Vegetarian and vegan diets good for kids and adults, nutritionists say

FoxNews

Plant-based diets are tied to a lower risk of health problems like heart disease, diabetes, obesity and certain cancers - and pretty much anyone can eat this way, according to a leading group of nutritionists.

Vegetarian and vegan diets are appropriate for all stages of life, including during infancy, pregnancy, childhood, adolescence and old age, the authors write in a position statement from the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.

That's because people who adopt a plant-based diet tend to consume more fruits and vegetables, fewer sweets and salty snacks, and smaller amounts of total and saturated fats, the statement, published in the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, asserts.

The trick is to make sure these diets are well planned out and well balanced, said Vandana Sheth, a registered dietitian nutritionist and spokesperson for the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.

"Any diet that is not well planned and balanced can have negative side effects," Sheth said by email.

"Just because foods are plant based doesn't automatically make them healthy," Sheth added. "For instance, pastries, cookies, fried and salty foods may be vegan but don't really provide much in terms of nutritional value."

For younger vegetarians and vegans in particular, it's important to plan meals that include enough iron, zinc, vitamin B-12, and for some, calcium and vitamin D, Sheth said.

"Well-planned vegetarian and vegan diets containing vegetables, fruits, whole grains, legumes, nuts and seeds can be nutritionally adequate and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of some chronic diseases," Sheth noted.

Approximately 3.3 percent of American adults are vegetarian or vegan, meaning they never eat meat, poultry or fish, according to the guidelines. This way of eating is much more common among younger adults than elderly people.

Among the health benefits noted in the guidelines, people who eat a plant-based diet are less likely to be overweight or obese than adults who consume meat.

Vegan diets in particular, which exclude meats as well as animal products like milk, eggs and honey, are associated with a lower risk of heart disease than other ways of eating, the statement also points out.

According to the authors, people who adopt a vegan diet reduce the risk of diabetes by 62 percent, the risk of prostate cancer by 35 percent, the chance of being hospitalized for a heart attack by 33 percent, the risk of heart disease by 29 percent and the risk of all forms of cancer by 18 percent.

"People who adopt vegetarian diets have a lower body mass index, better control of blood pressure and blood glucose, less inflammation and lower cholesterol levels compared with non-vegetarians," Sheth said.

Just because a diet is vegetarian or vegan, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's healthy, cautioned Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, dean of the Tufts Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy in Boston.

"For instance, fries and a coke are vegan," Mozaffarian, who wasn't involved in the position statement, said by email.

"Indeed, much of the harmful stuff in the food supply is vegetarian or vegan: refined grains, starches, added sugars, sweets, trans fats, salt, etc," Mozaffarian added. "People can have a vegetarian or vegan diet that is healthy or terrible; and a non-vegetarian or non-vegan diet that is healthy or terrible."

A healthy diet is rich in minimally processed foods, especially from plants, but also from animals, Mozaffarian said.

"I recommend a high-fat Mediterranean-style diet, rich in fruits, non-starchy veggies, nuts, beans, fish, whole grains, and vegetable oils; and including yogurt, cheese, poultry, and occasional half serving a week of fresh, unprocessed red meat," Mozaffarian said.

Heartening Report on Global Hunger

But still 800 million people go to bed hungry, IFPRI report notes

Asia Sentinel

The world has made significant progress in combating global hunger, according to the 2014 Global Hunger Index published this week by the International Food Policy Research Institute. The state of hunger in developing countries as a group has improved since 1990, falling by a heartening 39 percent, according to the 2014 index.

“Undernourishment fell most rapidly between 1990 and 1995, underweight after 2005, and progress in reducing child mortality has gained momentum since 2000,” the report notes. “Even with these improvements, the 2014 aggregate index remains ‘serious’ and warrants continued concern.”

Despite the progress, the report says, the level of hunger in the world is still serious, with more than 800 million people continuing to go to bed hungry, according to estimates quoted by IFPRI from the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization.

Other sources published recently say Indonesia, despite rapidly improving economic conditions, continues to suffer badly from childhood stunting from malnutrition. According to a 2013 report by UNICEF, in some provinces including Nusa Tenggara Barat, stunting is actually increasing as mothers forgo breastfeeding. According to the UNICEF report, stunting, which can affect mental acuity as well as physical prowess, has increased from 43 percent in 2003 to 48 percent in 2010. Stunting actually affects 17 percent of all children across Indonesia, according to Women Empowerment and Child Protection Minister Linda Amalia Sari Gumelar, up from 15 percent across the country, primarily because of parental unawareness of children’s growth needs.

Progress in addressing child underweight was the main factor behind the improved score for the region since 1990, with 26 countries reducing their scores by 50 percent or more. In terms of absolute progress, comparing 1990 GHI with 2014, Angola, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Chad, Ghana, Malawi, Niger, Rwanda, Thailand, and Vietnam saw the biggest improvements in scores.

