EPTVeganism: A Discussion - Page 3
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Elegance
Canada917 Posts
| ||
|
frantic.cactus
New Zealand164 Posts
http://player.vimeo.com/video/10533993 Biologically were not made to eat just plant matter, it results in deficiencies. Ethically, well that depends on your values. | ||
|
cLAN.Anax
United States2847 Posts
Ethics? No conflicts with me at all about eatin' meat. Vegetarianism I can more readily accept. I highly respect Artosis in particular for his views on it. I couldn't do that kind of diet myself, but I understand why people do so, even if I think their response is a tad extreme. Environment? I think there are more substantial things we are doing that affect our environment than consuming meat. I also believe our Mother Earth is a tougher thing than people realize. Nature is a greater force on our planet than most of us realize.  | ||
|
SolonTLG
United States299 Posts
On September 21 2012 06:40 wei2coolman wrote: It's natural, no? Lions eat zebras and stuff. Sharks eat fish. I don't see any protests against Lions from eating zebras and gazelles, do I? Sure I think most people should cut down on their meat consumptions, out of health reasons, but I don't see any inherent moral wrong doing out of the current meat eating society. Defining in what sense you mean it is "natural"? That term is subjective. I, now, "naturally" don't eat animals or animal products. We are not lions, sharks, or zebras, we are humans. Invoking other species is not relevant. Also, I am giving an ethical argument for veganism. Morals are something entirely different. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On September 21 2012 06:44 Elegance wrote: On the contrary, I don't eat vegetables (very finely ground to the point of no texture is fine unless its got a strong taste ie. mushrooms). Ah! a man of reason! hehehe, jk. Though I do notice my white American friends are far more inclined to remove vegetables out of their diet. Which I think is horrendous. They avoid eating as much vegetables as they can. I always try to get them to eat some veges, even simple things like lettuce into their diets... They avoid it so much, it's rather sad. I think for average caucasian Americans, parents don't do a good job balancing their kids diet. | ||
|
SolonTLG
United States299 Posts
What does that mean? Are you implying that we are like lions or something (see "Lion King" movie song)? | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On September 21 2012 06:46 SolonTLG wrote: Defining in what sense you mean it is "natural"? That term is subjective. I, now, "naturally" don't eat animals or animal products. We are not lions, sharks, or zebras, we are humans. Invoking other species is not relevant. Also, I am giving an ethical argument for veganism. Morals are something entirely different. eating animals "isn't extreme" because it happens in other species, so much so that they cause natural extinction patterns. Clearly my use of normal, was in terms of the idea of consuming meat on a universal scale, not on individual. No need to twist my words, you clearly knew what I meant. It is very much so relevant. Humans are omnivorous. just look at human evolution patterns, we have enzymes to digest meat, our bodies were made to do it. No one here is claiming being vegan is bad. We just don't want to hear vegans complain about how meat eating is bad, when it's an obvious biological inclination. Just like humans can choose to go without sex, but I don't want virgins bitching at people who do have sex because they have sex. | ||
|
Blacktion
United Kingdom1148 Posts
On September 21 2012 06:09 Blacktion wrote: As a scientist all i can say is wow. There is now a number of replies to this topic so i think ill elaborate on my post. 1. The OP created a long post but only gave one source: http://tctutoring.net/pdf/ChinaStudy.pdf The source he is a summary of a book (that anyone can publish, given money/a publisher who believes the book will sell) that gives no sources for its conclusions, a science based book with no sources?, i used over 20 while writing my undergrad dissertation. Zero evidence of peer review. 2. Theres a spelling mistake within the first 5 lines of the summary, peer review isnt just there for scientific accuracy. 3. Your post links no specific quotes from the book, in fact quotes from the author " I never intended to seek out evidence to support vegetarianism or veganism because of any preconceived ideas or experiences. Indeed, I tend not to use the 'V' words because they often infer something other than what I espouse." seem to suggest even he wouldn't support your post. -Judging by the fact the scientist behind the book seems to be respected in the community, seems to disagree with a large amount of your post, and you gave no specific quotes of him saying anything to support your posts conclusions, i have to conclude you are putting words in his mouth. | ||
|
jdseemoreglass
