A 12-YEAR-OLD girl in Scotland brought up by her parents on a strict vegan diet has been admitted to hospital with a degenerative bone condition said to have left her with the spine of an 80-year-old woman. Doctors are under pressure to report the couple to police and social workers amid concerns that her health and welfare may have been neglected in pursuit of their dietary beliefs.
The girl, who has been fed on a strict meat and dairy-free diet from birth, is said to have a severe form of rickets and to have suffered a number of fractured bones. The condition is caused by a lack of vitamin D, which is needed to absorb calcium and is found in liver, oily fish and dairy produce. Decalcification leads to the bones becoming brittle and can cause curvature of the spine.
One leading nutritionist, who asked not to be named, said: “In most instances, the parents who are imposing this very restrictive and potentially hazardous diet are not themselves brought up as vegans. They are imposing on their children something . . . which we do not know enough about to know it is safe.” Last year, an American vegan couple were given a life sentence for starving their six-week-old baby to death. In 2001 two vegans from west London were sentenced to three years’ community rehabilitation after they admitted starving their baby to death.
What in the world were they thinking?
Imprison all vegans
Further proof that man is not meant to live on a vegan diet.
I HATE VEGANS !
There is a consequence to having stupid beliefs. A shame that the consequences fell to an innocent child.
An infant on a milk free diet? Not even the mother’s milk? The mother being a vegan, the milk maybe lacking anyway.
Anyone who thinks that the human body evolved as a herbivore has the IQ of a gnat.
Doctors are under pressure to report the couple to police and social workers amid concerns that her health and welfare may have been neglected in pursuit of their dietary beliefs.
What are they waiting on?
#7. “What are they waiting on?”, my guess is they are waiting for legal clearance. Prosecuting cultural, religeous and ethnic minorities in the UK, on a point of cultural or ethnic divergence, is difficult because they invariably appeal on the grounds of persecution. Like, what happened recently in Texas.
Turn vegans into soylent green.
Last year, an American vegan couple were given a life sentence for starving their six-week-old baby to death. In 2001 two vegans from west London were sentenced to three years’ community rehabilitation after they admitted starving their baby to death.
This shows you the differences between the USA and the UK. Life sentence vs. 3 years of “community rehabilitation”. The more I hear about the UK the more I hate that country.
#9 chuck said, Turn vegans into soylent green.
There wouldn’t be much nutritional value, but why not?
Turn vegans into soylent green.
All you get when using vegans is Soylent Green Lite.
Just as bad as religious parents.
Anyone actually met an intelligent vegan?
Umm,
Vit D is also absorbed through the Eyes with Sunshine.
WHICH they didnt mention in the article.
As well as the idea that MOST vegans, do take supplements..For calcium, Vit D, and other nutrients..
Seems to me if you *have* to take a supplement, something is off with your diet or body, if its the diet change it
a vegan diet should be used for interrogations (shutters at thought of no meat while eating a pork roast)
>>Just as bad as religious parents.
Ah, go squirt yourself on a Jucy Lucy, Ketch:
http://tinyurl.com/56zdce
There should be a “Dvorak’s Law” (in analogy to Godwin’s Law) referring to the probaility of anti-spiritual defamation popping up in a thread here on dvorak dot org slash blog in which it’s completely irrelevant.
Aw come on Mustard, just because you’re a bible thumper doesn’t mean you have to get your panties in a wad over the mere mention of your superstitions. These parents could have sent their kid to church for some butt secks. Maybe you should go light some candles, sprinkle some water, shut our eyes and say some words to yourself – that should help this kid out, huh?
We can agree to disagree.
10…
Perhaps you’d like to elaborate on what great social principal was served by a life sentence? Were they likely to go rampaging through the society committing serial starvation upon people? Do you believe they were incorrigible criminals who need to be kept segregated from society to protect us all? Or, is it just a case for you of good old testament vengeance…. I’ll bet it’s that last one, and you consider yourself a good, moral, forgiving Christian. Yes, they were stupid to the point of criminal negligence, and almost certainly sick with remorse over the damage their idiocy caused…over doing what I’m sure they thought was a good thing…but…a life sentence? Is that going to bring that child back? Possibly the rack should be brought back to satisfy your own blood lust. Burning at the stake maybe?
Personally, I can’t think of anything better to do to them than force them to remain on a vegan diet the rest of their lives. Oh..and the community service. Might as well at least get some useful work out of them. Before they also die of starvation.
