Kids With High IQs Grow Up to Be Vegetarians

[Dardedar]

Kids With High IQs Grow Up to Be Vegetarians

By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay Reporter Fri Dec 15, 2:01 PM ET

FRIDAY, Dec. 15 (HealthDay News) -- As a child's IQ rises, his taste for meat in adulthood declines, a new study suggests.

British researchers have found that children's IQ predicts their likelihood of becoming vegetarians as young adults -- lowering their risk for cardiovascular disease in the process. The finding could explain the link between smarts and better health, the investigators say.

"Brighter people tend to have healthier dietary habits," concluded lead author Catharine Gale, a senior research fellow at the MRC Epidemiology Resource Centre of the University of Southampton and Southampton General Hospital.

Recent studies suggest that vegetarianism may be associated with lower cholesterol, reduced risk of obesity and heart disease. This might explain why children with high IQs tend to have a lower risk of heart disease in later life.

The report is published in the Dec. 15 online edition of the British Medical Journal.

"We know from other studies that brighter children tend to behave in a healthier fashion as adults -- they're less likely to smoke, less likely to be overweight, less likely to have high blood pressure and more likely to take strenuous exercise," Gale said. "This study provides further evidence that people with a higher IQ tend to have a healthier lifestyle."

In the study, Gale's team collected data on nearly 8,200 men and women aged 30, whose IQ had been tested when they were 10 years of age.

"Children who scored higher on IQ tests at age 10 were more likely than those who got lower scores to report that they were vegetarian at the age of 30," Gale said.

The researchers found that 4.5 percent of participants were vegetarians. Of these, 2.5 percent were vegan, and 33.6 percent said they were vegetarian but also ate fish or chicken.

the rest...

[Barbara Fitzpatrick]

I'm glad the researchers commented on all the factors that weren't taken into account in this study. The study is sort of like Hogeye's correlation between gun laws and genocide. A vegetarian diet can be, but is not necessarily, healthier than a diet that includes meat. How much meat, what kind of meat (note that there seemed to be no difference in the "vegetarians" who ate fish and chicken and the vegans), how the animals in question were raised (what fed, what conditions, etc) and slaughtered all make significant differences on how meat effects the eater's health. But then, so does whether or not the tofu a vegan eats is from genetically modified and Roundup-soaked soybeans. A vegan diet can be downright dangerous if the person eating it is going on fad diet information and doesn't do the study (and the work preparing) for a nutritionally balanced (having sufficiencies all the required nutrients and no overloads) eating plan. There are also studies out there perporting to correlate being underweight (30% below "target") with health and longer lifespans.

[Betsy]

thank you, Barbara, for that response. After reading this, I wondered if Darrel was trying to imply that those of us who are not vegetarians do not have a high IQ. I'd almost decided to drop the forum until I read your reply.

[Doug]

No, Betsy, the conclusion is this:

"Brighter people tend to have healthier dietary habits," concluded lead author Catharine Gale.

And a vegetarian diet tends to be a healthier diet than a carnivore diet.

[Dardedar]

I wondered if Darrel was trying to imply that those of us who are not vegetarians do not have a high IQ.

DAR
Good heavens. It was a headline article on Yahoo. I am not a vegetarian but I don't eat much meat because it doesn't agree with me very well and I am not confident of the quality of the factory farmed US meat. Also, once educated about some of the cruelty involved, it is hard to unlearn it. I grew up on a dairy farm and ate enough beef for a lifetime. If eating red meat makes you dumb, I should be in special ed.
Even if the claim in this fluffy article is true, it doesn't mean one wouldn't have a high IQ because they aren't a vegetarian. BTW, I don't think much of IQ tests either.

BARB
There are also studies out there perporting to correlate being underweight (30% below "target") with health and longer lifespans.

DAR
Yes that is my understanding too. I have read that in almost every animal tested, when they lower the calorie intake drastically they have been able to increase the lifespan up to 30%. For an anecdotal example, visit a nursing home. Not a lot of fat people.

