Morari Bapu
A Message from the Greatest Scholar on Sri Ram Charit Manas

I encourage all of you to celebrate the Gandhi Jayanti on October 2 as “Vegetarian Day” and to strive to live truly with the principles of

“Jiv Daya.”

I have always been telling in my Katha, that everyone should take high quality food for the sake of high quality in thoughts and action. I trust and bless everyone to make progress in this direction.

We start with an encouraging message from Morari Bapu, the greatest scholar on Sri Ram Charit Manas. The Jiv Daya principles are in his heart, as repeated many times in his Katha, as he tells the story of Ramayan. Only a vegetarian diet can bring progress in spirituality.

The same issue is eloborated in all other major religions. The American Vegan Society has studied them in depth to verify the relationships between Ahimsa, religions, and vegetarianism.

However, the western world has been skeptic, raising time and again the question of whether a vegetarian diet can provide adequate nutrition. We have a few papers from the North American Vegetarian Society that address these issues in detail. Bob LeRoy, RD, MS, EdM, the nutrition editor for Vegetarian Voice, authors them.

First of all, protein. The protein fear is so strong here, that some people are afraid that their bones would crumble and skin peel off if they didn’t eat meat! Let us learn how much protein we really need and how much is available from plant sources,

On page 4 we see that “Beans” provide the answer to the protein question. Actually, beans provide more protein than meat. Furthermore, they also provide vitamins and minerals. However, each individual bean does not provide all the essential amino acids, so some consider them incomplete, or ‘lowly’. But in reality, when eaten with grains, as most Indian foods are eaten, they provide complete and superior proteins.

Who needs fruits and vegetables? Everyone does… Now health officials advise us to have at least five servings a day. In India, due to high prices, we had learned to think of fruits as food only for rich or sick people. Vegetables too, especially among women, were never highly favorite. Take a trivia quiz to check your knowledge about a wide variety of fruits and vegetables and their nutrition values, on page 7. This may motivate you to eat those five recommended servings a day!

The “McLibel” suit in England attacted the attention of people from all over the world. Even though now it is becoming an ‘old’ story, it is worth thinking about what issues are at stake. The issues are large, and they are still real. Read a detailed report on page 10.

Vegetarian Resource Group conducted a Roper Poll to study the eating habits of youths. You will be surprised to see that many people never eat meat, or poultry, or fish/seafood, or all of them, and dairy products, or eggs. See the results.

See how you can contribute in a vegan health study. On page 15, see how Vegan Action targets food packaging with “V” Campaign. Also, learn some terms associated with use of chemicals on foods.

We appreciate generous donations from (1) Umesh & Harsha Shah, Lexington, NC, and (2) Ramesh & Jaya Shah, Mayfield Heights, OH.

Ahimsa, Religion, and Vegetarianism
from 35th Anniversary Issue of “Ahimsa,” by American Vegan Society — P.O. Box H, Malaga, NJ 08328-0908

Questions from two readers: 1) Is there any religion that advocates or teaches Ahimsa? 2) I am a conservative Southern Baptist who loves animals. Have you known others of fundamentalist background who became vegetarian? My friends tell me not to be vegetarian because you have to be very “liberal“ for that. Can you help?

For a religion that teaches Ahimsa in some form, you could practically take your pick. As for its adherents actually living up to it to a great degree, that is another matter. There is an active vegetarian group within the Friends (Quakers), and many Quakers opt for pacifism. About half the Seventh-Day Adventists (including more than a few vegie nutrition researchers and M.D.’s, some naturally-oriented) are vegetarians, many total-veg (most of the rest eat meat sparingly); but this is for human health rather than Reverence for Life.

Dr. Vaclavik’s book on The Vegetarianism of Jesus Christ links this Master to the Essenes, a dissident Jewish sect that practiced pacifism, communal sharing, and vegetarianism. They opposed alcohol use, slavery, the swearing of oaths, animal sacrifice, and the wearing of wool.

Some of Jesus’ advanced teachings on pacifism, marital fidelity, and oath-taking, can still be found in The Sermon on The Mount, though not necessarily in universal practice today.

The worldwide Jewish Vegetarian movement includes societies in several U.S.A. cities.

Hinduism contains Ahimsa, and many are lacto-vegetarians, though not necessarily pacifists. Jains profess Ahimsa in diet and behavior, and nearly all are at least lacto-veg. In the U.S.A. many are realizing the dairy-slaughter connection and developing further into veganism.

Many Buddhists follow a vegetarian diet and pacifism, notably in Asia, relatively fewer among those in the USA. There are teachings of the Buddha that even stress veganism for at least true and sincere disciples or monks, forbidding not only meat but also specifically silk, leather, milk and cheese.

In living by Ahimsan principles, one can be an adherent of any faith one wishes, for they are all enriched by Ahimsa. If one is shopping around, one can find a faith where the theology, cosmology, and rituals, seem harmonious with one’s own traditions or inner promptings. But to the extent that one puts the Golden Rule and Reverence for Life into one’s everyday deeds, to that extent Ahimsa (Dynamic Harmlessness) is being practiced.

AVS does not dismiss out of hands the benefits, serenity and comfort that many people derive from complex theological beliefs, liturgical and ritual practices. But if one does not wish to indulge in endless speculation and disputation on prior existence and potential future life, or metaphysical aspects of the universe, etc., Ahimsa can provide all the religion one needs; then whatever (if anything) comes after this life will not find that person very far off the mark. It is of no importance to us whether one considers oneself a “former” such-and-such religion adherent now practicing Ahimsa, or a present adherent whose Judaism (or Buddhism or Catholicism or Shintoism or whatever) has come into better focus with the understanding of Ahimsa. If one puts Ahimsa (doing the most good and the least harm one can) into practice, one will surely be following in the highest and best traditions of one’s own religion and master (or teacher or prophet or guru). This you can do, as a Christian or Buddhist or Jew, a Muslim or Hindu; as a theist, atheist or agnostic (Jainism and Buddhism, for example, do not even require a personal God), or simply as an Ahimsan, or under any other label, or no label at all.

