Why aren't you a vegan!?

gozunda

IrishKev wrote: »

'Free range' chickens held in captivity, male chicks being killed instantly as they're useless, ducks using the ability to walk as they're meant to spend time in water - it's not just cows mate. But it comes down to idealogical and ethical differences. I believe we're no superior to animals and don't need to kill and eat them as there are better alternatives out there. You have a different opinion and that's fine.

Yeah mate, I am aware of industrialised farming - animal , arable and horticulture. And yes there are many issues. It remains no reason to beat everyone with the same stick - it is as you suggested good reason to support buy local, buy organic and buy from who you know.

I have no problems with anyone not wanting to eat any meat no matter how well it is farmed or reared. But I reckon you need to move those goalposts into realising that much of what is designated plant food comes from areas with few if any environmental or ethical standards. That food also comes with a known and significant death toll with regards to animals. And that's where we are.

emaherx

IrishKev wrote: »

'Free range' chickens held in captivity, male chicks being killed instantly as they're useless, ducks using the ability to walk as they're meant to spend time in water - it's not just cows mate. But it comes down to idealogical and ethical differences. I believe we're no superior to animals and don't need to kill and eat them as there are better alternatives out there. You have a different opinion and that's fine.

Plenty of poultry farms are nothing like this though.

decky1

Unearthly wrote: »

Haha ok I won't continue with your discussion. You got me there with your debunking of science

Ah no it's just a bit of light banter, no offence meant.:cool:

Unearthly

decky1 wrote: »

Ah no it's just a bit of light banter, no offence meant.:cool:

No problem, all good from me.

Brb need to go for my 5th kip today

Bass Reeves

IrishKev wrote: »

It's definitely a fair question. But the water isn't just consumed by the cow, it takes into account every litre of water used in producing its feed, cleaning etc. Irish cows are only pasture fed for part of the year.

Just look at the video for a few seconds. Consider the amount of water involved. We slaughter just short of 2 million Cattle /year in Ireland. It would take nearly two years of it water for the water consumption you are talking about. Just shy of 700 days. Now along with that you have all the water that I presume is used for 34 million pigs and 3 million sheep and lambs. Finally you have the water used in dairying.

And do you know the amazing thing no river in Ireland looks like it is even going to start to dry up.

IrishKev

emaherx wrote: »

No it wasn't you defended your statement until you were called out on it, you even reworded it to make processed meat sound as bad as tobacco and radioactive material.


So you agree we need to and will continue to need to kill a certain number of animals?

LOL, apologies for accepting something I said was out of context. Really clinging onto that one. I'm not sure what else you want me to say.

We don't need to kill any animals. But it will continue unfortunately. If the gates of every farm were opened tomorrow my guess is most of them would die off from hunger or competition from others. Survival of the fittest and all that. Then the numbers would gradually decrease until they reproduce at a natural rate and not for our pleasure and greed.

The fact you're clinging onto these two arbritary arguments speaks volumes tbh.

gozunda wrote: »

Yeah mate, I am aware of industrialised farming animal , arable and agriculture. And yes there are many issues. It remains no reason to beat everyone with the same stick - it is as you suggested good reason to support buy local, buy organic and buy from who you know.

I have no problems with anyone not wanting to eat any meat no matter how well it is farmed or reared. But I reckon you need to move those goalposts into realising that much of what is designated plant food comes from areas with few if any environmental or ethical standards. That food also comes with a known and significant death toll with regards to animals. And that's where we are.

OK whatever you say. I'm beating sticks here by expressing my opinion on a discussion board. Regarding your other points I've already given my opinion on that so I'm not going to repeat myself.

emaherx

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Just look at the video for a few seconds. Consider the amount of water involved. We slaughter just short of 2 million Cattle /year in Ireland. It would take nearly two years of it water for the water consumption you are talking about. Just shy of 700 days. Now along with that you have all the water that I presume is used for 34 million pigs and 3 million sheep and lambs. Finally you have the water used in dairying.

