A vegan blogger, with a several hundred Twits following, in posting recipes for non-vegan relatives asserted today that "Fish is Healthy." (Kathy's so proud of her posts she won't let me link to them directly. Here's the address: http://kblog.lunchboxbunch.com/2009/04/cooking-for-your-not-vegan-family-4.html)
WTF? Suggesting sliced dead animal parts and cheese for sandwiches as part of showing love to non-vegan relatives I can live with (barely, I could write pages about this), but how can someone make that statement about fish? The problems with fish, from solely a health standpoint, as noted by a number of articles and studies by researchers, are readily apparent when you consider, minimally, pesticides and environmental pollution. Takes nothing but a quick "web search" to learn a few things of import.
So, here's a link to an article by Dr. McDougall that does an excellent job of summarizing the issues regarding fish. It's a good read and lays it all out in detail. Fish is not healthy nor advisable for human consumption for many reasons. My post awhile back on "Pescavegetarianism" provides more.
But, I do take real offense to a vegan posting that "fish is healthy," because I fear that altogether too many people who believe too much in the veracity of posts on that blog might actually, without a little research or thinking, buy into another erroneous "wellness, healthy and happy" nutritional pronouncement (especially coming from a vegan). This is more significant than the usual overstatements posted as the statement lends credence to a major dietary myth.
In general, I believe that we, as bloggers, have a real responsibility to provide accurate information that can be checked by any of our readers, not mindlessly parrot generalities and urban or marketing myths we read elsewhere. That way, our readers can make intelligent choices. I'm astounded at the amount of nutritional BS that's being posted on so many food-related blogs with no real substantiation. Issues regarding what we put into our bodies, imho, demand more accountability, especially if we are claiming certain "nutritional attributes" to any given product or food.
The focus of many bloggers primarily on taste to the exclusion of what's inside the stuff being reviewed or promoted, is biologically myopic... drops those who do so onto the same perceptual level as them who claim that "Milk Does A Body Good" and agree with McDonald's, "I'm Loving It." Ponder the following: if we didn't think beyond taste or silly corporate health hype to begin with, and do some research to figure out the truth, we wouldn't be vegans, would we? Should we stop questioning what we are told or read just because the blogger is "vegan" or a company says it's "natural"?
Finally, as a personal, situational "what works for me" side note: dietary enabling isn't necessarily love and understanding. I've been more effective by impressing relatives with tasty healthy VEGAN food as a matter of course and example (that I've researched as being healthy), and not waffling or appearing insincere in my beliefs by serving them something I intrinsically believe might negatively effect their health, and/or life. They can get that elsewhere if they need it. I won't be the pusher.
...and that's "lovin' them."
Comments