We are by no means ignorant of the world’s great religions and their tenets; many are fine and positive powers for good, if followed properly. But much of the priestly speculation and arrogance has served only to divide, to sow hatred and mistrust, theological jealously, intolerance and violence, as in the Middle East, Northern Ireland, India, and practically everywhere else on Earth to some degree. That which causes injustice or suffering to humans or fellow creatures, would not be a religion that leads one to the Ultimate. (Ahimsa is always an integral part of a religion — Ed.)

Top

How much protein do we really need, anyway?
Bob LeRoy, RD — North American Vegetarian Society — (518) 568-7970

Few food nutrients have been persistent “household words” in the 20^th century, but protein is certainly one. Schools and government agencies which are usually inept at making nutrition education messages “stick” in people’s minds, have been fabulously successful in instilling lifelong fears of not getting enough protein… but at the same time the researchers the world over have become increasingly clear, year by year, that human protein needs are vastly less than had previously been claimed.

In fact, if there were as much international consensus about political and economical matters as there is about protein requirements, then world peace would be at hand. Policy-makers at the United Nations and at national nutrition boards throughout the globe have for years agreed that people need to derive about 8 percent of their food calories from protein in normal life. This is the simple, reliable conclusion that never seems to “trickle down” to the U.S. general public, which rather is pushed to pile up arbitrary numbers of “grams” of protein, and is warned that animal-derived foods are supposedly crucial to protein nutrition. Results? People cannot comprehend the unwieldy “protein-gram” concept, and end up consuming great protein excesses. The U.S. population has in recent generations taken in 12 to 14 percent of its calories from protein, an inflated share due to sizable meat, fish, poultry, dairy and egg use. Because animal-product industries comprise the largest part of the food economy, and because maximizing protein intake at all costs has long been one of their key marketing messages, it is unlikely that Americans will soon hear news about actually needing only 8 percent of calories from protein.

It is now universally acknowledged that protein deficiency disease is basically nonexistent in the world except where calories are deficient (where people simply don’t have enough food). For the most part, the exercise physiology profession now accepts that complex carbohydrates are the body’s prime and ideal fuel for athletics, and that training regimens do not call for a greater share of protein in the diet (as calories get added, protein just increases proportionately). The medical profession now even accepts that therapeutic diets for the various types of diabetes should draw most calories from complex carbohydrates, and the previously recommended ultra-high-protein diets have been abandoned. As soon as these secrets leak out, we will leave the era of “protein paranoia.”

Protein-calorie-percents for fish range from 30 to 78 percent; those for chicken, eggs, beef, lamb and pork average 43 percent, 33 percent, 29 percent, 21 percent and 11 percent respectively; those for skim and whole cow’s milk average 43 and 23 percent. These foods obviously promote a protein glut in the diet, helping increase risk of osteoporosis and other degenerative diseases. Since all their remaining calories are from animal fat, their protein even carries with it other baggage highly undesirable for human health.

It is noteworthy that human milk contains only about 7.5 percent of its calories from protein, about one-third the content of cow’s milk and close to the overall recommended 8 percent. As the chart below suggests, you can effortlessly take in at least 8 percent of your diet’s calories from protein without using any animal product at all; any random, varied assortment of whole vegan foods will easily provide this. In fact, people who emphasize specialized foods such as soy products at the expense of greater diversity, may find they too consume large excesses of protein though avoiding animal foods.

PROTEIN-CALORIE-PERCENTS

Compiled from data published in Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Handbook of Amino Acid Content of Food and Biological Data on Protein.

61.2 Tofu 11.1 Cashews 39.4 Soyabeans, whole 11.0 Pistachio nuts 36.0 Cauliflower 10.9 Sesame seeds 33.7 Peas, fresh 9.6 Almonds 28.4 Broccoli 7.9 Brazil nuts 25.6 Spinach 7.5 Strawberries 24.4 Lettuce 7.3 Corn 24.3 Mung beans 6.1 Oranges 20.0 Lima beans 5.7 Peaches 19.5 Chickpeas 5.2 Apricots 17.7 Green cabbage 4.3 Bananas 16.3 Peanuts 4.2 Papayas 14.2 Okra 3.9 Coconuts 13.4 Tomatoes 3.9 Avocadoes 13.1 Wheat, whole grains 3.5 Grapes 13.0 Cucumbers 3.4 Mangoes 12.7 Eggplants 3.1 Dates

11.8 Barley, whole 2.3 Apples

Top

BEANS
‘Lowly legumes’ offer lasting legacy
By Bob LeRoy, RD, MS, EdM — Nutrition editor for Vegetarian Voice

Among cultivated staple-food plants throughout history, the legume may validly be dubbed “aristocracy.” And yet, we have lost track of much of the value of legumes in the cuisines, daily diets and convenience foods offered worldwide.

Beans and peas — devalued in ignorant pronouncements by nutrition professionals and government agriculturists throughout the 1900s — seem widely regarded as charisma-lacking foods, described half in jest as “lowly,” even by chefs who may better grasp their true worth.