And do you know the amazing thing no river in Ireland looks like it is even going to start to dry up.

I'm sure it was probably taken out of context.

dartboardio

I dont even know why or how the idea of veganism began. Why on earth did 2000 years later someone decide that killing animals for food was wrong?

People seem to get a bit precious and in denial about the fact that we are animals also. I say get down off yer high horse, eat your vegetables, dairy, meat and carbs and stop thinking about the animals 'feelings'


They would eat you.

emaherx

IrishKev wrote: »

LOL, apologies for accepting something I said was out of context. Really clinging onto that one. I'm not sure what else you want me to say.

We don't <B>need</B> to kill any animals. But it will continue unfortunately. If the gates of every farm were opened tomorrow my guess is most of them would die off from hunger or competition from others. Survival of the fittest and all that. Then the numbers would gradually decrease until they reproduce at a natural rate and not for our pleasure and greed.

They currently reproduce at a below natural rate.
The above statement just shows you know little about cattle.

The issue already exists in places like the phoenix park with deer. Without predators their numbers would grow quickly and expenentionly out of control.

Imagine every heifer over 2 producing a calf and the number of bulls would ensure they are impregnated why do you think they'd naturally reproduce slower (family planning maybe?)

Even if livestock farming reduced to a fraction of what it is now and eventually stopped control of the remaining animals would be necessary either eradication or regular culling.

dreamers75

If I was vegan I would be eating all the animals food then they would die and I would be at fault.


Cant win.

Say my name

In one gram of healthy soil there's more microbes than people on the planet.
In one drop of rumen fluid there's more microbes than people on the planet.

There can be billions of organisms in a handful of soil, invisible to the naked eye.
There's Bacteria, Archae, Fungi, Protists, Nematodes, Micro Arthropods and Micro Animals.
If you could picture yourself as a nematode winding through the soil environment, what meets you is a bustling metropolis, full of things to eat and predators to avoid. These city streets are not safe places to walk; they are dynamic and vibrant communities. If we had the equipment to listen into the soil ecosystem, it might sound like wild chatter and bloodcurdling screams!

Many of the organisms in soil make great subject material for a horror movie, like; Aliens ( Cordyceps mushrooms which burst from the bodies of insects), The Blob (slime molds), The day of the Triffids ( sting nematodes) and Frankenstein (Tardigrade).

Soil functions much like your gut: first you chew your food to make it smaller and then microbes and enzymes break it down further so nutrients can enter the bloodstream. The same action occurs in the soil, first by insects, ants, dung beetles and earthworms and then by an array of increasingly smaller organisms, from nematodes to protists, Fungi, and then the tiny bacteria. Just as a dose of antibiotics, stress or processed foods (meat and vegetable ) can give you digestive upsets, the same occurs underground following what we call "disturbance events".
These may include natural events, such as fire and flood, overgrazing, cultivation or herbicides, soluble salt fertilizers, fungicides and pesticides - what we call modern agriculture. Just as scientists are now discovering most of the health issues plaguing society are due to human gut issues, the same is happening in our soil systems. They have indigestion, gas, constipation, and even rampant diarrhoea! How we can rebuild the microbial bridge and optimize ecosystem health is the biggest challenge facing society today. In a healthy functional soil, there are 6 major livestock classes; viruses, bacteria and archae, fungi, protists, nematodes, micro arthropods and micro animals.



If you want to read more. Read "For the Love of Soil" by Nicole Masters.

ted1

dartboardio wrote: »

I dont even know why or how the idea of veganism began. Why on earth did 2000 years later someone decide that killing animals for

There wasn’t 7.7bn people on the planet 2,000 years ago. It’s not an issue if it being wrong , it’s unsustainable.

Sir Guy who smiles

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Obviously cats drink milk I have never seen a cat turn milk down because it came from a cow. Mice like cheese.

Cats will never give cows milk the thumbs down.

Do you know why?

