In my experience I've found arguing and debating the merits of a strictly vegetarian diet often end unproductively in conflict.Generally the discussion creates enough cognitive dissonance for an individual to become uncomfortable and defensive, but not enough for any lasting impact.
Lately I've found its much easier to persuade an individual of the merits of consuming significantly less meat and animal products than it is expound a strict vegetarian viewpoint. This is especially true when meatless or meat-reduced choices are more readily available than ever, and also much more palatable to the average person.
As someone who's been an ovo-vegetarian for some time and researched the subject quite extensively, I don't believe the issue is as black and white health-wise as many vegetarians believe. Vegetarian diets can be just as unhealthy as meat-based diets.
My own conclusions on nutrition lean towards a nutrient density based diet. Meat eating isn't necessarily excluded, and can still be included in moderation, albeit at levels far below that of the average American diet.
-Joel Fuhrman - Eat to Live
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-930295310466113431
-Nutrient Density Chart:
http://www.drfuhrman.com/library/article17.aspx (yes, Kale is 'the shit', I was surprised I wasn't aware of it before, but its now my favorite vegetable!)
-The World's Healthiest Foods:
http://www.whfoods.com/genpage.php?tnam ... ce&dbid=38
While the health implications are enough to convince many people, for me, its the environmental, social and moral implications of factory farming and modern meat production that really tip the scale.
A philosophical examination of the subject which includes both a discussion the roots of the current ecological crises as well as the direct correlation between the increasing role that animal-based, and highly refined, nutrient deficient, food products play in the leading causes of death/disease in 'western', 'industrialized' nations (cancer, heart disease, and stroke etc.), should, at least persuade a few people here be as 'conscious' of their 'taste' in food as they are in their 'taste' in music.
Many perennial, culturally independent 'truisms' and concepts such as: "you are what you eat", "do unto others...", "what goes around, comes around", "as above, so below" and 'karma' etc. become more experientially relevant (at least to me) in a dietary context. It doesn't take a mystic or philosopher to recognize the equilibrium between the pain and suffering inflicted on the billions of slaughtered animals, the wholesale environmental destruction/resource depletion required to sustain 'the modern diet' (the macrocosmic 'cancer' above,) and the microcosmic cancer within.
I'll admit there's also a large element of self-preservation at work as well. Without a doubt, one of the most effective ways to extend lifespan is through caloric restriction (CR) and also adequate intake of anti-oxidants, vitamins etc. The research on caloric restriction, anti-oxidants and life extension fits like a hand in a glove with a nutrient density based approach to nutrition as green vegetables being not only being the best source or nutrients, but also extremely low in calories.
http://www.calorierestriction.org/
Longevity Genes and Caloric restriction
http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2006/jul ... ity_02.htm
(this could also fit in the "post while you're drunk thread.
)