Some say the legume needs a gourmet revival; others in the vegetarian movement or food business seem to think all legumes have vanished except for the “Almighty Soy,” the single weapon with which meat and dairy may be overcome.

But, delicious, nutritious legumes are many and have much to brag about.

Agricultural Breakthrough

Cultivation of beans and peas was one of the most revolutionary agricultural breakthroughs ever. Root systems of leguminous plants develop nodes which harbor staggering numbers of nitrogen-fixing bacteria — organisms which bring in nitrogen from the air itself, making it available for the plant’s use.

Unlike nearly all cultivated crops, which deplete the soil of nitrogen (a key element for the growth process), bean and pea plants actually bolster the soil’s nitrogen content. This remarkable attribute has:

• enabled beans to grow in some soils where nitrogen deficiency would have doomed other crops;

• provided some soil rehabilitation through seasonally alternating legumes and other crops; and

• even allowed soil-sparing systems of interplanting different crops in the same row (practiced in various Native-American cultures with corn, beans and squash).

Powerhouses of Protein

The one nutritional attribute of legumes that has not remained a secret in this century has been their abundant protein content. Based on this, the U. S. Department of Agriculture long ago admitted beans and peas to the “Meat Group” of its Basic Four Food Groups. Of course, legumes have a group all their own in the New Four Food Groups released by Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine.

All legumes seem to derive 20 to 44 percent of their calories from protein (except for the peanut, at 16.3% due to its uniquely high fat content). This is daunting in view of recommendations by nutrition authorities in nearly all nations that only 8 – 10 percent of total calories in the diet need come from protein.

A vegetarian can effortlessly achieve an average of at least 8 – 10 percent protein, just by eating non-legume vegetables, grains and fruits — thus in fact, it is very possible to get TOO MUCH protein, if one eats a large amount of legumes!

For those people who are getting enough food to eat, it is not necessary to “combine proteins” in order to get ENOUGH protein. However, it is well known that eating foods of distinctly different amino acid makeup (within some reasonable span of hours) will allow the body to use the protein and nitrogen content of those foods to a greater, more efficient extent for true protein functions (tissue, hormone and enzyme building, etc.).

So, less of the protein will then be shunned off to be used inefficiently by the body as “fuel” — and potentially stored as fat — along with the processing of the useless nitrogen wastes which burdens the liver and kidneys.

The main way people achieve this beneficial protein complementation is by eating foods that are high in the amino acid lysine when compared to sulfur-containing amino acids PLUS foods that are high in sulfur-containing aminos when compared to lysine. Higher- lysine foods include legumes, green leafy vegetables, and cabbage-family vegetables. Higher-sulfur-amino foods include barley, corn, millet, oats, rye, wheat — and the high-fat sesame seeds, almonds, Brazil nuts, walnuts, and sesame, flax, pumpkin and sunflower seeds.

Legumes have been humanity’s best “lysine bargain” throughout history — yielding the most food lysine per cost of agricultural production, and doing this via foodstuffs that can easily be stored year around. Not so for green leafy and cabbage-family vegetables, which are otherwise the champions of vegetarian nutrition. Not coincidentally, beans and peas have been staple-food fixtures alongside foods they “complement” in countless human societies, for example:

• beans + corn (many Native-American/Latin-American cultures)

• chickpeas + wheat and/or sesame (Middle East)

• peanuts + millet (much of Africa)

• peas + oats (western Canada)

• one of the several daals + one of the various grains such as rice, wheat, barley, etc. (India) (- Ed.)

Far More Than Protein

The nutritional importance of legumes extends far beyond the realm of protein, and beyond the obvious fact that legumes, grains and starchy vegetables have provided the human race’s staple sources of complex carbohydrates (from which the great majority of calories should come, according to ALL nutrition authorities).

Though most people think of vitamin pills or nutritional yeast when the words “B complex” are mentioned, beans and peas throughout human history have been crucial sources of the full range of B vitamins other than B₁₂.

Major B vitamins like thiamine, riboflavin, niacin, pyridoxine, pantothenic acid and biotin are well supplied by the entire legume family. Niacin-rich peanuts act much like a niacin supplement, and probably gave protection from pellagra to those African peoples who traditionally used them with grains.

But what are the best B complex supplements? Sprouted legumes! The sprouting process manufactures plentiful new B vitamins (but probably not B₁₂). Only cabbage-related dark greens (kale, collards, etc.) offer as much B vitamin content per calorie as do good-quality sprouted beans… and no foods compare to home-grown sprouts in providing so much in B vitamins for so little dollar cost.

Eating sprouted legumes also helps avoid some inevitable concerns about taking commercial supplements: Why take a dose so much higher than what a human could consume from natural foods in a day; and why allow unwanted excesses of irrelevant nutrients to jeopardize delicate balances among nutrients in the body (as with the huge amounts of phosphorus in yeast products, normally almost devoid of calcium).

Legume sprouts (except alfalfa sprouts, which I discourage using) are also a very useful source of vitamin E, an antioxidant nutrient. Among unsprouted legumes, the few that have more than a tiny amount of fat also supply notable amounts of vitamin E or essential unsaturated fatty acids: high-fat soybeans and peanuts, and medium-fat (19.5% of calories) chickpeas.

Calcium Absorption

Magnesium, zinc and iron are amply provided in beans and peas in general, and calcium occurs in much smaller amounts. For all these minerals, absorbability is partly limited by some binding to phytate phosphorus. Both sprouting and fermenting (the latter exemplified by making tempeh from whole soybeans) are effective in breaking down much of the phytate and thereby increasing the amount of these minerals which the body can use.