>>Maybe you should go light some candles,
>>sprinkle some water, shut our eyes and say
>>some words to yourself
Oh, Mister Ketchup. I pity your ignorance. And your hubris. If you think pedophile priests butt-fucking cherubic altar boys has anything to do with my beliefs, I’ll stick with the onions and relish, thank you very much. Ketchup is dumb as a rock.
Mustard: http://tinyurl.com/3otmv
Heh heh. Guess I beat you down, hm Monsieur Ketchup? Flipping me the bird? {snicker}
Wikipedia gives a nice review of Vit D:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_D
I forgot that Milk is a source of Vit D ONLY BECAUSE it is fortified. Looks like I’m going to start taking a supplement because I don’t get out in the sun much either. Its not clearly stated, but it looks probably that you can’t get all the Vit D you need unless you live at the equator?
Mustard–of course anyone that takes a small inaccurately understood idea and builds a life around it AND inflicts that belief system on someone else is acting in a religious manner. Maybe not the same religion you made up, but certainly the same mechanism.
Wait, you forgot to click my name!!
>>of course anyone that takes a small
>>inaccurately understood idea and builds a life
>>around it AND inflicts that belief system on
>>someone else is acting in a religious manner.
Tasty waffles, hey look! Finally something Bobbo and I can cook (or at least agree on.)
I’ve been saying that self-same thing about Atheism for a dog’s age.
Although you’ve got a harder row to hoe with veganism, as that’s a belief system, but it doesn’t really have anything to do with GOD. That’s how Atheism _really_ slots into the definition.
ps: there’s nothing in the definition of “religion” that says you have to inflict it on somebody else. That’s you’re amendment. By the same token, there’s nothing in the definition of “religion” that say you have to fuck cherubic altar boys up the ass.
#25–Mustard==let me encourage you to reference your posts with numbers and names?
Not all religions teach infliction, but many do. Some are known for it, as in “evangelical.”
I also agree with you that those who practice a “hard atheism” and try to convert others thru their evangelism are also using the same mechanism that religion does.
You have it then that not all religions are the same, why would you think all atheism is the same? Or even the majority of either notion?
>>let me encourage you to reference your
>>posts with numbers and names?
Fuck, no. The numbers aren’t reliable, and as to whom I’m responding to, why would anyone need to know that (if they don’t already)? I’m responding to a statement, not to a person. I would think that a logician like yourself would recognize that. Tsk tsk.
>>You have it then that not all religions are
>>the same, why would you think all atheism is
>>the same?
Tsk tsk again, Bobster. You need to lay of the PS3 and start doing your homework.
I NEVER said that “all atheism is the same”. It’s a system of belief, on the spectrum from Total Disbelievers to guys who pay $40 to have emails sent after the rapture. Whether or not someone tries to inflict their beliefs on other really has no relationship to what exactly it is they believe.
#27–Mustard==responding to a statement is fine and dandy but when done not to the post just 1 or 2 above, or when done the next day, the entire post can be hard to find regardless of who wrote it and in view of several quoting the passage at issue. Name and number help to avoid that and give the responder an easier way to find the entire context. You should do it rather than inflict your idiosyncratic obsfucation on the rest of us. ((I trust you won’t confuse education with infliction?))
You are again evidencing your miscomprehension of what words actually mean consistent with your post a week or so ago. Is a glass totally empty in fact full of nothing? You reject that as nonsense while you post the same: “the spectrum from Total Disbelievers to guys who pay $40 to have emails sent after the rapture” I think most would agree that nothing is not on the same spectrum as 100%. There are difference in type as well as degree. Elephants are not 0% on the spectrum of monkeys. They are on a different spectrum. Same with atheism and religion. Some atheist cross breed with the religious and do fall on the spectrum, most do not.
Bobbo, you make me weary. Your relentless bloviating is just too tiresome to read. If you can’t figure out what I’m responding to from a full quote begun with double chevrons, that’s just tfb.
As to your statement “I think most would agree that nothing is not on the same spectrum as 100%.”, I can only hope you’ve been nipping at the Bailey’s Irish Creme Cream. I’d hate to think that you’re just a dummy.
As to your statement “I think most would agree that nothing is not on the same spectrum as 100%.” /// Correct–it looks wrong in isolation==only context provides the sense.
But otherwise, I agree.