In India, the percentage of underweight in children fell by almost 13 percentage points between 2005–2006 and 2013–2014 as a range of programs and initiatives launched by India’s central and state governments in the past decade seems to finally have made a difference for child nutrition, according to the document.

IFPRI found that both Thailand and Vietnam have achieved impressive progress in reducing hunger since 1990. In the past two decades, Thailand, IFPRI says, has experienced robust economic growth and reduced poverty despite brief setbacks related to the Asian financial crisis of 1997-1998. Vietnam has also cut back its 1990 GHI score by more than three-quarters, reducing the proportion of undernourished from 48 percent to only 8 percent, lowered underweight in children from 41 percent to 12 percent between 1990 and 2011, and more than halved the under-five mortality rate. While every second pregnant woman in Vietnam was anemic in 1995, only one in three pregnant women still suffered from anemia six years later.

GDP per capita has more than tripled in Vietnam since 1990, and strong, broad-based economic growth translated into a decline in the proportion of people living on less than US$1.25 per day, from 64 percent to 17 percent between 1993 and 2008, according to the World Bank 2014. The country put nutrition high on its agenda, effectively developed and carried out a plan to prevent protein-energy malnutrition among children, achieved high coverage of immunization and other primary healthcare services, granted targeted health subsidies to the poor, and ran successful social security programs.

The report by the Washington, DC-based NGO concentrates on one form of hunger that it says is often ignored or overshadowed by hunger related to energy deficits. It is hidden hunger—also called micronutrient deficiency—which affects some 2 billion people around the world, the report notes, meaning a shortage in essential vitamins and minerals can that have long-term, irreversible health effects as well as socioeconomic consequences that can erode well-being and development and take a toll on economies.

Hidden hunger can coexist with adequate or even excessive consumption of dietary energy from macronutrients, such as fats and carbohydrates, and therefore also with overweight /obesity in one person or community.

“Poor diet, disease, impaired absorption, and increased micronutrient needs during certain life stages, such as pregnancy, lactation, and infancy, are among the causes of hidden hunger, which may ‘“invisibly’ affect the health and development of a population.”

To eliminate hidden hunger, IFPRI says, governments must make fighting it a priority, investing in and developing human and financial resources, increase coordination, and ensure transparent monitoring and evaluation to build capacity on nutrition. Governments must also create regulatory environments that value good nutrition. This could involve creating incentives for private sector companies to develop more nutritious seeds or foods.

“Transparent accountability systems are needed in order to ensure that investments contribute to public health, while standardized data collection on micronutrient deficiencies can build the evidence base on the efficacy and cost effectiveness of food-based solutions.’

Model Ekonomi Baru dan Penarikan Subsidi: Bukti Dasar Barisan Nasional Yang Berbolak Balik dan Berat Sebelah.

Kenaikan harga sebanyak 5 sen RON 95 merupakan kenaikan kali kedua
berturut-turut dalam masa 6 bulan. Pengumuman yang dibuat oleh Dato’
Seri Idris Jala juga meliputi penarikan subsidi terhadap beberapa
barang keperluan seumpama gula(kenaikan sebanyak 20 sen),
diesel(kenaikan sebanyak 5 sen) dan gas petroleum cecair(kenaikan
sebanyak 5 sen).

Manakala Barisan Nasional menegaskan peningkatan harga tersebut adalah
kecil dampaknya terhadap rakyat, namun hala tuju dasar negara yang
terbentuk kesan dari kenaikan tersebut tidak boleh dipandang ringan.
Barisan Nasional melalui PEMANDU telah membentangkan pada sesi Hari
Terbuka Rasionalisasi Subsidi bertarikh 27 Mei 2010, bahawa sudah ada
rancangan untuk menarik balik subsidi minyak jenis RON 95 pada setiap
6 bulan. Pengumuman semalam mengesahkan akan ada kenaikan harga pada
masa hadapan, berkemungkinannya kenaikan yang lebih besar jumlahnya
dari yang dicadangkan iaitu kenaikan 10 sen setiap 6 bulan.

Penarikan balik subsidi beberapa jenis barangan juga diusulkan
termasuklah subsidi gas yang berkait rapat dengan Janakuasa Bebas yang
dimiliki segelintir elit korporat dan kroni Barisan Nasional. Namun
sehingga kini kelihatannya kenaikan harga hanyalah terhadap barangan
keperluan dan pastinya rakyat keseluruhan yang merasa pedihnya,
bukannya kroni.

PEMANDU menganggarkan sejumlah RM 1.12 billion akan dijimatkan pada
tahun 2010 sekiranya subsidi gas untuk Janakuasa Bebas serta sektor
bukan tenaga dapat dikurangkan. Ini dapat dicapai sekiranya harga gas
untuk Janakuasa Bebas dan sektor bukan tenaga naik masing-masing RM
4.65 per mmbtu(million British unit haba) serta RM 2.52 per mmbtu.
Sehingga kini, kerajaan melalui PETRONAS, berhasil menyediakan subsidi
buat Janakuasa Bebas dan industri lainnya sejumlah RM 19 billion
setiap tahun kerana harga gas selepas subsidi hanyalah RM 10.70 per
mmbtu(untuk Janakuasa Bebas), harga yang dikira amat murah jika
dibandingkan dengan harga pasaran buat gas yang diimpot iaitu RM 38
per mmbtu (sekiranya negara terpaksa mengimpot akibat dari
kekuranganpengeluaran).