United States3773 Posts
On September 21 2012 06:21 KwarK wrote: Complaining about how natural milk or eggs are on the internet is kinda odd. By that logic if nature had meant for us to remotely communicate abstract ideas with each other we'd be telepathic. Nature has no intention and humans are animals following our primal desires to consume, we use milk because we want to, nothing unnatural about it. Using anesthesia on a bull you're castrating is fairly absurd, it won't make the post op any less painful for it and if you're really that concerned about animals avoiding pain you might as well go out to Africa and start tranquilising zebra as lions catch them. You're not torturing the thing, you're doing a simple medical procedure. Regarding animals getting their neck slit while they're still alive, that's pretty much the point. If the animal were already dead then you wouldn't slit it's neck, you'd go "someone has already done this one, pass me the next one" and then slit that one's throat. You slit their throat in order to kill them, that's the idea, of course you do it while they're still alive. If you didn't and still proceeded to carve them up to make steaks I think that'd be crueler. Absolutely excellent post. I agree with every point, well said. Nature has no intention. It is ignorant and indifferent, including of human or other animal suffering. I would add that 99% of what we eat is organic in some form and has to be killed to give us sustenance, which means life is predicated upon death. We could still make a distinction between plants and animals due to their cognition, but at least it puts into perspective what life is all about so we don't get this misplaced notion that nature is all harmony and that humans invented cruelty. On September 21 2012 06:41 SolonTLG wrote: What would it take for you to give up the fish and occasional steaks? I'd settle for $5 million. I think. I mean fish and steak are pretty damn good, maybe life would no longer be worth living...  | ||
|
xeo1
United States429 Posts
1/3 fruits/vegetables 1/3 lean poultry/low fat dairy/nuts/seeds - drink water (optional: with liquid chrorophyll), tea (green preferrably) - avoid or limit trans fat, added sugar/salt, saturated fat (found in animal sources) - exercise daily, sleep at least 8 hours, don't smoke or do drugs, don't stress, use relaxation techniques - take Coenzyme Q10, resveratrol, Vitamin D3, Phosphatidylcholine, fish oil and a daily multivitamin (NOT ALL VERIFIED) - before you die sign up for cyronics (requires around $250,000) and hope future technologies can repair you and possibly keep you immortal. although it is a traditional custom, NEVER cremate yourself as it results in the destruction of your brain and thus your current self forever (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information-theoretic_death) you're welcome~ EDIT: extra info | ||
|
imJealous
United States1382 Posts
| ||
|
SolonTLG
United States299 Posts
On September 21 2012 06:44 frantic.cactus wrote: Well, humans cannot get essential long-chain fatty acids from ANY plant products. We have evolved to eat meat, because unlike our prime ape counterparts, we don't have the digestive system to turn short-chain fatty acids we get from plant matter into long chain fatty acids we need for development. Do you know why gorillas have huge abdomens? It's because they have a much more complex digestive system than us. Which is why it's unwise to compare us. http://player.vimeo.com/video/10533993 Biologically were not made to eat just plant matter, it results in deficiencies. Ethically, well that depends on your values. You are wrong. It is entirely possible to get all the essential amino acids from a vegan diet. Like any diet, one needs to take care and eat a balanced diet. There are 3 perfectly healthy vegan kids living across the street from me that haven't had an animal product a day in their life! | ||
|
SupLilSon
Malaysia4123 Posts
On September 21 2012 06:46 SolonTLG wrote: Defining in what sense you mean it is "natural"? That term is subjective. I, now, "naturally" don't eat animals or animal products. We are not lions, sharks, or zebras, we are humans. Invoking other species is not relevant. Also, I am giving an ethical argument for veganism. Morals are something entirely different. If you want to speak strictly biology and evolution, we were meant to have a mixed diet. There are very few naturally herbivorous human cultures because meat is an amazing source of nutrients and energy. Consumption of meat probably provided much needed energy to help homosapiens diverge from apes and develop more complex nervous systems. Sure, in this day and age it is completely possible and viable to live a vegetarian lifestyle if you live in a 1st world country. But that doesn't make it natural. Just like humans can choose to go without sex, but I don't want virgins bitching at people who do have sex because they have sex. Ty. Wei2cool you just won the thread xD | ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
