Are you vegetarian ?

[strongvoicesforward]

Do you have any research to back up your claims that feeding meat to starving masses is not practical in comparison to crops in africa?

Research does not set out to prove a negative.

Farming animal products is good for the economy just as much as crop growing is-

Farming animals is an inefficient use of recourses.

in places like africa where you cannot be choosey about what you farm, where its more of a case of grab and grow whatever is posible, saying that farming animals is bad because it causes enviromental problems cannot be justified over crop growing because over there they suffer just as many issues as each other.

I do have to ask this, are we talking about vegetarianism in general, or is this just a regional topic now as it concerns vegetarianism? Like I said before, when it is an issue of survival, all things are on the table for consideration.

But, it seems that even in Africa there are African orgs promoting vegetarianism. Do a search and you will find some. I am not going to defend African vegetarianism, let alone push it on those who are starving to death and need to eat anything just to survive.

In general however, producing flesh is inefficient in calorie production and harmful to the environment.

Do you have any data to back up that starving africans would be better off on a vegetarian diet? (taking into consideration these people suffer regular water shortages, don't have a large variety of crops, and don't have pills to supliment their diets and so forth)

Well, if they are starving, they need to eat what is available. Then it is a matter of survival.

Though, it is only common sense that animal livestock would put a greater strain on water sources. If a meat diet has been so helpful to Africans, then why are they still starving? Seems to not be working, if you ask me.

I don`t have the data to support that specifically says Africans would be specifically better off on a vegetarian diet. I don`t know if one exists that is worded as such and if everything is scarce like I have said several times, anything is fare for survival.

However, observations can be made about the data of recourse use and environmental damage from livestock and how that relates to and impacts the world in general. I am not an expert on anomalies and the cases of isolated areas and regions.

I do however have a position paper by the American Dietetics Association with a hundred references stating that vegetarianism offers advantages. Do you have any official papers of repute that are peer reviewed by national orgs that show a flesh diet is better than a vegetarian diet?

It has been my position all along that a vegetarian diet is just as well, and can supply all the nutritional needs of a person and offer advantages. I am not pushing anything on Africa. They have their own vegetarian societies addressing their issues and are more well acquainted with their unique problems than either I or you are. I will let them handle that debate. I am sure they are more capable than me on that issue as it concerns them.

 

[strongvoicesforward]

So you are only suspicious of people selling things then? Vegetarian organisations trying to pull people into their way of diet is no different than vicars and priests preaching to the unconverted to try and get them into their churches or religeon-

Sure they are. Research that is testable and peer reviewed with science backs up their claims and those of vicars' and priests' are not. Big difference.

...neither are trying to sell anything, but both could be questioned for biased properganda or whatever.

Both are trying to convince. But, one`s the vegetarian`s convincing is based on research and data. Not the religionists'.

If the vegan associating of the UK suddenly started farming crops would you start to take their teachings with a pinch of salt?

Until they were peer revued and backed up by other research, sure. Why not. Scepticism of claims is healthy. However, if the International Vegetarian Society started farming crops, they are doing so after much of the research has already been laid out for them. It would take new research that uncoverend falsities and errors in past research to make me question their claims.

 

[strongvoicesforward]

If we lived soley on crops then there would be even more water irregation. Crops are a far bigger drain on water supplies than animals are.

You are not realizing that it takes more crops to feed animals and therefore the use of water for large amounts of crops would be more taxed. Eliminating farm animals would not see the same proportionate rise or increase in crop production to make up for the loss of flesh.

 

[strongvoicesforward]

Where do you think all those lovely veggies were grown off? Animal crap and chemicals! Without animal farming to supply the huge quantities of fertiliser, farmers would be forced to resort to using chemicals entirely to feed their crops off- no ****, no veggies.
By eating organic vegetables you are actually supporting animal farming in many senses as to do it you need vast quantities of animal poop which come from the animal farms. By supporting GM veggies you are only supporting farminsg pumping even more chemical fertilisers into the streams and stuff.
Your reasoning is very flawed.

Animal waste is used. How much that can that be decreased and substituted with other advancements is being addressed. Vegetarianism is not an answer for a Utopian world, that is for sure. However, with animal farming larger amounts of cultivated land is needed to feed the livestock and that makes it necessary to bring even more fertilizer into the environment.

