Antioxidant Power of Plant Foods vs. Animal Foods

Antioxidant Power of Plant Foods vs. Animal Foods
5 (100%) 5 votes

On average, plant foods have 64 times more antioxidant power than red meat, poultry, fish, dairy, and eggs— but is it a fair comparison?

Discuss
Republish

Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.

In a review on vegetarian diets and public health published last year, they concluded that “Sufficient scientific evidence exists for public health policy to promote a plant-rich diet for health promotion. This does not need to wait for science to provide all the answers as to why and how.”

But this is certainly one reason: on average, 64 times more antioxidant power in plant foods than animal foods—but is this really a fair comparison? Included in the plant group were some things that were really just off the charts—like some exotic wild berries you could never actually find in a store, that really skewed the chart upwards for the plant foods. I mean, people eat things like corn; they don’t eat things like dried Norwegian cornflowers. So let’s bring it down to earth.

The average plant food does indeed have over a thousand units of antioxidant power, but for comparison’s sake, just to be fair to the animal foods, I’m going to choose the least healthy plant food I can think of—good old American iceberg lettuce, which I think of as basically just water. It does not have 1,157 units of antioxidant power; it has 17.

Still beats out fish, though, which averages 11. Even salmon? 7. Chicken? 6. Iceberg lettuce has nearly three times more antioxidants than chicken! A hardboiled egg? 2. And Egg Beaters, which is just the whites, zero. Even Coca Cola has 4! The same amount found in cow’s milk, or yogurt; though soy milk only has about twice that.

While plant foods average over 1,000, the best animal foods can do, in the meat category, is a serving of ox liver at 71. It beat out moose meat, reindeer steak, but still couldn’t quite reach the antioxidant power of a Snickers bar. This is why we need to eat a plant-based diet. Because even if you lived off of ox livers, the wild blueberry of the animal kingdom, one of the few animal foods that can beat out lettuce, you’d still never come close to your daily antioxidant need.

There is one animal product, however, that does kick some serious tush, topping over 200. There are even some types of berries that didn’t test that antioxidant-rich. An animal product so healthy, I have to encourage everyone to consume it—when you’re a baby. That’s the antioxidant content of human breast milk.

During infancy, breast is best. After infancy, plants are preferred.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site. 

Images thanks to Suzifoo, PacHD.com, Krasowit, flagstafffotos, Free-extras.com, weatherrockeye, Brian0918, Arad, and the National Cancer Institute.

Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.

In a review on vegetarian diets and public health published last year, they concluded that “Sufficient scientific evidence exists for public health policy to promote a plant-rich diet for health promotion. This does not need to wait for science to provide all the answers as to why and how.”

But this is certainly one reason: on average, 64 times more antioxidant power in plant foods than animal foods—but is this really a fair comparison? Included in the plant group were some things that were really just off the charts—like some exotic wild berries you could never actually find in a store, that really skewed the chart upwards for the plant foods. I mean, people eat things like corn; they don’t eat things like dried Norwegian cornflowers. So let’s bring it down to earth.

The average plant food does indeed have over a thousand units of antioxidant power, but for comparison’s sake, just to be fair to the animal foods, I’m going to choose the least healthy plant food I can think of—good old American iceberg lettuce, which I think of as basically just water. It does not have 1,157 units of antioxidant power; it has 17.

Still beats out fish, though, which averages 11. Even salmon? 7. Chicken? 6. Iceberg lettuce has nearly three times more antioxidants than chicken! A hardboiled egg? 2. And Egg Beaters, which is just the whites, zero. Even Coca Cola has 4! The same amount found in cow’s milk, or yogurt; though soy milk only has about twice that.

While plant foods average over 1,000, the best animal foods can do, in the meat category, is a serving of ox liver at 71. It beat out moose meat, reindeer steak, but still couldn’t quite reach the antioxidant power of a Snickers bar. This is why we need to eat a plant-based diet. Because even if you lived off of ox livers, the wild blueberry of the animal kingdom, one of the few animal foods that can beat out lettuce, you’d still never come close to your daily antioxidant need.

There is one animal product, however, that does kick some serious tush, topping over 200. There are even some types of berries that didn’t test that antioxidant-rich. An animal product so healthy, I have to encourage everyone to consume it—when you’re a baby. That’s the antioxidant content of human breast milk.

During infancy, breast is best. After infancy, plants are preferred.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site. 

