Guest guest Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 Hiya all, Did anyone hear the LBC radio phone-in this morning? My mate rang me up from London and played me a bit down the phone - the presenter was describing the vegan diet as child abuse. They also had a professor (if I remember correctly Prof. Tom Saunders from London Kings College) knocking veganism for kids as well. Did anyone here more of it? Cheers, James Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 I didn't hear it, but Professor Saunders had a piece in the Times this weekend: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece I assume that's the basics of what they were talking about. Gaya On 6/16/08, James H <james wrote: > > Hiya all, > > Did anyone hear the LBC radio phone-in this morning? My mate rang me up > from London and played me a bit down the phone - the presenter was > describing the vegan diet as child abuse. They also had a professor (if > I remember correctly Prof. Tom Saunders from London Kings College) > knocking veganism for kids as well. > > Did anyone here more of it? > > Cheers, > James > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 Hi, Strange article. What he writes seems entirely reasonable, yet the article has a title of 'lifestyle choice or child abuse' where the article makes clear that it is not abuse, and the first paragraph says that there are 'claims that bringing up children as vegans is a form of child abuse' without providing references for this, or indeed the author claiming it. So basically, if you read the article you'll see that a vegan diet is fine for kids, but if you just read the title and first paragraph, you'll come away with the idea that people are claiming it is child abuse. Nice piece of editing from the Times there... John - " Gayalondiel " <gayalondiel Monday, June 16, 2008 12:59 PM Re: LBC radio phone-in >I didn't hear it, but Professor Saunders had a piece in the Times this > weekend: > > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece > > I assume that's the basics of what they were talking about. > > Gaya > > > On 6/16/08, James H <james wrote: >> >> Hiya all, >> >> Did anyone hear the LBC radio phone-in this morning? My mate rang me up >> from London and played me a bit down the phone - the presenter was >> describing the vegan diet as child abuse. They also had a professor (if >> I remember correctly Prof. Tom Saunders from London Kings College) >> knocking veganism for kids as well. >> >> Did anyone here more of it? >> >> Cheers, >> James >> >> > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 I don't know. In one breath he states that vegan diets can be balanced and then follows up with the old adage " calcium deprivation due to lack of milk " . It seems half-sensible, half-implying that vegan=malnutritious On 6/16/08, John Davis <mcxg46 wrote: > > Hi, > > Strange article. What he writes seems entirely reasonable, yet the article > has a title of 'lifestyle choice or child abuse' where the article makes > clear that it is not abuse, and the first paragraph says that there are > 'claims that bringing up children as vegans is a form of child abuse' > without providing references for this, or indeed the author claiming it. > > So basically, if you read the article you'll see that a vegan diet is fine > for kids, but if you just read the title and first paragraph, you'll come > away with the idea that people are claiming it is child abuse. > > Nice piece of editing from the Times there... > > John > > - > " Gayalondiel " <gayalondiel<gayalondiel%40livejournal.com> > > > < <%40>> > Monday, June 16, 2008 12:59 PM > Re: LBC radio phone-in > > >I didn't hear it, but Professor Saunders had a piece in the Times this > > weekend: > > > > > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece > > > > I assume that's the basics of what they were talking about. > > > > Gaya > > > > > > On 6/16/08, James H <james <james%40telestial.org>> wrote: > >> > >> Hiya all, > >> > >> Did anyone hear the LBC radio phone-in this morning? My mate rang me up > >> from London and played me a bit down the phone - the presenter was > >> describing the vegan diet as child abuse. They also had a professor (if > >> I remember correctly Prof. Tom Saunders from London Kings College) > >> knocking veganism for kids as well. > >> > >> Did anyone here more of it? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> James > >> > >> > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 I didn't find the article (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece>) entirely reasonable. In fact, I found it a bit annoying: 1. " Vegans follow their diets because of a strongly held conviction that it is wrong to eat animals. " - Isn't that the definition of a vegetarian! Vegans follow their diets because we believe the uneccesary killing of animals is wrong (i.e., whether you end up eating the dead animal or not). 2. " Providing the diet is not restricted in variety and is supplemented with vitamin B12 and vitamin D... " - I know about the B12 issue in veganism, but is vitamin D also such an issue? 3. " There is plenty of sensible advice available from organisations such as The Vegan Society. Most vegans do follow this advice, but a significant number choose to ignore it and put their health and their children’s at risk. " - The advice is not necessarily being ignored: these vegans may be simply unaware of the advice. It makes us sound a bit stupid to assume some vegans are 'ignoring' the advice. 