan was very tempting, we tried not to touch the rice from biryani, or naan. We were just like a warrior, that try to stay on the path and had to defend ourselves from so many food temptations.
When we left the restaurant, we succeeded and didn’t touch any carbohydrates, but later in our next tour, cruising Berlin’s canal, we felt so hungry. Finally, my husband took out the eggs from the Tupper that we brought, and keep inside the bag. He offered me two boiled eggs, and he too two eggs for himself.
Inside the river cruise that was covered with glasses, suddenly full with the smell of egg that was strong enough to smell from a two or three-meter distance, and oops, it was a little bit annoying. The children were upset because of the aroma, and they started to complain. They said that it was embarrassing. We only hoped that it didn’t bother other passengers. Finally, the boiled eggs saved us from cheating!
In today’s world, diet has become an important part of one’s life. Food is related to a person’s well-being. High or low levels of specific macronutrients can lead to different types of problems. Different diets have different impacts on different bodies.
Gluten is a part of protein family called prolamins (glutenin and gliadin) which are the storage parts of protein in the starchy endosperm of many grains like wheat, barley and rye. A gluten-free diet as the name suggests is a diet containing no gluten in it. It refers to removal of all the grains which contain gluten in them.
Gluten-free diet has gained a large amount of popularity amongst general population. The consumption of gluten-free foods has increased over the last thirty years. People with coeliac disease have an intolerance to these grains. The intake of gluten by people with coeliac disease results into inflammation in the gut and pain. It is a global disease and the only available treatment for it is gluten-free diet. The avoidance of gluten has also made people believe that it can bring health benefits to them. Any restrictive diet results in nutritional inadequacy amongst people who do not have any problems. Consumption of a gluten-free diet primarily affects the grain intake. It can possibly result into nutritional deficiencies like fiber, folate, iron and some other micronutrients or nutrient excess like saturated fats.
This study aims to find the effects of a two-week gluten-free diet on number of serves of different food groups consumed by second year nutrition science university students. The data was self-reported by referring to the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating recommended serves list.
Methods
A randomized control trial was performed to see effects of a two-week gluten-free diet on 84 university students from NUT2002 unit of second year of Bachelor of Nutrition Science course at Monash, Clayton campus. Participants were randomly assigned to either intervention or control group, based on their student ID numbers picked out of a hat to reduce the risk of bias. Participants who had personal reasons contacted the unit coordinator to get allocated in their preferred group but everyone else was randomly allocated to the study groups.
Ethical Approval
This study was approved by Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee. All the participants were explained about a written consent form before participating in the study. It was compulsory for all the participants to sign up the consent form before getting involved in the study.
Study Design
The participants following both the diets were asked to report their demographic information like age, living arrangements and disposable income at the start of the study and were made to report their intake of food intake including vegetable and legumes, fruits, grains, meat, poultry, fish, dairy and discretionary foods based on the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating recommended serves at baseline and follow up. Also, participants had to record their weight at baseline and after two weeks to report the weight and BMI change. All of this data was self-reported by the participants by adding in their collected information on google docs to share it with the cohort.
Diet
Participants in the intervention group were given knowledge about which foods they can or cannot eat in the form of a lecture and a guided group discussion was held on the diet. The control group was instructed to follow up their regular diet as normal.
Outcomes Measured
The data was analyzed by using IBM SPSS. It was tested for normality and based on it either parametric T-test or nonparametric (the Wilcoxon rank sum test) was going to be used for data analysis. All p-values in the analysis were two tailed and under 0.05 (p £ 0.05) which were considered as statistically significant. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to analyze the data of one variable on two events (baseline and follow-up).
Results
The study sample consisted of 84 students out of which only 73, 35 from control and 38 from gluten-free diet, reported the complete data. The study was conducted for two weeks.
The age was presented as 1 labelled as 25 years and under and 2 labelled as over 25 years. ‘1’ was used as living with family, ‘2’ living on campus, ‘3’ living alone and ‘4’ others was presented in numbers mentioning about the participant’s living arrangements. Disposable income was presented as ‘1’ for income above $50 or more per week and ‘2’ for less than $50 per week. Weight and BMI change was noted at baseline and follow up and only the change between the two was reported in the data. The demographics data was non normally distributed because of which median and interquartile ranges are presented. The outcome of evaluating the weight and BMI change after following the diet was to see if following gluten-free diet would result in reduction or addition in weight of the participants. Participants following gluten-free diet gained some weight and had a little increased BMI. Whereas there was no change seen in control group.
