Hello, all. I was looking at the comments section of the recent Joe Rogan podcast about veganism. Some guy in the comments posted a Google Document that took me aback. It is 40 pages (and counting?!) of PubMed studies (and more) talking about meat and veganism.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zKl ... sFxig/edit#
If this doesn't work for you: http://archive.is/63FCT
If something is weird about it, I just saved it: goo.gl/xbyNBO
Relevant Vegan Studies
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 38
- Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 1:45 am
- Diet: Vegan
- _Doc
- Full Member
- Posts: 139
- Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2015 11:43 am
- Diet: Vegan
Re: Relevant Vegan Studies
Well, holy crap... My need for links to one's knowledge has been met. I need to read threw this instead of just skim threw it. Thanks for sharing. I wonder if anything on the list is incorrect.
Its a nice feeling when people can agree on something. Don't you agree?
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 38
- Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 1:45 am
- Diet: Vegan
Re: Relevant Vegan Studies
Remember, it's not just the blue, underlined things that are links. Even the greens are links to other sources._Doc wrote:Well, holy crap... My need for links to one's knowledge has been met. I need to read threw this instead of just skim threw it. Thanks for sharing. I wonder if anything on the list is incorrect.
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2016 7:48 am
- Diet: Vegan
Re: Relevant Vegan Studies
I don't understand why they had to mention Vegan Gains in the list of studies.
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 2:37 pm
- Diet: Vegetarian
Re: Relevant Vegan Studies
I don't understand why none of the links are direct links. They are all links to Facebook. Based on the two links I have checked, the editorial comments need to be taken with an unhealthy dose of salt.
- brimstoneSalad
- neither stone nor salad
- Posts: 10273
- Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
- Diet: Vegan
Re: Relevant Vegan Studies
There may be a lot of good stuff in there, but the problem with that kind of unreliability is the effort needed to desalinate the resource.St3v3B wrote:I don't understand why none of the links are direct links. They are all links to Facebook. Based on the two links I have checked, the editorial comments need to be taken with an unhealthy dose of salt.
Comprehensiveness AND reliability are essential.
It's like cowspiracy: some good stuff in there, and the general point is right, but when they get a couple numbers wrong (like saying 50% when it's probably somewhere closer to 30-something % ) it makes it hard to recommend.