It’s really weird that it seems the overriding purpose for your account is to attack vegans. You also must be really desperate, to go so far out of your way to miss the point, seeing the trees for the forest. I chose that article because it contains policy positions from several health authorities, not just one. But sure, maybe it would have been better to quote the others if one of them is technically expired, despite the fact that they actually do support the same policies, just with different wordings and in different papers. But let’s look at some of the others that were sourced, and you just completely ignored. From Dieticians of Canada:
Anyone can follow a vegan diet – from children to teens to older adults. It’s even healthy for pregnant or nursing mothers. A well-planned vegan diet is high in fibre, vitamins and antioxidants. Plus, it’s low in saturated fat and cholesterol. This healthy combination helps protect against chronic diseases.
Vegans have lower rates of heart disease, diabetes and certain types of cancer than non-vegans. Vegans also have lower blood pressure levels than both meat-eaters and vegetarians and are less likely to be overweight.
During pregnancy and when breastfeeding, if you follow a vegan diet you’ll need to make sure you get enough vitamins and minerals for your child to develop healthily.
Find out more about a vegetarian and vegan diet while pregnant.
If you’re bringing up your baby or child on a vegan diet, you need to ensure they get a wide variety of foods to provide the energy and vitamins they need for growth.
And I can go on with others. But you’re probably already going out of your way for another bad faith argument. By attacking my comment on the grounds of that statement being “expired”, you distracted from what is relevant and matters: are the claims true. And yes, they still are, and they will continue to be. Properly planned vegan diets are nutritionally adequate for all stages of life.
Yeah, it basically still is.
you should have quoted their true position, instead of an expired one then.
It’s really weird that it seems the overriding purpose for your account is to attack vegans. You also must be really desperate, to go so far out of your way to miss the point, seeing the trees for the forest. I chose that article because it contains policy positions from several health authorities, not just one. But sure, maybe it would have been better to quote the others if one of them is technically expired, despite the fact that they actually do support the same policies, just with different wordings and in different papers. But let’s look at some of the others that were sourced, and you just completely ignored. From Dieticians of Canada:
From the Association of UK Dieticians:
From the UK NHS:
And I can go on with others. But you’re probably already going out of your way for another bad faith argument. By attacking my comment on the grounds of that statement being “expired”, you distracted from what is relevant and matters: are the claims true. And yes, they still are, and they will continue to be. Properly planned vegan diets are nutritionally adequate for all stages of life.
if this were true, the AND would not have removed that claim from their latest position.
your uk dieticians link is referencing the same now-expired AND position