4. " Too often, severe malnutrition has occurred in children fed on inappropriate vegan diets consisting mainly of fruit. " - Fruitarians?? There was an article a few months ago on some child who was fed next to nothing, and it hit the headlines as being a vegan diet and how in inadequate it was. 5. " ...their claim that vegans are less likely to develop cancer is not true. " - Is he right here? 6. " Despite being warned that the lack of vitamin B12 is a problem, it seems that many vegans don’t heed the dietary advice seriously and follow their own pet nostrum, thinking they will adapt to a diet deficient in vitamin B12 " - How does he know these vegans think like this? Again, maybe they just aren't aware of the B12 issue. 7. " ...low calcium intake caused by the lack of milk... " - As Gayalondiel mentioned, what a daft statement. Especially as he then goes on to say, " ...vegans can easily increase their calcium intake by using fortified soy milk or by adding chalk (calcium carbonate) to foods such as bread. " But don't forget the natural sources - the vegan diet does not need that much support! 8. " Parents, whatever the dietary persuasion, have a duty to ensure that their children are properly nourished. Providing the advice given is followed, the right of parents to raise their children as vegans should be respected. Those who fail to follow this advice are guilty of child abuse. " - Maybe they should have done an article on the irresponsible parents who feed their obese children on McDonalds. They're the ones with the real health problems. Cheers, James John Davis wrote: > > Hi, > > Strange article. What he writes seems entirely reasonable, yet the > article > has a title of 'lifestyle choice or child abuse' where the article makes > clear that it is not abuse, and the first paragraph says that there are > 'claims that bringing up children as vegans is a form of child abuse' > without providing references for this, or indeed the author claiming it. > > So basically, if you read the article you'll see that a vegan diet is > fine > for kids, but if you just read the title and first paragraph, you'll come > away with the idea that people are claiming it is child abuse. > > Nice piece of editing from the Times there... > > John > > - > " Gayalondiel " <gayalondiel > <gayalondiel%40livejournal.com>> > < <%40>> > Monday, June 16, 2008 12:59 PM > Re: LBC radio phone-in > > >I didn't hear it, but Professor Saunders had a piece in the Times this > > weekend: > > > > > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece > <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece> > > > > I assume that's the basics of what they were talking about. > > > > Gaya > > > > > > On 6/16/08, James H <james > <james%40telestial.org>> wrote: > >> > >> Hiya all, > >> > >> Did anyone hear the LBC radio phone-in this morning? My mate rang me up > >> from London and played me a bit down the phone - the presenter was > >> describing the vegan diet as child abuse. They also had a professor (if > >> I remember correctly Prof. Tom Saunders from London Kings College) > >> knocking veganism for kids as well. > >> > >> Did anyone here more of it? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> James > >> > >> > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 Hi James, Perhaps I should have said 'more reasonable than most'! Yes, granted, it was somewhat, well, condescending I guess, and confused vegan, vegetarian, fruitarian, etc. But on the plus side it was by an apparently respected dietician who was saying that veganism can be healthy diet. Which is better than normal, and not promoting the 'vegan diet as child abuse' concept mentioned in the title. I fully agree though, that if papers are going to run with the occasional child made ill through a vegan diet, they should also run the very many more about children made ill by non-vegan ones. John - " James H " <james Tuesday, June 17, 2008 11:11 AM Re: LBC radio phone-in >I didn't find the article > (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece > <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece>) > entirely reasonable. In fact, I found it a bit annoying: > > 1. " Vegans follow their diets because of a strongly held conviction that > it is wrong to eat animals. " - Isn't that the definition of a > vegetarian! Vegans follow their diets because we believe the uneccesary > killing of animals is wrong (i.e., whether you end up eating the dead > animal or not). > > 2. " Providing the diet is not restricted in variety and is supplemented > with vitamin B12 and vitamin D... " - I know about the B12 issue in > veganism, but is vitamin D also such an issue? > > 3. " There is plenty of sensible advice available from organisations such > as The Vegan Society. Most vegans do follow this advice, but a > significant number choose to ignore it and put their health and their > children’s at risk. " - The advice is not necessarily being ignored: > these vegans may be simply unaware of the advice. It makes us sound a > bit stupid to assume some vegans are 'ignoring' the advice. > > 4. " Too often, severe malnutrition has occurred in children fed on > inappropriate vegan diets consisting mainly of fruit. " - Fruitarians?? > There was an article a few months ago on some child who was fed next to > nothing, and it hit the headlines as being a vegan diet and how in > inadequate it was. > > 5. " ...their claim that vegans are less likely to develop cancer is not > true. " - Is he right here? > > 6. " Despite being warned that the lack of vitamin B12 is a problem, it > seems that