• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Alyssa Luck

Alyssa Luck

  • About Me
  • Deep Dives
  • The IBD Index
  • Functional Orthodontics
  • YouTube
  • Instagram
  • Contact Me
  • Show Search
Hide Search

Veg*n is Not a Curse Word

Alyssa Luck · Feb 28, 2013 · 10 Comments

Note: this is one of my oldest posts, written when I was 19. Upon re-reading almost a decade later, I’m struck by my extreme naivety – but nevertheless, what I wrote back then does still resonate with me on a certain level. So, if for no other reason than to maintain a time capsule of my internet rants and raves, I decided to leave it up!

Yesterday, Alex Jamieson told the world that she is no longer a vegan. If you don’t know who she is and really don’t care, just bear with me for a minute. Alex is best known from the documentary Super Size Me, where her then-boyfriend Morgan Spurlock ate nothing but McDonalds for 30 days. Alex used a vegan approach to get Morgan’s health back on track after his 30 day McDiet, and she has since been a leading voice for health and nutrition in the vegan community. I would encourage you to read her post, but here’s the gist: Alex discovered that at this point in her life, her body needs some animal products to be healthy. Her post yesterday was the first time she’d publicly announced her decision to incorporate some animal products into her diet.

As you can probably imagine, much drama ensued in the comments section. Leave it to the Internet to turn something as simple as eating an egg into a veritable Armageddon. She received much adulation from meat-eaters and vegetarians alike for being true to her body and not being shamed into conforming to a label. She received some thoughtful, measured comments from vegans, as well as former vegans who shared her same experience. But she also received a hefty dose of retaliation from the vegan community, with accusations of weak will power and hypocrisy. 

Reading those comments made me frustrated, and actually kind of angry. If you’ve ever gotten into a comment war on Facebook, you know the feeling: blood pressure rising with each additional word you read, false starts where you go to reply and realize that someone else has already said what you were going to say. A lot of things made me angry- the misinformation, the closed-mindedness, the lack of compassion and sensitivity (not all from vegans, mind you!). But the most frustrating thing to me is that we should be on the same side. Vegans, primals, ancestralites, raw foodies – we all have the same goals. You don’t believe me? Let me list them, and just tell me you don’t agree with these:

  1. Healthy, happy people
  2. Healthy, happy animals
  3. Healthy, clean environment

Anyone want to tell me you don’t share those goals? No? Good.

Sure, the primary goal may change, depending on your circumstances. For instance, most people go Paleo for health reasons. But do they not emphasize the importance of animals being raised as nature intended? Do they not set forth the goal to buy locally from small, sustainable farmers?

And many vegans choose their path for sustainability reasons, and to promote animal welfare. But do they not also choose it because of the expected benefits to their personal health? As far as I know, there aren’t many vegan ‘martyrs’ who believe that veganism will harm their personal health, yet still decide to be vegan for moral reasons.

There’s a huge chasm between the ancestral and vegan communities, and not enough effort has been made to bridge it. Our priorities among these goals differ based on where we are in life, but the important thing is that the end goals are the same. It’s clear that there are intensely passionate people on both sides; why else would we take time out of our day to get in ridiculous online comment wars? But right now, that passion is split into opposing forces. Where we should be 10 + 10 = 20, we are -10 + 10 = 0.

This might sound like idealistic mumbo-jumbo to some of you, and I’ll be the first to admit that I can be idealistic to a fault. But I’m also logical to a fault, and I want to take a step towards bridging this gap with some reason and understanding. That’s why this is the first post in a series that will explore every aspect of veganism, and how it relates to an ancestral lifestyle. I mostly want to do this because I’m curious: what are the possible issues with a vegan diet, and what are the possible benefits? Why do some people thrive on a vegan diet, while others develop health issues? Which people are more likely than others to succeed as vegans? And does eating meat really make me a compassionless earth-killer?

