CoSForums Archive - U - Vegetarianism/Veganism

GryffindorGr

April 4th, 2004, 2:28 pm

Actually, fish is healthy, but the seas are getting emptier by the minute. It's not just the cows that are suffering.
Don't worry! They have what they call "fish farming" :)

Here's a good site for info on it:

Oceans and fishing (http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Oceans/Fish_Farming/)

bystrwznbrry
I am saying that people are genetically engineered to get the diseases they will get in their lives. Yes, you can try to live a healthy life style and hope what you do doesn't trigger the gene you have that is going to give you cancer but in the long run if your meant to get it your going to get it.

Not always. This is not really true. I think it has a lot to do with what you eat and what your family eats. I did an study on it a few years ago over what causes diseases in certain groups of people. For example, the North American Indians (particularly in the Canadian areas, since I can't recall the name of the tribe right now) and a couple other groups had no traces of Alzheimers disease in the genetic line. This was mainly due to what they ate; ie, Fresh food from the ocean, they grew their own food, etc. and so forth. I'll have to get back on this if ever I find that essay again. :D

About eating meat, well, I believe the Native Americans (American Indians) had the best idea! They didn't just slaughter meat; they prayed and respected the buffaloes. So when they decided to hunt down one or two buffaloes, they made sure that this provided not only meat source for the entire tribe, but also, the hides of the buffalo provided clothing and housing. There were so many useful things that they did with it. They did the same with the cutting down of trees, etc...prayed and respected it's natural cycle and the earth itself for giving them the food source and shelter.

Jenni The Hurja

April 4th, 2004, 3:29 pm

I still hold to my earlier post that you can't get away from meat (no matter what the form) and if you feel that just stopping eating it because you want to make a difference in some way you really aren't going to stop an industry of that size.

And I agree with what Angora answered to that: you can only do what you can do. I don't think anyone here claims that they don't use any products that have been tested on animals or that have any animal based substances in them. I'm not a vegan and I know I could do so much more, but even though I'm not going to stop the industry by being a vegetarian I still I think I am making a difference - a small one though it is. You'd imagine supply had something to do with the demand.

Alaasea Lisseul

April 4th, 2004, 6:31 pm

Azimuth

April 4th, 2004, 6:50 pm

merry meet,
I am niether.. but i do wish the whole world could be vegatatriens.... I hate eating meat... but it tastes so good.... I try my best to steer away from meat products.. but occasonally I will eat chicken or something..... I am upsessed with animals. They were here before us... so why kill them.... I am sorry but I have failed to see anyone pull out a gun and shoot a human then put them up on the serving menue.. tis very disturbing isn't? Well I must say it s the same way for the animals... I just disppise animals crulty or killing for no reason.

Well, why is it okay for Lions to eat Antelopes? For Sharks to eat Fish? For Eagles to eat Mice? Why is it okay for nearly every animal on the planet to eat other animals, but not Humans? We are animals. We are the most intelligent animals, yes, but animals nevertheless. The difference is that we have the choice between meat and vegetation, whereas other animals are acting on their instincts. There is no reason why we should make the choice not to eat meat however, because if other animals can eat meat, then so can we.

GryffindorGr

April 4th, 2004, 7:37 pm

Well, why is it okay for Lions to eat Antelopes? For Sharks to eat Fish? For Eagles to eat Mice? Why is it okay for nearly every animal on the planet to eat other animals, but not Humans? We are animals. We are the most intelligent animals, yes, but animals nevertheless. The difference is that we have the choice between meat and vegetation, whereas other animals are acting on their instincts. There is no reason why we should make the choice not to eat meat however, because if other animals can eat meat, then so can we.

True! That's why we are called "Omnivores" and not just "Herbivores" and "Carnivores" :)

We're able to digest meat and vegetables in our stomach. But to become a vegetarian, is commendable because it takes a personal affirmative action within themselves and advocating against the disasters of factory animals and the useless slaughter of animals in particular. Perhaps there are many layers of why one becomes one and also that it's a personal choice.
But we have in our system which makes us tolerable to have both ingested.

