this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2023
1153 points (88.3% liked)

vegan

2622 readers
16 users here now

Please also check out vegantheoryclub.org for a great set of well-run communities for vegan news, cooking, gardening, and art. It is not federated with LW, but it is a nice, cozy, all-in-one space for vegans.


We ask that the you have an understanding on what veganism is before engaging in this community.

If you think you have been banned erroneously, please get in contact with one of the other mods for appeals.

Moderator reports may not federate properly and may delay moderator action. Please DM an active mod if an abusive comment remains after reporting it.


Welcome

Welcome to c/[email protected]. Broadly, this community is a place to discuss veganism. Discussion on intersectional topics related to the animal rights movement are also encouraged.

What is Veganism?

'Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals ...'

— abridged definition from The Vegan Society

Rules

The rules are subject to change, especially upon community feedback.

  1. Discrimination is not tolerated. This includes speciesism.
  2. Topics not relating to veganism are subject to removal.
  3. Posts are to be as accessible as practicable:
    • pictures of text require alt-text;
    • paywalled articles must have an accessible non-paywalled link;
    • use the original source whenever possible for a news article.
  4. Content warnings are required for triggering content.
  5. Bad-faith carnist rhetoric & anti-veganism are not allowed, as this is not a space to debate the merits of veganism. Anyone is welcome here, however, and so good-faith efforts to ask questions about veganism may be given their own weekly stickied post in the future.
    • before jumping into the community, we encourage you to read examples of common fallacies here.
    • if you're asking questions about veganism, be mindful that the person on the other end is trying to be helpful by answering you and treat them with at least as much respect as they give you.
  6. Posts and comments whose contents – text, images, etc. – are largely created by a generative AI model are subject to removal. We want you to be a part of the vegan community, not a multi-head attention layer running on a server farm.
  7. Misinformation, particularly that which is dangerous or has malicious intent, is subject to removal.

Resources on Veganism

A compilation of many vegan resources/sites in a Google spreadsheet:

Here are some documentaries that are recommended to watch if planning to or have recently become vegan:

Vegan Fediverse

Lemmy: vegantheoryclub.org

Mastodon: veganism.social

Other Vegan Communities

General Vegan Comms

[email protected]

[email protected]

Circlejerk Comms

[email protected]

[email protected]

Vegan Food / Cooking

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Attribution

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You cited a private blood test, I assumed you wouldnt read anything I gave you. Also, Im not your mother, the issues with these pills is widely googleable.

Government wiki paragraphs with the quality, accuracy, and peer review quality of webmd are 100% not sources, thats correct. You also shouldnt cite them in your science paper this term. Notice how the actual peer reviewed studies got proper responses? Shocker.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Lmao, no sources of your own. Figures.

Easy to dish out but not to take, eh?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago

Did you want me to go dig up those reports? I can do that for you when I get home, I just figured you got your blood test and you have repeatedly told me you do not value my input at all.

I wasnt about to waste the time reading papers to make sure I grab the right link for some numbnuts who wouldnt click em. Do you need me to do that for you?

Also looool, yeah bud its very easy to dish out a bunch of completely irrelevant links when you think a link is just a hollow gotcha that no one will read. Shame you couldnt find anything relevant, but if you need me to show you how to do that I am happy to.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hey, actually? I got super lucky with the first article I found.

https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/10/8/1096

So for starters, this is specifically for B12. Not intentional, as my point applies to all powder pills, but sure as shit topical.

Article details dietary B12, an equivalent intake pill B12 supplement, and a 4x intake pill B12 supplement.

The dietary? Restored the deficiency.

The 2 pills? Not only signifigantly less effective, but also almost equivalently so.

Thats insane. I assumed that quadrupaling the dose would improve the intake, its just a huge waste of money to eat 4-8 vitamin pills a day. But the study shows a quadruple dose is completely ineffective!

Also, (and I skimmed this specific bit from the results) it seems that the pill based intake was primarily in the liver. Now, the study correctly makes no causational link here, but that lightly implies that the liver is filtering out supplementals rather than letting it enter the dietary process. No clue if thats true, but a big possibility that I hope gets looked into further.

(Article also implies its not the powder pill form but rather the dietary type used in the pill. But it doesnt isolate powder sources of both versions of B12, so thats not conclusive.)

So, uh. Yeah. Big research article for you, the pill doesnt do shit, eating more of them also doesnt do shit, you need to be eating it in the food.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

And yet it does improve B12 levels sufficiently to resolve what would be a deficiency for rats.

I never claimed that dietary nutrients don't have a better uptake.

In addition, while rats and humans are similar, it's still done on rats and not humans. Maybe instead of a daily pill the rats needed a pill twice a day? And if we were rats that's what would recommendation would be? After all, rats need a lot more B12 than we do. In addition, this was just 6 weeks. Maybe given sufficient time both methods work just fine? You should note that even the dietary B12 failed to raise B12 levels back to the original value. The timescale may just be too short.

Sure, interesting study, but it's not conclusive for humans.

As a last note, the study that seems to be most commonly cited is https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2532799/

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago

The study literally demonstrated that a quadruple dose only provided a partial effective intake for the liver and failed to provide enough for the brain, and you think a double dose would work? The kook strikes again!

Also, you understand that rats are used for nutrient studies because our digestive systems are insanely similar? "Hurr but Im not a rat" hasnt been a real rebuttal in a century.

Wild, who would have guessed the blood test kook would deny peer reviewed evidence. Oh, shit, it was me? I called that? Gnarly. Guess I was right, giving you the link was a waste of time.

Cited about what? That study appears to be about diagnosing cause of specifically B12 deficiencies and response to injections, which 1) has nothing to do with powder pill vitamin intake and 2) is talking about malabsorption, not suplementation of an intentionally abandoned dietary intake.

If you want to talk about a study, you need to say what your context is. Lol who am I kidding, the kook doesnt give a shit about science