- This article is about the dietary lifestyle, "Vegan" can also mean "relating to vega", especially the star Vega, as in astronomical references to the Vegan system, or Science Fiction references to aliens from that system. There are several other uses of the word "vega" which occasionally require use
of "vegan"
In its adjective form, vegan describes:
- a philosophy and practise of respect for animals, which avoids the use of
animals for food, clothing, and other human purposes
- people who ascribe to such a philosophy and practise
- food, clothing, other products, or diets that avoid the use
of animals in line with the above.
As a noun, a vegan is a person who follows a vegan lifestyle (i.e. one who avoids
animal products).
Definition
Veganism is defined in the following quote from the Memorandum of Association (http://www.vegansociety.com/html/about_us/memorandum.php), the British Vegan Society (2004):
- "The word 'veganism' denotes a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude — as far as is possible and
practical — all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by
extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, including humans and the
environment.
- In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals."
Overview
The word vegan (pronounced vee-gun, sometimes mispronounced vay-gun) was originally derived from
vegetarian in 1944 when Elsie Shrigley and Donald Watson, frustrated that the term "vegetarianism" had come to include the eating of dairy
products, founded the UK Vegan Society. The word starts and ends with
the first three and last two letters of vegetarian, representing that veganism begins with vegetarianism and then takes it to its logical conclusion. Therefore the term vegan was originally coined to differentiate those vegetarians who
(primarily for ethical or environmental reasons) sought to eliminate all animal products
in all areas of their lives from those who simply avoided eating meat. A few vegans see use
of the word as a noun as offensive, and prefer to be referred to using the adjectival form; they think that "he is a vegan" is
wrong, but "he or she is a vegan person" is correct.
Those who are vegans for ethical reasons today generally oppose the violence and
cruelty they see as involved in the (non-vegan) food, clothing and other industries. By extension, cruelty and
exploitation are ideally avoided in all human activities and relationships between humans as well as with non-human animals.
Though vegans are often accused of placing more importance on non-human animals than on their fellow humans, most vegans are
aware of human rights issues and seek to avoid companies and organizations
that exploit others and to be "ethical consumers"; many find
themselves becoming increasingly active in the fight for human rights as a direct result of embracing veganism. Animal products
such as leather, silk or wool are avoided. Soap must be made of vegetable oil instead of animal.
Toothpaste and hair products, etc., must not be tested by animal experiments
such as the Draize or the LD50
tests.
- The group argued that the elimination of exploitation of any kind was necessary in order to bring about a more reasonable
and humane society. From its inception, veganism was defined as a "philosophy" and "way of living." It was never intended to be
merely a diet and, still today, describes a lifestyle and belief system that revolves around a reverence for life. - Joanne
Stepaniak (author of The Vegan Sourcebook).
That the vegan movement has distanced itself, over the years, from the simple dietary practice of vegetarianism is evident in
British supermarkets such as Sainsburys, Tesco and the Co-op by the numerous products which are marked either "suitable for vegetarians" or
"suitable for vegetarians and vegans" - clearly giving mainstream
acceptance to the difference between the two systems. For instance, the Co-op supermarket has a
website (http://www.co-op.co.uk/ext_1/Development.nsf/504ca249c786e20f85256284006da7ab/923bbd35445996a600256a71002f9a26?OpenDocument#%5B%3Cblockquote%3E%5D)
where customers can learn more about these two philosophies' dietary requirements.
Animal products
Animal products include all forms of meat, poultry, fish, shellfish,
eggs, dairy
products, fur, leather, wool, silk, and byproducts such as gelatin, rennet, whey, and the
like. The Vegan Society and most vegans include insect products such as honey and beeswax in their definition as well. There
is some debate on the finer points of what constitutes an animal product; some vegans avoid cane sugar that has been filtered with bone char and some won't drink
beers and wines clarified with albumen (egg white), animal blood (this is exceedingly rare today), or isinglass (even though they are not present in the final product). Further, some vegans
avoid food cooked in pans if they have been used to cook meat, though this is often impractical in "mixed" households. Although
technically an 'animal product' human breast milk is usually considered an acceptable food for vegan infants.
Other ideals may include aiming for sustainable
agricultural systems that exclude animal by-products such as blood, fish and bone or animal manures. Some vegans view the adoption of such Vegan organic horticultural and agricultural methodologies as integral to their
ethical stance.
Motivation
Many vegans cite, as their primary motivation, the concept of reducing animal suffering. Utilitarian philosophers, such as Jeremy Bentham, and especially Peter Singer, argue that the suffering of all sentient animals should be taken into consideration when making
ethical decision; thus, by abstaining from consuming products from animals exploited for food - veganism is the application of
this system of ethics. Though Peter Singer's ethical theory recognizes the suffering of sentient animals, it does not, however,
rely on the concept of rights. However, philosophers such as Tom Regan and Gary L. Francione believe
that because sentient animals are capable of valuing their life, they have the inherent right to possess their own flesh, and therefore it is unethical to treat sentient animals as property, or as a
commodity.
