Understanding the ethical vegetarian.

Xcellor

Both dairy and egg production both result in huge suffering and exploitation for animals so how do vegetarians following this diet for ethical reasons reconcile their position?

Senature

I also often wonder this in relation to those "vegetarians" who claim animal welfare as their main reason but then eat seafood despite the awful wildlife destruction that results from many forms of fishing.

(I believe the technical term is pescatarian, but many who follow this diet refer to themselves as vegetarian.)

I am coming to the realisation that all mass food production/consumption seems to have massive detrimental impacts on the environment, including growing, harvesting and transporting vegetables to supermarkets. So it's hard not to feel like no matter what you do it's wrong and has negative consequences. If people feel better for trying to do something good then in some ways I guess that's better than doing nothing.

Xcellor

Senature wrote: »

I also often wonder this in relation to those "vegetarians" who claim animal welfare as their main reason but then eat seafood despite the awful wildlife destruction that results from many forms of fishing.

(I believe the technical term is pescatarian, but many who follow this diet refer to themselves as vegetarian.)

I am coming to the realisation that all mass food production/consumption seems to have massive detrimental impacts on the environment, including growing, harvesting and transporting vegetables to supermarkets. So it's hard not to feel like no matter what you do it's wrong and has negative consequences. If people feel better for trying to do something good then in some ways I guess that's better than doing nothing.

Until humans evolve to absorb energy from the sun rather than needing to eat there will always be some collateral damage to the environment to feed us.

Fish are highly intelligent creatures and have demonstrated self awareness. Octopi have evolved problem solving skills etc. Sea life is alive... Maybe an argument can be made over jelly fish but the nutritional worth versus the amount of sodium really makes eating this sort of fish rather pointless.

Egg production at scale is disgusting, the live maceration/crushing of male chicks happens even in the "free range" context.

davidjtaylor

Senature wrote: »

I am coming to the realisation that all mass food production/consumption seems to have massive detrimental impacts on the environment, including growing, harvesting and transporting vegetables to supermarkets.

This is why I advocate everyone who has any space at all - from a kitchen window ledge to an acre or more - should be growing something towards their diet or at least be making some preparations towards this end.

Senature wrote: »

So it's hard not to feel like no matter what you do it's wrong and has negative consequences.

No, one shouldn't feel that way. A vegan has a huge positive effect (or hugely less negative if you're a half empty glass sort of person) not only on animals not born merely for exploitation/death but also by setting the right example to those around you.

davidjtaylor

Xcellor wrote: »

Both dairy and egg production both result in huge suffering and exploitation for animals so how do vegetarians following this diet for ethical reasons reconcile their position?

Firstly, it's possible that ethics don't come into it for many vegetarians. They're cutting back on meat for health or environmental reasons.

There is always the comfortable fallback that animals - sheep shorn, cows and goats milked, chickens laying - don't actually have to die for vegetarians' benefit.

But as far as ethics enters their worldview, there is almost as much cognitive dissonance with vegetarians as there is with carnists. Look on the bright side - at least animals are not bred especially for their eating. There is a quantitive reduction in suffering. Not excusing it, just saying.

gozunda

davidjtaylor wrote: »

Firstly, it's possible that ethics don't come into it for many vegetarians. They're cutting back on meat for health or environmental reasons.
There is always the comfortable fallback that animals - sheep shorn, cows and goats milked, chickens laying - don't actually have to die for vegetarians' benefit.
But as far as ethics enters their worldview, there is almost as much cognitive dissonance with vegetarians as there is with carnists. Look on the bright side - at least animals are not bred especially for their eating. There is a quantitive reduction in suffering. Not excusing it, just saying.

This is the vegan & vegetarian forum - No?

This may be relevant:

This is a supportive community. Boards is a unique online resource in that it is one of the only places online where vegetarians and vegans are not segregated. This is a good thing. We share the same goals, so let's not alienate eachother by shaming or assuming elitism. At the same time, please be accepting of our differences and don't be insulted by the truth.

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057216954/1/#post90546176

I note some apparent derision towards vegetarians and the use of the vegan derogatory term for those who eat a normal mixed diet.

Though why have a go a vegetarians? Each and every individual makes their own choices. Similarly It's easy to point out the hypocrisy inherent in veganism with the death and destruction of billions of animals and organisms through cultivation and the reliance of many those eating a plant based diet on the importation of cheap foods from areas with few if any ethical or environmental standards. There is no get out of jail free card with this either. It happens.

Personally I know many vegetarians who choose to live their lives ethically and without dissonance and imo rarely if ever engage in finger pointing or critiscim of others.

Fair play to them..

Xcellor

gozunda wrote: »

This is the vegan & vegetarian forum - No?

This may be relevant:



https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057216954/1/#post90546176

I note some apparent derision towards vegetarians and the use of the vegan derogatory term for those who eat a normal mixed diet.