But to say that because animals who eat other animals because they can, so therefore we should is not wholly correct. Many of these animals cannot ingest vegetables and it is within their genetic system that they can only eat meat (this is after all, going into the kreb cycle and the balance of mother nature)

If we look into this closely, the unbalance of too many predators are not good and therefore the same is said of too many rabbits, deers, etc, which would cause a whole lot of diseases!
Check out what has happened in the parts of the east coast where Deer run rampant because they have no predators. This caused "Deer ticks" that made lyme disease!

And there was a story in upper North America where Wolves became rampant and there was no supply or little supply of deer, etc. and therefore it became a mad and crazy inhabitant for the wolves. Mother nature made it so that predators are predators for a reason, and that the balance is there for elk, deer, and birds, etc, and so forth to create this harmony in life.

Azimuth

April 4th, 2004, 8:31 pm

But to say that because animals who eat other animals because they can, so therefore we should is not wholly correct.

Yeah, what I meant was, as long as other animals can eat each other, then there is no proper reason for us to turn vegetarian.

RubberSoul

April 6th, 2004, 10:01 pm

Yeah, what I meant was, as long as other animals can eat each other, then there is no proper reason for us to turn vegetarian.
But (for most) being a vegetarian isn't a question of other animals eating each other, so therefore we can too. I would agree that eating meat is normal and healthy, but it's the way that humans go about getting the meat that is disgusting, and usually tends to steer most people toward vegetarianism.

I'm sure there wouldn't be nearly as many vegetarians on this planet if slaughterhouse regulations weren't as cruel and unhumane as they presently are.

Zee

April 7th, 2004, 2:10 am

I'm not a vegetarian or vegan because, as I mentioned on another thread, meat is the one major source of vitamin B12, which is an essential vitamin. I believe that if a diet does not provide all essentials naturally, then it's an incomplete diet, and therefore bad for me. I don't like taking suppliments, because I shouldn't have to.

I don't begrudge anyone else the right to make a choice of diet on what they hold true, however, I have some major problems with vegetarians and vegans, not because of their beliefs in animal welfare, but because of some major hypocrisies inherent in the lifestyle. The biggest one of these is that being vegan/vegetarian does not really encourage fewer animals to be killed.

Think about it. If you're vegan or vegetarian, what are you mostly eating? Wheat? Soy? These are grown in fields, right? And how are they harvested? Why, with great big combines that crush millions of field mice, squirrels, possums, and other innocent animals every year. Going even further, did you know that deer and elk really like to eat wheat, soy and vegetables? And that every year, there are controlled hunts to get rid of those deer and elk that are attempting to eat the food you're eventually going to buy?

The less meat you eat, the more wheat, soy, vegetable or fruit products you must eat in order to be full and remain healthy. All these things are grown in fields full of animals that attempt to eat the crops, and if they escape the combines, they can still be killed in other, even more devestating ways. A popular method to getting rid of any pest is to introduce a predator. Introduce too many predators in an environment that doesn't prey on them in turn, and you've got an ecosystem that's gone completely out of balance. A vegan or vegetarian diet is really no less responsible for the death of animals than an omnivorous diet is. What you don't kill for meat is made up for by what you kill in order to eat your crops.

There are even studies that suggest you do less harm by eating more meat and dairy, rather than less: http://www.wildlifedamagecontrol.com/animalrights/leastharm.htm
http://eesc.orst.edu/agcomwebfile/news/food/vegan.html

So in the end, I'm actually rather appalled by the ignorance inherent in the animal welfare aspect of being vegan/vegetarian. I can certainly understand not wanting animals raised for food to be kept in horrible conditions, but there are better ways to accomplish a change in policy than boycotting by changing your diet, while not even understanding the true consequences of that action.

GryffindorGr

April 7th, 2004, 1:12 pm

I'm not a vegetarian or vegan because, as I mentioned on another thread, meat is the one major source of vitamin B12, which is an essential vitamin. I believe that if a diet does not provide all essentials naturally, then it's an incomplete diet, and therefore bad for me. I don't like taking suppliments, because I shouldn't have to.