Both the study groups reported data on the number of serves consumed following the gluten-free or the control diet. The intake of number of serves of different food groups including vegetable and legumes, fruit, grains, meat, poultry and fish, milk, cheese, yoghurt and discretionary food items was noted by the participants at baseline (day 1) and follow up (day 14) of the diet. The data was non normally distributed as to why medians and interquartile ranges are displayed. Also, to compare the variable’s value on two different events which was baseline and follow-up, the Wilcoxon rank test was used to get p-value. The vegetable intake for control and gluten-free diet evaluated that the p-value was 0.03 for both the groups, meaning that there is some significant difference and the null hypothesis is rejected. Also, the intake of grains for both the study groups show p-value 0.05, which means that there is no statistical significant difference between these variables. The medians of both study groups in baseline and follow up show similar results. The results for both the study groups were quite similar to each other except the grain intake.
Discussion
This study aimed to find the effects of a two week gluten-free diet on number of serves of different food groups consumed by second year nutrition science university students. During this two weeks of study, thirty eight university students who followed the intervention diet, i.e. gluten-free diet consumed an adequate amount of vegetables and legumes ranging from 4-5 serves. The intake of fruits met the daily recommended number of serves. The consumption of grains dropped down considering that six serves should be consumed according to the Australian Guide to Healthy eating. The intake of meat was adequate, meeting the recommendations. The dairy intake was near to the recommended serves and discretionary serves were quite adequate.
Thirty eight participants reported that they consumed about two to four serves of grains which did not meet the daily requirements.. In 2011-12, it was surveyed in Australia that the population largely consumed grains by eating foods like variety of breads, ready to eat cereals, cookies, doughnuts, pasta, flours used for baking etc. These food items contain gluten in them which people avoiding gluten cannot consume. T.Thompson et al. in her study estimated the intake of grains and different nutrients from a three day food record and she concluded that grains which contain gluten in them are a good source of dietary fibre, folate, iron, niacin, riboflavin and thiamine and reduction in grain intake in people following a gluten-free diet can result in low levels of folate, iron, dietary fibre and many more nutrients in the body. The consumption of grains that do not contain gluten in them helps to meet up the recommended serves of grain intake but it does not provide with the exact same amount of nutrients that are present in gluten containing products. Also in a study of S.J Shepherd et al., they looked into a seven day food intake and Giorgia Vici et al. aimed to evaluate the nutritional quality of gluten-free diet, both these studies found that the gluten-free food items like ready to eat cereals or breads do not contain enough amount of dietary fibre as during the process of making these foods, the grain’s outer layer is removed which contains the highest amount of fibre and only the starchy inside part is used. In addition, a paper in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association reported that these food items are not enriched or fortified because of which people consuming gluten-free food suffer with low levels of folic acid, iron and B-vitamins in their body.
The study of university students showed an adequate amount of vegetable, legumes and fruits consumed in both study groups. In 2014-15, it was found that almost half population (49.8%) above the age of 18 years in Australia consumed their recommended serves of fruit whereas only 7% of the population met the vegetable guidelines. Vegetables and fruits are naturally gluten-free foods, an increased intake was expected to see in this food group as these foods provide a good amount of fibre and other vitamins and minerals. Since, the grain intake was less, higher intake of fruits and vegetables would help to meet the dietary fibre requirements as the recommendations are set if a person is consuming enough of all other food groups and since the grain intake is low which supplies a good amount of dietary fibre, the fruits and vegetables intake could have increased in participants following gluten-free diet to meet their fibre requirements. In addition, the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics reported that consumption of fruits and vegetables when following a gluten-free diet helps to reduce sodium intake and the urge to drink sugar sweetened beverages helping them to maintain their energy levels. This is helpful as a lot of processed gluten-free foods available in the market are high in sugar content so consumption of fruits would help in avoiding the additional sugar content from the drinks.
The intake of meat, poultry and fish was adequate in both the diets. But it is hard to say if the participants following the gluten-free diet met their recommended protein intake as the servings consumed were similar comparing both the study groups and the recommended serves are set keeping in mind about the other food groups role in providing the adequate amount of nutrients as according to J. Miranda et al. gluten is present in the primary protein of wheat flour and its removal from the diet would result in low amounts of protein content in the body. The protein content that people following gluten-free diet cannot consume from grains should consume from increasing their meat, fish and poultry intake a little as to supply their body with adequate amounts of protein.