many vegans don’t heed the dietary advice seriously and > follow their own pet nostrum, thinking they will adapt to a diet > deficient in vitamin B12 " - How does he know these vegans think like > this? Again, maybe they just aren't aware of the B12 issue. > > 7. " ...low calcium intake caused by the lack of milk... " - As > Gayalondiel mentioned, what a daft statement. Especially as he then goes > on to say, " ...vegans can easily increase their calcium intake by using > fortified soy milk or by adding chalk (calcium carbonate) to foods such > as bread. " But don't forget the natural sources - the vegan diet does > not need that much support! > > 8. " Parents, whatever the dietary persuasion, have a duty to ensure that > their children are properly nourished. Providing the advice given is > followed, the right of parents to raise their children as vegans should > be respected. Those who fail to follow this advice are guilty of child > abuse. " - Maybe they should have done an article on the irresponsible > parents who feed their obese children on McDonalds. They're the ones > with the real health problems. > > Cheers, > James > > John Davis wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Strange article. What he writes seems entirely reasonable, yet the >> article >> has a title of 'lifestyle choice or child abuse' where the article makes >> clear that it is not abuse, and the first paragraph says that there are >> 'claims that bringing up children as vegans is a form of child abuse' >> without providing references for this, or indeed the author claiming it. >> >> So basically, if you read the article you'll see that a vegan diet is >> fine >> for kids, but if you just read the title and first paragraph, you'll come >> away with the idea that people are claiming it is child abuse. >> >> Nice piece of editing from the Times there... >> >> John >> >> - >> " Gayalondiel " <gayalondiel >> <gayalondiel%40livejournal.com>> >> < <%40>> >> Monday, June 16, 2008 12:59 PM >> Re: LBC radio phone-in >> >> >I didn't hear it, but Professor Saunders had a piece in the Times this >> > weekend: >> > >> > >> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece >> <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece> >> > >> > I assume that's the basics of what they were talking about. >> > >> > Gaya >> > >> > >> > On 6/16/08, James H <james >> <james%40telestial.org>> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hiya all, >> >> >> >> Did anyone hear the LBC radio phone-in this morning? My mate rang me >> >> up >> >> from London and played me a bit down the phone - the presenter was >> >> describing the vegan diet as child abuse. They also had a professor >> >> (if >> >> I remember correctly Prof. Tom Saunders from London Kings College) >> >> knocking veganism for kids as well. >> >> >> >> Did anyone here more of it? >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> James >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 I am fearful about how many vegans might have actually been put off having children altogether because of all the persecution of vegan families over the years. It would not surprise me if the very high numbers of childfree by choice vegans had a lot to do with this problem (I realise many vegans choose to be childfree anyway for other reasons of their own). There have been several cases of persecution of vegan families in the US as well as the UK, and it surely makes being a vegan parent a daunting prospect for many vegans who are at the stage in life where they are thinking about whether to start a family. This is why we have been regularly inviting vegan families to meet up in the London area over the last 14 years, we do not want vegan families to feel isolated and " freakish " , and you feel less so if you have like-minded friends in the same position! A few years ago I also came across vegan families on low incomes who could not get their vegan baby milk formula (Farleys) at a discount rate (the discount for low income only applied to cows milk formula). Surely this was a clear case of discrimination and was illegal? We all know breastfeeding is best of course, but occasionally it does not work out for various reasons and these parents should have had the same rights as other formula milk users. I don't know if anyone ever took it to the courts though. We would have if it had happened to us, and would have had no hesitation at all in doing so! Lesley On Behalf Of John Davis 17 June 2008 11:41 Re: LBC radio phone-in Hi James, Perhaps I should have said 'more reasonable than most'! Yes, granted, it was somewhat, well, condescending I guess, and confused vegan, vegetarian, fruitarian, etc. But on the plus side it was by an apparently respected dietician who was saying that veganism can be healthy diet. Which is better than normal, and not promoting the 'vegan diet as child abuse' concept mentioned in the title. I fully agree though, that if papers are going to run with the occasional child made ill through a vegan diet, they should also run the very many more about children made ill by non-vegan ones. John - " James H " <james Tuesday, June 17, 2008 11:11 AM Re: LBC radio phone-in >I didn't find the article > (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece > <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece>) > entirely reasonable. In fact, I found it a bit annoying: > > 1. " Vegans follow their diets because of a strongly held conviction that > it is wrong to eat animals. " - Isn't that the definition of a > vegetarian! Vegans follow their diets because we believe the uneccesary > killing of animals is wrong (i.e., whether you end up eating the dead > animal or not). > > 2. " Providing the diet is not restricted in variety and is supplemented > with vitamin B12 and vitamin D... " - I know about the B12 issue in > veganism, but is vitamin D also such an issue? > > 3. " There is plenty of sensible advice available from organisations such > as The Vegan Society. Most vegans do follow this advice, but a > significant number choose to ignore it and put their health and their > children's at risk. " - The advice is not necessarily being ignored: > these vegans may be simply unaware of the advice. It makes us sound a > bit stupid to assume some vegans are 'ignoring' the advice. > > 4. " Too often, severe malnutrition has occurred in children fed on > inappropriate vegan diets consisting mainly of fruit. " - Fruitarians?? > There was an article a few months ago on some child who was fed next to > nothing, and it hit the headlines as being a vegan diet and how in > inadequate it was. > > 5. " ...their claim that vegans are less likely to develop cancer is not > true. " - Is he right here? > > 6. " Despite being warned that the lack of vitamin B12 is a problem, it > seems that many vegans don't heed the dietary advice seriously and > follow their own pet nostrum, thinking they will adapt to a diet > deficient in vitamin B12 " - How does he know these vegans think like > this? Again, maybe they just aren't aware of the B12 issue. > > 7. " ...low calcium intake caused by the lack of milk... " - As > Gayalondiel mentioned, what a daft statement. Especially as he then goes > on to say, " ...vegans can easily increase their calcium intake by using > fortified soy milk or by adding chalk (calcium carbonate) to foods such > as bread. " But don't forget the natural sources - the vegan diet does > not need that much support! > > 8. " Parents, whatever the dietary persuasion, have a duty to ensure that > their children are properly nourished. Providing the advice given is > followed, the right of parents to raise their children as vegans should > be respected. Those who fail to follow this advice are guilty of child > abuse. " - Maybe they should have done an article on the irresponsible > parents who feed their obese children on McDonalds. They're the ones > with the real health problems. > > Cheers, > James > > John Davis wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Strange article. What he writes seems entirely reasonable, yet the >> article >> has a title of 'lifestyle choice or child abuse' where the article makes >> clear that it is not abuse, and the first paragraph says that there are >> 'claims that bringing up children as vegans is a form of child abuse' >> without providing references for this, or indeed the author claiming it. >> >> So basically, if you read the article you'll see that a vegan diet is >> fine >> for kids, but if you just read the title and first paragraph, you'll come >> away with the idea that people are claiming it is child abuse. >> >> Nice piece of editing from the Times there... >> >> John >> >> - >> " Gayalondiel " <gayalondiel >> <gayalondiel%40livejournal.com>> >> < <%40>> >> Monday, June 16, 2008 12:59 PM >> Re: LBC radio phone-in >> >> >I didn't hear it, but Professor Saunders had a piece in the Times this >> > weekend: >> > >> > >> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece >> <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece> >> > >> > I assume that's the basics of what they were talking about. >> > >> > Gaya >> > >> > >> > On 6/16/08, James H <james >> <james%40telestial.org>> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hiya all, >> >> >> >> Did anyone hear the LBC radio phone-in this morning? My mate rang me >> >> up >> >> from London and played me a bit down the phone - the presenter was >> >> describing the vegan diet as child abuse. They also had a professor >> >> (if >> >> I remember correctly Prof. Tom Saunders from London Kings College) >> >> knocking veganism for kids as well. >> >> >> >> Did anyone here more of it? >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> James >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 I'd take that to court, no question. It's not just vegans - what if your child is lactose-intolerant and you're on low income? All it needs is one person to take it through the courts and then (assuming a win) you'd have a precedent for every case that followed and eventually the rules would change (well, in my idealistic little world, anyway). I was quite surprised with the vitriol that I came across when discussing this on my LJ. There are a couple of mothers on my flist and some pregnant ladies as well, and some of them took my statement that I intended to raise my children to follow what I believe is right until such time as they can choose for themselves as a personal attack on them. I don't understand why, but I don't have the strength to continue with that line of argument for now, it's just bringing me down and that's not what I need. Gaya On 6/17/08, Lesley Dove <Lesley wrote: > > > I am fearful about how many vegans might have actually been put off having > children altogether because of all the persecution of vegan families over > the years. It would not surprise me if the very high numbers of childfree > by > choice vegans had a lot to do with this problem (I realise many vegans > choose to be childfree anyway for other reasons of their own). > > There have been several cases