Vegetarianism is inspired by different things; some people switch to vegetarianism as a religious measure, others for health reasons and others for personal reasons. Such a diet is however, a delicate balance because it does away with food items that are high in proteins. Vegetarianism, which a good and noble concept, is not foolproof. It is healthy way of life, but it results in loss of vital minerals and food components.
A vegetarian diet has many pros, chief among them a reduction of risk of contracting diseases such as cancer and cardiovascular complications, obesity and diabetes (Powell 3). It is also hypothesized that the average vegetarian lives longer than meat-eaters because they develop better immunity, enjoy a sample supply of calcium, iron and other vital (Powell 10). Lamley, while refuting claims that vegetarians are less prone to the risk of obesity because they enjoy a good proportion of minerals with a minimum and manageable level of cholesterol insists that they are at equal risk as meat lovers (339). In a psychological sense, vegetarians who avoid meat for humane reasons are able to save animals that would otherwise have been reared by increased demand (Powell 15).
As a prominent disadvantage, a vegetarian has to add more fruits and vegetable to cover the loss of protein and other mineral-rich meals (Lamley 345). Some, like Vitamin B12 are only found in meat and cannot be compensated for in vegetable. The Vitamin is vital for the conversion of minerals and other substances into ATP. Vegetarians also lack Vitamin D whose lack is most prominent in young and developing children who are raised as vegetarians. In addition, finding a vegetable with enough proteins to cover the gap is hard, and at times, as when all 9 essential amino acids are sort, impossible (Lamey 340). Even with minerals such as iron and calcium, the lifelong vegetarian has to take supplements to cover the difference.
Vegetarianism is a nutritional concept informed by moral and medical reasons. Powell argues that vegetarianism would save society from obesity, and the American population would be healthier. On the other hand, Lamey is assertive that most reasons, especially the moral factor, are overrated. There are numerous arguments that surround this topic, although both sides agree that a blanked diet is of the essence.
Works Cited
Lamey, Andy. "Food Fight! Davis versus Regan on the Ethics of Eating Beef". Journal of Social Philosophy 38 (2): 331–348, 2007. Web.
Powell, Kimberley A. Lifestyle as rhetorical transaction: A case study of the vegetarian movement in the United States. New Jersey Journal of Communication. Volume 10, Issue 2, 2002. Print.