As I’m sure you know, I eat meat, and you can take that bias for what it is. But I’d like to think I can still approach this topic with open-mindedness and objectivity, with the end goal of increasing understanding and cooperation on both sides. I don’t really have a stake in the matter – I’m not making money on books or nutrition coaching, and I don’t care if other people eat the way I do. I don’t even have a concrete plan about how many posts I’ll do, or what my conclusions will be. Like I said, I’m curious! This will not be a ‘Definitive Guide’ by any means, but I’m sure I’ll learn something useful (: I will go where the research takes me, and even if nobody ever reads these posts, I’ll satisfy my own desire for better understanding.

I know there will always be disagreement between these communities. But in this world where public health is disastrous, species are dying out, and chickens have their beaks cut off in factory farms, I think we have bigger fish to fry more important issues on our hands.

And to all you Paleo people out there, for gosh sakes – vegan is not a curse word.

Posts in this series:
Plant-Based Diet or Plant-Based Diet?
Are Humans Herbivores?
Is it Possible to be Healthy on a Vegan Diet? [Part One]
Is it Possible to be Healthy on a Vegan Diet? [Part Two]
A word on raw meat, carnivory, and compassion towards animals

Related

Blog, Nutrition and Health, Rants & Musings

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Jessica says

    February 28, 2013 at 8:11 pm

    Incredibly insight post and very well written! I found you via CaveGirl this week and started following your blog. I can see she was right, you have an important voice in the paleo/primal/ancestral community. Thank you for that! SuperSize me was one of the first things my husband and I watched that set us on the path to find the paleo/primal/ancestral world a couple of years ago. I agree, we all have the same goals and I wish we all worked together better. I look forward to your follow up posts about veganism. I have a sister who recently went vegan in the last few years and I shy away from discussing food with her because of our vastly different view on eating animals.

    Oh, BTW, I wish you had a *like* button feature on your site. Sometimes I don’t have anything to add but like to show the blogger that I visited and appreciated their post. Just a thought.

    Reply
    • Alyssa Luck says

      February 28, 2013 at 11:25 pm

      Thank you so much Jessica! That means a lot.

      And thank you for the heads-up on the like button! Now you can like my posts AND like the blog on Facebook (:

      Reply
  2. Molly says

    March 2, 2013 at 9:56 am

    I came across your blog via http://www.marksdailyapple.com (which I came across via flickr and…oy! Starting to think maybe MY body just needs me to get off the computer!). I’m a GF vegetarian with vegan leanings, but I try not to be overly dogmatic and appreciate your balanced viewpoint—thanks for sharing.

    Reply
    • Alyssa Luck says

      March 2, 2013 at 10:00 am

      Hi Molly! Haha I can totally appreciate the insane amount of time that can slip away when blog-hopping. Also, I appreciate your punny blog title…I too am a sucker for good puns, especially gluten-related ones 🙂 Thank you for your comment!

      Reply
      • Molly says

        March 2, 2013 at 10:40 am

        Thanks! I like your blog name, too. (Great header pic as well!)

        Reply
  3. Christiane says

    April 22, 2013 at 12:35 pm

    Congratulations on a really excellent post. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being vegan as long as you read up on what you need to eat to keep yourself healthy. There are too many people today telling everyone else how they should live their life.
    I completely agree with your comment, Healthy, happy people, Healthy, happy animals
    Healthy, clean environment.

    Reply
    • Alyssa Luck says

      April 23, 2013 at 8:15 am

      Thank you Christiane!

      Reply
  4. John Torres says

    April 23, 2013 at 8:12 am

    Just found your blog… And I like it! 🙂

    Reply
    • Alyssa Luck says

      April 23, 2013 at 8:14 am

      Thanks John! 🙂

      Reply

Trackbacks

  1. 5 Reasons You Should Eat Oysters | Truthbutter says:
    August 3, 2015 at 1:20 pm

    […] you impale me with a vegetable, hear me out. I truly respect vegans who decide to forgo all animal products to reduce animal suffering, lessen their personal […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Primary Sidebar

 

Hi! I’m Alyssa. I like thunderstorms and cats, hate wearing shoes, and enjoy devising extensive research projects for myself in my free time. This is me in Bali with a monkey on my shoulder. And this is my blog, where I muse about health-related topics and document my relentless self-guinea pigging. If you want to know more about me, click here!

