VeggieBoards banner
61 - 76 of 76 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jemdude View Post

Lacto-ovo vegetarianism is the most common form of vegetarianism, so that has to mean something.
Not sure but I think India has more vegetarians than the rest of the world combined, and they are mostly lacto-vegetarians, making that the most common vegetarian form? (Not that I need to follow the biggest group - can't stand/handle milk products myself)..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
716 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by tensai View Post

Not sure but I think India has more vegetarians than the rest of the world combined, and they are mostly lacto-vegetarians, making that the most common vegetarian form? (Not that I need to follow the biggest group - can't stand/handle milk products myself)..
In the western world, lacto-ovo vegetarianism is the most common form. But I don't see this as a matter to argue about.
 

·
Riot Nrrrd
Joined
·
3,180 Posts
Nearly every point I had already has come up, so how about some history?


The word 'vegetarian' indeed came out of the 1847 conference. It seems to have been coined slightly earlier at Alcott House, a reform-minded school/intentional community ... here's a link to the wikipedia entry on Alcott House since I'm not good at describing it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcott_House

Meals at Alcott House would be described as vegan today. Eggs & milk were not on the menu. Members of Alcott House made up SOME of the 1847 conference. Also in attendance were members of the Bible Christian Church. BCC members DID use eggs and milk although they abstained from flesh. The groups worked together to come up with the definition of 'vegetarian' promoted by the society. My guess is the wording 'may contain' is the result of tough negotiations. They apparently work!

There's more but I'll let y'all absorb that.
Plus I'm watching Top Chef and I can't pontificate and watch TV simultaneously
 

·
Herbivorous Urchin
Joined
·
9,717 Posts
Discussion Starter · #64 ·
@Dave Interesting!!

Edit: I'm SO glad you posted that, I have to write a paper this weekend about changes in the educational system, and so on, And I'm going to pull some things from that!
 

·
Riot Nrrrd
Joined
·
3,180 Posts
Continuing ....

The natural next question is "why did Bible Christian Church folks use eggs?" Right now I don't really know. To be honest the style many things were written in during the 19th century gives me a headache
Have to read it in small doses.

But I *have* already developed a decent idea of why eggs continued to be seen as vegetarian after the 1847 definition even though they was some opposition to the idea. At least some vegetarian cookbooks in the late 1800s would stress a difference between TRUE vegetarians (who were egg- and dairy-free) and the vegetarians who used these products. The difference was given by way of explanation of how vegetarians did eat rather than a suggestion of how they should eat. In 1910 a book of 2 essays and a number of recipes that omitted eggs and dairy on ethical grounds was published called "No Animal Food!" Anna Kingsford (one of my favorite people in history) would not call herself a vegetarian because she felt a true vegetarian would eat only plant matter while she herself consumed dairy (and maybe eggs, I'm not sure about those).

The greater public questioned the inclusion of eggs and dairy as vegetarian pretty much from the start. An 1852 review of vegetarian and alternative health writings also differentiated between 'true' vegetarians and egg/dairy users. Early vegetarians were probably more bothered by their depiction in the popular satire magazine Punch as people who lived on twigs and such. Consuming eggs and dairy allowed one to avoid being made fun of.

The matter was not entirely settled. The issue of eggs and dairy was a hot topic in vegetarian circles in the 20s and 30s, although I've never actually seen examples of the discussion. Couldn't find scans or transcriptions. And then of course in the 40s you have the founding of the Vegan Society, but that's beyond the scope of this topic.

Some primary sources:

No animal Food!: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/22829...-h/22829-h.htm
Punch on vegetarianism: http://books.google.com/books?id=FUc...tarian&f=false
Westminster Review (scroll up to read entire review): http://books.google.com/books?id=8UC...eather&f=false
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
888 Posts
Do you think that those early vegans/ strict vegetarians would have gotten sick due to not having enough B12? And possibly D (what with this being in the UK and sunshine being a rare treat rather than something that we are privileged to see on a regular basis)?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,245 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucky_charm View Post

Do you think that those early vegans/ strict vegetarians would have gotten sick due to not having enough B12? And possibly D (what with this being in the UK and sunshine being a rare treat rather than something that we are privileged to see on a regular basis)?
I'd say no. People in those days weren't fortifying foods with B12 and D, because they hadn't even discovered them yet. They would have had no clue that there were nutrients missing from a plant based diet that they could get from animal products. Milk and eggs are not good sources of those nutrients anyway, or they wouldn't have to fortify everything under the sun with B12 and D to keep full on meat eaters from getting sick nowadays. People didn't take drugs and antibiotics and drink chlorinated water, so they probably had sufficient intestinal bacteria to make the B12 they needed. I believe diseases caused by vitamin D deficiency did kill lots of people during the industrial revolution when the need for factory workers grew, and those workers were treated abysmally and never allowed to see the sun.

