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?
Vegans can never deny the fact that we humans are MAMMALS, built to drink milk, and also eat both meats and vegetables. Vegan diet is just incomplete and a semireligious fad.
>>Vegan diet is just incomplete and a
>>semireligious fad.
Only “semireligious”? Not fully? Are you sure vegans aren’t worshiping at the altar of vegetables, offering human sacrifices to the Cucumber God? Attempting to pass Propositions in California forcing everyone to adhere to their dietary laws?
Jesus. I think we need to revise Dvorak’s law to state that “as soon as a post is made here, somebody’s instantly going to take a cheap shot at people of faith”. Fuck Godwin and his law, he was WAY too conservative for this crowd.
Mustard,
I’d hate to think that you’re just a dummy.
Too late.
***
As for Ketchup. Why on earth do some morans insist on showing the world what a dickhead they are.
Grow up and start acting like a high schooler at least.
Humans are omnivores. It’s MAYBE possible for an adult human to have an (almost) totally vegan diet, but I doubt it. There are dietary needs that are difficult to obtain from just plants. We aren’t adapted to the intestinal flora that allows rabbits to live off of grass for one thing. And even rabbits have to be fed mother’s milk (A DAIRY product, so to speak.) until they are mature enough to switch to their mostly cellulose diet. Fruit, veggies and grains are good for you, but you gotta have proteins and fats as well. Just don’t eat as much of them as I did. Oink.
Mr. Mustard.
Most of the time you make a certain amount of sense to me..with the exception of your theory that atheism is a belief of some kind. So maybe I just don’t understand your definition of “belief”. To me..belief is something you have when you have no evidence to the contrary (ie..lack of any countering knowledge) ..or..evidence to the contrary that you don’t want to accept. “I believe the world is flat” is a belief in the first sense before the evidence was clear..then became a belief only in the second sense. The first..in a given time frame, can be considered rational..the second..less so. Under either of these cases..I don’t see how atheism fits. All evidence suggests no deity…so..no need for belief..anymore than I need to believe in rain. The second definition is moot. If you come up with some proof of a deity…and I then say s/he does not exist..then I fall into that category and it becomes belief.
As I say, maybe you understand the definition of “belief” differently than I do. If so, could you explain it? It’s silly to argue if we can’t agree on the terms in the first place.
And no..I don’t disrespect your belief. I think it’s borderline insane..but I think I’m borderline insane and I don’t believe for a second…^_^. As I say, I find you mostly rational, even though you believe…except for this one argument of yours..that anyone who doesn’t believe in some sort of monotheistic deity believes in..no monotheistic deity? I don’t believe the sky is falling, so I must believe the sky isn’t falling? Or I just know the sky isn’t falling, since I can go out and look…belief does not enter into it.
>>I don’t believe the sky is falling, so I
>>must believe the sky isn’t falling?
Pretty much.
I’m not talking about agnostics here (who “don’t know”), I’m talking about the evangelical hard-case atheists who “know”, beyond what the consider to be reasonable doubt, that God does NOT exist. No proof, they just “know” it.
And in furtherance of their “knowledge” they feel compelled to ridicule, disrespect, lampoon, browbeat, imprison, and even kill those whose evidence-free beliefs are not the same as theirs.
Thanks for your consideration of this matter.
George Bernard Shaw and Hitler were both vegetarians, so you’ve got quite a wide variation to swathe.
I have been a lax vegetarian for 36 years. For a bit of that, I was a Vegan. I think that it is possible to be healthy and a Vegan, but it is tricky. Green leafy vegetables (e.g. kale) are a better source of calcium than milk is. For Vitamin D, you have good old-fashioned sunshine, or if what you find in Scotland is insufficient, fish liver oil. GBS ate liver. He said that it’s not a food, it’s a medicine.
But to deny an infant mother’s milk, if that is what they did, is crazy, maybe even criminal. I can’t imagine any belief system (except a food company executive’s bank account) that would prohibit mother’s milk. It’s just a crazy idea that gets into some people’s heads.
Another example: in the hippy days, some young people got severe nutritional deficiencies by sticking to a so-called macrobiotic diet, which consisted largely of brown rice. In fact, if you look at the real macrobiotic diet, it is something quite different. For example, it requires more root vegetables than brown rice (amongst other things). So the brown-rice thang was just a crazy idea that got into somebody’s head.