Around 20 pages ago, someone made the point that the world's population is growing so rapidly, and we're here for such little time, that limiting your own single chance at life is pointless.

I must say I agree. The population of the world increases every day by 220k people net. Having even one kid makes you abhorrent to the environment.. So why should I, a childless man, worry about my effect on the world, when every week, over a million new people are added?

If we take an average of 70 years, fifteen million years of life are added every single day..

The mantra goes that you don't need some people to be perfect, you need lots of people go be imperfect. I do my bit in reducing my footprint, but people should realise that the vast majority of their footprint is set in stone. You might knock off a few percent with your diet, but don't go around pretending that your tofu made it to your table with much less effect on the world than some bacon.

Bass Reeves

Deleted User wrote: »

Around 20 pages ago, someone made the point that the world's population is growing so rapidly, and we're here for such little time, that limiting your own single chance at life is pointless.

I must say I agree. The population of the world increases every day by 220k people net. Having even one kid makes you abhorrent to the environment.. So why should I, a childless man, worry about my effect on the world, when every week, over a million new people are added?

If we take an average of 70 years, fifteen million years of life are added every single day..

The mantra goes that you don't need some people to be perfect, you need lots of people go be imperfect. I do my bit in reducing my footprint, but people should realise that the vast majority of their footprint is set in stone. You might knock off a few percent with your diet, but don't go around pretending that your tofu made it to your table with much less effect on the world than some bacon.

TBH until people understand that it is the price of oil you have to increase there will be little reduction in Global warming. While we in Europe might consider oil price important in the battle against climate change it is not the same elsewhere. Until right across the world oil is increased in priced up to European levels we will not see changes in attitude.

By increasing oil prices we reduce world consumption. But countries like the US are unwilling to follow this path. Everything else is only p!55ing against the wind.

IrishKev

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Around 20 pages ago, someone made the point that the world's population is growing so rapidly, and we're here for such little time, that limiting your own single chance at life is pointless.

I must say I agree. The population of the world increases every day by 220k people net. Having even one kid makes you abhorrent to the environment.. So why should I, a childless man, worry about my effect on the world, when every week, over a million new people are added?

If we take an average of 70 years, fifteen million years of life are added every single day..

The mantra goes that you don't need some people to be perfect, you need lots of people go be imperfect. I do my bit in reducing my footprint, but people should realise that the vast majority of their footprint is set in stone. You might knock off a few percent with your diet, but don't go around pretending that your tofu made it to your table with much less effect on the world than some bacon.

For me, it comes down to wanting to give any future kids I have a similar chance at life to our current one. If I can make some small dietary changes that also benefit me in other ways to make that even slightly more possible, then it's worth it.

Also, not underestimating the power of one is important. When people see how much healthier and more energetic I am it rubs off. That few percent you talk about mightn't make a massive difference for one, but the domino effect of other people following suit begins to take its toll after a while.

the_syco

I prefer meat over vegetables.

Haven't tasted a vegan yet :pac:

gozunda

ted1 wrote: »

There wasn’t 7.7bn people on the planet 2,000 years ago. It’s not an issue if it being wrong , it’s unsustainable.

At present - globally there is no shortage of food. What there is corruption and inequality.

https://www.worldhunger.org/letter-food-shortage-world-questions/

As a sector agticulture and food production has become more vastly more efficient over the past century without significant expansion.

“For the world as a whole, per capita food availability has risen from about 2220 kcal/person/day in the early 1960s to 2790 kcal/person/day in 2006-08, while developing countries even recorded a leap from 1850 kcal/person/day to over 2640 kcal/person/day” (FAO, p. 174). This is enough to feed everyone.

It is estimated that all forms of agriculture contributes less than a quarter of all ghgs emissions worldwide. That's the same agriculture which feeds the worlds people.

The remainder over 70% of all emissions are down to the ever growing use of fossil fuels in the energy and transport sectors. Is population growth - and consequent increased enegy demand unsustainable in the long term? Yes it is. Does it mean that that we all have to be vegans - thankfully no it doesnt. Want to make a difference? It's not that difficult to figure out ...