The consumption of dairy products met the recommended serves approximately. But according to a study it was found that people following a gluten-free diet tend to consume less dairy products resulting in deficiency of calcium and vitamin D which further results in high risk of osteoporosis found by two studies.
The intake of discretionary foods was within the recommended range of serves inn both study groups. This was expected as the participants are Nutrition Science students of second year and they would consume a healthy diet. Whereas according to Mallika Marshall of Harvard Medical School, the variety of gluten-free foods in the market are made with a lot of sugar and fat to make them taste good. She also claimed that by consuming these products instead of other whole foods, nutritional deficiencies could arise resulting into more serious health problems which can be seen in people who consume convenient foods.
The limitation of this study is that there could have been some university students who followed gluten-free diet before participating in this study and got randomly allocated towards the control study group which would result in consuming a gluten-free diet but being a part of control group. Also, the participants studying nutrition science may likely consume more healthier options available and not consume the discretionary foods which are gluten-free as much as the normal population which would result in adequately meeting up with the recommended serves. Also, complete and correct collection of data could be improved. It resulted in elimination of some participants leading to a reduced sample size with only seventy three participants in total, thus leading to a reduced chance of a proper population representation. However, the focus on a specific group allows better and closer observation of a healthy population. The time duration for the study of two weeks may have influenced food choices of participants and they may require more time to give better results. Information about participant’s ethnicity would have helped to understand more about the food habits of the study group as university is a diverse place and university students participating in the study would consume different types of foods resulting in different aspects contributing to the number of serves consumed by a person. An example in context of this can be Asian people consume a lot of rice and since it doesn’t contain gluten, their grain intake would be higher whereas people from other backgrounds who don’t consume rice would have lower serves of grain.
Further, research is required to develop a strong believe that if consuming a gluten-free diet is beneficial for people who are not allergic to gluten. Improvements can be made to adjust the limitation of this study.
Conclusion
In summary, the results indicate that gluten-free diet resulted in decreased serves of grains but did not affect any other food group intake. This can lead to some nutritional risk factors. To achieve better results, the study should be done on a bigger set of people representing different ethnicities in future. It is better to consume gluten containing foods if a person does not have any allergies as they are enrich in nutrients that are very beneficial for our body.
The diet of prehistoric homo sapiens is an interesting topic to research due to its evidential contribution to the history of human eating practices. In pre-agricultural times, people consumed the products of their hunting and gathering efforts. In particular, the evidence of historical findings presented by Harris (1998) suggests that male homo sapiens of the prehistoric era consumed hunted animals that contained large amounts of protein while leaving smaller animals, such as frogs, insects, and others, to women and children. Similarly, another source of food was gathering, which allowed for eating berries and plants, which were consumed regularly (Harris 1998). Overall, this evidence is informed by the anthropological, archeological, and historical findings cited by the author of the book. Therefore, the evidence is strong and convincing due to the credibility of the information sources.
Discussion
The practice of cannibalism, which involves eating human beings, is a topic that continues to evoke a macabre interest in today’s contemporary civilizations. Particularly problematic is the question of how human cannibalism came to exist in the first place. Cannibalism in contemporary humans has been linked to any combination of the following motivations: survival, behavior that is insane or criminal, aggressive, spiritual or ceremonial, culinary or nutritional, and medical (Harris 1998). However, cannibalism is not unique to modern humans; a variety of hominin species has done it since at least one million years ago. Modern humans are not the only species that have engaged in this behavior. As a consequence, there is a very good chance that pre-agricultural homo sapiens engaged in anthropophagy which had its advantages and disadvantages.
The assumed advantage of consuming human flesh in the prehistoric era might be the satisfaction of the cultural and ritual needs of the people, as well as a means of their survival in turbulent times. Evidence from different parts of the world suggests that cannibalism occurred during times of economic, nutritional, political, or social stress. The archaeologist David Rockefeller, who was devoured by the Asmat tribe in New Guinea in 1961, and the Uruguayan rugby players whose aircraft crashed in the Andes in 1972 are two examples that have been reported as late as the 1960s. Cannibalism may also be affected by societal norms, such as those practiced by the Fore people of New Guinea, for whom it was discovered to be a means of demonstrating affection for a deceased relative and expressing sadness over the loss of a family member (Harris 1998). Consequently, there are various reasons serving as advantages that could have motivated the emergence of cannibalism at the time.
