Compare and Contrast Vegetarian Diet - Free Samples to Students

Question: Discuss about the Compare and Contrast Vegetarian Diet. Answer: Introduction: The debate on whether a vegetarian diet or one that contains meat is better than the other has been the primary focus by the nutritionists, researchers, and environmentalists to some extent. The debate has taken longer time as the experts try to come up with conclusive findings. The truth of the matter is that the diets are consumed almost equally by a larger population. Consequently, both vegetarian and meat-containing diets have got their benefits and drawbacks. In addition, both diets have positive and adverse effects on health and environment. Most important to note is that they also have certain nutritional value. The primary purpose of this paper, therefore, is to show the comparison and the contrast between a vegetarian human diet and the one that contains meat. Vegetarian and meat-containing diets have nutritional value that is beneficial to people's health. For instance, meat is a rich source of omega 3, iron, protein and vitamin B12. Similarly, a vegetarian diet provides nutrients such as proteins, vitamins, and fats. Research has proven that the intake of a vegetarian diet and controlled intake of meat-based diet have significant health benefits (Frey, 2013). The health benefits of these diets include protection from; cancer, ischemic heart disease, diabetes, stroke, hypertension, and obesity. On the contrary, the two diets have also got a negative impact on health (Sabate, 2003). Compared to the meat-containing diet, a vegetarian diet may contain lower bioavailability and concentration of vital nutrients as well as the energy content thus resulting in some nutrients deficiency (Yepes, 2015). For instance, individuals under a strict or unbalanced vegetarian diet may experience problems with metabolism, especially during pregnancy, lactat ion or development stage. Meat-based diets, on the other hand, when taken in excess, contain very high level of fats that can raise the level of cholesterol. The resultant results have adverse effects on health. Such an individual is at greater risk of developing life-threatening diseases such as heart diseases, diabetes, some types of cancer, hypertension, and obesity. It is also reported that a vegetarian and the one that includes the consumption of meat have notable effects on the environment. It is estimated that 4 billion and 2 billion of the world's population live mainly on plant-based diets and meat-based diets respectively. The 4 billion people are obliged to depend on a vegetarian diet due to the scarcity of fresh water, energy resources as well as the cropland (Sabate, 2003). Notably, the World Health Organisation predicts that more than 3 billion people suffer malnourishment due to the overwhelming population growth and reduced energy sources, land and water (Soret et al., 2014). Nonetheless, a vegetarian diet and a meat-based diet differ on their degree of sustainability and their impacts on the environment (Pimentel Pimentel, 2003). Plant-based diets or a vegetarian diet is highly sustainable and has relatively lower impacts to the environment compared to a meat-based diet (Pimentel Pimentel, 2003). According to Pimentel and Pimentel (2003), the consumption of meat-based diets has increased environmental effects due to the amount of land required, water use and the waste product that is generated. It also assumed that the promotion of the consumption of vegetarian diets would significantly reduce the human effects on the environment. The research also reveals that the production of livestock alone consumes 70 percent of the global agricultural land which is approximately 30 percent of the global land use. Consequently, the world experiences environment problems such as loss of biodiversity, climate change, scarcity and pollution of fresh water (Springmann et al., 2016). The production and consumption of vegetarian and meat products are ethically questionable. While the ethical vegetarians believe that they are ethically upright to consume a vegetarian diet, they are also opposed to the practices used in meat production. Some of the issues that have been outlined concerning why it is not ethically right to consume meat-based diets include; animal rights, religious scruples, animal welfare and environmental ethics (Yepes, 2015). However, there is the existing controversy between the ethical vegetarian and those that support eating meat. On one hand, the ethical vegetarians maintain that the reasons for not causing any harm to animals are similar to that of not hurting human beings. Additionally, they argue that just like killing a human is justified under certain circumstances, the killing of animals should equally be the same. On the other hand, the supporters of meat-eating cite scientific, religious, cultural and scientific reasons to support meat- based diets (Yepes 2015). In conclusion, the consumption of a vegetarian diet or a meat-based diet remains a contentious issue. While the consumption of both diets has its positive and negative effects, people have their reasons as to why they prefer one to the other. It is also arguable that the diets have certain effects not only to human health but also to the environment and ethics. In this view, therefore, it is evident that there are substantial comparison and contrast between a vegetarian diet in humans and the one that includes the consumption of meat. References Frey, R. (2013). Power Vegan: Plant-fueled Nutrition for Maximum Health and Fitness. Agate Publishing. Pimentel, D., Pimentel, M. (2003). Sustainability of Meat-based and Plant-based Diets and the Environment. Am J Clinical Nutrition, 78:660-663. Sabate, J. (2003). The contribution of vegetarian diets to health and disease: A paradigm shift? Am J Clinical Nutrition, 78:502-507. Soret, S., Mejia, A., Batech, M., Jaceldo-Siegl, K., Harwatt, H., Sabat, J. (2014). Climate change mitigation and health effects of varied dietary patterns in real-life settings throughout North America. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 100(Supplement 1), 490S-495S. Springmann, m., Godfray, H.C. J., Rayner, M., Scarborough, P. (2016). Analysis and valuation of the health and climate change co-benefits of dietary change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America, 113(15):4146-4145. Yepes, M. F. (2015). Major FB implications. The Routledge Handbook of Sustainable Food and Gastronomy, 113.