Soybeans contain more calcium than do other legumes; their calcium-to-calorie, calcium-to-phosphorus and calcium-to-protein ratios are similar to those of chickpeas or navy beans. Despite their phytate and unusual calcium-bindable oxalate content, they show, in some studies, about twice as much calcium absorbability as other common unsprouted beans. This absorption rate is only half to three-quarters’ that of the “calcium champions” (kale, collards and related greens) and broccoli, and soybeans can’t compare to any of these in terms of calcium ratios… but it points to theoretical usefulness for soy as a calcium source.

Soy or no soy, an epidemiological look at any society where beans and peas are among the staples, and dairy products are not consumed, reveals that osteoporosis is conspicuously absent!

Balanced Iron

On the other hand, absorbability of iron from soybeans seems poor (though improved in fermented soy products such as tempeh), and this has been traced to binding by soy protein as opposed to phytate or oxalate… a problem apparently not shared by other legumes.

Still, epidemiological studies of cultures using soybean products heavily and animal products minimally (e.g. the massive, recent Study Of Diet And Disease In China) have not found iron deficiency to be a public health problem.

Balanced diets comprised of natural vegetarian foods — without mega-dosing or iron supplements — seem easily to find iron’s happy medium: avoiding anemia caused by iron deficiency, and avoiding iron excess which, various studies show, can promote free radical formation and undermine the health of the heart.

Top

Fruits & Vegetables

What’s the big deal about fruits and vegetables? Even if they taste great or look gorgeous, are they meant to be taken seriously? Why were fruits and vegetables put on this planet, anyway? Well, THEY probably think they’re here to have fun and to make more fruits and vegetables, but we humans are convinced that they must be here for our own benefits. So, let’s look at the unique things which they alone among all foods do for us.

Water Foods

Fruits and vegetables are the only foods which, like our bodies, are comprised mostly of water! They assist us in meeting our cells’ daily fluid needs, and in “flushing” the digestive system. When predominantly dry foods are eaten, the body must contribute water from its fluid reserves merely to carry on the chemical breakdown of food proteins. The body must contribute much greater amounts of water to get the whole mass of digesting food into a liquid enough state to be handled at all.

Dried foods basically have a “dehydrating” effect on the body (increasing the need to drink fluids separately), while fruits and vegetables have a water-sparing or “rehydrating” effect. This is a critical issue in parts of the world where fruits and vegetables are the only uncontaminated water source!

Their water content offers some direct nutritional benefits, too: They may be called the finest sources of fiber and undigestible carbohydrate simply because they offer the necessary water without which fiber won’t do any good. Eating dried prunes and bran-containing whole-grain foods in a dry state within an overall-dry meal will, by comparison, do much less for the colon’s health, but will definitely arouse quite a thirst.

Nutrient-Dense Foods

The phrase “nutrient-dense” may conjure images of dry, heavy foods like nuts, dried fruits, and powdered concentrates manufactured from who-knows-what. However, what it actually means is “containing large amounts of nutrients per calorie.” Here again, fruits and vegetables are nature’s unique representatives.

One hundred calories’ worth of mixed fruits and vegetables will certainly offer much greater vitamin and mineral content than 100 calories’ worth of any other class of food; calories we take in from fruits and vegetables are attached to what’s really the most nutritious part of our whole diet.

For various nutrients such as iron, we find that 30 or 40 individual foods providing the most of that nutrient per calorie are ALL fruits or vegetables (a few dried sea vegetables are included.) A calcium chart would list many vegetables that contain more calcium per calorie than the highest-listed animal product, despite long-standing myths touting dairy products as ideal calcium sources. (We will publish a chart next year — Ed.)

Vitamin-C Foods

First known only as a scurvy-preventive substance, ascorbic acid has amassed quite a reputation over the last two generations:

• as vitamin C, one of the first essential vitamins ever identified; • as a nutrient helpful in times of acute or threatened infection; • as a promoter of increased iron absorption from meals in which it is included; • as one of the very few nutrients authoritatively credited with cancer-preventive effects; • as an anti-oxidant nutrient helpful in avoiding free-radical formation;

• and as a chelating agent somewhat useful in drawing heavy metal contamination out of the body.

All of nature’s foods containing vitamin C are fruits and vegetables. (Some, like dark leafy greens and cabbage-family vegetables, have much more than others.)

Carotenoid Foods

Carotenoids sound like invaders from another galaxy, but are actually the family of plant pigments which includes beta-carotene. They are vitamin-A complexes from plants that give carrots and winter squashes their orange-to-deep-yellow coloring inside.

They, like vitamin C, are anti-oxidants and among the few nutrients confirmed as cancer-preventive agents.

Once again, they are only found in fruits and vegetables, though not in all. Examples also include dark leafy greens, red and yellow peppers, dark-flesh rutabagas, apricots, peaches, broccoli, green beans, sugar snap peas and various tropical fruits.

Alkaline-Ash Foods

Virtually all foods whose overall mineral content results in an alkaline residue (i.e. where calcium, magnesium, potassium, iron, zinc are most prominent) are fruits and vegetables. Most other foods yield an acid ash (i.e. where phosphorus, sulfur, silicon, boron are most prominent), while some are closer to neutral. Addition of sodium chloride salt doesn’t change the underlying acid/alkaline character. Fruits and vegetables are thus very important in maintaining certain balances in our mineral metabolism.

Diets which are heavily acid-ash dominant can result in excessive excretion of minerals such as calcium, magnesium, iron and zinc. Particularly, the acid-ash influence of large amounts of meat and animal-products seems to be one major factor causing increased calcium loss in the urine, thus increased daily needs for calcium and increased risk of osteoporosis.