Another advantage of cannibalism might be considered within the context of evolutionary development. It has been hypothesized that humans did not start eating meat until the late Pleistocene period, which occurred approximately 10,000–11,000 years ago (Sack 2021). If this is the case, then cannibalism was a relatively recent cultural and nutritional experiment in human social evolution. According to the findings of Garn and Block (1970 cited in Sack 2021), “while human flesh may function as a source of both protein and calories in an emergency, it is dubious that routine people-eating ever had any nutritional importance.” Cole expanded on this finding by analyzing the relative nutritional qualities of other animal fleshes, including human flesh (Sack 2021). When viewed in conjunction with Slater’s beliefs about the evolution of human civilization (Slater 1959: 1042–1059 cited in Sack 2021), the effect that cannibalism had on nutritional health and, as a result, female fertility suggests that cannibalism played a role in the evolution of early human society. This finding broadens the significance of archaeological studies on cannibalism, which often ends after describing and analyzing specific episodes of cannibalism.
The disadvantages of anthropophagy might be related to health issues and the insufficiency of nutritious features of human flesh. Cannibalism is connected to the dynamics of early human groups’ reproduction and their chance of survival. Due to a number of factors, it is very improbable that early humans were able to maintain their health by subsisting only on human flesh as their food source. First, considering that the human body is made up of roughly 70 percent water, the human body’s nutritional value per kilogram of butchered meat is probably lower than that of the animals that early man most frequently hunted (Sack 2021). Similarly, when a cow is slaughtered to provide human food, only around fifty to sixty percent of the animal’s total live weight is deemed appropriate for human consumption (Sack 2021). Therefore, late Pleistocene cannibals would have probably hunted human prey to extinction with less health value than they would have obtained from ingesting other similarly sized prey.
The practice of cannibalism on an irregular or sporadic basis presents various dietary challenges. Firstly, eating human brains might spread kuru illness, which is a kind of transmissible spongiform encephalopathy, to other people; yet, in the long run, cannibalism can select for genetic resistance to this disease (Mead et al. 2003 cited in Sack 2021). Secondly, a diet that consisted primarily of meat, such as the one that was popular in the 1970s and 1980s as a rapid weight-loss diet for brief periods, was linked to malnutrition, kidney problems, constipation, osteoporosis, and an increased risk of cancer and heart disease (Scharffenberg 1979: 15–48 cited in Sack 2021). Other negative impacts were aggressive and antisocial behavior (Hippchen 1978: 3–19 cited in Sack 2021), which the researchers attributed to the fact that diets high in meat lack critical carbohydrates, roughage, vitamins, and amino acids. These elements are required for cognitive development hence diminishing the possibility of prolonged cannibalism in a brutal sense.
The reason why one should research and study the diet of early homo sapiens is that it informs contemporary humanity on the evolutionary changes it has passed until today. Importantly, the changes in dieting and the factors predetermining the choice of particular foods allow for integrating several domains of human development history, including cultural, social, economic, and others. Therefore, the investigation of what prehistoric humans ate is not merely an intellectual exercise but a scientific tool for understanding the principles of human evolution and the manifestations of multiple factors’ impacts on human life in the historical context.
Conclusion
In summation, the kinds of foods that human ancestors consumed may provide people with a wealth of information about the kinds of lives they led and the places in which they lived. Food consumption also played a key effect in the development of humans, notably about two million years ago when meat first began to play a prominent role in the human diet. Consequently, an essential part of human development could be uncovered, or societal beliefs and norms that led to the current development.
Cited References
Harris M. 1998. Good to eat: Riddles of food and culture. Prospect Heights Ill.: Waveland.
Sack G. 2021. The Limited Nutritional Value of Cannibalism and the Development of Early Human Society. Social Evolution & History. 20(2).
Implications of exercise and diet on aging constitute a critical are of research in adult development and aging. People engage in various activities like healthy eating and physical exercise in order to regulate the aging process. Studies have shown that many people regulate their diets and engage in physical exercise in order to reduce the levels of calories in their bodies (Marie & Thomas, 2013). Numerous theories explain the concept of healthy living and its implications on aging. People encounter different experiences and make varied choices that affect the vitality of their brains throughout their lives.