You’re safer if you stick to “moderation in all things”. Anybody who has witnessed the health and reverence to life of the Inuit people (who traditionally ate nothing but flesh, ever) will have to admit that there might be more than one proper Way of Life.
The life sentences were too severe, but that’s what you’ve got to expect in the Land of the Imprisoned. If they had done that ghastly thing for money rather than [misplaced] love, they’d probably have gotten away with a wrist-slap fine.
#37 Mr. Bellies – Good points. Kudos.
#36–Mustard==”And in furtherance of their “knowledge” they feel compelled to ridicule, disrespect, lampoon, browbeat, imprison, and even kill those whose evidence-free beliefs are not the same as theirs.”
Haw! Haw! And thats whats wrong with belief systems. The high priesthood of atheism is the scientist. (Definitional quibbles aside.) How many scientists have done anything except look for more evidence when confronted with disagreement? Poor MM sees the world thru mustard flaked lenses of distortion and thinks everyone is just like himself==everyone on the same continuum. Religion is zero percent science, so science is religion too. I’ll say again: “HAW! HAW!!!”
#39 Bobbo
All I can say is I hope you have a designated driver. You’re flagged, dude.
36
Of course they know it. The same way I know the sky isn’t falling. There isn’t the slightest bit of evidence for it. I can be agnostic too…and say maybe the sky is falling and maybe it isn’t..but only one of those is true. I do need to believe that it is. I don’t need to believe that it isn’t.
It is possible to say “I don’t know if the sky is falling, I haven’t looked today”…but once you look..the answer is obvious.
What I am trying to communicate..I think…is that what you see as belief is just the dumbfounded look people get when they state the obvious..that the sky isn’t falling…and you come back and tell them it is.
Now..if you show them pictures of the sky all over your front lawn…well…then you get to have the dumbfounded look when they say it’s not there….^_^
@39 “The high priesthood of atheism is the scientist.”
There are scientific atheists and emo atheists.
The scientific ones use evidence, data and knowledge as the backbone of their belief system.
The emo atheists have an anti-religion agenda that borders on hate and a specious regard for established knowledge contrary to their belief system.
I wish there were separate designations as the latter group’s behavior really taints the value of being a member of the former group.
#42–HMyers==I have to think that all these designations fall on a continuum of such beliefs and others even contradicting as well? Few things are as hard to nail down as “what a person thinks.”
Such a hodgepodge.
Easy to know what a fascist thinks though==either you agree 100%, or you are the enemy. But even some fascist (religious, governmental, economic, environmental, etc) can be difficult to spy as they lie.
Would that god would just part the clouds and smite the evil ones, but he chooses not to. I most people really are part of the problem or part of the solution?==with the other parts a mystery?
>>The emo atheists have an anti-religion
>>agenda that borders on hate
I’m gratified to see that somebody else here on dvorak dot org slash blog recognizes this fact.
I don’t think you’re going to win too many admirers by pointing it out, though.
>>I have to think that all these designations
>>fall on a continuum
Oh, would that “continuum” be similar to the “spectrum” that you recently lampooned?
I think you need to go back for a refresher course in logic, son. Or at least for one in common sense.
#19: The reason for a life term for people starving their child to death is that it was premeditated murder, even if they thought otherwise.
That isn’t veganism, thats just crazy people.
If they fed the baby nothing but mcdonald’s food, then they wouldn’t be going to jail.
46
No, it’s not pre-meditated murder..and I doubt that’s what they were convicted of. I would think planning and intent would have been difficult to prove…while the pure idiocy would have easily led to an involuntary manslaughter conviction. In fact..I’d be surprised if it ever went to trial. I would think that..given the mental states of a couple of people who by then would certainly have known that their action had killed their child would have been easy to talk into pleading to the involuntary manslaughter charge.
If they did fight it, I can see a jury being so disgusted with their refusal to acknowledge responsibility that they would convict on a higher charge…since prosecutors love the “throw everything at the wall and see what sticks” method of “justice”.
I’m just wondering what justice was served. I say it was just “vengeance”..
#48, Shin,
I’m just wondering what justice was served. I say it was just “vengeance”..