For many, the vegan philosophy also has close connections with the concept of Ahimsa, a Sanskrit word central to the Jainism, Buddhism and Hinduism, originally taught by Mahavira and Buddha in the 500 BCE, and more recently promoted by Mahatma Gandhi - Ahimsa roughly means "non-killing and non-harming." The American Vegan Society
website (http://www.americanvegan.org/) says: "It is not mere passiveness, but
a positive method of meeting the dilemmas and decisions of daily life. In the western world, we call it Dynamic Harmlessness."
Ahimsa is also used as a backronym: Abstinence from animal products,
Harmlessness with reverence for life, Integrity of thought, word, and deed, Mastery over oneself,
Service to humanity, nature, and creation, and Advancement of understanding and truth.
Those who avoid animal products for reasons of health (eg, due to allergies, or to
avoid cholesterol), rather than compassion sometimes describe themselves as
"dietary vegans". However, popular vegan author Joanne Stepaniak
argues that this term is inappropriate because veganism is by definition about helping animals. She believes that a term such as
"total vegetarian" would be a better categorisation for those who, for example, avoid eating meat and dairy products, but
continue to buy new leather shoes.
A Time/CNN poll published in Time Magazine July 7, 2002, found that 4% of American adults consider themselves vegetarians, and 5% of self-described
vegetarians consider themselves vegans. This small-sampled poll may suggest that two-tenths-of-one-percent of American adults are
vegans. A 2000 poll (http://www.vrg.org/nutshell/poll2000.htm) suggested closer to 0.9% of the USA' adult
population may be vegan.
In the UK, research [1] (http://www.imaner.net/panel/statistics.htm) showed that 0.4%, approximately 250 000 people
were vegan in 2001.
Modern veganism in context
Veganism as a secular movement is a modern idea, as a reaction to the exploitation of nature, including imposing unnecessary
suffering on non-human animals. Although it can be seen as a minor and localised reaction to the excesses of the developed world,
the principles behind it can be found in much older ethical/religious doctrine of the East, such as Hinduism, Buddhism or Jainism. (See the discussion of 'Ahimsa' elsewhere on this page, and in
Wikipedia).
Much stricter forms of diet have been followed for thousands of years by adherents of Jainism, and a restricted diet is an integral part of their religious doctrine, which promote non-suffering. Jain
monks usually follow a much stricter form of veganism where they eat only fruits and beans so that they can avoid indirect
killing of plants. They abstain from eating root plants such as garlic, onion and potatoes because it requires one to kill the
plant. Stricter Jains also abstain from walking on grass. In fact, some Jains have been known to starve themselves to death in
order to avoid harming any living creature or plants. There are even those who wear masks over their mouths and noses to avoid
any possibility of breathing in tiny insects.
Except for these extreme cases, secular veganism is pretty much unheard of in most parts of the world. In most parts of
developing countries, meat and animal products used to be a minor part of the diet. Because raising animals for food takes up far
more resources than the raising of crops, regular consumption of animal products has historically been limited to the wealthy;
this has, in turn, led to animal products becoming "aspirational foods", desirable because of their expensiveness. This situation
has begun to be reversed by the rising standard of living in these countries and the associated "westernisation" of their
cultures. In many of these countries, health problems associated with over-eating are on the rise, and so are serious environmental problems (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3559542.stm). Consequently, there is a small but growing
awareness of the health and environmental benefits of a vegetarian diet.
Similar diets
There are several diets often thought of as similar to veganism, though there are significant difference, including the
aforementioned fruitarian/fructarian diet, raw foods, and the macrobiotic diet. There
are also numerous religious groups that regularly or occasionally practice a similar diet, including some sects of Buddhism, Hinduism, and Jainism, as well as some Christian sects such as the Eastern Orthodox church and the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
More recently, many young people who subscribe to the anarcho-punk or
straight edge punk movements have embraced veganism, and corresponding
beliefs of the animal rights movement. Straight Edge is a philosophy in
which one does not partake in the drinking of alcohol, casual sex, or recreational drugs, and was born out of anger at the
cultural excesses of the 1980s. Another recent variation of veganism is the "freegan"
diet (practitioners sometimes called "opportunivores"), which essentially allows its practitioners to violate the tenets of
veganism when a food item is free or of a post-consumer nature (example: discarded food).
Vegan Nutrition
For more information see main Vegan Nutrition Article
Diet and nutrition are an important part of the lives of all people. While veganism can require extra effort to maintain a
nutritionally balanced diet, this is not generally a problem provided sensible guidelines are followed.