of persecution of vegan families in the US as > well as the UK, and it surely makes being a vegan parent a daunting > prospect > for many vegans who are at the stage in life where they are thinking about > whether to start a family. > > This is why we have been regularly inviting vegan families to meet up in > the > London area over the last 14 years, we do not want vegan families to feel > isolated and " freakish " , and you feel less so if you have like-minded > friends in the same position! > > A few years ago I also came across vegan families on low incomes who could > not get their vegan baby milk formula (Farleys) at a discount rate (the > discount for low income only applied to cows milk formula). Surely this was > a clear case of discrimination and was illegal? We all know breastfeeding > is > best of course, but occasionally it does not work out for various reasons > and these parents should have had the same rights as other formula milk > users. I don't know if anyone ever took it to the courts though. We would > have if it had happened to us, and would have had no hesitation at all in > doing so! > > Lesley > > > <%40> [ > <%40>] On Behalf Of > John Davis > 17 June 2008 11:41 > <%40> > Re: LBC radio phone-in > > Hi James, > > Perhaps I should have said 'more reasonable than most'! Yes, granted, it > was > somewhat, well, condescending I guess, and confused vegan, vegetarian, > fruitarian, etc. But on the plus side it was by an apparently respected > dietician who was saying that veganism can be healthy diet. Which is better > than normal, and not promoting the 'vegan diet as child abuse' concept > mentioned in the title. > > I fully agree though, that if papers are going to run with the occasional > child made ill through a vegan diet, they should also run the very many > more > > about children made ill by non-vegan ones. > > John > - > " James H " <james <james%40telestial.org>> > < <%40>> > Tuesday, June 17, 2008 11:11 AM > Re: LBC radio phone-in > > >I didn't find the article > > ( > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece > > > <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece > >) > > entirely reasonable. In fact, I found it a bit annoying: > > > > 1. " Vegans follow their diets because of a strongly held conviction that > > it is wrong to eat animals. " - Isn't that the definition of a > > vegetarian! Vegans follow their diets because we believe the uneccesary > > killing of animals is wrong (i.e., whether you end up eating the dead > > animal or not). > > > > 2. " Providing the diet is not restricted in variety and is supplemented > > with vitamin B12 and vitamin D... " - I know about the B12 issue in > > veganism, but is vitamin D also such an issue? > > > > 3. " There is plenty of sensible advice available from organisations such > > as The Vegan Society. Most vegans do follow this advice, but a > > significant number choose to ignore it and put their health and their > > children's at risk. " - The advice is not necessarily being ignored: > > these vegans may be simply unaware of the advice. It makes us sound a > > bit stupid to assume some vegans are 'ignoring' the advice. > > > > 4. " Too often, severe malnutrition has occurred in children fed on > > inappropriate vegan diets consisting mainly of fruit. " - Fruitarians?? > > There was an article a few months ago on some child who was fed next to > > nothing, and it hit the headlines as being a vegan diet and how in > > inadequate it was. > > > > 5. " ...their claim that vegans are less likely to develop cancer is not > > true. " - Is he right here? > > > > 6. " Despite being warned that the lack of vitamin B12 is a problem, it > > seems that many vegans don't heed the dietary advice seriously and > > follow their own pet nostrum, thinking they will adapt to a diet > > deficient in vitamin B12 " - How does he know these vegans think like > > this? Again, maybe they just aren't aware of the B12 issue. > > > > 7. " ...low calcium intake caused by the lack of milk... " - As > > Gayalondiel mentioned, what a daft statement. Especially as he then goes > > on to say, " ...vegans can easily increase their calcium intake by using > > fortified soy milk or by adding chalk (calcium carbonate) to foods such > > as bread. " But don't forget the natural sources - the vegan diet does > > not need that much support! > > > > 8. " Parents, whatever the dietary persuasion, have a duty to ensure that > > their children are properly nourished. Providing the advice given is > > followed, the right of parents to raise their children as vegans should > > be respected. Those who fail to follow this advice are guilty of child > > abuse. " - Maybe they should have done an article on the irresponsible > > parents who feed their obese children on McDonalds. They're the ones > > with the real health problems. > > > > Cheers, > > James > > > > John Davis wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> Strange article. What he writes seems entirely reasonable, yet the > >> article > >> has a title of 'lifestyle choice or child abuse' where the article makes > >> clear that it is not abuse, and the first paragraph says that there are > >> 'claims that bringing up children as vegans is a form of child abuse' > >> without providing references for this, or indeed the author claiming it. > >> > >> So basically, if you read the article you'll see that a vegan diet is > >> fine > >> for kids, but if you just read the title and first paragraph, you'll > come > >> away with the idea that people are