Though why have a go a vegetarians? Each and every individual makes their own choices. Similarly It's easy to point out the hypocrisy inherent in veganism with the death and destruction of billions of animals and organisms through cultivation and the reliance of many those eating a plant based diet on the importation of cheap foods from areas with few if any ethical or environmental standards. There is no get out of jail free card with this either. It happens.

Personally I know many vegetarians who choose to live their lives ethically and without dissonance and imo rarely if ever engage in finger pointing or critiscim of others.

Fair play to them..

The OP was because I'm genuinely interested. Even when I went plant based it was a while before I understood the dairy/egg production methods. So is it a lack of awareness? Should vegans aim more of their efforts towards helping vegetarians make the transition?

As mentioned there is no way to feed the world without some unavoidable animal deaths. However live chick maceration/crushing is avoidable. The nutrients of an egg are not essential to life and one of the most cholesterol dense foods eaten by humans.

seamus

Xcellor wrote: »

Both dairy and egg production both result in huge suffering and exploitation for animals so how do vegetarians following this diet for ethical reasons reconcile their position?

Ultimately everyone consumes at the level of suffering they find tolerable.

Plenty of meat eaters will make an attempt to choose ethically-slaughtered meat rather than densely-farmed. They will eat cows and chickens, but they won't eat dogs and cats.

Since we are generally raised from birth to not think about where our food comes from, this breeds dependence. This is why you have the age old "where do you get your protein from" question, and people who have difficulty understanding how you can have a meal without meat.

Hence when someone becomes vegetarian for ethical reasons, they engage in a level of backtracking. If one was to ethically examine everything, you'd end up growing your own food out the back and becoming Peig Sayers. Which you're not going to do; it's not practical to upend your entire life like that. Instead it becomes a slow weaning of oneself off the de facto diet in which they were raised.

But, people also recognise that the only way to cause no suffering is to not exist. By existing, you are consuming energy and you will therefore cause suffering. All the ethical individual can do is take steps to reduce that suffering as much as is practical.

It also has to be acknowledged that no man is an island. Mass production does bring with it efficiencies of usage and waste. 1,000 people growing their own vegetables in private patches will likely create a lot more waste and consume a lot more energy than a large-scale facility producing vegetables for those 1,000.
So anyone with an ethical outlook needs to consider that self-sufficiency isn't always the most ethical approach. Socialising your production can produce less suffering in the long-term.

On the egg question? It's a matter of what's practical. Going egg-free is harder than going wheat-free. There are eggs in everything, even though there doesn't really need to be. But it's become the de facto ingredient for so many things, and is so low down on the vegan/vegetarian suffering "scale", that it's not frequently brought up as a big one.

It will though. There was time not too long ago when eschewing beef on ethical grounds was considered a crazy and over-the-top reaction.

gozunda

Xcellor wrote: »

The OP was because I'm genuinely interested. Even when I went plant based it was a while before I understood the dairy/egg production methods. So is it a lack of awareness? Should vegans aim more of their efforts towards helping vegetarians make the transition?

As mentioned there is no way to feed the world without some unavoidable animal deaths. However live chick maceration/crushing is avoidable. The nutrients of an egg are not essential to life and one of the most cholesterol dense foods eaten by humans.

As was detailed above - I gather that the forum was created with the idea that:

one of the only places online where vegetarians and vegans are not segregated. This is a good thing. We share the same goals, so let's not alienate each other by shaming or assuming elitism

It remains that not everyone holds the same views or ideology. "Helping people to make the transition" in order to change their opinions - smacks of overt evangelicalism tbh and also shows a certain lack of respect for another individuals opinions.

The chick macheration issue is imo and to use a bad pun 'over egged' for these purposes. Not all egg production use commercial poulty suppliers. In my experience it is easy to source eggs produced from poultry where no maceration is involved.

And remember not all male chicks are macerated in commercial operations either. Some male chicks are reared for slaughter and some processors also use gas to kill chicks.

Whichever is used it would appear that maceration is viewed as wasteful and has led to the development of new egg scanning techniques making maceration redundant in the near future.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/male-chick-culling-technology-1.3647228

https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/spectroscopy-allows-in-egg-chicken-sexing-/2500274.article

Edit meant to add

As mentioned there is no way to feed the world without some unavoidable animal deaths. 

I personally believe that this is not a given. Like the egg production issue - there are technologies and methods whereby the deaths of wildlife can be reduced and / or avoided in Food production. I see this as a significant ommision in the philosophy of veganism tbh. At the end of the day it matters little to the animal killed whether it's death was deemed 'unavoidable' or otherwise...

davidjtaylor

seamus wrote: »

1,000 people growing their own vegetables in private patches will likely create a lot more waste and consume a lot more energy than a large-scale facility producing vegetables for those 1,000.
So anyone with an ethical outlook needs to consider that self-sufficiency isn't always the most ethical approach. Socialising your production can produce less suffering in the long-term.