There we have the contributions made uniquely by fruits and vegetables. Yet, much more can be said, for instance:

• They are the predominant sources of nutrients known to be preventive against cancer development. • They commonly play a key role in therapeutic diets designed to combat degenerative disease. • Nearly all of them contain more than enough protein per calorie to meet the overall protein recommendations for human diets. • They include foods which are the best calcium sources, by all measures which matter (calcium per unit of protein, per unit of animal protein, per unit of phosphorus, and per calorie);

• For most nutrients, specific fruits and vegetables are the foods which would yield the most of that nutrient PER ACRE of production.

There’s plenty of evidence for the opinion I’ve held since I was 18: Fresh fruits and vegetables are the most important foods any one of us ever eat.

Super-Trivia Quiz

1. What food contains more calcium per calorie than any other common food? 2. What part of a citrus fruit contains the greatest concentrations of vitamin C and calcium? 3. Fruits picked when ripe provide flavor and nutritional value superior to that of fruits picked unripe. However, what is the one common fruit which must be picked unripe, to avoid rotting within? 4. This food is a fixture in Caribbean and southern cuisines, derives more than one-fourth of its calories from protein, exceeds all dairy products by all measures for calcium content, is very high in all the nutrients which have been considered cancer-preventive for more than a decade, is grown in all climates and survives early frosts, is generally biannual but is perennial in some tropical areas. What is it? 5. This food sounds like the one above nutritionally, and when home-grown in Canada and far-north New England areas is often dug out from under the snow to get fresh early-winter vegetables. What is it? 6. Fructose, when used as an ingredient is a refined product. Natural fructose does not appear abundantly in nature. Fructose is the principal sugar in only common fruit, and in only one common vegetable. What are they? 7. There are only 6 common fruits or vegetables whose calcium content is suspected of having poor or unreliable absorbability. What are they? 8. This food is popular in Caribbean and southern cuisines, contains more protein per calorie than pork, has a greater calcium content (by weight, per calorie, per unit of protein, per unit of phosphorus, and per dollar of retail cost) than cottage cheese, is high in vitamin C, is not a goitrogenic food, grows in the northeast U.S. but definitely doesn’t survive early frosts, and is prized by some as a soup/stew ingredient. What is it? 9. This north-country food is produced by a weedlike perennial plant, adds juiciness and sweetness to salads when shredded, has a name which make no sense at all, and is ready to harvest in the autumn, but may be left unharvested all winter (snow, freezing and all) and then harvested when spring arrives, at which time it has increased dramatically in sweetness and vitamin C content. What is it? 10. What dried vegetable contains more iron than any other food?

11. Eggs are often used as a binding or a thickening ingredient in recipes, but there are various alternatives, some of which are from fruits and vegetables. Arrowroot and kuzu powders come from an uncommon plant root, but there are three common fruit and vegetable items I’ve used in this way. You may have used others. I’ll tell you my three, why don’t you write NAVS and tell us yours?

Answers to Super-Trivia Quiz

1. Bok-choi (spelled other ways too), easy-to-grow oriental green leafy cabbage-family vegetable, a tender delicacy in salads and common ingredient in many cooked Chinese dishes.

2. The white stuff between the sections, and under the skin layer.

3. Pears.

4. Collard greens.

5. Kale.

6. Pears, Jerusalem artichokes.

7. (Due to sizable oxalic acid content.) Beet greens, chard, spinach, parsley, rhubarb, beets. The latter two contain little calcium anyway.

8. Okra. (“Goitrogenic” foods such as most legumes and cabbage-family foods slow down somewhat the rate of use of dietary iodine by the thyroid gland. Just having a dependable iodine source, such as tiny amounts of sea vegetables, avoids any need for concern about this.)

9. Jerusalem artichokes.

10. Dulse, a dried sea vegetable.

11. Mine are potato flour from regular potatoes, pureed papaya and overripe fresh plantain. What are yours?

by Bob LeRoy, RD

Bob LeRoy holds an MS in Nutrition and Public Health, and an EdM in Community Nutrition Education. He has served as nutrition advisor to NAVS since 1990. You can contact North American Vegetarian Society at P.O. Box 72, Dolgeville, NY 13329, or 518-568-7970.

Top

McLibel Case
The story of two ordinary vegetarians taking on the giant McDonald’s in London Court

A small group distributed leaflets in front of a McDonald’s restaurant — The Big McD’ decided to teach them a lesson — A couple accepted the challenge — Vegetarian organizations from all over the world poured in to support — The case should have lasted only a few days, but instead went on for months… years… — Became the longest in British history — Started in 1994, finished in 1997 — McD’ learned its lesson: “Might is not right!”

The three reports below explain the whole story in a nutshell.

The McLibel Trial – A Mammoth Legal Battle

This was a mammoth legal battle between the $30 billion a year McDonald’s Corporation and two London Greenpeace supporters (Helen Steel and Dave Morris). The trial began in June 1994, became the longest civil case in British history in December 1995, and lasted until end of 1996. McDonald’s sued Steel & Morris for libel over a 6-sided “Factsheet” produced by London Greenpeace, entitled “What’s Wrong With McDonald’s? — Everything they don’t want you to know,” which they distributed in 1989/90.

Approximately 180 witnesses from the UK and around the world have given evidence on all the issues in the case, namely:

The connection between multinational companies like McDonald’s, cash crops, and starvation in the third world.

• The responsibility of corporations such as McDonald’s for damage to the environment, including destruction of rain forests.

• The wasteful and harmful effects of the mountains of packaging used by McDonald’s and other companies.