In any individual, these experiences and choices affect their quality of life and the process of aging. The main reason for this phenomenon is that people are ignorant of effective and recommended practices that are good for their health. Many people believe that healthy living is losing weight, adhering to nutrition philosophies, and avoiding eating their favorite foods (Erickson, 2009). However, healthy living practices entail maintaining body fitness and vitality by eating foods that provide adequate energy to the body. In addition, it involves consuming foods that improve mood. According to nutritionists, people should improve their diet and exercise choices as early as possible in order to enjoy their benefits with regard to aging.
These choices are easy to apply and have little or no side effects hence the reason why they are recommended for the aging population. Studies have shown that regular exercise is an elixir for healthy aging as long as it is happens within the recommended limits (McGraw, 2010). Healthy aging is an important topic among professionals and the lay people because studies have shown that old people suffer a lot from bad diet and lifestyle choices.
Discussion
People have developed various theories that explain the concept of aging. These theories have attempted to explain the main causes of aging as well as provide ways in which people can manage the effects of the process. One of the commonly discussed and applied theories is the genes vs. lifestyles theory (Beard, 2008).
This theory presents two different perspectives about the concept of aging and enumerates ways in which people can deal with it. According to the theory, people should be less concerned about aging and its impacts. Aging is a predetermined process that depends on ones genes. The theory argues that an individual starts the aging process from the day they are born to the day they die. On the other hand, the theory also argues that one can slow down the aging process by making healthy lifestyle choices. Better nutrition and regular exercise helps people enjoy healthy aging experiences. Another theory that explains this concept is the “use it and lose it” theory (Beard, 2008).
According to this theory, when something is overused without any maintenance there is a high possibility that it will diminish and lose value. When a person embraces poor diets and uses drugs without exercise, the body weakens and experiences difficulties repairing itself as the individual ages. Healthy eating habits and exercise help to boost the body’s immune system. A strong immune system protects the body from illnesses. The theory argues that physical and mental activities help individuals to feel young (Marie & Thomas, 2013).
A big percentage of the aging population experience a slow and unhealthy life due to bad lifestyle choices they make as they age. The World Health Organization (WHO) provides a number of recommendations on healthy lifestyle choices that people can apply depending on their age. Most of these recommendations provide insight on how people can use healthy eating habits and regular exercise as a way of combating the effects of aging (Weil, 2005).
The World Health Organization encourages people to choose low calorie foods and increase consumption of plant products such as fruits, whole grains, nuts, and vegetables. In addition, it encourages people to reduce their intake of saturated fats. Doctors urge people to regulate their intake of granulated sugar and sodium, as well as avoid consuming foods containing pathogens (McGraw, 2010). Embracing healthy eating habits helps to protect people against illnesses and conditions such as obesity, diabetes, cancer, and osteoporosis among others. Studies have shown that people suffering from diet related complications such as obesity and diabetes have low glucose levels in the body (Perkins, 2009). This situation often worsens as someone grows old.
Most people are increasingly succumbing to health complications such as obesity, cancer, and diabetes due to poor diet choices. People have turned to eating fast foods and genetically modified foods (Weil, 2005). Many people prefer fast foods and genetically modified foods because they are cheap, tasty, convenient, and readily available. However, people are ignorant of the fact that these foods have a lot of calories, fats, and sodium. Consumption of these substances results in weight gain and development of serious health complications that affect people as they age. Studies have established that there is a strong link between aging and increase in body weight (Kelly, 2009). Body weight has a direct relation with the level of insulin in the body and its proper functioning. Insulin sensitivity and glucose tolerance in the body depends on the body weight of an individual. Studies have established that insulin sensitivity and glucose tolerance is very low among people who are obese (Perkins, 2009).
Therefore, regular exercise and better diet choices can help to reduce the rate of insulin resistance in the body especially among the aging population. Studies have also shown that regular exercise and healthy eating habits among the aging population helps to improve the rate of glucose metabolism in the body. People who choose healthy eating habits and exercise on a regular basis have better aging experiences (Stanton, 2007). This is because insulin sensitivity in the body, which reduces with age, remains within the recommended levels in order to prevent old people from illnesses such as diabetes. Insulin sensitivity is very important for the aging population because it ensures effective regulation of the amount of glycogen stored in the liver, as well as accelerating the oxidation of sugars in body cells. Studies have shown that most people who fail to exercise and watch their diet from an early age suffer from diabetes and cancer (Bloom & Klein, 2004).