claiming it is child abuse. > >> > >> Nice piece of editing from the Times there... > >> > >> John > >> > >> - > >> " Gayalondiel " <gayalondiel<gayalondiel%40livejournal.com> > >> <gayalondiel%40livejournal.com <gayalondiel%2540livejournal.com> > >> > >> < <%40> < > %40 <%2540>>> > >> Monday, June 16, 2008 12:59 PM > >> Re: LBC radio phone-in > >> > >> >I didn't hear it, but Professor Saunders had a piece in the Times this > >> > weekend: > >> > > >> > > >> > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece > >> > <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece > > > >> > > >> > I assume that's the basics of what they were talking about. > >> > > >> > Gaya > >> > > >> > > >> > On 6/16/08, James H <james <james%40telestial.org> > >> <james%40telestial.org <james%2540telestial.org>>> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Hiya all, > >> >> > >> >> Did anyone hear the LBC radio phone-in this morning? My mate rang me > >> >> up > >> >> from London and played me a bit down the phone - the presenter was > >> >> describing the vegan diet as child abuse. They also had a professor > >> >> (if > >> >> I remember correctly Prof. Tom Saunders from London Kings College) > >> >> knocking veganism for kids as well. > >> >> > >> >> Did anyone here more of it? > >> >> > >> >> Cheers, > >> >> James > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 Lactose intolerance means they would be able to get it on prescription from heir GP, so I think that would be covered, while the ethical lifestyle choice would not be covered. I'm sorry to hear about those hostile idiots on LJ, personally I would cut them off if they are being abusive. You do not have to keep them on your list, in the end it is probably up to you if you let them get away with behaving this way or tell them to go away if they cannot be more respectful of your choices as a vegan! Good luck! I don't really know how LJ works though! Actually they are probably defensive because of their own underlying guilt about the animals they eat. Lesley _____ On Behalf Of Gayalondiel 17 June 2008 12:24 Re: LBC radio phone-in I'd take that to court, no question. It's not just vegans - what if your child is lactose-intolerant and you're on low income? All it needs is one person to take it through the courts and then (assuming a win) you'd have a precedent for every case that followed and eventually the rules would change (well, in my idealistic little world, anyway). I was quite surprised with the vitriol that I came across when discussing this on my LJ. There are a couple of mothers on my flist and some pregnant ladies as well, and some of them took my statement that I intended to raise my children to follow what I believe is right until such time as they can choose for themselves as a personal attack on them. I don't understand why, but I don't have the strength to continue with that line of argument for now, it's just bringing me down and that's not what I need. Gaya On 6/17/08, Lesley Dove <Lesley (AT) vegan4life (DOT) <Lesley%40vegan4life.org.uk> org.uk> wrote: > > > I am fearful about how many vegans might have actually been put off having > children altogether because of all the persecution of vegan families over > the years. It would not surprise me if the very high numbers of childfree > by > choice vegans had a lot to do with this problem (I realise many vegans > choose to be childfree anyway for other reasons of their own). > > There have been several cases of persecution of vegan families in the US as > well as the UK, and it surely makes being a vegan parent a daunting > prospect > for many vegans who are at the stage in life where they are thinking about > whether to start a family. > > This is why we have been regularly inviting vegan families to meet up in > the > London area over the last 14 years, we do not want vegan families to feel > isolated and " freakish " , and you feel less so if you have like-minded > friends in the same position! > > A few years ago I also came across vegan families on low incomes who could > not get their vegan baby milk formula (Farleys) at a discount rate (the > discount for low income only applied to cows milk formula). Surely this was > a clear case of discrimination and was illegal? We all know breastfeeding > is > best of course, but occasionally it does not work out for various reasons > and these parents should have had the same rights as other formula milk > users. I don't know if anyone ever took it to the courts though. We would > have if it had happened to us, and would have had no hesitation at all in > doing so! > > Lesley > > > @ <%40> .com <%40> [ > @ <%40> .com <%40>] On Behalf Of > John Davis > 17 June 2008 11:41 > @ <%40> .com <%40> > Re: LBC radio phone-in > > Hi James, > > Perhaps I should have said 'more reasonable than most'! Yes, granted, it > was > somewhat, well, condescending I guess, and confused vegan, vegetarian, > fruitarian, etc. But on the plus side it was by an apparently respected > dietician who was saying that veganism can be healthy diet. Which is better > than normal, and not promoting the 'vegan diet as child abuse' concept > mentioned in the title. > > I fully agree though, that if papers are going to run with the occasional > child made ill through a vegan diet, they should also run the very many > more > > about children made ill by non-vegan ones. > > John > - > " James H " <james (AT) telestial (DOT) <james%40telestial.org> org <james%40telestial.org>> > <@ <%40> .com <%40>> > Tuesday, June 17, 2008 11:11 AM > Re: LBC radio phone-in > > >I didn't find the article > > ( > http://www.timesonl <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece> ine.