I'd take very slight issue with that - industrial monoculture pharming is way too far in the wrong direction, just as at the other end of the scale, one person trying to provide her own food is simply backbreaking. There are better ways: the mid-size model (groups of around 100 on shared, contiguous land, some of whom do peripheral work rather than actual growing) isn't common yet but is considered optimum. Your last line above applies.

emaherx

davidjtaylor wrote: »

I'd take very slight issue with that - industrial monoculture pharming is way too far in the wrong direction, just as at the other end of the scale, one person trying to provide her own food is simply backbreaking. There are better ways: the mid-size model (groups of around 100 on shared, contiguous land, some of whom do peripheral work rather than actual growing) isn't common yet but is considered optimum. Your last line above applies.

There certainly is a balance required, but your ideal will never happen as the vast majority don't want to produce their own food. Farming is the only way we are going to keep our growing populations fed. Also people want varity and you are not going to efficiently grow all of the food people want/need on a small plots in our climate.

As for the poor vegetarians being targeted in this thread. What exactly is the issue with eggs? Can you name an animal on this planet that doesn't eat eggs if it finds them? I understand that a lot of eggs are produced in deplorable conditions but not all and people can chose where they source their eggs.

We have kept hens in the past and I've even seen them eating eggs, have also seen cows eating eggs.

davidjtaylor

emaherx wrote: »

There certainly is a balance required, but your ideal will never happen as the vast majority don't want to produce their own food.

'Never' is an inadvisable word, emaherx! There will come a time when more people will have to get their hands dirty. Maybe when everyone on this board is dead and gone but it will come.

Mancomb Seepgood

emaherx wrote: »

As for the poor vegetarians being targeted in this thread. What exactly is the issue with eggs? Can you name an animal on this planet that doesn't eat eggs if it finds them? I understand that a lot of eggs are produced in deplorable conditions but not all and people can chose where they source their eggs.

We have kept hens in the past and I've even seen them eating eggs, have also seen cows eating eggs.

I think the issue is with the conditions in battery farms (and some free range as well),along with the killing of male chicks at birth.

I eat eggs and dairy btw so I suppose I can be considered to be unethical to an extent!I originally gave up meat and fish for dietary reasons but the environmental argument is more of a motivation now.I admire those who can stick to a vegan diet, particularly when travelling.

I've found that this forum has become much more vegan oriented over the years,I wonder does this reflect wider society?

gozunda

Mancomb Seepgood wrote: »

I think the issue is with the conditions in battery farms (and some free range as well),along with the killing of male chicks at birth.

I eat eggs and dairy btw so I suppose I can be considered to be unethical to an extent!I originally gave up meat and fish for dietary reasons but the environmental argument is more of a motivation now.I admire those who can stick to a vegan diet, particularly when travelling.

I've found that this forum has become much more vegan oriented over the years ,I wonder does this reflect wider society?

Some vegans seem to be quite vocal in their beliefs and even want to persuade others of the the 'rightousness' of same. In my experience a lot of the threads on Boards have had an element of that ...

davidjtaylor

Mancomb Seepgood wrote: »

I've found that this forum has become much more vegan oriented over the years,I wonder does this reflect wider society?

Hope so!

emaherx

Mancomb Seepgood wrote: »

I think the issue is with the conditions in battery farms (and some free range as well),along with the killing of male chicks at birth.

Agree totally, my point is it is not hard to source eggs which are not produced in this manner. And also agree that the "free range" tag dosen't mean a whole lot.

Plenty of our fruit/vegetables produced in unethical ways, with issues from slave labour to environmental and animal welfare.

Xcellor

gozunda wrote: »

The chick macheration issue is imo and to use a bad pun 'over egged' for these purposes. Not all egg production use commercial poulty suppliers. In my experience it is easy to source eggs produced from poultry where no maceration is involved.

Not all egg production use this but what % does?

How is it easy? Is it mentioned somewhere on the packaging, "Chick friendly. No Maceration"

Even if there was no maceration, what happens to the hens that stop laying or get sick? We exploit them to get the most out of them and then they are killed.

davidjtaylor

Chick culling [...] It occurs in all industrialised egg production whether free range, organic, or battery cage—including that of the UK and US. [...] Many methods of culling do not involve anaesthetic and include cervical dislocation, asphyxiation by carbon dioxide and maceration using a high speed grinder. Asphyxiation is the primary method in the United Kingdom, while maceration is the primary method in the United States. By 2020, US producers expect to sex the eggs before they hatch, so male eggs can be culled.