D.

[Betsy]

It's called the "food chain". people were meant to eat meat, we get necessary nutrients from it and it's been that way since the beginning of time.

sorry, darrel, i just recalled a night when we had dinner at your house and was lectured by your son about vegetarianism, so i assumed that you were doing the same. and, to imply that i'm not intelligent because i'm not a vegetarian is insulting.

but obviously i was being overly sensitive. so nevermind.

[Barbara Fitzpatrick]

Where the meat v no meat argument always derails for me is the lack of definitions. How much meat is in the diet and where'd it come from. Humans are omnivores. Our systems are designed for mostly fruits and vegetables and some meat. (In a diet researched and approved by Metropolitan Life - vested interest in long life - and the U.S. Gov't during WWII - vested interest in worker output - an adult female doing moderate work or male doing sendentary work should eat daily: 1/2 lb fruit, 1 lb vegetables, 1/2 lb grain, and 1/2 lb meat or meat equivalent in milk, cheese, egg, etc., with the type of veg or fruit determined by calorie needs.) That much grain was to supply partly vitamins but mostly cheap calories and proteins.

We do not have enough stomachs to efficiently process grain nor grasses, but cattle do. The argument that meat takes more resources that could feed more people cheaper is based on feedlot practices. The petrochemical inputs to grow grain to feed cattle is massive and very destructive to the soil where used. Western Iowa would have been much better off leaving the land in prairie grass and "managing" the buffalo herds than killing off the buffalo, growing corn, and feedlotting beef. So would the rest of us. However the "truck farms" of the Mississippi basin have mostly been shut down so the land can be agribizzed to rice and soy (with massive petrochemical inputs - and mined water) and we are importing an economically harmful as well as nutritionally harmful proportion of our fruits and vegetables.

As to IQ - the most intelligent people strive for eating practices that are the most beneficial to themselves. Whether that includes meat or not depends on what research they've done and their own personal preferences. The least intelligent eat whatever conagra-purchased advertising tells them to. It shows.

[Doug]

Where the meat v no meat argument always derails for me is the lack of definitions. How much meat is in the diet and where'd it come from. Humans are omnivores. Our systems are designed for mostly fruits and vegetables and some meat.

DOUG
That's right. Chimps are the same way in the wild. Fruits and other plants make up most of their diet, with some insects and such thrown in on occasion. They also eat meat, but rarely.

[Dardedar]

BARB
A vegan diet can be downright dangerous if the person eating it is going on fad diet information and doesn't do the study (and the work preparing) for a nutritionally balanced (having sufficiencies all the required nutrients and no overloads) eating plan.

DAR
Dangerous? I suppose if you substitute potato chips and junk food for good food. Not sure if you are referring to the old idea of protein combining made popular by "Frances Moore Lappe's 1971 runaway besteller Diet for a Small Planet." That's now been discarded and Lappe's has admitted her mistake:

"Protein combining (also protein complementing) is the theory, now largely discredited, that vegetarians must eat foods such as beans and rice together, or at least on the same day, so the different amino acids in the foods combine to form a "complete" protein, containing all eight essential amino acids necessary for human growth and maintenance. In fact, all essential amino acids are present in common individual plant foods, including beans, rice, potatoes, and corn."

More here.

BETSY
It's called the "food chain". people were meant to eat meat,

DAR
Meant to? Did someone mean for us to? We're omnivores, we can eat pretty much whatever's handy. It's optional.

BET
we get necessary nutrients from it

DAR
When I was a vegetarian in the early ninties, I didn't get necessary nutrients from it. Millions, if not perhaps a billion people (25% of India) on this planet, are vegetarians and they do not get necessary nutrients from meat. So these nutrients aren't very "necessary."

...a night when we had dinner at your house and was lectured by your son about vegetarianism, so i assumed that you were doing the same.