alyssa.luck

alyssa.luck
Photo dump from the last year. Thanks to everyone Photo dump from the last year. Thanks to everyone who made 28 the best yet - excited for 29🥰

(PS. In case anyone wants to know what it’s like in my head, I was going to write something like “year 28” or “my 28th year” but then I realized that the year between your 28th and 29th birthdays is not your 28th year of life, it’s your 29th year. I am turning 29 because I have been alive for 29 years. So then I had a whole thing about how to word it without being inaccurate and ended up going with what you see above which is vague and weird but the point is it was a good year and I love all the people in my life dearly)
Biology of Belief (2005) was written by Bruce Lipt Biology of Belief (2005) was written by Bruce Lipton, who earned a PhD in developmental biology in 1971 and was an anatomy professor and academic researcher in the 70s and 80s. Despite the book's presentation and Lipton's background, this is not a science book. It is an exposition of an ideology, supported by haphazard and poorly contextualized nuggets of evidence, rhetorical leaps, and a mind-boggling overuse of analogies. 

The book largely failed to deliver on its promised content. What it does is argue for the primacy of the environment over DNA in controlling life; propose that the cell membrane rather than the nucleus is the "brain" of the cell; invoke quantum physics to explain why modern medicine fails; explain that our behavior is largely controlled by our subconscious mind; inform parents that they therefore have a great deal of control over the destiny of their children; and conclude that humans must become nonviolent protectors of the environment and of humanity because Everything Is Connected.

It’s not that these points aren’t relevant to the topic at hand - they are. But they were not connected in a coherent way that would explain how “belief” actually works (like…biologically), and the treatment of scientific concepts throughout was careless, or perhaps disingenuous.

I think he's correct about many things, some of them being common knowledge. For instance, the "new" science of epigenetics is now old news, as is the critical role of parenting and early environment in shaping a child’s future. But however important these and attendant concepts may be, the book did not do a good job explaining, supporting, or connecting them. 

As far as practical guidance, he refers the reader to a list of resources on his website, which is fine, but I expected some scientific insight into how/why those modalities work. None was given. 

On the plus side, the book was quite thought-provoking, and I came away with loads of references and topics to follow up on. My favorite line? "There cannot be exceptions to a theory; exceptions simply mean that a theory is not fully correct."
Friedrich Nietzsche, The Gay Science (section 382) Friedrich Nietzsche, The Gay Science (section 382), as quoted in the introduction to Thus Spoke Zarathustra because I like the translation better.
This paper totally changed the way I think about e This paper totally changed the way I think about early nervous system development and the relationship between physiology and sociality. 

The authors propose that newborn babies are not inherently social, and have just one goal in life: physiological homeostasis. I.e. staying alive. This means nutrients, warmth, and regulation of breath and heart rate, i.e. autonomic arousal (it’s well-accepted that newborns sync their breathing and heart rate with caregivers through skin to skin contact). 

All these things are traditionally provided by a loving caregiver. So what the baby experiences during the first weeks of life, over and over, is a shift from physiological perturbation to homeostasis (a highly rewarding event inherently) REPEATEDLY PAIRED with things like the sound of a caregiver’s voice and seeing their face. Thus, over time, the face/voice stimuli become rewarding as well. 

The authors argue that THIS is the beginning of humans’ wiring for sociality, and may explain why loving social interactions can have such a profound regulating effect on physiology throughout life: because the brain was trained for it at an early age. 

This framework holds all kinds of fascinating implications for what happens if that initial “training” isn’t so ideal. What if the return to nutritional homeostasis via feeding is paired with negative expressions and vocalizations rather than loving ones, perhaps as could occur with PPD? What happens if the caregiver has poor autonomic regulation, such that social stimuli become paired with cardiorespiratory overexcitement in the baby? Could that have potential for influencing later introversion vs extroversion? (Because if social interaction is paired with autonomic overexcitement, that could lead to social interaction literally being more energetically draining, which is what introverts experience. Thoughts?)

For my energy metabolism enthusiasts: Table 1 in the paper draws a link between metabolic rate and sociality across species. Swipe for a screenshot. 

