When it comes to ploys for the adoption of veganism, weight loss is right up there as one of the top. Hell, Skinny Bitch alone was so popular I couldn’t chuck a block of tofu without hitting a Skinny Bitcher. Unfortunately it was a nutritional atrocity that set people up for failure all the while dangling the skinny carrot. Appealing to people’s obsession with weight loss is a common tactic for the quick sell but it becomes much more than mere calories with vegans. It’s about the goodness of the food itself.
So it’s curious but I guess not surprising that vegans are poo-pooing this experiment where a nutrition professor goes on a “twinkie” diet and not only loses weight but gets healthier. And no it doesn’t look like any of those snack cakes are vegan, now go tell THAT! His point is that if you want to lose weight, it’s the calories stupid. When you eat too many calories you become overweight which lead to many of the afflictions that vegan advocates often claim their diet cures. Raw foodists have this correlation confusion honed to perfection where they give credit to the raw state of the food rather than to its low calorie content.
Eating “healthy” food it doesn’t guarantee weight loss. Dietitians refer to this as the health halo effect. Basically people tend to overeat when they believe a food to be healthy. The food gains this halo of goodness and anything else is devilish. Skinny Bitch actually has a chapter in its book called “Sugar is the Devil”! For vegans, anything with a modicum of animal derived product is verboten but I wonder if this experiment was slightly altered to employ only vegan junk food if the poo would still be flung. Morgan Spurlock in his documentary Super Size Me lays blame to the poor quality of fast food as a contributor to rampant obesity. I wonder though if the results of eating the same fast food diet like he did for 30 days but under the caloric limit would result in similar health benefits as the Twinkie diet.
Professor Mark Haub’s Snack Food Diet has been generating a lot of attention for the “diet” part when in reality it’s not a plan he recommends, it’s just a nutrition exercise. He’s exploring the ideas of “good food” and “bad food” in a culture that yearns for an easy demarcation when it looks more and more like the demarcation that counts most of all is simply the number of calories. That would mean though we would need to consume less calories…and that would be a bummer now wouldn’t it?
Vegans love the polarization of food into “good” and “evil” though because it dovetails nicely into their own restrictive diet. It also doubles as a tool for which to hammer their square peg Vegan Diet into a round hole of how everybody should eat. If you are what you eat and the food you eat is “evil”…well…