A commitment to healthy eating habits is one of the best practices for achieving a healthy aging experience. In contemporary society, people choose between eating organic foods and in organic foods. Studies have shown that people prefer organic foods because of their natural methods of production. According to nutritional experts, organic foods have high nutrient value and contain fewer chemicals compared to inorganic foods (Bloom & Klein, 2004). Organic foods are very good especially among the aging population because they reduce their vulnerability to chronic disease. Organically produced foods provide the body with numerous benefits that help to improve metabolic process. Studies have shown that a big percentage of the aging population experience slow movements due to lack of exercise and unhealthy body weight. Foods with low calories help old people to maintain their movement because their body fat remains within healthy limits (Kelly, 2009).
Exercise is one of the practices that the World Health Organization recommends people to do in order to achieve healthy lifestyles. Some of the benefits of regular exercise among the aging population are that it helps to boost their moods and memory functions. Exercise helps to increase blood flow in the body and the brain, which help people to have better memory and high moods. Studies have shown that high moods and better brain functions helps in eliminating chronic conditions such as depression that are common among the old (Stanton, 2007). However, fitness experts discourage people from engaging in excessive exercise because it can speed up the rate of aging especially among middle-aged people.
According to studies conducted on the effects of excessive exercise, too much stress leads the body to release a hormone called Hydrocortone in large amounts. High levels of this hormone in the body lead to health challenges such as premature aging, gloominess, weight gain, memory loss, and restlessness among others. Therefore, people should have regulated exercise that can effectively maintain the level of body fat within healthy levels (Perkins, 2009). People who have excessive exercise can also fast track aging if they consume foods with high protein content and have lengthy exposure to sunlight.
Studies have shown that the best way to combat the effects of aging is starting exercise at an early age. This ensures that exercise is controlled and hormones responsible for weight loss and lowering chronic tenderness are released in the body from an early age (Erickson, 2009).
Limited body inflammation and low body weight makes one look younger. People should adopt healthy lifestyle practices from an early age and continue practicing them when they grow old. However, fitness experts encourage people to improve their lifestyles by knowing that it is never too late for anyone to start exercising. People belonging to the aging population should not consider themselves too old to start watching their diet and exercising. People should consider the benefits of healthy aging, which entails continuous reinvention as someone passes through various stages in life (Bloom & Klein, 2004). Studies have shown that people who engage in healthy aging programs from an early age enjoy more independence during their sunset years.
Conclusion
According to a report released by the United States National Library for Medicine (USNLM), people in the United States are having a prolonged life today compared to the number of years people lived in the last couple of decades. People have adopted healthy lifestyles through regular exercise and watching their diet. In addition, the report states that although people know that they cannot stop the aging process, understanding various body changes and adapting a healthy aging lifestyle can help in combating their impacts. Studies have shown that regular and supervised exercise especially among the youth plays a crucial role in treating depression, which contributes to slowing down the process of aging.
References
Beard, S. (2008). Active living, cognitive functioning, and aging. Journal of Aging and Health, 5(2), 30-41. Web.
Bloom, M., & Klein, W. (2004). Successful aging: Strategies for healthy living. The Journal of Nutrition Health and Aging, 17(6), 23-27. Web.
Erickson, M. (2009). Old is the new young: Erickson’s secrets to healthy living. Journal of Aging and Health, 6(1), 30-36. Web.
Kelly, W. (2009). Health aspects of aging: The experience of growing old. Journal of Aging and Health, 5(7), 45-53. Web.
Marie, K., & Thomas, C. (2013). Fast living, slow ageing. The Journal of Nutrition Health and Aging, 21(1), 45-60. Web.
McGraw, R. (2010). Aging society and healthy living: A Solution for an Independent Living? The Journal of Nutrition Health and Aging, 19(4), 10-34. Web.
Perkins, S. (2009). Healthy aging for dummies. The Journal of Nutrition Health and Aging, 19(2), 16-23. Web.
Stanton, R. (2007). Essential concepts for healthy living. Journal of Aging and Health, 4(4), 16-19. Web.
Weil, A. (2005). Nutritional status in chronically ill elderly patients. Is it related to quality of life? The Journal of Nutrition Health and Aging, 18(2), 192-197. Web.