Anyway, check out the paper! It’s free, just google “growing a social brain pdf.”
I’ll be under general anesthesia in a couple day I’ll be under general anesthesia in a couple days to have two tooth implants placed, and I think I’ll take the opportunity to have a little heart-to-heart with my subconscious mind. A bit of medically-assisted self-hypnosis, if you will. 

I randomly stumbled upon these papers a couple months ago - an RCT showing reduced post-op pain in patients who listened to recorded positive messages while under general anesthesia, plus a post-hoc analysis of the same data that found reduced post-op nausea and vomiting in a subset of high-risk patients. 

The full review paper from the first slide is unfortunately in German, but it has long been recognized that even when unconscious, the patient is listening (for better or for worse). 

It boggles my mind that it isn’t standard of care to have patients listen to recordings like this while under sedation, considering that almost nothing could be easier, safer, or cheaper, and we have at least some evidence of significant efficacy. I mean c’mon, what more could you want from an intervention? 

(Yeah, I know. Profit. If anyone still thinks that our medical system operates with patient well-being as the foremost goal, you’re deluding yourself.)

“There should be a fundamental change in the way patients are treated in the operating room and intensive care unit, and background noise and careless conversations should be eliminated.”

“Perhaps it is now time to finally heed this call and to use communication with unconscious patients that goes beyond the most necessary announcement of interventions and is therapeutically effective through positive suggestions. When in doubt, assume that the patient is listening.”
If you've seen "vagus nerve exercises" that have y If you've seen "vagus nerve exercises" that have you moving your eyes or tilting your head, you've probably encountered the work of Stanley Rosenberg. The exercises he created and introduced in his 2017 book now appear in instructional videos all over the internet. 
 
The book itself has much to recommend it: it's accessible, it's practical, it's inspiring. But it has one major flaw: the solid practical and informational content regarding the cranial nerves is framed in terms of the scientifically dubious polyvagal theory. 
 
I particularly enjoyed the book as an introduction to the therapeutic arena of bodywork, of which Rosenberg is a skilled practitioner. His book is full of case reports that demonstrate how immensely powerful extremely subtle movements and physical manipulations can be. These do need to be kept in perspective: it's a small sample size of the most remarkable cases, and the results were achieved within the supportive clinical environment of a skilled practitioner. You can tell from his descriptions how refined his technique is. But nevertheless, it was a paradigm-shifting read for me, and the exercises give you something concrete to play around with. 
 
The book also brought the cranial nerves and the concept of “social engagement” to the fore as arbiters of health. Rosenberg has a solid background in cranial nerve anatomy and shares many interesting tidbits and considerations that you don’t typically hear; for instance, the potential impact of dental and orthodontic work on cranial nerve function.
 
So, is it worth reading? If any of the above piques your interest, go for it! Just read my post on polyvagal theory first – you can use the book to practice separating the wheat (solid informational content) from the chaff (pseudoscientific framing). If nothing else, the book is a nice reminder that genuine healers who get lasting results for their patients do exist.

But if you just want to try the exercises, you can easily find them all on YouTube. 

“You learn techniques to understand principles. When you understand the principles, you will create your own techniques.” -Stanley Rosenberg
Load More Follow on Instagram

Recent Posts

  • Polyvagal Theory: A Critical Appraisal
  • Lymphatic Support for Ulcerative Colitis and Crohn’s Disease
  • Heart Rate Variability 101: What It Is, How It’s Measured, and Controversies in the Literature
  • Autonomic Nervous System 101: Anatomy and Physiology
  • Vitamin A Detox Diet for Ulcerative Colitis and Crohn’s Disease

Recent Comments

  • Alyssa Luck on Polyvagal Theory: A Critical Appraisal
  • Andrew Cook on Polyvagal Theory: A Critical Appraisal
  • Alyssa Luck on Getting Enough Carbs on the Autoimmune Protocol (AIP)
  • eugenie breida on Getting Enough Carbs on the Autoimmune Protocol (AIP)
  • eugenie breida on Getting Enough Carbs on the Autoimmune Protocol (AIP)

Categories

Archives

Copyright © 2023 · Monochrome Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in