A factoid that escapes most of those desiring “justice” against someone who has done something they don’t like.
So now the state is going to police what parents feed their kids? Maybe have a roving patrol that knocks on doors and checks the shelves?
#50, Lyin’ Mike,
Some days you truly amaze.
The law requires every parent to provide for their children and protect them from harm. Not absolutes, just to a minimum. No castles, but a decent shelter. Not gourmet, but nutritious food. If the parent can’t provide or abuses the child then the state will provide for the child. If the parent has purposely harmed the child then it becomes a criminal act.
In this case the parents were aware that the child was in duress. In failing to seek medical help or follow the medical advice, the parents purposely injured their child.
This does not become an excuse for the State to intrude into every home. It does remain that every professional who comes in contact with the child and suspects abuse is required to report that abuse to police or child welfare. Every citizen is morally required to report abuse to the authorities as well. Except for you who would prefer to turn a blind eye for fear of a lawsuit. Unless you’re packing.
So do you follow all advice given by doctors? Do you take every single medicine they recommend?
>This does not become an excuse for the State to intrude into every home
Sure it does.
#52 & 53, Lyin’ Mike,
What I do is not the issue. The child was ill and they either didn’t provide proper medical attention OR failed to follow through on the the medical advice given. When the child failed to recover they were obligated to seek further help. They didn’t.
The law is there to protect children because they can’t protect themselves. This case does not give the government any more power to “intrude” or “invade” a home. The standards remain the same as before.
Humans are omnivores. It’s MAYBE possible for an adult human to have an (almost) totally vegan diet, but I doubt it. There are dietary needs that are difficult to obtain from just plants. We aren’t adapted to the intestinal flora that allows rabbits to live off of grass for one thing. And even rabbits have to be fed mother’s milk (A DAIRY product, so to speak.) until they are mature enough to switch to their mostly cellulose diet. Fruit, veggies and grains are good for you, but you gotta have proteins and fats as well. Just don’t eat as much of them as I did. Oink.
Hey look, vegan’s aren’t all bad. Don’t group us in with the extremists, and I doubt any of the vegans I know would condone the crimes of these parents. Oh. and by the way.
“Vegans can never deny the fact that we humans are MAMMALS, built to drink milk, and also eat both meats and vegetables. Vegan diet is just incomplete and a semireligious fad.”
Can you think of any other MAMMAL that drinks milk past the age of infancy?
Or another MAMMAL that drinks the milk of another species?
Oh, and there are plenty of MAMMALS that are herbivores. Like cows, pigs, sheep.. oh wait. We eat those!
– we aren’t all unintelligent. You seem to be the ones who are uneducated. get some information before you start bashing a whole group of people based on the actions of irresponsible human beings.
i am vegan but these paretns are stupids and they dont have the right to force her daughter for this diet, but please people dont be idiot and dont hate vegans just for 2 stupids vegan parents
This guy is a long-time Vegan
And he is 72 years old.
Suck it, meatheads.
vao se fuder,viva ao vegans loucos,que so falam merda.
oh wait
And there was an (omnivorous) cult who starved a 3-yr-old child to death in my area. Am I saying all omnivores are whackos? No. You get crazy people everywhere, and though they usually recieve more attention than the general population, does not mean they are representative of that population.
Vitamin D is synthesized by the skin with adequeate exposure to sunlight- 20 minutes a day without sunscreen is adequate for most. Just like cows’ milk, most soy and almond milk products are also fortified with vitamin d, as are many products like Luna/Clif bars. The parents were irresponsible, but its perfectly possible to get enough vitamin D on a vegan diet.
Another misconception is that vegans are against baby humans drinking breast milk. 99% of vegans I know think its ridiculous to deprive a baby of its mothers breast milk.
People who usually have that misconception don’t understand the motivations of vegans, which are usually animal rights/welfare, the environmental impact of meat and dairy, and the fact that dairy isn’t natural for humans to consume.
Dairy is the breast milk of another species, and we drink it into adulthood, too. To say humans NEED dairy is like to saying penguins NEED giraffe milk.
Fyi, I’m a vegan and I run varsity cross country and distance track. Just saying we are not all anorexic potheads like you feel the need to make us out to be.