God/evolution gave you canine teeth and incisors for a reason. Use them.

He/it also gave you pinky toes, an appendix, and probably some other crap you don't need.

I wish we could get an independent expert in longitudinal research methodology to comment on this particular study. As it stands, you and I would probably continue to go back and forth, and since I started this sidebar, it probably isn't contributing much to the overall thread. I'd rather move on to other points to discuss/debate.

The methods they employed are no different than deciding at the outset: we're taking these two groups, experimental and control, and following them for 5 years. We'll take a baseline measure, then one at 1-year, and then a final 5-year follow-up with both groups. Results at each time interval will be published. Very standard and appropriate methods. The difference in this case, it appears, is that the researchers did not originally plan to do the 5-year follow-up, but made that decision at the 1-year point. IMO, this difference does not bias the overall study. Availability of funding and staff, willingness of participants to continue with the study, and statistical power of the sample size would all factor in to how they make these determinations. But these factors are largely separate from valid research methodology.

The drop-out rate in the study is not primarily the fault of the researchers, nor should it be held against them, aside from the small sample size at its end. The results aren't using the measurements from the drop-outs, so I don't see why this is a major point for you. Not ideal, yes, but worthless?

Again, I don't hold these folks as gold standard, nor do I view veganism that way, but you don't appear willing in the slightest to consider that there may be kernels of helpful information, from a general health perspective, that may be derived and applied from primarily plant-based human diets. I do appreciate your opposing viewpoint, which gives me a starting point to dig deeper.

If you are a vegan you will post like OrganicGreen though. That seems like enough reason to eat meat

Oh Towelie's just walking on sunshine a little more than the rest of us!

You are eating the wrong tofu. I am a devoted omnivore, and I eat tofu by choice because it's tasty and has a good texture. Look for a store that sells it fresh.

What is a good vegan source of protein? I'm thinking of cutting down my meat consumption.
I mostly eat rice / potato / vegetable / noodle soup for dinner. Need protein though.

Tofu

This is classic bad veganism. Fiberless white starches like potatoes and rice and sugar are not health foods. They are non-meat foods, but that's not the same thing as being healthy, and the failure to understand that is why veganism is properly maligned as being faux-healthy.

Lentils. They are very satisfying in the same way meat is. Lentil soups and curries are the main ways I eat them. I think they are the tastiest vegetarian protein.

Fu, a Japanese type of wheat gluten is pretty delicious too. I have had other similar preparations that vary in tastiness, but if you get the right stuff it's pretty good.

Have you told your sister that it's not blood?

This.

Also, why does it seem to be the consensus around here, vegan and non-vegan, that meat is bad for you?

Globally, wheat is the leading source of vegetable protein in human food.

Quinoa is also an excellent source of protein, and contains a balanced set of essential amino acids for humans, making it a complete protein source, unusual among plant foods.

Legumes, such as black bean, broad bean, chickpeas, fava beans, green and yellow peas, kidney beans, lentils, mung bean, peanuts
pinto bean, red bean, etc

Nuts

I think the consensus is that meat is bad for you, because of studies like this. Also, see wikipedia. However. Though.

My initial reaction, notice this quote:

"The subjects in the study who ate the most red meat had other less-than-healthful habits. They were more likely to smoke, weigh more for their height, and consume more calories and more total fat and saturated fat. They also ate less fruits, vegetables and fiber; took fewer vitamin supplements; and were less physically active."

It seems there is more than just meat consumption at fault here.

Oh, so it's just RED meat...

make sure you also read the next paragraph

I think excessive meat is bad for you! A stereotypical American diet has too much meat.

I have.

I've found it to take on flavor well, but that it has little to offer on it's own. As for the texture, if you dredge it lightly you can get a nice crispy exterior, but the interior is what it is. It's fine in a lasagna or chili or similar meat substitution/filler where other things provide the texture.