Images thanks to Suzifoo, PacHD.com, Krasowit, flagstafffotos, Free-extras.com, weatherrockeye, Brian0918, Arad, and the National Cancer Institute.

Doctor's Note

For more info on plant-based antioxidants, check out these videos:

If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my videos for free by clicking here.

60 responses to “Antioxidant Power of Plant Foods vs. Animal Foods

Commenting Etiquette

The intention of the comment section under each video and blog post is to allow all members to share their stories, questions, and feedback with others in a welcoming, engaging, and respectful environment. Off-topic comments are permitted, in hopes more experienced users may be able to point them to more relevant videos that may answer their questions. Vigorous debate of science is welcome so long as participants can disagree respectfully. Advertising products or services is not permitted.

To make NutritionFacts.org a place where people feel comfortable posting without feeling attacked, we have no tolerance for ad hominem attacks or comments that are racist, misogynist, homophobic, vulgar, or otherwise inappropriate. Please help us to foster a community of mutual respect. Enforcement of these rules is done to the best of our ability on a case-by-case basis.

  1. These comparisons of plants to animal products are undoubtedly enlightening and of course we should all be eating huge amounts of salad and greens daily.. but it would be great to see some discussions about grass fed beef/dairy and pastured eggs thrown into the mix, to see how we could improve our nutrition (and animal welfare/food production standards) without giving up some of our favourite animal products too.

    Thanks for the videos, all very informative and thought-provoking..

    Michelle from http://www.mybigfatgreenblog.wordpress.com




    0



    1
    1. Regardless of how meat is handled and how animals are raised, animal products in itself are nutrient poor and is a cancer promoter. There are not many positive things that can be said about meat even if it were organic. Its still not healthy.




      2



      0
  2. LOL at the snickers bar. Love the way you present the data! I wonder, what portion did they use of each? Average portion of lettuce V average portion of fish? I presume. I wouldn’t be eating a whole head of lettuce very often……!




    0



    0
      1. Hi, I have just followed the link you posted and read through some of the original study, including the pdf file with all of the results in. The results really confuse me! The amounts of the foods I considered high antioxidant seem to be a lot lower than I would have thought.

        For example, I eat lots of red lentils & medjool dates, and was expecting them to be very high. Apparently red lentils are 0.23 per 100g (this is a third of the snickers bar mentioned?). USA Medjool dates are showing as only 0.56, so only 2/3rds of the snickers bar?

        I am disheartened by these results, considering I thought I was following a very high antioxidant diet, I don’t have huge quantities by weight of berries and spices very often, so have to rely on my staple foods. Even Broccoli is showing as approx 1.0, compared to a snickers bar being 0.73.

        Could you do anything to put these results in perspective, or are we just consuming much less antioxidants then we might think even following a rich plant based diet?




        0



        0
        1. I can only partially answer this question and say that although brocolli may not have a mega dose of antioxidants, antioxidants are phytochemicals but not all phytochemicals are antioxidants. Most phytochemicals being studied for health reasons do function as antioxidants, but many serve additional functions that are unrelated to their role as antioxidants. So brocolli may come close to antixoxidant content of a snickers bar but this is only part of the nutrient profile. Hope this helped!




          0



          0
          1. chocolate is actually very high in antioxidants… sugar isnt good for you in high quantities, but thats a different story.
            REAL chocolate (cocoa) is a powerhouse of antioxidants (before its processed – heated etc…)




            0



            0
            1. Unfortunately cocoa nibs don’t taste as good as chocolate bars. :) I would be interested in knowing the best middle ground. My approach is to throw a bit in, but put it in the “treat” category.




              0



              0
              1. sf_jeff: re: “Unfortunately cocoa nibs don’t taste as good as chocolate bars.” I’m with you there!

                re: “I would be interested in knowing the best middle ground.”
                Here’s a thought for you: Cocoa powder is the cocoa bean without the fat/cocoa butter. Of course cocoa powder by itself is pretty yucky. But there are some fun things you can do with cocoa powder that might meet that middle ground you were talking about. For example, b00mer recently suggested mashing up cocoa powder in sweet potatoes for a kind of chocolate pudding. You might also look into making chocolate-banana soft-serve, which is just frozen bananas, cocoa powder and maybe some dates thrown into a really good blender. Or another idea is adding cocoa powder to Mexican dishes, including making say a mole sauce.