Graces7

Sir Guy who smiles wrote: »

Cats will never give cows milk the thumbs down.

Do you know why?

Apparently some boffin decided that ALL cats are lactose intolerance so milk became off limits in some circles and still is.

In my 40 years of breeding, rescuing etc I have never had a lactose intolerant cat.

Wanderer78

gozunda wrote:

At present - globally there is no shortage of food. What there is corruption and inequality.

I'd say there's an over supply of certain foods in certain regions of the planet, particularly more wealthier western countries such as ours, corruption and inequality certainly isn't helping

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

The process is often brutal, but even if it were pain-free, the argument goes that animals shouldn't be killed in the same way we wouldn't recommend it for horses or dogs.

For me the question comes down to two different topics. First is whether there are any arguments against eating meat at all. Second the arguments related to how we treat the animals we get meat from.

So far I have never been given any arguments at all for the former. So I am happy to eat meat.

As for the latter - I try to source my meat as ethically as possible and where possible I even keep it or hunt it myself. Our Christmas geese are - for
example - currently roaming around on my land being fed and treated very well. I also have some wild rabbit ready for the kill.

IrishKev

gozunda wrote: »

At present - globally there is no shortage of food. What there is corruption and inequality.

https://www.worldhunger.org/letter-food-shortage-world-questions/

As a sector agticulture and food production has become more vastly more efficient over the past century without significant expansion.



It is estimated that all forms of agriculture contributes less than a quarter of all ghgs emissions worldwide. That's the same agriculture which feeds the worlds people.

The remainder over 70% of all emissions are down to the ever growing use of fossil fuels in the energy and transport sectors. Is population growth - and consequent increased enegy demand unsustainable in the long term? Yes it is. Does it mean that that we all have to be vegans - thankfully no it doesnt. Want to make a difference? It's not that difficult to figure out ...

While you're correct in saying agri contributed to under a quarter of all emissions, this picture shows that it is barely second place between electricity and heat. Agriculture contributes almost double the emissions than every single method of transport combined. That's trucks, airplanes, cars, etc. all in one. Anyone who wants to make an immediate difference to the global climate crisis can do so by making small changes in their diet, plain and simple.

Making cement contributes 8% towards our carbon dioxide emissions. Is it the housing one since that pie is all greenhouse gases, not just carbon dioxide?

FeirmeoirtTed

IrishKev wrote: »

While you're correct in saying agri contributed to under a quarter of all emissions, this picture shows that it is barely second place between electricity and heat. Agriculture contributes almost double the emissions than every single method of transport combined. That's trucks, airplanes, cars, etc. all in one. Anyone who wants to make an immediate difference to the global climate crisis can do so by making small changes in their diet, plain and simple.

If agriculture is 25% of the "problem" then all foods are off limits you realise all food forms part of agriculture. Why not look at the other 75% of the problem aswell do you own a car iPad do you use electricity and heat your home? Do you live in a house? Do you travel abroad? Do you shop online?

IrishKev

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Making cement contributes 8% towards our carbon dioxide emissions. Is it the housing one since that pie is all greenhouse gases, not just carbon dioxide?

Yep, 76% of GHG is carbon dioxide, the rest is methane, nitrous oxide and some others.
Link: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data

IrishKev

FeirmeoirtTed wrote: »

If agriculture is 25% of the "problem" then all foods are off limits you realise all food forms part of agriculture. Why not look at the other 75% of the problem aswell do you own a car iPad do you use electricity and heat your home? Do you live in a house? Do you travel abroad? Do you shop online?

Nothing is 'off-limits', it's simply a matter of cutting down your carbon footprint as much as its practical and possible. I'm still going to need to 'live in a house', so the best way to make an impact is to make small changes to diet, ie. stop eating meat and dairy. Further impacts can also be made by, as you say, cutting down on fossil fuels and car usage.