What use would there be for dairy cows and slaughterhouse cows if we did not eat meat or drink milk? Answer: none. What is the likelihood of those cows being able to survive and thrive in the wild if we set them loose? Answer: none. So if we stop drinking milk and eating meat, we are going to send all of these cows to extinction. Is it crueler to milk and cull a few cows, or wipe them from the face of the Earth? I can understand vegetarianism. It's just fine to say "hey, I don't want to get my food from killing animals." I don't personally subscribe to that logic, but I see where those guys are coming from. But to say that even milking cows that were BRED for producing far more milk than their calves could ever drink is CRUELTY? Well, you've got to be an absolute idiot to think that for a second. Same with considering it cruel to eat unfertilized eggs. Veganism for health reasons is one thing. Veganism for moral reasons is ignorant as hell. | ||
|
SupLilSon
Malaysia4123 Posts
On September 21 2012 06:53 SolonTLG wrote: You are wrong. It is entirely possible to get all the essential amino acids from a vegan diet. Like any diet, one needs to take care and eat a balanced diet. There are 3 perfectly healthy vegan kids living across the street from me that haven't had an animal product a day in their life! You realize Amino Acids and Fatty Acids are entirely different compounds? And this is the biggest thing that bugs me about Veganism. Ethically, morally I'm all for it. If you think it's wrong to eat animals, that's all on you and I don't care. But when vegans start trying to justify and force Veganism on everyone else by claiming it's scientifically superior I get a bit irritated. Many of them only know the surface of the science needed to understand nutrition and how it interacts with the body but they feel perfectly fine telling you Veganism is superior... | ||
|
frantic.cactus
New Zealand164 Posts
On September 21 2012 06:48 SolonTLG wrote: What does that mean? Are you implying that we are like lions or something (see "Lion King" movie song)? Yes. We are the ultimate predator, and like lions have evolved to get essential nutrition from meat and animal products. Death is part of the circle of life, one day we will die and nourish the earth and give back what we have borrowed. | ||
|
pwncakery
Canada131 Posts
Didn't claw my way to the top of the food chain to eat like a rabbit. | ||
|
Feartheguru
Canada1334 Posts
Can I also point out that I think your view of "morality" is a little sparse(honestly I can't think of an appropriate word)? Cutting a plant in half or yanking it out of the ground without anesthesia, is literally the same thing except you don't hear it scream. In what way is that more "moral" than killing an animal? Lastly the information about eating less chicken --> equal to taking x cars off the road is information designed to mislead since it doesn't even account for the eco-cost in terms of the food to replace the chicken. | ||
|
Kich
United States339 Posts
On September 21 2012 06:10 ImAbstracT wrote: There is a connection between diabetes (type 1 I believe) and obesity to animal product consumption. You can literally eat all the fruits, veggies, nuts, and plant based foods you want without worrying about being overweight. *This is just from some sources I have read. Don't use my posts to make your dietary choices.* This is grossly untrue. Literally every vegan I have had contact with (4) was overweight. | ||
|
SolonTLG
United States299 Posts
On September 21 2012 06:48 wei2coolman wrote: eating animals "isn't extreme" because it happens in other species, so much so that they cause natural extinction patterns. Clearly my use of normal, was in terms of the idea of consuming meat on a universal scale, not on individual. No need to twist my words, you clearly knew what I meant. It is very much so relevant. Humans are omnivorous. just look at human evolution patterns, we have enzymes to digest meat, our bodies were made to do it. No one here is claiming being vegan is bad. We just don't want to hear vegans complain about how meat eating is bad, when it's an obvious biological inclination. Just like humans can choose to go without sex, but I don't want virgins bitching at people who do have sex because they have sex. No, using the world "normal" implies judment because what is normal is a social construct. Again, you cannot reference what other species do when I am giving an ethical argument for HUMANS not to eat animals. Other species do their own thing and we should minimize out inference in their lives. It does NOT matter what humans did in the past in terms of meat consumption, only the future. Humans don't have to eat meat, I am proof of that. Humans can make ethical choices, and we can choose not to eat meat. The sex example is a bad one. Obstaining from sex only affect that person. Eating animals affects animals. | ||
| ||