(Wikipedia)

gozunda

Xcellor wrote: »

Not all egg production use this but what % does?
How is it easy? Is it mentioned somewhere on the packaging, "Chick friendly. No Maceration"
Even if there was no maceration, what happens to the hens that stop laying or get sick? We exploit them to get the most out of them and then they are killed.

Sorry you'll have to look up the percentages yourself. It remains maceration is not involved in all poultry enterprises.

Like any foodstuffs - it is not difficult to find such non commercially produced foods with a little bit of effort. That is my personal experience. I know of others who do similar.

You say 'exploit'? Do do suggest throwing away foodstuffs simply because they don't agere with someone else's opinions? Surely it is making use of farm produce as efficiently as possible.

Btw where animals are sick - the normally would not enter the human food chain. Not saying it never hard happened but there are unscrupulous individuals in all walks of life. Such animals are culled to prevent suffering and stop the spread of infection to other animals etc.

The main point was that maceration looks like it will be replaced by other technologies which will eliminate what is a wasteful process.

gozunda

davidjtaylor wrote: »

Chick culling "(Wikipedia)

Em not too sure I would rely on Wikipedia for all my information. But I note what It says that the UK largely does not use maceration.

This already detailed from the link in my original post:

Male chicks are typically gassed, asphyxiated or (macerated).

*

Plus there is at least one large scale poultry producer In Ireland that I know of rearing male birds (cocks) as roasters commercially.

Plus the huge network of poultry keepers in Ireland and other countries who breed and sell their own stock for the production of egg laying and rearing

*https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/male-chick-culling-technology-1.3647228

emaherx

Xcellor wrote: »

Not all egg production use this but what % does?

What difference does that make to someone who eats their own hens eggs or otherwise knows the source of their eggs?

Xcellor wrote: »

How is it easy? Is it mentioned somewhere on the packaging, "Chick friendly. No Maceration"

Buy your own hens, or buy from a small producer, probably no packaging to read for a start.

Xcellor wrote: »

Even if there was no maceration, what happens to the hens that stop laying or get sick? We exploit them to get the most out of them and then they are killed.

Sick hens don't tend to live long, so is the question should they be put down? Or let die?

Hens that don't lay are probably fairly old I'm sure many are culled (far from the same thing as being minced the day they are born), I know of many people with hens where they are left wandering around as always.

Mancomb Seepgood

gozunda wrote: »

Some vegans seem to be quite vocal in their beliefs and even want to persuade others of the the 'rightousness' of same. In my experience a lot of the threads on Boards have had an element of that ...

There is probably some truth to that,although any of the discussions I've seen in After Hours subject of veganism seem to be full of posts from angry omnivores.Usually it's only third wave feminism and political correctness that seem to provoke that much outrage in AH!

I certainly don't blame vegans for being passionate about the subject of animal cruelty if that's an issue that's close to their hearts.It definitely forces someone like myself to think about what I eat and the consequences-I'm the first to admit I'd find it hard to give up dairy and egss primarily because I like travelling and eating out.What price my convenience and enjoyment?

I would hope though that this forum doesn't become essentially vegan-only by alienating those who aren't at that point yet,or may never be.

gozunda

Mancomb Seepgood wrote: »

There is probably some truth to that,although any of the discussions I've seen in After Hours subject of veganism seem to be full of posts from angry omnivores.Usually it's only third wave feminism and political correctness that seem to provoke that much outrage in AH!

I certainly don't blame vegans for being passionate about the subject of animal cruelty if that's an issue that's close to their hearts.It definitely forces someone like myself to think about what I eat and the consequences-I'm the first to admit I'd find it hard to give up dairy and egss primarily because I like travelling and eating out.What price my convenience and enjoyment?

I would hope though that this forum doesn't become essentially vegan-only by alienating those who aren't at that point yet,or may never be.

Agree with most of what you say there. Regarding at least some of the AH threads - I remember a few controversial topics not least the one where a vegan charity erected giant billboards which made emotive attacks on farming. I gathered that campaign backfired somewhat.

What amazes me here is that there are more vegans creating threads to discuss meat and animal products than are often to be found in either farming or nutrition forums!

It does surprise me that there arn't more pro vegan threads here about vegan foods etc promoting veganism etc rather than the constant stream of anti-meat based themes.

Many of these comments seem to beat a similar drum - that everything to do with animal products and animal farming are the worst ever - even where there is evidence to the contrary. I understand the passion but the tendency to throw the kitchen sink plus the dirty bathwater at animal agriculture doesn't always work and can sometimes be even negative to those arguments.

I know some have argued against non vegans posting on the forum - but I can see that those who have knowledge of food and agriculture will be interested in highlighting and discussing at least some of the inconsistencies.

It also appears that a lot of the populist vegan info on YouTube and elsewhere is based on various popular misconceptions and American derived content and unfortunately repeated ver batim