                Just some ideas for you.




                0



                0
                1. Interesting. Does cocoa powder retain the antioxidant power of nibs even if it is roasted and alkalized? If that’s true then I guess it’s well worth finding a way to incorporate into ones diet.




                  0



                  0
                  1. sf_Jeff: re: “Does cocoa powder retain the antioxidant power of nibs even if it is roasted and alkalized.” I don’t know the answer to that question. I think cocoa powders are created with different processes with different brands, so there may be some products that are better than others.

                    If I had to guess, I would say that just like any plant food, the more processed it is, the less nutrition. But on the other hand, that doesn’t mean that cocoa powder has *none* of the good stuff. From all of the various recommendations I have seen, it seems to me that cocoa powder probably has enough good stuff still in it to make eating it worth while. But that’s just my opinion.




                    0



                    0
        2. Just to throw this out there, an easy way to add antioxidants to your diet is to add teas and herbal teas. Search for “hibiscus” (cold brewed) for a good example. Also remember that it is a lot better to drink a little bit of an antioxidant source every three hours then to drink the same total amount once per day (assuming you are not getting too many calories with the antioxidants).

          Another option is to search for the “Amla smoothie” video. If you are getting fiber and polyphenols from your diet but are a bit low in antioxidants, it’s probably easy to spike your antioxidant level with just a few additions.




          0



          0
    1. Hi KamalPrasad, Unfortunately I’m not aware of any studies in this area. It would be nice if there was more studies done in this area. We’ll all have to stay tuned. On the other hand there are several studies that show that following a whole food plant based diet will result in lower blood pressures and cholesterol levels which one would imagine would lower the risk of having another stroke. see Dr. Gregers videos nutritionfacts.org/videos/avoiding-cholesterol-is-a-no-brainer/ and nutritionfacts.org/videos/whose-health-unaffected-by-eggs/




      0



      0
    1. Hi BarbaraH- Thanks for the link. Jeff Novick is one of the best read evidence based registered dieticians I know. His post points added to the videos that Dr. Greger has previously posted point out some of the difficulties in figuring out how much and what type of antioxidants to consume, how to prepare foods, are the antioxidants absorbed(i.e adding a squeeze of citrus to green tea markedly increases absorption), do they make it into the cells or their organelles through the effects of outside factors such as stress.It is complex. See Dr. Greger’s previous videos: http://nutritionfacts.org/videos/mitochondrial-theory-of-aging/ and http://nutritionfacts.org/videos/antioxidant-level-dynamics/ among others for further information. I would just keep up with the science by following reliable sources and make the best choices as you plan your whole food plant based diet.




      0



      0
  3. Speaking of Jeff Novick, I am a little confused over your opinion of iceberg lettuce versus Jeff’s here:

    Jeff’s conclusion is: “Iceberg lettuce is a healthy food. Not only is it fairly high in nutrient density, it is very low in calorie density. Yet, somehow it gets relegated to the level of junk food.”




    0



    0
    1. Based on it’s nutritional content, it’s the least healthy leafy green on the planet, but even the least healthy green is healthier than a lot of what the public eats! Check out my video Nation’s Diet in Crisis to see just how bad the Standard American Diet is.




      0



      0
      1. I agree the Standard American Diet is in crisis, that is not my question at all.

        In your video, you said “Iceberg lettuce, which I think of as bascially just water”.

        This is what I am a little confused about versus examining the actualy nutritional facts of iceberg lettuce. It may be the “least healthy leafy green”, but that does not make it unhealthly. Similarly, grass fed, lean beef may be the “most healthly beef”, but that doesn’t make it healthy.

        It appears at first glance that you have fallen victim to a food myth. Do you really consider iceberg lettuce to be basically just water in nutritional content?




        0



        0
        1. Iceberg lettuce is 96% water, but that’s not a bad thing–water is a nutrient too! I’m not saying it’s junk food; I’m just saying that any other green is better so if you have a choice (and even most salad bars these days offer alternatives) pick something better.




          0



          0
          1. I still think you are dissing iceberg lettuce unjustifiably. Romaine lettuce is 95% water so I don’t see the point about iceberg lettuce being 96% water making them all that different. Is that 1% difference really that significant?

            As long as one is eating a wide variety of fruits and vegetables, iceberg lettuce is a perfectly good and healthy choice at times, even if other leafy greens are available. Some people prefer it, so it might mean that they end up eating more resulting in more net nutrients. Also, if one needed more Vitamin C or E, then iceberg lettuce is the better choice.

