Assuming that crops grown in controlled ecological life-support systems (CELSS) should provide a basis for meals that are both nutritious and attractive (to taste and vision), and that CELSS diets on the moon or Mars or in space-craft during long voyages will have to be mostly vegetarian, a workshop was convened at the Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas, U.S.A. on 19 to 21 January, 1994. Participants consisted of trained nutritionists and others; many of the approximately 18 presenters who discussed possible diets were practicing vegetarians, some for more than two decades.

The available evidence supports neither a beneficial nor a detrimental effect of a vegetarian diet on physical performance capacity, especially when carbohydrate intake is controlled for. Concerns have been raised that an emphasis on plant foods to enhance carbohydrate intake and optimize body glycogen stores may lead to increases in dietary fiber and phytic acid intake to concentrations that reduce the bioavailability of several nutrients, including zinc, iron, and some other trace minerals.

To fully grasp how so many smart, right-minded people could get it so wrong, it might help to start with a quick review of medical history. Take the radical mastectomy, conceived by William Halsted in the late 19th century. The procedure was intended to remove all cancer cells of the breast, the overlying skin, the underlying muscle, and regional lymph nodes (Figure 1). It was mutilating, permanently disfiguring, and no more effective than less radical, less disfiguring procedures.

Increased plasma levels of adiponectin, metformin therapy of diabetes, rapamycin administration in transplant patients, and lifelong consumption of low-protein plant-based diets have all been linked to decreased risk for various cancers. These benefits may be mediated, at least in part, by down-regulated activity of the mTORC1 complex, a key regulator of protein translation.