I don't own a car. I'm trying to cut down on my air travel. Again, 'practical and possible'.

emaherx

IrishKev wrote: »

Nothing is 'off-limits', it's simply a matter of cutting down your carbon footprint as much as its practical and possible. I'm still going to need to 'live in a house', so the best way to make an impact is to make small changes to diet, ie. stop eating meat and dairy. Further impacts can also be made by, as you say, cutting down on fossil fuels and car usage.

I don't own a car. I'm trying to cut down on my air travel. Again, 'practical and possible'.

The biggest increase in methane in the last decade has been fossil fuels most notably from fracking. Oh and rice a plant based food funny enough. This accounts for an extra 25 Terra grams per year

https://unfccc.int/news/nasa-confirms-methane-spike-is-tied-to-oil-and-gas

wakka12

FeirmeoirtTed wrote: »

If agriculture is 25% of the "problem" then all foods are off limits you realise all food forms part of agriculture. Why not look at the other 75% of the problem aswell do you own a car iPad do you use electricity and heat your home? Do you live in a house? Do you travel abroad? Do you shop online?

Not comparable. Everyone needs to heat their home to survive, and live in a house, and use electricity,but you dont have to eat meat,and in the grand scheme of things an extremely minor lifestyle change compared to for instance your other helpful suggestions such not heating your home anymore, never using electricity, or never leaving ireland again, its a very viable lifestyle optional with a lot of benefits compared to those other options , thats the point of the discussion. A very childish comparison I must say.

gormdubhgorm

IrishKev wrote: »

It comes across as very narrow minded if you tar all 'veganised' people with the same brush from one person's comment.

Also, 'outside forces'? That just sounds like a conservative us against them mentality. Appreciation of your own country and dietary choices don't really line up either.

emaherx wrote: »

Says the person who wants to tar all livestock farmers with the same brush and constantly post very misleading information about same.

Exactly I know exactly the game that is being played by vegans it is a smug superiority being non vegan is viewed as backward - being a vegan is being viewed as forward and progressive.

From my own viewpoint I still believe veganism to be unnatural how many animals in the world are vegan? Would a vegan not feed a cat fish, or cat food would the cat food have to be vegan? Would a vegan mourn the dead mouse a cat bought home? In my view it is likely as most vegans seem slightly quirky and off beat.

The real ironic thing I find is that the farmers who are much maligned by some vegans are more at one with nature than many vegans themselves.
The vegans who munch on thier avocado and toast and have humus in thier nice little urban apartment.
The vegans who are starving with the hunger and are malnourished.

wakka12

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Exactly I know exactly the game that is being played by vegans it is a smug superiority being non vegan is viewed as backward - being a vegan is being viewed as forward and progressive.

From my own viewpoint I still believe veganism to be unnatural how many animals in the world are vegan? Would a vegan not feed a cat fish, or cat food would the cat food have to be vegan? Would a vegan mourn the dead mouse a cat bought home? In my view it is likely as most vegans seem slightly quirky and off beat.

The real ironic thing I find is that the farmers who are much maligned by some vegans are more at one with nature than many vegans themselves.
The vegans who munch on thier avocado and toast and have humus in thier nice little urban apartment.
The vegans who are starving with the hunger and are malnourished.

This one is trotted out a lot. Why does it matter? I think every vegan realises humans are naturally omnivorous because Vitamin B12 is essential to survival and only found in animal products. The difference between humans and animals is that we have evolved to act in ways beyond how our natural instincts compel us to if there might be perceived benefits to doing so. It also doesnt mean it's necessarily damaging or a bad thing for animals to not do not do the 'natural ' thing.Its not natural at all for a dog to live in a house for it's entire life and not live in a pack and eat dog food all day, and yet they do, and they probably live longer and happier lives than many canines in the wild. It's not natural we live in warm cosy houses all day, or have thousands of varieties of food to buy in a supermarket two minutes away from us, yet both of these unnatural things have brought great improvements in quality of life and health for humans.