            I suppose if one doesn’t eat a proper wide variety of fruits and vegetables, then the slight difference might make a difference. But if one is eating a healthy, plant-based diet and you like iceberg lettuce, enjoy it without any stigma or guilt.




            0



            0
        2. Patrick, I think the point Dr. Greger is making is that, yes, iceberg lettuce is healthy but there are other greens and vegetables that are far healthier. Iceberg lettuce is the most consumed by American families and it would contribute to their health if they ate more of the cruciferous greens.




          0



          0
  4. ORAC value of foods (aside from the vitamin C and E) have never been shown to have any benefit in vivo, they might be potent in a test tube, but have little to no antioxidant benefits in the body.  In fact, only 5% of phytochemical antioxidants are even absorbed and then they’re fast-tracked to the liver for excretion.  The only benefit of phytochemicals is probably their hormetic effect, as the body treats them as a toxin.  Also, the amino acids in meat (and meat has a much more favorable amino acid profile for this and much higher protein density) can be directly used by the body to produce glutathione, the most potent antioxidant in vivo.  Not to mention meat has very high concentrations of CoQ10, the second most powerful antioxidant in vivo, as well as creatine (an indirect antioxidant by boosting mitochondria efficiency), Carnitine and Carnosine (two potent in vivo antioxidants).  All of these meat-derived antioxidants are critical to antioxidant recycling in the human body, which are FAR more important then total antioxidant numbers.  Antioxidants without proper recycling chains just become pro-oxidants.  It’s great that your a vegan (I’m one myself for ethical reasons), but purposely misleading people by presenting information in a bias fashion and/or cherry-picking what studies you analyze is quite unethical and completely goes against what real science is about.  I would never try to stretch the science to make it look like a vegan diet is more healthy than a vegan-style diet that also incorporates 6-10oz of whole-food meats per day. 




    0



    0
    1. But all these substances you have mentioned that are present in meat, we can make ourselves. This is barring a disorder that prevents carnitine formation, present in about 1 in 30,000 to 40.000 people. .

      I am of the opinion that, as our calorie requirements are much more limiting than the weight or volume of foods we can eat, the best tactic for high antioxidant consumption is to eat foods highest in antioxidants per calorie. It is disappointing that the study makes its conclusion by comparing the values found in 100g (I looked up the study), rather than taking it a step further and comparing by calorie. Actually, if you go by calorie, even the iceberg lettuce would surpass all of the animal products.

      Just for an experiment, I decided to compare ox liver caloric density (I had to use beef liver to find approximate calories, but it should be sufficiently similar) to iceberg lettuce caloric density.

      Using a nutrition tracker, cronometer, which utilizes data from the NCCBD, I found that 100 grams of beef liver and 1370 grams of iceberg lettuce were roughly equal in calories (191 calories). Beef liver should be calorically very similar to ox liver.

      This reveals a caloric density ratio of 13.7 (1370/100). This means that for finding the ratio of antioxidants per calorie we can multiply 13.7 by 17 (antioxidants in iceberg lettuce). This gives us 233 antioxidants compared to ox liver’s 71 antioxidants.

      In the end we have a ratio of 3.28 to 1. Per calorie iceberg lettuce more than triples the amount of antioxidants in ox liver.

      With this in mind, we see eating meat simply can not be recommended for antioxidant consumption. It is a waste of your daily allotted calories. And considering the myriad risks associated with increased meat intake, meat intake can not be recommended for any other reason either. We know we can be healthy on a plant based diet (much healthier in fact), so in practice overall the risks of meat eating outweigh any benefits we could hope to gain from eating meat.