• McDonald’s promotion and sale of food with a low fiber, high fat, sodium, and sugar content, and the links between this type of diet and diseases including heart disease and cancer.

• McDonald’s exploitation of children by its use of advertisements and gimmicks to sell unhealthy products.

• The barbaric way animals are reared and slaughtered to supply products for McDonald’s.

• The lousy conditions that workers in the food service industry work under, and the low wages paid by McDonald’s

• McDonald’s hostility towards trade unions.

“The Vegan News” — Vol. 2, Issue 3

‘McLibel’ Trial pits activists against corporate giant


British pair defend anti-McDonald’s leaflet

“Vegetarian Voice” — Vol. 21, No. 3

It’s “the best free entertainment in London,” according to a British newspaper. This battle is contested by two impoverished campaigners. Originally there were five defendants, but three decided to apologize and avoid any costs, because there is no legal aid to fight libel cases. However, Steel and Morris opted to fight the case, determined to counter McDonald’s attempts to silence its critics.

They did not write the Fact sheet; they only defended the allegations made in it against McDonald’s. Steel is a former gardener. Morris is a former postman and a single parent. Their combined annual earnings totaled less than $ 11,000. They are not even a couple; however, they battled together for a cause they believed in.

Fast food restaurants have been publicly criticized in many parts of the world for many similar reasons. Some observers have argued that McDonald’s brought suit in England because of its relatively more favorable libel laws. The case most likely could never have been filed in the United States, where the First and Fourteenth Amendments provide protection of freedom of speech and a corporation may only maintain an action for libel if it can prove malice on the part of the person alleged to have made the offending comment. Putting the question of malice aside, a person or company bringing a libel suit in the U.S. must also prove that the information published about them:

1) is defamatory (hurts their reputation and/or good name), and
2) is not true.

Thus, if this case had been brought in the United States, the burden of proof would have fallen on McDonald’s. The corporation would have had to prove that the information was both false and damaging to its reputation.

In England, it is the other way around. The defendants in this case had the more difficult burden of proving that the criticisms of McDonald’s published in the London Greenpeace leaflet are true.

Some 180 witnesses, roughly evenly split for each side, gave evidence in court about the effects of the company’s operations on the environment, on millions of farm animals, on human health, on the Third World and on McDonald’s own staff.

The leaflet is still in circulation, with over 1.5 million copies distributed in the UK alone since the libel writs were issued. The defendants argue that every word in the leaflet is true, and thus cannot be considered libelous.

Running concurrently with McDonald’s libel suit is a countersuit by Steel and Morris that alleges the fast food corporation libeled them when it distributed a leaflet in Spring 1994 which claimed Steel, Morris and other critics were deliberately circulating lies about McDonald’s.

The trial reportedly cost McDonald’s some $9,600 a day. A lawyer for the restaurant chain originally expected the trial to last three to four weeks. But when it passes its first anniversary (June 28, 1995), it was widely reported that McDonald’s had started secret negotiations with Steel and Morris and had twice flown members of its U.S. board of directors to London to meet them.

Steel and Morris represented themselves against the burger giant’s team of top libel lawyers. They lacked formal legal training but performed the vast majority of legal preparations themselves, as well as presenting the case in court and questioning witnesses. Some sympathetic lawyers occasionally provided legal advice on an informal basis.

The case attracted hundreds of articles in the press (including front-page coverage in the Wall Street Journal) plus international TV and radio coverage in the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, France, South Africa, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, Japan, Trinidad, Russia, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Austria, Thailand and Israel. (In India, animal rights activists Mrs. Maneka Gandhi spoke about this through various media at her disposal. — Ed.)

The Verdict and Aftermath
It was an 800-page Judgement, summarized into 45 pages that the Judge read in Court

JUNE 19, 1997: Mr. Justice Bell gave his verdict. Even though the company had spent nearly 20 million dollars, it got awarded only $ 94,000 (which is being appealed). The Judge found the criticisms made in the Factsheet to be true, which is not surprising since the evidence was overwhelmingly in the Defendants’ favor. After the verdict, at a victory rally, the defendants said, “the company found that all its dirty laundry got aired in public during the trial, exposing the truth behind its glossy image.” The company refused to comment.

McLIBEL JUDGE CONDEMNS McDONALDS’ CORE BUSINESS PRACTICES — Mr Justice Bell ruled that substantial and significant parts of the London Greenpeace Factsheet criticising the company have been proved to be true by the evidence brought by the McLibel Defendants, Helen Steel & Dave Morris. Of the other parts of the Judgment, McDonald’s won on the basis of controversial legal and semantic interpretations of the meaning of the Factsheet, “What’s Wrong With McDonald’s?” These mainly regarded McDonald’s claim that the Factsheet meant that the company itself directly caused rainforest destruction and hunger in the third world (ignoring the Factsheet’s criticisms of multinationals and the food industry in general). It also inferred that people have a very real risk of cancer, heart disease and food poisoning from eating the company’s food, even though the Factsheet did not say this. The judge astonishingly also ruled that all the comments (bar one phrase) in the Factsheet would be treated as statements of fact which had to be proven by primary sources of evidence.

However, the company must be devastated that despite all the disparity and unfairness, the Judge still found it to be factual that McDonald’s “exploits children” through their advertising, that they are “culpably responsible” for cruelty to animals, and that the company is anti-Union and pays such low wages that it further depresses the already low wages in the catering industry. The Judge also found that McDonald’s food was “high in fat, saturated fat, animal products, and sodium” and that “advertisements, promotions and booklets have pretended to a positive nutritional benefit which McDonald’s food ….. did not match” (i.e. that the food is not nutritious and that they are therefore deceiving the public when they promote it as such).