Vegetarianism in the environmental paradigm is not about choosing and having the perfect choice; it is about having the best possible choice.

No, your reasoning is flawed and you are not thinking very deeply on the matter. Just the fact that you think going vegetarian would create a larger strain on the water supply because you think more people eating plant life would mean an increase in plant production, IS WRONG -- because you did not and do not realize that the increase in production from increased human use demand would not surpass the loss of production from lifestock no longer consuming plant life -- hence water and other recourses would be conserved. Why don`t you understand that?

 

[strongvoicesforward]

Oh right, so we should just put a cork up all the cows arses or kill them all off?

Are you trying to build a strawman argument? I don`t think anyone would suggest putting a cork up their arse or just kill them off. I sure wouldn`t. If the world ever goes to a meat free civilization, I am sure it will be one in which animals were bred less and less as production wanes in the face of loss demand. Economics would phase things out slowly.

With more crops, the need for lorries/trucks as transportation is vastly increased.

You are right. 65%~80% of all grain goes to produce livestock. If meat were not being produced there would be the save in fossil fuels from not transporting meat AND grain. If livestock were not in the equation human increase consumption WOULD NOT rise to the same level at that point in time to match the same amount of grain needed by livestock -- let alone surpass it.

Don`t you understand the concept of value added? Could you explain to me what the concept of that phrase means to you and if you understand that with each phase of production to value added, recourses are used to add value? Have you taken an economics course and come across the phrase of "value added"? It is a pretty basic concept in economics.

 

[strongvoicesforward]

And i'm pointing out the flaws in your arguements right now

We will agree to disagree on that.

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

All these questions can be discussed now on the appropriate thread now you have made one, i will follow up your points there.

 

[strongvoicesforward]

Continuing on with the health aspects of the discussion:

Approximately 100 years ago Japan decided to 'modernize' its eating habits by copying western nations' diets. Until then Hepatitis E (HEV) was unknown in Japan. However, by importing pigs from Britain for consumption that soon changed according to Japan's Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry.

The research group, headed by Shunji Mishiro, director of Toshiba General Hospital's research department, has concluded that the import of British pigs, which started with the government's drive to build a "rich country with a strong army" in the Meiji era (1868-1912), was the cause of the virus' entry. As eating meat became popular among Japanese, HEV spread across the country, the group said. ...

The ratio of pigs carrying the virus is very high, and the group concluded that it is highly probable the pigs brought the virus into the country. With the popularization of meat-eating, the virus became indigenized, the group concluded.-- The Daily Yomiuri newspaper, 13 April, 2006 pg. 3​

 

[nurizeko]

I voted i eat meat.
I wont go into a long explanation as to why, suffice to say i have the entire history of evolution and mother nature and biology behind this.
SCIENCE! :bikkuri:
(sorry....a silly battlecry me and some blokes have...)

Many animals like goats can live on plant matter that we cannot eat but can grow in sparse conditions like grass, and can survive on very little water- which is why goat farming is very popular in africa.

I thought a problem in africa and stuff is goats are eating everything anyway so it all contributes to the vicious cycle.

As for SVF dude, you gotta cut down on the text-floods, burying your opponents in an essay of babbling on isnt helping, its ussually better to get the core of your points across with approproate links pointing to evidence and infomation that is required to validate your position.
In other words one post at a time covering all the things you have to say in response to the post(s) you wish to address, i know you feel like you got alot to say, but im sure most of your concepts are conveyable in one reasonable sized post.

If the Masters students and intellectuals at another forum i visit can do it and still kick anothers ass, im sure we can to.


I have to say, the majority of humanity eating meat is and interesting situation, and the fact this has been going on all of humanities existance, and the omni/carnivore species before it.

 

[strongvoicesforward]

I voted i eat meat.
I wont go into a long explanation as to why, suffice to say i have the entire history of evolution and mother nature and biology behind this.

Always good to put a little discipline on natural behaviour if that behavior results in degradation of environment and cruelty. In addition, it`s beneficial to choose something over something else when studies have shown that an alternative can meet all the traditional needs and offer benefits.