I don't know what people who were ignorant of the existence of substances like vitamins B12 and D would have been able to blame deficiency diseases on, but I wouldn't expect them to see much difference in their health from eating milk and eggs, but not meat, especially when so many meat eaters get B12 anemia in spite of heavy animal food intake.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,693 Posts
B12 is a whole different issue in modern times. Soil in a natural setting would be fairly rich in B12 because animals produce it in their intestines and **** it out all over the places in proximity to where they are doing most of their eating and, since it would not have been standard practice to wash the heck out of everything you eat, you would be getting trace amounts of B12 with almost everything.

Now animals are (understandably) kept away from food crops and what little B12 manages to make its way into the soil and onto the fruit/veggie is unlikely to be there by the time it gets harvested, transported, washed, cooked, etc.

Vitamin D does not IDEALLY depend on your dietary preference. If you're outside a significant portion of the time, you should be able to synthesize enough of it from the UV exposure. The changing nature of society to be inside most of the time, except when moving from one inside place to a different inside place, combined with our obsession with covering ourselves with sunscreen lotion to protect us from what little sunlight we do get, forces us to unnaturally depend on getting the vitamin D from food and/or vitamin supplements.
 

·
Riot Nrrrd
Joined
·
3,180 Posts
Quote:
Do you think that those early vegans/ strict vegetarians would have gotten sick due to not having enough B12?
Some did. Not all (nomad888's explanation helps explain why). B12 deficiency was noted in some of the first Vegan Society members, many of whom had already abstained from all animal products for years. In the 1970s the vegan intentional community The Farm (of cookbook fame) saw a number of B12 deficiencies, especially in children and women.

The thing to take away: if you're vegan supplement your B12 intake. It's the right thing to do.

Not just for yourself. Considering how often anti-veg people use things like this to argue against vegan diets, why give them more ammunition?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
888 Posts
Yeah I know it's important to supplement I just wondered if a lot of veg*ns back then got sick and if maybe that was where the 'sick veg*n' idea might have come from.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
888 Posts
I just can't see how people could have gotten enough vitamin D from the sun where I live even if they were outside all day, unless global warming has really changed the weather. Even in summer we often don't see the sun for days or sometimes weeks, and in winter it can be nearly constantly heavy clouds. Maybe they all just had rickets :p.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomad888 View Post

Vitamin D does not IDEALLY depend on your dietary preference. If you're outside all the time you should be able to synthesize enough of it from the UV exposure. The changing nature of society to be inside most of the time, except when moving from one inside place to a different inside place, combined with our obsession with covering ourselves with sunscreen lotion to protect us from what little sunlight we do get, forces us to unnaturally depend on getting the vitamin D from food and/or vitamin supplements.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
http://www.enchantedlearning.com/sub...cken/egg.shtml

Ultimately, yes they are vegetarian regardless of ethical treatment of the animal. Being a vegetarian means no consumptions of meat or product created from their attached physical bodies, regardless of ethical treatment of the animal. Eggs, if not fertilized, are vegetarian because they are not a meat product. The eating of an egg is the utilization of a natural process, ovulation, in which the egg contains no meat, skin or organelle. An egg is the result of ovulation of the oocyte (like a human's egg), the whites which are oviduct secretions, and different shell membranes. Blood spots are often the result of a ruptured capillary during ovulation and do not necessarily indicate fertilization of an egg. Some vegetarians use leather, that still makes them vegetarians just for other reasons. If one purchases/consumes eggs knowing it is harming a chicken he is still a vegetarian, just less subjectively ethical than others.
 

·
Riot Nrrrd
Joined
·
3,180 Posts
Quote:
Ultimately, yes they are vegetarian
In the end it depends on the definition used. "not meat" or "not a product of slaughter" works with the word 'vegetarian' if that is how it is defined, which seems to be how it is used today and how it has been since it entered popular use in 1847. The word 'vegetarian' was used in print a handful of times between 1842 and 1847, and given that all these uses were associated with Alcott House - where eggs were not used - it is likely that anyone familiar with the word at that time would not view eggs as vegetarian.

(Don't assume they had concerns similar to those who don't use eggs today though. I haven't seen it confirmed or debunked from primary sources, but the common view is that the particulars of the diet at Alcott House/The Concordium had to do with asceticism largely rather than humane concerns.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
501 Posts
I consider them to be vegetarian b/c they are not, nor have they ever been alive. But, I don't eat eggs. For me, for some reason, I put them in the same category as meat even though they are technically vegetarian. I do eat cheese though. I think because cheese is so well disguised, I have been able to trick myself into not really thinking about where it comes from. It's hard to do that with eggs. It's an animal ovum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,093 Posts
to me as a Vegetarian....Yes.....but its a personal decision.....

Ride Free!!

Peace, LOve and Hippiness
 
61 - 76 of 76 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top