Possible and probable benefits
Besides diminishing animal suffering, a vegan diet is thought to reduce the risk of many health problems, including heart failure, obesity, diabetes, asthma, high blood pressure, constipation,
cancer, psoriasis, and Eczema though this should not be confused with overall health or longevity. The Independent
newspaper reported recently that the very oldest people tend to have a large proportion of vegetarians among their ranks.[2] (http://www.worldveganday.org/html/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=236) The
same source quotes research by Dr Pramil Singh, of Loma Linda University in California, showing that vegetarianism provides a
3.6-year survival advantage. The research was based on a 20 year study of people of the Adventist faith.
Many vegan advocacy sites have a tendency to imply that a vegan diet is inherently healthy and a diet consisting of meat is
inherently unhealthy. It is likely that such a reductionist view, reducing dietary health to the consumption or nonconsumption of
animal products is overly simple and essentially unhelpful. A properly planned vegan diet will supply high levels of fiber,
micro-nutrients, and anti-oxidants, as well as limiting the intake of harmful fats found abundantly in some meat and dairy
products, all of which promise positive health effects. It must be remembered, however, that lifestyle, environmental health,
social conditions, medical access, and emotional well being all contribute to overall health, and the attribution of complex
health issues to single causes is usually unwise. The simple elimination of meat from the diet without thought and planning
toward providing well balanced nutrition, including protein and mineral intake, is no guarantee of improved health.
Professor Colin Campbell found that the consumption of animal products was correlated with ill health on a statistical
basis.(See the China project). His work therefore supports the
association of good health with veganism though this outcome should be understood as the result of changing life style than
anything else.
Veganism is also more environmentally sustainable, and may improve the
conditions of low income people in and out of third world countries by freeing more food for human consumption. But it can be
equally argued that increased demand for crop raise price hence impoverishing people who largely subsist on crops. Some counter
this argument by pointing out that supply is flexible enough to cope with increased demand. But if this is true, whether some
people eat meat should make no difference in the first place.
Also, veganism can make substantial cuts to one's food budget, meat is usually the most expensive thing that people buy,
food-wise - and beans, rice, nuts and other vegan staples are inexpensive and nutritious.
For most forms of livestock, approximately 10kg of grain are needed for every kg of meat produced. The remaining 9kg or so of
feedstock is converted into gas, waste or fertilizer (and the waste can be toxic, where animals are fed their own waste and the
rendered 'byproducts' of other animals). Veganism thus avoids these environmental and food-chain problems. However, it should be
noted that grains used to feed livestock is not same as the one consumed by human and therefore, one should not simply equate
these two.
See the references below for more detail on these issues.
Vegetarian vs omnivore diet: cycling stamina
Dr. Per-Olaf Astrand did a classic study of diet and endurance using nine highly trained athletes, changing their diet every
three days. At the end of every diet change, each athlete would pedal a bicycle until exhaustion. Those with a high protein and
high fat meat (carnivore) diet averaged 57 minutes. Those that consumed a mixed (omnivore) diet, lower in meat, fat and protein
averaged 1 hour and 54 minutes: twice the endurance of the meat and fat eaters. The vegetarian, high carbohydrate diet athletes
lasted 2 hours and 47 minutes, triple the endurance of the high-protein group. (Source: Astrand, Per-Olaf, Nutrition Today 3:no2,
9-11, 1968) [3]
(http://www.filipinovegetarianrecipe.com/why_vegetarian_foods_are_best_for_you/vegetarian_foods_are_energizing.htm)
Vegan cuisine
For a list of vegan recipes complementary to this article see the wiki cookbook
section, Vegan cuisine (http://wikibooks.org/pac/Cookbook:Vegan_cuisine).
Criticism
Practical
Veganism requires a level of attention to the details of consumption which many non-vegans view as
inconvenient, particularly in the area of food preparation. Most dishes prepared in western culture involve at least one
non-vegan element - dairy, in particular, is pervasive. And while most people are accustomed to the idea of vegetarianism, it is
much more difficult for vegans to simply "eat around" the non-vegan elements in a meal. Unsympathetic non-vegans may resent the
extra effort of accommodating the vegan diet, and may additionally view vegan substitutions for non-vegan ingredients (such as
soy milk for milk) as inferior.
Political
Perceptions of veganism are often influenced by ideological associations with a variety of other movements and organizations,
including environmentalism, anti-globalization, and especially more outspoken animal rights activist groups such as PETA.
Nutritional
The vegan diet without dietary supplement may result in vitamin deficiencies, most notoriously of Vitamin B12. Other deficiencies include calcium, protein, and essential
fatty acids, though careful monitoring of diet can help make up for these deficiencies.
