n-3 in plasma in British meat-eating, vegetarian, and vegan men.

[Guest guest]

Am J Clin Nutr. 2005 Aug;82(2):327-334.

Long-chain n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids in plasma in British

meat-eating, vegetarian, and vegan men.

Rosell MS, Lloyd- Z, Appleby PN, TA, NE, Key

TJ.

Cancer Research UK Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford,

Oxford, United Kingdom, and the Nutrition, Food and Health Research

Center, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Plasma concentrations of long-chain n-3

polyunsaturated fatty acids are lower in vegetarians and in vegans

than in omnivores. No data are available on whether these

concentrations differ between long- and short-term vegetarians and

vegans. OBJECTIVES: We compared plasma fatty acid composition in meat-

eaters, vegetarians, and vegans and examined whether the proportions

of eicosapentaenoic acid (20:5n-3; EPA), docosapentaenoic acid (22:5n-

3; DPA), and docosahexaenoic acid (22:6n-3; DHA) were related to the

subjects' duration of adherence to their diets or to the proportions

of plasma linoleic acid (18:2n-6; LA) and alpha-linolenic acid (18:3n-

3; ALA). DESIGN: The present cross-sectional study included 196 meat-

eating, 231 vegetarian, and 232 vegan men in the United Kingdom.

Information on anthropometry, diet, and smoking habits was obtained

through a questionnaire. Total fatty acid composition in plasma was

measured. RESULTS: The proportions of plasma EPA and DHA were lower

in the vegetarians and in the vegans than in the meat-eaters, whereas

only small differences were seen for DPA. Plasma EPA, DPA, and DHA

proportions were not significantly associated with the duration of

time since the subjects became vegetarian or vegan, which ranged from

<1 y to >20 y. In the vegetarians and the vegans, plasma DHA was

inversely correlated with plasma LA. CONCLUSIONS: The proportions of

plasma long-chain n-3 fatty acids were not significantly affected by

the duration of adherence to a vegetarian or vegan diet. This finding

suggests that when animal foods are wholly excluded from the diet,

the endogenous production of EPA and DHA results in low but stable

plasma concentrations of these fatty acids.

PMID: 16087975 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

See:

Pesco/pollo vegetarianism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

(Redirected from Pesco/Pollo vegetarianism)

" Pesco/pollo vegetarianism " , " pescetarianism " or " semi-vegetarianism " are

neologisms

coined to describe certain lifestyles of restricted diet. Most commonly, these

include the practice of not eating certain types of meat (most commonly " red "

meat

such as beef, pork, lamb) while allowing others, such as seafood. There are

usually

no restrictions on non-flesh animal products such as dairy, eggs, or leather.

Those

observing such a diet often do so for health reasons although many do practice

for

ethical or religious reasons.

Terminology

Terms for these diets arose in response to growing numbers of people

(particularly

in the United States) who have systematically restricted diets that do not meet

the

restrictions of more stringent diets such as vegetarianism or veganism. The

logic of

the terms is fairly simplistic: pollo is derived from the Latin for chicken,

pesco

or pesce from the Latin for fish (although all are actually closer to modern

Italian). These prefixes are then appended to the root word vegetarian. Since a

vegetarian is one who eats vegetables but restricts animal products, a

pesco-vegetarian likewise eats fish and vegetables but may restrict other meats

or

animal products, and a pollo-vegetarian allows chicken.

" Semi-vegetarian " is even more general, but is also fairly ambiguous. Arguably

any

normal diet could be called semi-vegetarian. In Britain during the early 1990s,

the

term was demi-vegetarian (from the French word demi meaning half).

" Pescetarian " (usually pronounced as English, not Italian) is a variant of

pesco-vegetarian that dates back in print to at least 1993 [1]. As of August

2004,

" pescatarian " , " pescotarian " , " piscatarian " , and " pollotarian " can all also be

found

on the internet, but " pescetarian " is the most popular. " Pescavore " is also

somewhat

common, formed by analogy with " carnivore " . " Fishetarian " was also used in print

as

early as 1992, but is no longer very prevalent.

Note that these are ad hoc coinages not in line with the usual utilisation of

Latin

roots to form new words. The root meaning " fish " is pisci- and the root meaning

" chicken " is pulli-.

Terminology objections

Most objections to these new terms come from those who feel that

pesco/pollo-vegetarians are misrepresenting themselves. Some fear that this may

lead

to the public understanding of " vegetarian " becoming skewed, and claim that

already

diners asking for vegetarian meals at many restaurants are offered dishes with

" not

very much meat " or " only seafood or chicken " .

On the other hand, pesco- and pollo-vegetarians have a practical reason to ask

for

vegetarian food as a simple way to avoid beef and pork.

Rationale

There are many possible rationales for maintaining a pesco/pollo-vegetarian

diet.

One is health, based on the perception that " red " meat is detrimental, perhaps

due

to hypercholesterolemia. Many pesco-vegetarians claim that eating certain kinds

of

fish raises HDL levels that protect against this condition, and also point out

that

some fish are a convenient source of omega-3 fatty acids.

While vegetarians and vegans sometimes claim environmental concerns as their

motivation, this is less clear-cut among pesco/pollo-vegetarians. In particular,

the

pesco-vegetarian diet can be environmentally unfriendly if further precautions

are

not taken, due to the problems of overfishing, habitat damage, and by-catch. For

this reason, environmentally conscious pescetarians commonly focus on eating the

species that are most sustainably fished and avoid many farmed fish (e.g.

salmon) as

well.

For some the rationale is ethics: believing that either the treatment, or simply

the

killing and eating, of mass market meat animals is unethical. The justification

for

eating chicken or fish in this case is usually either " I have to eat some kind

of

meat " (see also complete protein), " chicken and/or fish are less intelligent

than

other animals " , or in the case of pescetarians " fish are not mistreated in the

same

way that factory farmed animals are " or " hooked/netted fish do not suffer as

much as

land animals that are shot in the wild " .

Of course, it is worth pointing out that some people simply do not like certain

kinds of meat.

--- mstewarthm@... wrote:

---------------------------------

I wish studies such as this one would address that ever-growing in size and

importance group: the fishetarians (such as myself).

Maco

Al Pater, PhD; email: old542000@...

__________________________________________________