Lierre Keith, and experiments on starving children

Plenty of what Lierre Keith writes in The Vegetarian Myth is not only wrong, but also inflammatory. For example, take one of Keith's hand-wringing statements about the babies of vegan mothers:

One researcher put it bluntly: "... when women avoid all animal foods, their babies are ... developmentally retarded ... There's absolutely no question that it's unethical for parents to bring up their children as strict vegans" (page 241)

It is inaccurate and hysterical to claim that all children of all vegan mothers are "retarded", and that all vegan mothers are "unethical".

In fact, the claim is so ridiculous that I was very curious to know who this supposed "researcher" was. Surely no scientist worth their salt would make such an unequivocal pronouncement? It turned out that the researcher in question - Professor Lindsay Allen - was rather more equivocal than Lierre Keith would have her readers believe.

The BBC news article quoted by Lierre Keith continues:

Professor Allen stressed that although the study (which was supported by the National Cattleman's Beef Association) was conducted in a poor African community that was malnourished, its message was highly relevant to people in developed countries.

She accepted that adults could avoid animal foods if they took the right supplements, but she said adding animal source food into the diet was a better way to tackle malnutrition worldwide than quick fixes with supplements in the form of pills.

However, Professor Allen's study was, in my opinion, both unethical and flawed in its methodology - and not least because the study was funded by the Cattleman's Beef Association.

The study by Allen, et al, titled Animal Source Foods Improve Dietary Quality, Micronutrient Status, Growth and Cognitive Function in Kenyan School Children, involved feeding extra food (in the form of meat, milk, or vegetable oil) to hundreds of malnourished Kenyan school children.

The "Control" group of children - who were also malnourished Kenyan school children - received no food supplement.

It would come as no surprise to anybody that the health of these malnourished children improved when they were fed a daily supplement of meat for two years.

The health gains were not as significant for the children who received the energy supplement in the form of vegetable oil. However, the children in this so-called "Energy" group were actually consuming fewer calories per day than the children in the "Meat" and "Milk" groups, and the daily oil supplement for the "Energy" group amounted to just 3g of oil (containing approximately 27 calories, including 3g of fat).

By contrast, the children in the Meat group received a 60g supplement of meat (containing approximately 127 calories, including 7g of fat), while the children in the Milk group received a 200mL supplement of milk daily (containing approximately 132 calories, including 8g of fat).

When it comes to the ethical treatment of children, I think the average vegan is way ahead of Professor Lindsay Allen.