SCIENCE!
(sorry....a silly battlecry me and some blokes have...)

Yes, science is good. It is even better when harnessed with compassion and choosing the best choices it points out. Even Hitler wanted to use science for eugenics -- but I don`t think that was very compassionate.

I thought a problem in africa and stuff is goats are eating everything anyway so it all contributes to the vicious cycle.

Then goats shouldn`t be raised and exploited if it is damaging the natural fauna and wildlife. Just what are you thinking?

As for SVF dude, you gotta cut down on the text-floods, burying your opponents in an essay of babbling on isnt helping, its ussually better to get the core of your points across with approproate links pointing to evidence and infomation that is required to validate your position.
In other words one post at a time covering all the things you have to say in response to the post(s) you wish to address, i know you feel like you got alot to say, but im sure most of your concepts are conveyable in one reasonable sized post.
If the Masters students and intellectuals at another forum i visit can do it and still kick anothers ass, im sure we can to.

I`ve addressed this personal note HERE to keep the thread from going off.

I have to say, the majority of humanity eating meat is and interesting situation, and the fact this has been going on all of humanities existance, and the omni/carnivore species before it.

Yes, interesting. And, bears and wolves and mountain lions defacate in the forest, too. We, when given the choice as we civilize more and more, alter our natural actions. The large portion of our recorded history has also seen slavery for the benefit of the oppressor -- however, I don`t find that interesting bit of fact is a reason to keep doing it just because of a long tradition of it.

 

[strongvoicesforward]

Singer and songwriter artist, Prince, has been voted "Sexiest Vegetarian" in Peta`s annual voting contest for the title.

Prince, a strict vegan, recently quoted Ghandi in a line that he closed his new album "3121" with. Taking a little artistic freedom in spelling style, he quotes Ghandi:

"2 my mind, the life of a lamb is no less precious than that of a human being."​

Compassion is a melodious note to the ear. Ghandi makes it into Western music with his thought for animals on that point. The message spreads a little more.

Slowly slowly, the water flows from mountain top, to stream, to river, to sea. It will get there. Just takes time. Yes...in due time, in due time.

 

[Revenant]

I have taken on a vegan diet, simply for environmental reasons. I am not opposed to killing animals for meat, but most of the meat and dairy we consume is a waste of resources (free range ranches, farms, etc, on agriculturally unviable land isn't such a waste of land, after that it might simply depend on how they dispose of waste, etc), in a time when we are outcompeting other species, and just starting to feel the effects of our choices.

I'd go for fish, were we also not overfishing our seas. A vegan diet with algae based vitamin B12 and DHA supplements seems to fulfill all that an animal diet would. I'll wait and see how I feel a few months down the road, but so far, I feel a bit better than I was when consuming all that meat. If I just don't feel good after a few months (my diet is nutritionally quite sound, after a lot of tinkering on Nutritiondata.com <-- an incredible site, adding up food nutrients, comparing food, and finding the best sources of certain nutrients), I'll perhaps try adding in bits of omega-3 and vitamin B12 rich fish a couple times a week, or something.

 

[strongvoicesforward]

That`s great, Revenant! Glad to hear that.

Surprised you are starting off with a vegan diet. Most people start vegetarian and then move to a vegan diet.

What you said is true:

...most of the meat and dairy we consume is a waste of resources (free range ranches, farms, etc, on agriculturally unviable land isn't such a waste of land, after that it might simply depend on how they dispose of waste, etc), in a time when we are outcompeting other species, and just starting to feel the effects of our choices.

and

I feel a bit better than I was when consuming all that meat.

I do, too.

btw, were you following the thread, "Vegetarianism for the environment"?

 

[Revenant]

btw, were you following the thread, "Vegetarianism for the environment"?

Only looked once briefly, although I'd like to get in there and perhaps collect some data for anyone who asks why I decided to go vegan.

 

[strongvoicesforward]

As already noted elsewhere in another thread, the main reasons to choose a vegetarian diet are:

1. Moral

2. health

3. Environmental

My reason is based on moral. For me, I would liken that to the bricks in a wall. Health and evironmental reasons would be the mortar that connects the bricks.