OUTRAGE AS MULTINATIONALS LEGALLY PERMITTED TO LIBEL THEIR CRITICS — Judge finds that McDonald’s published unjustified, defamatory statements about the Defendants in an attempt to discredit them, but says this was permissible in law.

JUDGE FINDS McDONALD’S ISSUED DEFAMATORY AND ‘UNJUSTIFIED’ STATEMENTS TO DISCREDIT THE DEFENDANTS — but rules the company had the right to self-defence! Pre-trial publication by McDonald’s of 300,000 leaflets and press releases attacking criticisms of the Corporation as ‘lies’ had sparked a counterclaim by the Defendants for libel. The company was unable to bring a single piece of evidence to substantiate its defamatory assertions that the Defendants had deliberately circulated false information. In fact, the judge found that McDonald’s leaflets were ‘defamatory’, ‘unjustified’, contained allegations which McDonald’s knew to be untrue and that ‘part of the motive….was to discredit the defendants’. But, astonishingly, he ruled that this was legally permissible as McDonald’s had a right of self-defence to protect itself since the company was under ‘attack’ from Helen and Dave!

JULY 17th FINAL DEADLINE PASSES — McDonald’s abandons legal efforts Thursday July 17th, the four week deadline set by Mr Justice Bell for any final legal applications by the parties in the action. This was passed without McDonald’s making any application for an injunction or costs. The Corporation has thereby conceded a huge victory to the public dissemination of “What’s Wrong With McDonald’s?” leaflets.

CORPORATION CONDEMNED IN PARLIAMENT — MP’s Early Day Motions of July 18th call for sanctions against McDonald’s and an end to multinationals’ right to sue for libel.

CAMPAIGN UNSTOPPABLE — The Defendants stance in fighting the case has been totally vindicated; evidence in the trial has backed up all the criticisms made of McDonald’s over the promotion of unhealthy food, and exploitation of people, animals and the environment. 500,000 leaflets were handed out in the UK and around the world following the verdict. The campaign has become unstoppable.

DEFENDANTS PLAN FURTHER LEGAL ACTION — Plans are now underway to appeal against legal aspects of the verdict and the parts of the judgment which went against the Defendants, to sue McDonald’s hired agents for damages, and to take the British Government to the European Court of Human Rights.

McDONALD’S SLAMMED IN PARLIAMENT — Jeremy Corbyn MP has sponsored two Early Day Motions which were put before Parliament on Friday 18th July. They refer to Mr Justice Bell’s findings in the McLibel Trial and slam the McDonald’s Corporation over its ‘deceptive and exploitative business practices’, calling for ‘effective sanctions’ and ‘appropriate compensation’ to be paid by the company. They further condemn ‘unfair and oppressive libel laws’ and call for ‘urgent reform to safeguard public rights’.

SANCTIONS — The McLibel Support Campaign believes in the public’s right of self-defence, and is now calling for sanctions to be implemented against the McDonald’s Corporation:

(1) The National Food Alliance called, on July 17th, for a ban on food advertising targeting children (NFA — Jeanette 0171 628 2442).

(2) The Farm Animal Welfare Network is demanding immediate legislative action to end the cruel practices identified by the trial judge (FAWN — Clare 01484 688650).

(3) Trade Unions and labour activists are stepping up their recruitment drive in the catering industry and their campaign for a guaranteed minimum wage (TGWU — Oliver 0181 809 4977).

(4) Local residents’ associations are broadening their objections to new McDonald’s stores to include concerns regarding the targeting of local children and the lowering of local wage levels (e.g. NOMAC, North London — David 0181 347 9857).

McDONALD’S U.S. PRESIDENT REMOVED FROM OFFICE — Ed Rensi, the Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer, was removed from office at the beginning of July along with his management team.

For more details on the Judgement, please contact us or visit the home page at address below.

A Plea to McDonald’s New Management Team

Please consider cutting in half the number of meat items on your menu, and diverting your R & D budget towards developing and promoting tasty and healthy recipes that use no animal products.

“U.S. McLibel Support Campaign” — (802) 586-9628 P.O. Box 62 — Craftsbury, VT 05826-0062

[email protected] — http://www.mcspotlight.org

Top

Roper Poll on “Eating Habits of Youths”
“Vegetarian Journal” — November/December 1995

The Vegetarian Resource Group conducted a Roper Poll of 8 to 17 year olds to find the number of young vegetarians in the United States. There were a few surprises, with some of the numbers being higher than would be expected.

For comparison purposes, we asked the same question as in our adult poll (See Vegetarian Journal July/August, 1994.) “Please call off the items on this list, if any, that you never eat: Meat. Poultry. Fish/Seafood. Dairy Products. Eggs. Honey.” Note that in most polls, respondents are asked if they consider themselves vegetarians. We used the word never which should give us a lower but more accurate figure.

A whopping 11% of girls 13-17 said they don’t eat meat. This compares to 7% of adult females. This may be a trend. However, generally teenage females answer food questions differently from adults because of greater interest in their weight and appearance. Based on information we received over the Internet, our American figures here correspond with British figures. A 1993 Trent survey of children in England aged 11 to 16 indicated 12% of girls claimed to be vegetarian. Also in Great Britain, in The Daily Telegraph Gallup Poll of May 1993, 11% of 15 to 19 year olds described themselves as vegetarian.