      0



      0
  5. Why did my post get deleted?  Nice censorship…
    ORAC value of foods (aside from the vitamin C and E) have never been shown to have any benefit in vivo, they might be potent in a test tube, but have little to no antioxidant benefits in the body.  In fact, only 5% of phytochemical antioxidants are even absorbed and then they’re fast-tracked to the liver for excretion.  The only benefit of phytochemicals is probably their hormetic effect, as the body treats them as a toxin.  Also, the amino acids in meat (and meat has a much more favorable amino acid profile for this and much higher protein density) can be directly used by the body to produce glutathione, the most potent antioxidant in vivo.  Not to mention meat has very high concentrations of CoQ10, the second most powerful antioxidant in vivo, as well as creatine (an indirect antioxidant by boosting mitochondria efficiency), Carnitine and Carnosine (two potent in vivo antioxidants).  All of these meat-derived antioxidants are critical to antioxidant recycling in the human body, which are FAR more important then total antioxidant numbers.  Antioxidants without proper recycling chains just become pro-oxidants.  It’s great that your a vegan (I’m one myself for ethical reasons), but purposely misleading people by presenting information in a bias fashion and/or cherry-picking what studies you analyze is quite unethical and completely goes against what real science is about.  I would never try to stretch the science to make it look like a vegan diet is more healthy than a vegan-style diet that also incorporates 6-10oz of whole-food meats per day. 




    0



    0
    1. I appreciate that someone has spoken up on the benefits of (small amounts) of meat consumption. The Inuit of Northern Canada subsisted entirely on seal and bear meat for millennia. Perhaps an omnivorous diet is how we humans evolved. There is no question about the benefits of a vegan diet, but giving a balanced view is preferred. Thank you.




      0



      0
      1. The Inuit were extremely unhealthy to the point that when their diet became more modernized with arrival of processed foods, their cardiovascular health improved.

        Just because the Inuits are surviving, does not mean they are thriving, or will live as long.




        0



        0
  6. This is an old video but I am wondering why you are comparing anti-oxidant values of plants and meats. Surely people eat meat for protein and fats, and then have the plants for the anti-oxidants. I hear you that meat isn’t great for us and I haven’t even watched any of those videos yet. But I am still eating some grass fed organic raised meat because I got too thin on a plant diet alone.




    0



    0
    1. Animal fat, that being saturated fat, serves no dietary purpose for us and the more we consume the less healthy we are.

      http://nutritionfacts.org/video/trans-fat-saturated-fat-and-cholesterol-tolerable-upper-intake-of-zero/

      As for protein, all whole plant foods contain complete proteins and if one eats till they are hungry till they are full then they are getting adequate protein.
       Just because beef is organic and grass fed does not change inherent traits of meat that make it harmful. For example, bacteria inherently grows on meat and endotoxins found in meat is an inherent trait. These endotoxins cause chronic inflammation.
      http://nutritionfacts.org/?s=endotoxin

      Continue exploring this wbesite and you will  find that the issue with meat is far more then just contamination.
       




      0



      0
      1. Thank you. I watched all the Volume 9 videos and I am convinced to try a plant based diet again. I am being tested now for Gluten sensitivity with cross-linked foods so that eliminates most starches from my diet. I’m just scared to go down to 95 lbs again like I did on the vegan diet last time.




        0



        0
        1. Going gluten-free doesn’t eliminate most starches. Rice, corn, GF-certified oats, millet, buckwheat, amaranth, potatoes, sweet potatoes, and quinoa are still available to you. I realize I’m replying several years after your comment, but maybe this will be helpful to someone else reading this thread down the road.




          0



          0
  7. okay, so let us assume that plant-based foods are far more healthy to eat than animal-based foods. but within the plant foods, which are the healthiest? that is, assuming that the five main categories of plant foods are fruits, raw vegetables, high-starch vegetables, nuts, and seeds, what is the order of the healthiest plant food group to the least healthy?




    0



    0
    1. There are lots of helpful videos on that here. Search antioxidants and you should find a ton. Also in his book “How Not To Die” you get a lot of insight into this. But all plant foods are healthy. Variety seems to be the best. As far as least beneficial, iceberg lettuce seems to be it from what I’ve seen. I find it impossible to say one food is the “most healthy” because different plant foods offer so many different nutrients and phytonutrients that work in different ways, thus the variety thing.




      0



      0
  8. The plant kingdom is so vast in nutrients, major minerals, minor minerals, protein, the way nutrients work together and cooperate within the human body and the processes that create vitamins that it will NEVER be known just how all of it works together for the good of the human body. The VASTNESS of what has been proven in clinical studies is not even the tip of the iceberg of how a plant based diet was made for the human race to live life, thrwart disease and THRIVE!




    1



    0
  9. I’m vegetarian but I find this was taken completely out of context. Meat was never supposed to be an antioxidant, it’s just protein & fat. Antioxidants are to come from vegetables and fruits. So to say meat doesn’t have antioxidants is like saying plant-based foods don’t have B12 so we should eat meat. None the less, shocked about snickers & coke.




