Luciana Baroni
I enjoy sincere and sympathetic attention of the media against the misfortunes that afflict the vegan diet because of their choice-and I hope to be only a confirmation of something that begins to be tangible, namely the existence now an undisputed good number of vegan-, to offer some thoughts:.
The probability that any event will happen, in percentage terms, ranging from 0 to 100. Assuming that the risk in biology and absolute 0 100 absolute does not exist, we can say that when assessing the risk of a biological event, it can expand in a range that goes from 0 to 100.
Regarding the concept of risk, therefore, there will be nothing that can ensure complete safety or not, the certainty of occurrence of a given event, but you can distinguish between factors that, given a risk estimate, are able to influence positively (ie, to increase that risk) or negatively (ie to reduce that risk). To understand each other, While the flesh "brings to" bowel cancer, not all carnivores are affected by this tumor, but could instead become some vegan hit.
No risk factor, however, can be evaluated on its own, and for this there are statistical procedures that allow to assess the weight of each risk factor, releasing it from the effect of other risk factors coexist.
The same reasoning applies to the frequency of occurrence of an event, in this case a given disease or death. We are always having to deal with the number of people who fall ill or die from the disease of that date, which is expressed as the number or percentage of persons in the total population in a certain period of time.
Again, if an event occurs in a certain population, you can then study what are the factors that may be responsible for that event. In this case, in subjects with a given risk factor, the event should occur with increased frequency (if the risk factor is positive) or reduced (if the risk factor is negative) than the general population (for as the inhabitants of a nation or a region) or group of persons defined as "control", which are not carriers of this risk factor. Since
so that what may seem complicated, we come to a practical example on the subject that interests us, namely the influence of diet on health. Scientific studies conducted on vegetarians indicate that people have a reduced risk of developing some diseases among vegetarians and there are fewer people infected with these same chronic diseases. In the general population when stratified on the basis of consumption, these same diseases appear to be favored (ie, the risk is increased) in those who consume large amounts of animal foods and in those who consume low amounts of plant foods, compared to those who are in the range of consumption at the opposite end. This does not mean, however, that absolutely or who is a vegetarian who eats many plants will have the mathematical certainty of not ever get sick of that disease, as well as in carnivores or those who eat few vegetables there will be people who do not even if they fall ill.
The fact of knowing a person who smokes and who died in old age, does not mean that smoking is good or that anyone who smokes is not likely to die from the consequences of smoking: a smoker out of 2 in fact die because of this habit . This is basically the difference between anecdote and science, anyone can get convictions on the basis dell'aneddotica, but the face of science should recognize that reality can be reviewed and another with humility and honesty these beliefs.
take now, after this long but necessary introduction, the last piece of news: The death of a baby son of vegans in the U.S..
Although this child's death not due to diet but to the criminal carelessness of parents, also assume that a number of vegan children have died in the first year of age in a certain period of time, and we see how to evaluate the event , making the case of Italy, of which we have reliable data, and stating what was said at the beginning, and that is when a particular event occurs in the population, no one is protected with a 100%.
Now, using figures "round" we see that in Italy there are 60 million people and 6 million vegetarians are vegans among them 600 thousand, which transforms these numbers in a 1% of vegans, vegetarians and 9% to 90% of Italian population in the carnivores . This means that, for any event occurring in the Italian population, should I wait for this event, if the diet has no influence on it, should be well distributed in the 60 million Italians:
-90% in carnivores
- 9% -1% vegan vegetarian
a simple example, if in Italy every year 1000 people are infested with lice, I have to wait until I have about:
-900 -90 carnivores
lacto-ovo -10
vegan
head lice each year.
If instead of 10 vegans, they were for example 5, after excluding the influence of other favorable conditions, I can say that the vegan diet protects against head lice. And if the vegans were affected by head lice a year, I might say so even more forcefully. Instead, what usually happens, paradoxically, is being transformed into a completely opposite conclusion: since there is only one vegan I was struck by lice, then it is the fault of the diet!
Returning to the facts, let the event infant death in the first year of age, the number of children dying under one year of age. Well, Italy in 2350 children die every year (equivalent to 4.7 per thousand births, which are 500 000 children), for various reasons: white deaths, infections, congenital disorders, trauma, violence and abuse, and so on. As these children will be children of both meat-eaters, vegetarians and vegans that, we must consider the death will affect these children according to what is the distribution of carnivores, vegetarians and vegans in the Italian population, then (without decimals):
-90% of children are carnivores, that is, 2115 children died each year
-9% of children will be vegetarian, that 211 children died each year
-1% will be children of vegans, that is, 23 children deaths each year
mean we should expect every year the death of about 23 children of vegans, within the first year of life in Italy. This means that only if he dies in a year a larger amount (and with statistical significance), we have to worry about and evaluate what is the weight of different variables, including diet, this increase in mortality.
At this point I hope that the deception is clear to everyone without even need to explain it: The death of a child (but were also 5-10) appears to be an event below the expected figure. The death of an only child is an event so rare, that catches the eye because of its uniqueness, and yet the significance from which the event is the exact opposite: the vegan diet kills children!
not add anything else, I hope I was clear enough and it helped to reassure those who, even if only for a moment, he had fallen into the trap the media, artfully concocted by those profiting from filling the hospitals of the chronically ill, the whose life could be better if they were absolutely well advised and educated.
The vegan diet can not unfortunately guarantee immortality or absence of disease but significantly protects against many adverse events. It seems to me that a more valid reason to not give up!
0 comments:
Post a Comment