Back to the United States, about 5% of male teenagers don’t eat meat, exactly the same as adult men. What’s fascinating is that the opposite figures appeared for 8-12 year olds. Eleven percent of boys say they don’t eat meat, while only 6% of girls don’t eat meat. Is this an inaccurate glitch in the figures or a sign of something to come? Is the meat industry being successful in their campaigns aimed towards males and bringing boys back into the fold? We’ll be very curious to see the figures next time we conduct this poll.

Overall, 7% of youngsters say they don’t eat poultry, with only 3% of adults abstaining. Gender doesn’t affect the figures that much. Not eating fish or seafood is the most surprising finding, with 18% of kids saying they don’t eat it. The children’s age and gender don’t have great impact. Only 4% of adults say they don’t eat fish.

The high number of children and teens who do not eat fish can be explained only by postulating. We would have expected many children to at least eat tuna or fish sticks. Are parents no longer serving this? Do the kids not realize they are fish products? Do children just not like fish? This possible trend will also be fascinating to watch the next time VRG does a poll.

Most other figures are in line with our adult poll. As for vegetarians, almost two percent of 8 to 12 year olds say they don’t eat meat, fish, or fowl. This is consistent with the adult poll, which came up with 1%, although more females than males are vegetarian among adults. A little over one percent of teens are vegetarian. Our adult figures are close to those reported by the National Livestock and Meat Board from research conducted by MRCA Information Services.

Because we are dealing with a small percentage of the population, it’s hard to be sure that we have an accurate picture of vegans. But it appears that, as with adults (disregarding the use of honey), 1/3 to 1/2 of the teen vegetarians are vegan. We wouldn’t have predicted this before doing the adult poll, but it makes sense. Many polls give the number of vegetarians as six to 10 percent. These are people who call themselves vegetarian. This is closer to our figure for people who don’t eat meat. Of course many in this six to 10 percent figure probably eat meat sometimes. It seems that once a person “truly” becomes vegetarian, that is they don’t eat meat, fish, or fowl, they probably continue towards veganism and thus don’t consume dairy and eggs. The implication for marketing is that if you are producing a product for vegetarians, you might as well make it vegan (no animal products).

Another confusing result to us is that 4% of teens in the northeast don’t eat meat, while the highest number of abstainers from meat are in the central part of the country, with 11%. The west is an average of 8%. As far as vegetarians, the highest number also came out of the Midwest, though with the small numbers we may want to avoid making conclusions too quickly. Racial status doesn’t affect the numbers. The percentage of vegetarians is somewhat lower among the upper class than in middle or lower economic situations. Parents having attended college push figures up a little, but not too much. Other factors, such as households owning a personal computer or parents working don’t have much of an impact either.

One thousand twenty-three children and teens participated in this poll, which was conducted by interviewing youths at their homes. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 4%. Because of the uncertainty inherent in doing all polls and because we are gathering data about a subset of the population, conclusions have to be put in perspective with other information, trends, and past and future surveys.

The “V” Campaign
Vegan Action Targets Food Packaging

Have you ever wished you could identify vegan products with one quick glance instead of reading long lists of ingredients and memorizing who does and who does not test on animals?

The past few years have seen a tremendous increase in the number of people choosing to adopt a vegan lifestyle. Surprisingly, there is no quick and easy way for these consumers to identify animal-free products. Vegan Action hopes to change all that with the “V” Campaign.

Just as the “K in the circle” logo is used to identify kosher products, Vegan Action will soon be registering a “vegan v” symbol with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. This symbol will quickly tell consumers that products bearing it are completely vegan. Products displaying the logo will have to meet the strictest current definition of veganism, meaning they contain no animal products, were not tested on animals, and they did not involve the use of animal products in their manufacture (i.e., white sugar).

Vegan Action feels that several important benefits will result from the use of the symbol. The most obvious is that consumers will be able to tell at a glance that a product is vegan. But they will also be able to easily identify companies that share their support of veganism. Perhaps most importantly, the logo further propels veganism into the mainstream of public consciousness, raising interest in and awareness of the vegan lifestyle while making it easier to take part in.

Given the scope of this campaign, Vegan Action will need volunteers in a number of areas. If you or someone you know could conduct a trademark search for us, it would defray a major time and monetary expense. Please contact us immediately. Secondly, although we already have a tentative logo, we will consider any ideas that are submitted to us. Keep in mind that the logo should be simple and readily identifiable. Send camera-ready art to our address below. Finally, if you know a representative from a company that produces vegan products, please explain the benefits of using the logo and have the person contact us. If you cannot contribute in one of these ways, your financial support is needed and would be greatly appreciated.

The “V” Campaign “Vegan Action” P.O. Box 4353

Berkeley, CA 94704

WHAT’S IN A NAME?

Stores increasingly are applying labels to fruits and vegetables to indicate decreased use or absence of synthetically compounded chemicals and fertilizers. The following are some of the most frequently used terms and what they generally mean. The list was taken by Vegetarian Resource Group, from Wall Street Journal, March 21, 1989, B-1.

NO-SPRAY: Pesticides and other chemicals are not sprayed onto the crop, but synthetically compounded fertilizers may be used.

SUSTAINABLE: May have some pesticides and other chemicals applied, but attempts are made to use reduced levels in conjunction with biological-control methods to manage rather than kill pests.

TRANSITIONAL: Crops grown on land prepared with organic techniques, but not long enough to be certified as organic by a state or trade group.

ORGANIC: Synthetically compounded chemicals and fertilizers are not used, although some naturally occurring chemicals can be employed on crops.

BIODYNAMIC: The farmer plants and cultivates crops “in harmony” with the earth’s seasons and utilizes organic materials native to the region.

January – March

April – June

July – September

Top