    0



    0
    1. I’m not certain that it’s out of context. Eating animal products means less room for antioxidant-rich foods (plants) in the diet, whereas eating a vegan diet does not mean less room for B12 intake (obtained very easily with a supplement). According to the studies shared by Dr. Greger, the estimated minimum antioxidant need is 8 000-11 000 units, which means rich-antioxidant foods should be consumed practically all day, everyday. It’s harder for people to eat a suitable antioxidant diet if it’s the animal foods take take up the space in their plates… Also, a well-balanced vegan diet of whole foods will also meet the body’s needs for protein and fat…




      0



      0
  10. But the Salmon contains the most powerful antioxidant you can find in nature (Astaxanthin) which is more powerful than even Lycopene.




    0



    0
    1. Chlorella also has this antioxidant and farmed salmon seems to have pollutants. Organic salmon issues concern as well in regards to pollutants. Of course the choice is yours! I worry a bit with chlorella, as a case study on psychosis is enough to issue caution. It does still appears to be super helpful for patients with Hepatitis C and perhaps others, but this case on psychosis was enough to sound the alarm. We’re updating the resources to the Q&A link I sent so stay tuned. Thanks for your note.




      0



      0
      1. Dr. Greger says chlorella is safe and he’s pretty cautious on food safety so I honestly trust him. But I also trust my own experience. I eat a scoop (about 2 grams) of chlorella powder every day and have for almost an entire year uninterrupted, I have no adverse effects and my blood work always comes back really well and with no concerns. Last summer, a few months into my love affair with chlorella, I got my blood tested for heavy metals and my blood work came back perfect. I get organic chlorella grown outdoors in Taiwan which I’ve read is the best stuff because it produces the cleanest organic chlorella (South Korea is said to produce the cleanest conventional chlorella) and the outdoor growing part I’ve read is important because to produce chlorella growth factor, it needs to be exposed to sunlight. I’ve read that in South Korea, while their chlorella is pure, it is grown indoors. Now I’m not sure if there is NO chlorella growth factor when grown indoors, but it does make sense.
        I get my chlorella from Vitacost (their Vitacost brand) because of its quality and awesome price. I just dislike their new packaging as I find I have to dump it out into a bigger container (I’m currently reusing their old container for this) because the opening is so small in their new containers that it’s almost impossible to scoop out the chlorella (it comes with a scoop). Anyways, I contacted Vitacost when I was looking for the best chlorella to buy and asked about where and how it was grown, that’s how I found out it’s from Taiwan and grown outdoors. It says on the label that it’s a product of China because technically, Taiwan is China.




        0



        0
        1. Oh! I also wanted to add that it really isn’t anyone’s choice to consume another living being when they don’t absolutely need to for survival (like say, a lion) because when there is a victim involved, it is no longer a personal choice. For that matter, it isn’t just one victim (and I’m not just talking about that victim’s family), but all life really, as our use of animals for food has a devastating impact on the planet and all life on it. Even the human choosing to support fishing and animal agriculture is a victim of this, they just don’t realize it yet.




          0



          0
  11. I personally am looking for a good source of breast milk to possibly supplement my diet. If anyone is in the know, I am in Northern VA. I’ve had a couples sources already so it is not new to me. Thank you. :)




    0



    0
    1. Is that a joke? We aren’t meant to consume breast milk past infancy. We weren’t designed to. Breast milk was created for babies to grow a certain amount within a certain period. Why do people think doing completely unnatural things is a good idea? Nature is perfect in design. Our radical ideas of going against nature, such as drinking breast milk into adulthood (let alone that of other species) are just silly compared to the billions of years of nature’s brilliance.




      0



      0
  12. Not to mention though, the oxidation that consuming animal products causes. And while the liver of some poor innocent ox may have a lot of antioxidants compared to other animal “foods,” it also would contain toxins (as livers do) and heavy metals. And then you have to account for how much eatings animals and animal products disrupt the human body e.g. what it does to our digestive system, what the harmful fats do to our hearts, etc. PLUS the added salt to their flesh as preservatives or to pump up their volume, often making chicken breast more sodium laden than salty potato chips. I would like to see a study showing some of the redundancy of the antioxidants found in these animal “foods”… I mean is it even enough to counteract most of the harm consuming these products causes?




    0



    0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This