Vegans tend to suffer less from obesity-related illnesses, cancers, heart trouble, stroke, and diabetes; however, this should
not be confused with the overall health or longevity of vegans. So far no statistical study has shown that vegans will live
longer than those who eat meat.
However, this should not be regarded as conclusive evidence to indicate that meat eating and/or vegan diets are unhealthy.
Vegetarians, vegans, or those who eat only fish meat tend to belong to higher sociological and economical groups, which tend to
have a better quality of life than the general population, who consume meat, often smoke, and exercise less.
Moral/ethical
The primary ethical criticism of veganism is against its underlying philosophy of "indirect
responsibility" via reductio ad absurdum. First of all,
a vegan diet does not stop the killing of animals in the production of food. Field animals such as rodents, snakes and rabbits as
well as worms and insects are routinely killed in
the course of producing crops. Such an argument is an example of a Perfect solution fallacy. Proponents of Veganism would argue that the intent is to avoid
suffering, realizing that there is no way to live without infringing on some other life. Critics would further argue that, though
daily recommended protein intake obtained from a vegetarian diet is generally less bloody than a diet consisting of meat, it is
theoretically possible to take fewer lives if one eats meat from free roaming animals (such as fish or meat obtained by hunting).
In this instance the consumer is not responsible for living organisms consumed by such an animal while it is growing up. Vegans
would argue that there is not enough space and resources on the planet Earth to allow
Free Range farming to meet the dietary
desires of the current human population.
Critics also point out that any act of consumption is likely to involve proxy killing. When we purchase books (timber), switch
the light on (to use electricity) or drive a car (gas, plastic, steel, electricity), we indirectly contribute to the destruction
of the environment and therefore the taking of life. In essence, human existence causes suffering. Vegans would respond that
minimizing suffering is their goal, as eliminating it is unrealistic. Further, they would claim that inadvertant suffering,
though regretful, is far less odius than intentional suffering, and consequently would seek to minimize the inadverdant and
eliminate the deliberate. When presented with the choice of minimal inadverdent suffering and deliberate suffering, the Vegan
chooses the former. One implication of the critic's position is that one should not procreate, so as to avoid proxy killing by
one's offspring and their descendants. One who has led a strictly vegan diet all his/her life but failed to practice
contraception would have caused infinitely more (indirect) suffering than a man who led a life of greed and gluttony but avoided
producing children. Yet, this argument, which could arguably be seen as a Straw
man, ignores the fact that people who are driven by greed and gluttony have not been shown to not procreate or that Vegans,
in any official position, advocate avoiding contraception. Since veganism does not take a reproductive stance it leaves that
decision to each indiviual vegan, as reproductive choices are made by all individuals. A Vegan parent would argue that raising
vegan children involves less cruelty than raising omnivorous ones, and that the more vegans there are, the more pressure there is
on industry to minimize cruelty in their products. If a shampoo manufacturer eliminates animal products and testing from it's
products, they are eliminated for all consumers, vegans and non-vegans.
In essence, critics claim that veganism merely serves as a symbolic gesture while it obscures the nature of human activities,
yet these activities are exactly what vegans are seeking to change, starting with their own. The underlying principles of
veganism indicate that one should consume less. For example, one may be more careful about the "quantity" of food one consumes
rather than the "type" of food. Vegan's would take this one step further and claim that food consumption does not have to be an
either/or situation. A responsible consumer can control their "quantity" and "type" of food consumption and enjoy the benefits of
both decisions. Critics argue that veganism is not exactly wrong but misguided.
Sometimes vegans can be percieved as believing themselves to be morally superior to non-vegans. This can give rise to such
misconceptions as veganism being a religion, as the deeply religious have also been criticized for similar perceived behavior.
Any individual who has deep moral or ethical convictions is convinced that they are right and that others who don't share those
convictions are wrong. How the convicted person reacts to those others often causes friction, but as such is not the exclusive
domain of vegans and cannot be considered a fair criticism. Many vegans try to preempt this stereotype by making efforts to avoid
behaving in ways that might reinforce it, and after being vegan for a length of time, many realize that such behavior is
counter-productive to the goals of veganism. Unfortunately, many new vegans and those predisposed to such behavior can cause the
stereotype to strengthen, especially among those who may only meet a handful of vegans and develop an opinion on those few
encounters.
References
Nutrition
Environmental issues
- Prof. V. Smil, Rationalizing Animal Food Production, in Feeding the World: A Challenge for the 21st Century,
MIT Press, London, 2000. This provides evidence for the amount of grain required to raise livestock.
- C. de Haan, H. Steinfeld & H. Blackburn, Livestock and the Environment: Finding a Balance FAO, USAID, World Bank,
1998. Provides evidence of environmental damage caused by animal farming, mainly factory farming.
External links
Vegan organizations
Nutrition
General articles
(See also external links on the vegetarianism page.)
|