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece > > > <http://www.timesonl <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece> ine.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece > >) > > entirely reasonable. In fact, I found it a bit annoying: > > > > 1. " Vegans follow their diets because of a strongly held conviction that > > it is wrong to eat animals. " - Isn't that the definition of a > > vegetarian! Vegans follow their diets because we believe the uneccesary > > killing of animals is wrong (i.e., whether you end up eating the dead > > animal or not). > > > > 2. " Providing the diet is not restricted in variety and is supplemented > > with vitamin B12 and vitamin D... " - I know about the B12 issue in > > veganism, but is vitamin D also such an issue? > > > > 3. " There is plenty of sensible advice available from organisations such > > as The Vegan Society. Most vegans do follow this advice, but a > > significant number choose to ignore it and put their health and their > > children's at risk. " - The advice is not necessarily being ignored: > > these vegans may be simply unaware of the advice. It makes us sound a > > bit stupid to assume some vegans are 'ignoring' the advice. > > > > 4. " Too often, severe malnutrition has occurred in children fed on > > inappropriate vegan diets consisting mainly of fruit. " - Fruitarians?? > > There was an article a few months ago on some child who was fed next to > > nothing, and it hit the headlines as being a vegan diet and how in > > inadequate it was. > > > > 5. " ...their claim that vegans are less likely to develop cancer is not > > true. " - Is he right here? > > > > 6. " Despite being warned that the lack of vitamin B12 is a problem, it > > seems that many vegans don't heed the dietary advice seriously and > > follow their own pet nostrum, thinking they will adapt to a diet > > deficient in vitamin B12 " - How does he know these vegans think like > > this? Again, maybe they just aren't aware of the B12 issue. > > > > 7. " ...low calcium intake caused by the lack of milk... " - As > > Gayalondiel mentioned, what a daft statement. Especially as he then goes > > on to say, " ...vegans can easily increase their calcium intake by using > > fortified soy milk or by adding chalk (calcium carbonate) to foods such > > as bread. " But don't forget the natural sources - the vegan diet does > > not need that much support! > > > > 8. " Parents, whatever the dietary persuasion, have a duty to ensure that > > their children are properly nourished. Providing the advice given is > > followed, the right of parents to raise their children as vegans should > > be respected. Those who fail to follow this advice are guilty of child > > abuse. " - Maybe they should have done an article on the irresponsible > > parents who feed their obese children on McDonalds. They're the ones > > with the real health problems. > > > > Cheers, > > James > > > > John Davis wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> Strange article. What he writes seems entirely reasonable, yet the > >> article > >> has a title of 'lifestyle choice or child abuse' where the article makes > >> clear that it is not abuse, and the first paragraph says that there are > >> 'claims that bringing up children as vegans is a form of child abuse' > >> without providing references for this, or indeed the author claiming it. > >> > >> So basically, if you read the article you'll see that a vegan diet is > >> fine > >> for kids, but if you just read the title and first paragraph, you'll > come > >> away with the idea that people are claiming it is child abuse. > >> > >> Nice piece of editing from the Times there... > >> > >> John > >> > >> - > >> " Gayalondiel " <gayalondiel@ <gayalondiel%40livejournal.com> livejournal.com<gayalondiel%40livejournal.com> > >> <gayalondiel%40livejournal.com <gayalondiel%2540livejournal.com> > >> > >> <@ <%40> .com <%40> < > %40 <%2540>>> > >> Monday, June 16, 2008 12:59 PM > >> Re: LBC radio phone-in > >> > >> >I didn't hear it, but Professor Saunders had a piece in the Times this > >> > weekend: > >> > > >> > > >> > http://www.timesonl <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece> ine.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece > >> > <http://www.timesonl <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece> ine.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece > > > >> > > >> > I assume that's the basics of what they were talking about. > >> > > >> > Gaya > >> > > >> > > >> > On 6/16/08, James H <james (AT) telestial (DOT) <james%40telestial.org> org <james%40telestial.org> > >> <james%40telestial.org <james%2540telestial.org>>> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Hiya all, > >> >> > >> >> Did anyone hear the LBC radio phone-in this morning? My mate rang me > >> >> up > >> >> from London and played me a bit down the phone - the presenter was > >> >> describing the vegan diet as child abuse. They also had a professor > >> >> (if > >> >> I remember correctly Prof. Tom Saunders from London Kings College) > >> >> knocking veganism for kids as well. > >> >> > >> >> Did anyone here more of it? > >> >> > >> >> Cheers, > >> >> James > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 It's not on really... The guy's a professor - he shouldn't be writing about such topics if they confuse him!... I was hoping someone on here heard the radio