Revenant on the otherhand, as seen from his post above, has decided that his reason to go vegan is based on "environmental" considerations. I would only hope that moral and health reasons, based on buddhist teachings which Revenant to my memory seems to be a follower of, would also find their way into his view on the topic as mortar between his bricks.

Whatever the reason for going vegetarian/vegan one may have -- I am not too concerned about. In the end, the decision to choose one of those diets will mean less demand for a product that causes suffering. I personally would not care why someone has decided not to cause me suffering -- I would just be appreciative of the fact that suffering is not my lot due to the actions of others.

Knowing all three reasons are valid though, does help one to know that the choice to not eat flesh is indeed the right one.

 

[Revenant]

I am not Buddhist, I do agree with a lot of it's ideas though, and especially the training of the mind via meditation, and the existentialism it promotes.

Here's an article I came across on the health of taking on a vegan or vegetarian diet.

Heart benefits. Numerous studies have shown that a vegetarian diet lowers blood pressure, cholesterol, and blood lipid (fat) levels. That adds up to a lower risk for heart disease. The one problem might be for vegetarians who don't eat fish, because they're missing out on the best source of omega-3 fats, which have a variety of benefits for the heart. Flax and walnuts contain a version of omega-3s that may make up for the lack of fish, but it's hard to imagine they could do it completely.

Vitamin B12. Dairy foods and eggs are good sources, so many vegetarians get plenty of vitamin B12. The stricter vegan diet, which doesn't include any animal-based foods, could theoretically lead to a shortage of B12. The vitamin is added to several brands of breakfast cereal (Total, for example) as well as some brands of soy milk. Note, though, that many "natural" health-food cereals are not fortified with any vitamins, including B12.

Underlined are links. Nutritionally going vegan isn't a problem so long as one gets their vitamin B12. Getting Omega-3 would just be a bonus for most people, as most westerners don't eat enough Omega-3 rich fish.

 

[strongvoicesforward]

I am not Buddhist, I do agree with a lot of it's ideas though, and especially the training of the mind via meditation, and the existentialism it promotes.

That is what I was referring to. Wasn`t 100% sure if you were actually Buddhist, just recall you citing Buddhism and the Dalai Lama on several occassions.

btw, I read those MH articles, too, a while back.

 

[monrepo]

No, I'm not.

 

[Duo]

If I had a strong desire to eat some form of meat, then perhaps I would feel compelled to eat mussels or oysters. But I do not have that feeling to consume meat to optimally sustain myself. In fact, since I have become a vegetarian I feel more healthy/energetic.
I do think that there is a significant number of vegetarians who eat shell fish of some kinds. Some follow a general rule that if it has eyes or a brain, then they won`t eat it (I have not adopted that rule).
Yes, animals are killled in the production of plant food for human consumption. It would be illogical to assume one could live a life on Earth without causing no harm to something. It happens -- just as one walking on the ground undoubtedly kills insects. If one were to try to avoid all nonintentional death caused by their action, they would be imobile in a room and verily forfeit their life. That is a neurotic answer to the desire to not cause suffering.
Vegetarianism is not about leading the perfect life of not harming anything through consumption -- it is about choosing the least of the harms that exist and still being able to live a modern lifestyle.
We most definitely need fruits and vegetables to survive. The same cannot be said of meat. Therefore, one could never choose to keep a modern lifestyle but then consume nothing but mussels and oysters and to insure that those that are consumed were not farmed in a negative impact on the environment, choose to roam the shoreline and harvest ones own.
I may also suggest that the farming of mussels and oysters in natural bodies of water impact negatively on the aquatic life in those vicinities. There is most definitely displacement.

I think vegetarianism is a luxury of western world individuals. I'd like to see the trend spread to developing nations and see if it is such a choice of a lifestyle. In my view you can't live a modern lifestyle without meat either. What do you do when you are sick? Instead of chicken soup what is there to be taken, celery soup?? And how about very young children that need protein to grow or feeble persons, meat is essential and saying otherwise is false in my view. However, if a vegetarian puts for the idea that he/she dont like meat and would rather prefer a diet on vegtables and fruit that is fine. However, to make it seem that vegetables are more important than meat is misleading.

 

[strongvoicesforward]

Hi, Duo.

