Well, there was a long term study done on low-carb (lots of meat) diets.
It was 26 years long, lead by Teresa Fung. It found that the "all-death" risk increased by 23%, death from Cardiovascular related deaths by 14%, and cancer deaths by 28%.
Contrasting that, those following vegetable-based diets showed a 20% decrease in all-deaths and 27% fewer from cardiovascular disease.
Before anyone balks at this study, if followed 121,000 females and 51,000 males.
Full disclosure:
"Limitations: Diet and lifestyle characteristics were assessed with some degree of error. Sensitivity analyses indicated that results were probably not substantively affected by residual confounding or an unmeasured confounder. Participants were not a representative sample of the U.S. population."
http://www.annals.org/content/153/5/289.abstract
Now, this does not mean that vegetarians are right, it only means that the average american, when following a diet that emphasizes animal fats and protiens as the primary source for those, is less healthy for you. If the average american worked out 4-6 days a week, vigorously, which included resistance training (weight lifting) AND cardio, you would see an improvement AS LONG AS all nutrional needs were met, which includes fiber and other nutrients from veggies.
A high protein and fat diet is obviously bad for you.
Animal meat IS good for you and your body does work best off of food that matches animal nutrional profiles (because, get this, we evolved off of mostly animal meat, some berries, and nuts.) but it needs the exercise with it, too.
Eat up your meat...but eat your veggies, too. That's not all: work out, as well.
Does those, and you'll be at the best health point as possible.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Screw being vegetarian. I'd rather eat meat and be happy.
One can be happy and a vegetarian. So if you are saying you'd rather be happy and eat meat than be a vegetarian and sad than that's fair enough though I don't think eating meat or not eating meat is important to state in that case. On the other hand if you are saying you'd rather eat meat and be happy than be a vegetarian and be happy then that would need elaboration, it just seems to be your initial stance restated. Alternatively you may mean that you personally could not be happy if you were not to eat meat, but that's not easily clear from what you said. In conclusion I think you should be more precise in your postings in the future.
Originally posted by Bardock42Jesus, did you think I was actually bashing on vegetarians?
One can be happy and a vegetarian. So if you are saying you'd rather be happy and eat meat than be a vegetarian and sad than that's fair enough though I don't think eating meat or not eating meat is important to state in that case. On the other hand if you are saying you'd rather eat meat and be happy than be a vegetarian and be happy then that would need elaboration, it just seems to be your initial stance restated. Alternatively you may mean that you personally could not be happy if you were not to eat meat, but that's not easily clear from what you said. In conclusion I think you should be more precise in your postings in the future.