If you are replacing your meat intake (or what you would have eaten as meat throughout the day) with a balanced combination of what gregorio posted (whole grains, legumes, small portions of nuts or seeds, soy products if you so choose) then you will not be deficient in protein needs. Many vegetables (spinach, broccoli) also complement protein needs well.

Many years ago, vegetarian meal recommendations included "food combining", which stated that it was superior to combine in a single meal foods that, taken together, accounted for all the essential amino acids. This previous belief has been overturned in favor of the first paragraph above, so daily veg protein dietary recommendations are not quite so restrictive, although it requires more attention than an omnivore's.

If you are interested in further details, here's(protein calculator at bottom of page) a site you can input your ideal body weight and then see how different foods contribute to your overall protein needs (as a recommended daily allowance).

Another nice site with introductions to veg diet is here: http://www.pcrm.org/health/diets/

I had always heard the "complete your protein" message that you allude to above. I guess the thinking now is that as long as you get all the essential amino acids in your diet, it doesn't matter if they are taken at the same time?

I believe that a comination of a legume/bean protein source plus some whole grains generally accounts for all the amino acids, so it's really not very hard to do.

I have been struggling with this for a long time. My meat intake has gone down considerably and I have been eating primarily whole fruits and vegetables.

I believe there is merit to the studies finding a link between excessive meat intake and cancer and heart disease. It's just a small risk factor for most people, there's no cause and effect but you will be at higher risk. Everyone will have a story of the chain smoking carnivore grandmother living to 110 and the organic vegan getting cancer at 25. That's just being results oriented and such anecdotes should be ignored regardless of which side they support.

Although I do believe that meat is a risk factor for cancer and heart disease that is not the reason why I have moved towards vegetarianism (not veganism). Finding out where your food comes from and thinking about your impact on the world is what it boils down to for me. Some people are perfectly fine with cows being packed onto feed lots for weeks and then led into slaughter by the thousands and processed in a factory, and that's fine. It's no different than people disagreeing about abortion or gay marriage, your perspective will shape how you view them. Most people choose not to think about where the food comes from, just what they like. For me, there are really 3 issues with the food supply:

1. Environmental - energy/land/pesticided/chemicals used for food production. Generally fruits and vegetables take less energy to produce and have less impact on the land.

2. Animal welfare - people fall over the spectrum on this, from people who believe only in backyard gardens because farming equipment kills insects and rodents to those who believe there's nothing wrong with killing dolphins with rusty forks to the eyeballs and eating them while still alive. For me, that means supporting local farmers who have standards I can live with.

3. Sustainability - as population increases the current eating habits will become unsustainable for most people as the markets react. Farming of cattle or other agricultural animals will obviously not become extinct, they will just raise prices as supply goes down relative to demand. For things like Tuna or other high-demand fish, there is real risk of extinction if people don't stop overfishing (I'm looking at you, Japan).

Right, that's what I've learned recently - the issue for complete protein is quality and quantity but the timing of the protein intake (with respect to combination of incomplete protein foods) is not as important as once believed. It is convenient though that rice and beans do make a tasty dish.

Still though, protein deficiency in my diet is something I'm concerned about and haven't completely resolved. I've read that protein, omega-3 fatty acids, calcium, vitamin B12, and vitamin D are some of the major nutrients that may be deficient in a poorly planned vegan diet.

Much better for the environment to eat food produced locally and organically, with local being preferable to organic if you can't get local and organic.

Unstressed animals taste better.

Malthusian fallacy. Also, most tuna species are fished sustainably.

Unless you live in a climate with good growing conditions, eating locally produced food can have a bigger environmental impact than transporting food from places more condusive to growing them. The environmental impact of transport is only responsible for 11% of the emissions from food production, and most of the emissions come from things like heating greenhouses, fertilizers and cow gas.
So if you live in the UK and buy tomatoes transported from Spain, you are being more responsible in terms of the environment than if you buy locally produced tomatoes, etc.