This is a wonderful concept but let me play Devil's Advocate. Please now, be truthful. You only eat plants? Mushrooms are not a plant. Spirulina is not a plant. Not even dulse or "sea vegetables" are really botanical plants. And salt? Nope, salt is not a plant.
Just giving you a hard time! Anyway I really appreciate the part about normalcy. I see that quite often. For instance, there is "milk" and then there is "breastmilk." Since all milk is breastmilk, and originally human breastmilk, why does cow breastmilk get the "normal" term? As well as with "organic" foods, when organic foods are the original food, the default! With my own garden sometimes I have to remind myself that this is "organic" and not "normal" food. I appreciate the movement in using the word "intact" as opposed to "uncircumsized" since that is also the default. The default should never be an "un-" word!!
No posts published so far.
Funny you should write this article. This past June, the Denver post published an article focused on Joel Fuhrman's "Nutritarian" concept, but they led off with a statement that vegetarians are defined by what they don't eat. Gah! They only allow 150 word letters to the editor so I responded as best I could. Below is my response which was published in the June 10th edition. Best regards.
Re: “Nutrition ambition fuels a new appetite,” June 7 fitness article.
It was nice to see the article about eating a nutrient-dense diet, the “nutritarian” diet. But why would the author lead the story with the statement that “Vegetarians are defined by what they shun — meat”? It seems pretty obvious that vegetarians are defined by what they do eat — a plant-centered diet.
It is true that many people do not adopt a vegetarian or vegan diet because both are perceived as diets of rejection and denial. Who wants to live a life of denial, especially regarding something as rewarding as eating delicious food? Not many people, including vegetarians. The reason so many people, about 6 percent us, can sustain as longtime vegetarians is not because they are disciplined and willing to suffer for the animals, for the environment or for good health. They endure as vegetarians because, in addition to benefitting the animals, the environment and their own health, they understand that a plant-centered diet is a diet of abundance, of variety and of deliciousness.
Steve Billig, Denver
The writer is director of the Vegetarian Nutrition Center of Colorado.
This letter was published in the June 10 edition.
fair comment daisy, though there is perhaps a difference in the botanists' 'plantae' and the way us common folks use 'plant' - and even the botanists only separated fungi from plantae as recently as 1969...
However, as the potential for nit-picking could result in an almost endless list of 'optional extras' - maybe for the definition we should revert to the commonly used 'plant based diet' which implies things other than plants on top of the base.
Some of us were concerned that it could also allow any type of animal product above the base, but we need to keep the IVU definition concise, even if the result is deliberately a little ambiguous.
Astute article AND comments everyone.
It confirms that VegSource is the kind of community to be in, for me.
Who can I talk to interest VegSource and other Veg organizations in exhibiting at SIT for Change celebration in Berkeley's MLK Civici Center Park on September 18?
Michael, have you contacted the SF Veg Society? They can probably also suggest some other local groups.
Copyright ©2012 VegSource Interactive, Inc. Reproduction of material from any VegSource pages without written permission is strictly prohibited.
VEGSOURCE ® is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office as a trademark of Mostly Magic Productons, Inc.