I see it did cite a specific vegan hazard ratio, however that ratio is tied with pescetarianism in men, and well above both pescetarianism and 1/week meat consumption in women. If you take this at face value it suggests small-but-present meat consumption, in addition to millk and eggs, are good for women, and fish at least is good for men.
[Note that the pescevegetarian and semivegetarian categories include unlimited milk and egg consumption]
Given the wide and greatly overlapping confidence intervals for all diets among women, it might be more fitting to interpret these tables as suggesting that “animal product consumption pattern doesn’t seem associated with mortality among women in this sample” than that “small-but-present meat consumption, in addition to millk and eggs, are good for women.” Based on the data presented, a variety of diets could potentially be optimal, and there isn’t a big difference between them. I think this fits my initial conclusion that veganism isn’t obviously bad for your health ex-ante if you supplement e.g. B12.
@Natália Coelho Mendonça I would really appreciate a reply or at least acknowledgement of my comment here. I took your initial comment to be a very strong endorsement of the paper in ways I think make a reply a fair request.
That’s not true. The Adventist study I cited explicitly calculated the mortality hazard ratio for vegans, separately from non-vegan vegetarians.
(I’ll reply to the questions in your last paragraph soon).
I see it did cite a specific vegan hazard ratio, however that ratio is tied with pescetarianism in men, and well above both pescetarianism and 1/week meat consumption in women. If you take this at face value it suggests small-but-present meat consumption, in addition to millk and eggs, are good for women, and fish at least is good for men.
[Note that the pescevegetarian and semivegetarian categories include unlimited milk and egg consumption]
Given the wide and greatly overlapping confidence intervals for all diets among women, it might be more fitting to interpret these tables as suggesting that “animal product consumption pattern doesn’t seem associated with mortality among women in this sample” than that “small-but-present meat consumption, in addition to millk and eggs, are good for women.” Based on the data presented, a variety of diets could potentially be optimal, and there isn’t a big difference between them. I think this fits my initial conclusion that veganism isn’t obviously bad for your health ex-ante if you supplement e.g. B12.
[Details here.]
@Natália Coelho Mendonça I would really appreciate a reply or at least acknowledgement of my comment here. I took your initial comment to be a very strong endorsement of the paper in ways I think make a reply a fair request.
Oh cool, I misread a comment from the author.