DAR
Now doubt he was quite righteous about it, but give him a little slack, he must have been about ten. He's over it now (16).

Something I observed over and over, when I was a vegetarian, is how people can be offended just by a person deciding to stop eating meat. I saw it over and over and it wouldn't matter how quiet I was about it. People at work (Siglers) made a big deal out of it, I didn't. Tamara pointed out it is the same with other groups. If you are out with drinkers and don't drink, or with smokers (especially if you quit), they can get touchy about it. No doubt, if you are out with vegetarians and used to be one but have reverted to eating meat, some of them might be touchy about it too. I guess it makes people question their beliefs and that makes them uncomfortable.

D.

[Savonarola]

BETSY
It's called the "food chain". people were meant to eat meat,

DAR
Meant to? Did someone mean for us to? We're omnivores, we can eat pretty much whatever's handy. It's optional.

This exchange reminds me of an interesting bit of related information.
The human body per se is incapable of digesting cellulose. Instead, bacteria in our gut break it down into compounds we can digest. So, one could say that "people aren't meant to eat green vegetables." On the other hand, because we clearly evolved the mechanism to pass these bacteria from mother to child during pregnancy without infecting the wrong parts of the child, one could say that "people are meant to eat green vegetables..."
(Okay, so maybe it's not all that interesting, but I'm a geek.)

BET
we get necessary nutrients from it

DAR
When I was a vegetarian in the early ninties, I didn't get necessary nutrients from it. Millions, if not perhaps a billion people (25% of India) on this planet, are vegetarians and they do not get necessary nutrients from meat. So these nutrients aren't very "necessary."

There are six nutrients, all of which -- by definition -- are necessary: carbohydrates, protein, fats, water, vitamins, and minerals. It doesn't matter so much from where you get them, so long as you get them.

[Barbara Fitzpatrick]

Darrel, I was thinking of some of the "macro" diets popular in the 70s. They could be downright deadly. I can still spot a vegetarian who's not getting complete nutritional requirements by the "off" color and texture of the skin (apparent - I don't go touching strangers to check their skin texture).

As to meat or no meat - again, we need to define terms. I remember - also in the 70s - in the vegetarian discussion were also the "philosophic vegetarians" and the "economic vegetarians". Part of the debate is why a person is vegetarian in the first place. The amount of meat eaten is also an issue. We are designd/evolved to eat some meat. We are not designed/evolved to eat a lot of meat. Our intestines are too long. True carnivores, like cats, have very short intestines to get rid of the residue quickly after it leaves the stomach.

As far as I can tell, there is also a gender difference. While men can, and usually do, eat more meat, and without ill effect, than women, women seem to need a certain minimum of meat and men can become vegetarians with fewer "side effects". I know that I must have meat, and red meat at that, a minimum of once a week to function optimally. I don't know what it is in red meat - suggestions have been b-12 or the form of iron available - but I have problems with depression, nausea, inability to focus (literally - I have trouble reading), as well as a slight "woosiness" if I don't get my meat.

Those of us active in the environmental community who eat meat do get attacked on a regular basis by fellow environmentalists over that 16-lbs of vegetable protein it takes to make 1-lb of feedlot beef protein. For me, the solution to that is not to stop eating meat, but to eat "saladbar" beef (beef raised on a rotational pasture method - see Joel Saladin's book) - or bison. Better, of course, would be to hunt for your own, but I don't hunt and I don't have a freezer - and it isn't viable when you are talking about feeding large cities (and that gets us back into safe food and meat inspections and all that of another thread).

[Doug]

Dangerous? I suppose if you substitute potato chips and junk food for good food. Not sure if you are referring to the old idea of protein combining made popular by "Frances Moore Lappe's 1971 runaway besteller Diet for a Small Planet." That's now been discarded and Lappe's has admitted her mistake:

"Protein combining (also protein complementing) is the theory, now largely discredited, that vegetarians must eat foods such as beans and rice together, or at least on the same day, so the different amino acids in the foods combine to form a "complete" protein, containing all eight essential amino acids necessary for human growth and maintenance. In fact, all essential amino acids are present in common individual plant foods, including beans, rice, potatoes, and corn."