I think vegetarianism is a luxury of western world individuals. I'd like to see the trend spread to developing nations and see if it is such a choice of a lifestyle.

A quick look and it was rather easy to find vegetarian movements/societies in developing nations. If I were to spend more time on it I am sure I could find more. Keep in mind, India still has a lot of poverty and many poor Hindi and Jans are vegetarian.

One thing I did notice, though, during the search, is that most vegetarian societies in places such as Africa do not have the funds to actively promote the practice, such as an org like Peta here in the West. Most of these vegetarian societies just have addresses or tel #s, so I am assuming they cannot even afford internet connection or homepage construction, but some do have e-mail addresses.

Here are a few:

VEGETARIAN SOCIETY OF KENYA
Kaushik Kothary, P O Box 43414 , NAIROBI , Kenya

VEGETARIAN ORGANISATION MAURITIUS
C/o Edge Communication , PO Box 252 , CUREPIPE , Mauritius
Ph: +230 674 8000 / Fax: +230 676 7700 .
WEBSITE AVAILABLE HERE.

NIGERIA VEGETARIAN SOCIETY
Emmanuel Eyoh, Suite 19,Clemco Plaza 22,Latif Salami St , International Airport Rd, Ajao Estate , LAGOS , Nigeria
Ph: +234 803 722 6279 .
Email: no-spam@[email protected]

NIGERIAN VEGETARIAN EDUCATION NETWORK
Robert Maduka, P O Box 489 , ORLU , Imo state , Nigeria

S.O.U.L. VEGETARIAN SOCIETY
142 St Michael's Road , East Street , ABA , Imo State , Nigeria

Some others and their dates of formation listed here on the International Vegetarian Union are:

1960 - Nigerian Vegetarian Society
1960 - West African Vegetarian Society
1979 - Egyptian Vegetarians
1979 - South African Vegetarian Union
1982 - Pan African Vegetarian Union
1997 - Vegetarian Society of Botswana
2001 - L'Alliance Vegetarienne Congo
2002 - Vegetarian Society of Uganda
2002 - Vegetarian Society of Ghana
2002 - The Zambia Society of Vegetarians

In my view you can't live a modern lifestyle without meat either.

I am not sure why you would say that. The fact that vegetarians exist in the modern world holding corporate jobs, competing at high levels of sports, making up to perhaps as high as 5~10% of the U.S. population clearly shows that they can. The news sure isn`t rife with vegetarians keeling over after a few weeks into their new eating habits, is it?

What do you do when you are sick? Instead of chicken soup what is there to be taken, celery soup??

That`s the point, we vegetarians don`t get sick! Just kidding. Honestly, though, my colds are much more infrequent and much less severe, not hanging around as long as they did compared to when I consumed flesh. But, tomato soup, onion soup, or brocali soup do quite well with helping with colds.

And how about very young children that need protein to grow or feeble persons, meat is essential and saying otherwise is false in my view.

Perhaps the American Dietetic Association, the largest association of nutritiona professionals in the world, and their formal position on vegetarianism could change your view somewhat. In their position paper on the topic which is supported by over a hundred references to research from such places as the USDA, AMA, numerous universities, etc... they clearly state that children and adults can lead a healthy life on a vegetarian diet, and that such a diet offers benefits.

Vegetarian diets offer a number of nutritional benefits, including lower levels of saturated fat, cholesterol, and animal protein as well as higher levels of carbohydrates, fiber, magnesium, potassium, folate, and antioxidants such as vitamins C and E and phytochemicals. Vegetarians have been reported to have lower body mass indices than nonvegetarians, as well as lower rates of death from ischemic heart disease; vegetarians also show lower blood cholesterol levels; lower blood pressure; and lower rates of hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and prostate and colon cancer. ...

The United States Dietary Guidelines (23) state, "Vegetarian diets can be consistent with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, and meet Recommended Dietary Allowances for nutrients."

LINK TO ORIGINAL SOURCE

​

However, if a vegetarian puts for the idea that he/she dont like meat and would rather prefer a diet on vegtables and fruit that is fine. However, to make it seem that vegetables are more important than meat is misleading.

The truth of the matter stands for itself: In this modern world, one can live healthily on a diet consisting of nothing but plant life. The same cannot be said of meat.