Oleh itu kita mahu Perdana Menteri dan pentadbiran beliau memberi
penjelasan mengapakah mereka terburu-buru untuk menarik balik subsidi
minyak, gula dan gas petroleum cecair, sedangkan kesan dari keputusan
tersebut hanya akan membebankan rakyat terbanyak. Pada masa yang sama
kita mempersoalkan tindakan mereka kerana kebijakan tersebut tidak
menjurus pula terhadap golongan elit korporat terutamanya mereka yang
rapat dengan pemerintah.

Tambahan pula sehingga kini kita hanya dihamburi janji sedangkan
perubahan yang dijanjikan hanya sekadar suatu wayang dan permainan
komunikasi terutamanya berkaitan sistem pengagihan subsidi. Kita
berpandangan Perubahan mesti disegerakan kerana ianya mustahak demi
memastikan bantuan dari pemerintah sampai kepada golongan
berpendapatan rendah sekaligus meringankan beban mereka berhadapan
dengan kos sara hidup yang meningkat.

PEMANDU begitu tangkas memastikan subsidi ditarik balik, akan tetapi
begitu perlahan mengungkapkan penyelesaian untuk mengagihkan semula
subsidi demi kepentingan rakyat terbanyak dan miskin.

Justeru kita ragu keberkesanan serta iltizam untuk melaksanakan
perubahan walaupun bahagian terakhir Model Ekonomi Baru baru sahaja
dibentangkan. Model Ekonomi Baru diwar warkan sebagai satu rancangan
untuk membawa perubahan terutamanya buat sistem ekonomi, namun sejarah
menjadi saksi apabila tiba waktu untuk melaksanakannya, mereka
sentiasa gagal.

Barisan Nasional cuba meyakinkan kita betapa penarikan balik subsidi
adalah perlu demi mengurangkan jurang defisit yang sebenarnya akibat
dari keborosan selama ini. Akan tetapi apa yang mereka cuba lakukan
hanya mengelak dari persoalan sebenar isu subsidi iaitu harga yang
tidak munasabah buat Janakuasa Bebas, kebanyakannya milik kroni.

Lebih menyedihkan, RM 126 juta yang berjaya dijimatkan dari penarikan
balik subsidi gula sebanyak 20 sen pada 16hb Julai lalu itu lebih
kecil jumlahnya jika hendak dibandingkan dengan bayaran kepada PEMANDU
sebagaimana yang dilaporkan Malaysiakini (pada 3hb Disember 2010). Di
mana letaknya keabsahan moral kerajaan memerintah ini yang mengambil
RM 126juta dari rakyat terbanyak demi untuk membayar RM 66 juta kepada
penasihat yang membantu menubuhkan sebuah unit kerajaan dan RM 65 juta
pula buat keseluruhan operasi PEMANDU untuk tahun 2010.

Pastinya saya mendengar pengumuman berkaitan dengan Model Ekonomi Baru
dengan rasa penuh curiga. Barisan Nasional akan cuba sedaya upaya
untuk mengelirukan rakyat dengan segala macam pengumuman kononnya demi
kebaikan sektor awam, namun pada masa yang sama boros membayar mereka
yang berkhidmat dalam PEMANDU dengan bayaran yang mampu menyaingi
sektor swasta.

Dokumen Model Ekonomi Baru menumpu mempromosi liberalisasi dan
pembatalan kawal selia, akan tetapi pada masa yang sama memberi lesen
kepada YTL untuk menjayakan projek 700MHz tanpa tender terbuka. Berita
ini pastinya mendapat cemuhan awam dan kalangan mereka dari industri
telekomunikasi.

Pastinya wujud corak ketidaktuntasan di antara pengumuman yang dibuat
dan pelaksanaan oleh pemerintah. Ini tidaklah mengejutkan kerana kita
sedar pemerintah kini taksub untuk mencipta ilusi indah hasil dari
bantuan firma perhubungan awam, yang mana upahnya dibayar dari dana
awam. Bagi mereka yang paling mustahak adalah untuk terus kekal
berkuasa.

Justeru Pakatan Rakyat bersama dengan rakyat keseluruhannya
bertanggungjawab untuk terus memerhati dan memastikan pemerintah
membuat keputusan demi kemaslahatan rakyat serta negara. Kita tidak
boleh gagal, kerana akibatnya ialah harga minyak RM 2.10 seliter dalam
masa setahun lagi.

YB DATO’ SERI ANWAR IBRAHIM
KETUA PEMBANGKANG