More here.

DOUG
I remember that book. My parents had a copy. I'm glad to know it's defunct.

[Barbara Fitzpatrick]

Part of whether or not a grain is a "complete" protein (has all of the amino acids humans cannot generate in the digestive process) is whether or not you're talking about a whole grain or a refined one. Many of the "essential" amino acids are in the germ, which is removed in the refining of corn, wheat, and rye (and I think barley). Oatmeal is a whole grain (so is popcorn), and I'm pretty sure rice maintains it's proteins when milled (brown rice is better because of the fiber and b vitamins in the "coat" that milling removes). Just because someone is a vegetarian doesn't mean they know (or are willing) to eat whole grains. (Native Americans combined grain and legumes and it worked very well for them - until they were shoved on reservations and given refined corn to replace their "home grown".)

[Tony]

Man I would never survive as a Vegetarian. My decidedly typical working class upbringing was fueled by a meat and potato diet. It's terrible. I hate most vegetables, though I love most fruit. If forced to live Vegetarian, I would die in months.
My wife is an occasional vegetarian. We don't think meat is murder, but the suffering involved in farming meat it terrible and I often have to put up a mental block whenever I eat a burger. Our sympathies lie in our dislike for animal cruelty.

And can someone tell me-is it not widely established that during Human evolution, the rapid growth of large brains was fueled by the high protein diet provided by hunting?? Seems I have read that somewhere.

Ever seen a Venus Fly trap in action? Some plants, are most certainly, not vegetarian!

[Dardedar]

If forced to live Vegetarian, I would die in months.

DAR
I bet if you really were forced to live as a vegetarian, you would change your opinion.

And can someone tell me-is it not widely established that during Human evolution, the rapid growth of large brains was fueled by the high protein diet provided by hunting??

DAR
I've haven't heard that. There are lots of carnivores that have small brains and aren't very bright. I don't think there is much certainty about what fueled our larger brains. However, a high protein diet can fuel a larger ass.

D.

[Barbara Fitzpatrick]

Tony - according to the Aquatic Ape Hypothesis, which I find much more logical than anything else I've read - Occam's Razor and all that - the "big brain" was developed during a more or less aquatic phase that also gave us subcutaneous fat instead of fur as the "insulation" to help regulate our body temperature and the ability to voluntarily control our breathing that permitted the development of speech (marine adaptations you also see in marine mammals such as dolphins). The abundant protein in question was from readily available fish/shellfish trapped in littoral pools by receding tides - and explains why our cells, brain cells especially, need the "omega6/omega3" balance of essential fatty acids that are normally found in fish - and not in terrestrial animal flesh. (And why, even with the mercury contamination, health experts still recommend keeping fish in the diet. Just eat a species that has less mercury contamination. That will mostly be Pacific Ocean fish, since the prevailing winds move the mercury from our coal-fired power plants east into the Atlantic.)

I also have a problem with the "production" methods of Agribiz meat and feel guilty every time I eat meat in restaurants. I purchase pasture-raised, local whenever possible, meat to prepare at home. Wild & hunted (I don't hunt, but I have friends who do, and share) is also fine by me, as long as the animal isn't "endangered", which white-tailed deer most certainly aren't. Humanely raised and slaughtered meat is available - it's just expensive.

[Savonarola]

The remainder of the Aquatic Ape Hypothesis discussion has been moved to here. Please continue all discussion in the appropriate thread.

--Sav, FFForums Science moderator

[Doug]

the rest...

DOUG
The link is broken.

[Savonarola]

the rest...

DOUG
The link is broken.

Try this one.