coverage to see how he came across on the radio. (The presenter was very anti-vegan, though, I'd guess, probably to try and generate a few emotive phone calls...) John Davis wrote: > Hi James, > > Perhaps I should have said 'more reasonable than most'! Yes, granted, it was > somewhat, well, condescending I guess, and confused vegan, vegetarian, > fruitarian, etc. But on the plus side it was by an apparently respected > dietician who was saying that veganism can be healthy diet. Which is better > than normal, and not promoting the 'vegan diet as child abuse' concept > mentioned in the title. > > I fully agree though, that if papers are going to run with the occasional > child made ill through a vegan diet, they should also run the very many more > about children made ill by non-vegan ones. > > John > - > " James H " <james > > Tuesday, June 17, 2008 11:11 AM > Re: LBC radio phone-in > > > >> I didn't find the article >> (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece >> <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece>) >> entirely reasonable. In fact, I found it a bit annoying: >> >> 1. " Vegans follow their diets because of a strongly held conviction that >> it is wrong to eat animals. " - Isn't that the definition of a >> vegetarian! Vegans follow their diets because we believe the uneccesary >> killing of animals is wrong (i.e., whether you end up eating the dead >> animal or not). >> >> 2. " Providing the diet is not restricted in variety and is supplemented >> with vitamin B12 and vitamin D... " - I know about the B12 issue in >> veganism, but is vitamin D also such an issue? >> >> 3. " There is plenty of sensible advice available from organisations such >> as The Vegan Society. Most vegans do follow this advice, but a >> significant number choose to ignore it and put their health and their >> children’s at risk. " - The advice is not necessarily being ignored: >> these vegans may be simply unaware of the advice. It makes us sound a >> bit stupid to assume some vegans are 'ignoring' the advice. >> >> 4. " Too often, severe malnutrition has occurred in children fed on >> inappropriate vegan diets consisting mainly of fruit. " - Fruitarians?? >> There was an article a few months ago on some child who was fed next to >> nothing, and it hit the headlines as being a vegan diet and how in >> inadequate it was. >> >> 5. " ...their claim that vegans are less likely to develop cancer is not >> true. " - Is he right here? >> >> 6. " Despite being warned that the lack of vitamin B12 is a problem, it >> seems that many vegans don’t heed the dietary advice seriously and >> follow their own pet nostrum, thinking they will adapt to a diet >> deficient in vitamin B12 " - How does he know these vegans think like >> this? Again, maybe they just aren't aware of the B12 issue. >> >> 7. " ...low calcium intake caused by the lack of milk... " - As >> Gayalondiel mentioned, what a daft statement. Especially as he then goes >> on to say, " ...vegans can easily increase their calcium intake by using >> fortified soy milk or by adding chalk (calcium carbonate) to foods such >> as bread. " But don't forget the natural sources - the vegan diet does >> not need that much support! >> >> 8. " Parents, whatever the dietary persuasion, have a duty to ensure that >> their children are properly nourished. Providing the advice given is >> followed, the right of parents to raise their children as vegans should >> be respected. Those who fail to follow this advice are guilty of child >> abuse. " - Maybe they should have done an article on the irresponsible >> parents who feed their obese children on McDonalds. They're the ones >> with the real health problems. >> >> Cheers, >> James >> >> John Davis wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Strange article. What he writes seems entirely reasonable, yet the >>> article >>> has a title of 'lifestyle choice or child abuse' where the article makes >>> clear that it is not abuse, and the first paragraph says that there are >>> 'claims that bringing up children as vegans is a form of child abuse' >>> without providing references for this, or indeed the author claiming it. >>> >>> So basically, if you read the article you'll see that a vegan diet is >>> fine >>> for kids, but if you just read the title and first paragraph, you'll come >>> away with the idea that people are claiming it is child abuse. >>> >>> Nice piece of editing from the Times there... >>> >>> John >>> >>> - >>> " Gayalondiel " <gayalondiel >>> <gayalondiel%40livejournal.com>> >>> < <%40>> >>> Monday, June 16, 2008 12:59 PM >>> Re: LBC radio phone-in >>> >>> >>>> I didn't hear it, but Professor Saunders had a piece in the Times this >>>> weekend: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece >>> <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4137426.ece> >>> >>>> I assume that's the basics of what they were talking about. >>>> >>>> Gaya >>>> >>>> >>>> On 6/16/08, James H <james >>>> >>> <james%40telestial.org>> wrote: >>> >>>>> Hiya all, >>>>> >>>>> Did anyone hear the LBC radio phone-in this morning? My mate rang me >>>>> up >>>>> from London and played me a bit down the phone - the presenter was >>>>> describing the vegan diet as child abuse. They also had a professor >>>>> (if >>>>> I remember correctly Prof. Tom Saunders from London Kings College) >>>>> knocking veganism for kids as well. >>>>> >>>>> Did anyone here more of it? >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> James >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.