In one of my favorite University classes on Medicine and herbs history, we're taught that supplements (vitamins) ingested in our bodies are the same as the vitamins in the foods we eat. Our bodies don't recognize whether it's a vitamin pill or from the food itself. It doesn't matter. What is important is that we have to eat, even if it's a little bit of everything and take the supplement as part of our daily requirement in order to get all the needed vitamins in our systems. Many times, food when steamed or cooked, loses many of it's rich vitamins by this. (I have been anemic before because I had bad eating habits. I would not eat for a couple days then eat like a pig the next few days. It was very unhealthy but now I'm more aware.)
But you're right, for you, since you dislike taking supplements why should you take pills on the side with your food when the food you eat can provide all that for you. But does all of it?
I was also taught that alcoholics in general who lose a lot of their Vitamin B12 (from the mental ) and due to the fact that alcohol kills brain cells. They are recommended to take these supplements on the side. I just wanted to type that in because it's interesting. :)

I don't begrudge anyone else the right to make a choice of diet on what they hold true, however, I have some major problems with vegetarians and vegans, not because of their beliefs in animal welfare, but because of some major hypocrisies inherent in the lifestyle. The biggest one of these is that being vegan/vegetarian does not really encourage fewer animals to be killed.

No, I dont think many Vegetarians are ignorant of that. They know it exists and that is why they act on it for their own personal identity. It's like those job strikers in a way. Will it help? Who knows. A lot of times it doesn't but few times it has.

There are even studies that suggest you do less harm by eating more meat and dairy, rather than less: http://www.wildlifedamagecontrol.com/animalrights/leastharm.htm
http://eesc.orst.edu/agcomwebfile/news/food/vegan.html

So in the end, I'm actually rather appalled by the ignorance inherent in the animal welfare aspect of being vegan/vegetarian. I can certainly understand not wanting animals raised for food to be kept in horrible conditions, but there are better ways to accomplish a change in policy than boycotting by changing your diet, while not even understanding the true consequences of that action.
I'll have to read up on those sites. But briefly looking at one of them, I believe I also stated that Native American Indians are the best at conducting a very good hunting and respectful way of acquiring meat. :)

Factory animal conditioning is horrible. This was brought on by corporations and money making--to feed and house the entirety of a population who demands so much food.
But I like the farming techniques which are very healthy and correct way of growing and feeding animals. The problem with this is that it costs too much money while factory animals are cheaper and they can make more money. It's all about money.

Jenni The Hurja

April 7th, 2004, 3:09 pm

I can certainly understand not wanting animals raised for food to be kept in horrible conditions, but there are better ways to accomplish a change in policy than boycotting by changing your diet, while not even understanding the true consequences of that action.
I can't see a better way to accomplish a change in the conditions the animals are kept, than by boycotting the meat.

You say that the vegan/vegetarian diet causes the deaths of as many or even more animals than the so called 'normal' diet. Don't know if this is true or not, maybe it is. But don't the animals that die in the fields have better lives than the ones who are kept in captivity?

I have nothing against hunting in principle.

Zee

April 7th, 2004, 8:50 pm

In one of my favorite University classes on Medicine and herbs history, we're taught that supplements (vitamins) ingested in our bodies are the same as the vitamins in the foods we eat. Our bodies don't recognize whether it's a vitamin pill or from the food itself. It doesn't matter.
Oh, I definitely believe it doesn't really matter, I suppose you could just say it feels a bit like cheating to me. ;) To me, if I'm not eating the right foods to give me all of my essential nutrients, my diet isn't balanced. Suppliments are an option, but it feels like it just shouldn't be necessary for me to take them in the first place. I certainly have nothing against suppliments in general, though, it's just a personal choice for me to get my vitamins directly from food.

I'll have to read up on those sites. But briefly looking at one of them, I believe I also stated that Native American Indians are the best at conducting a very good hunting and respectful way of acquiring meat. :)
Oh, absolutely. Someone should have left them in charge of providing the nation with meat, we'd have a much better situation on our hands. ;)

Factory animal conditioning is horrible. This was brought on by corporations and money making--to feed and house the entirety of a population who demands so much food.
But I like the farming techniques which are very healthy and correct way of growing and feeding animals. The problem with this is that it costs too much money while factory animals are cheaper and they can make more money. It's all about money.
I can't see a better way to accomplish a change in the conditions the animals are kept, than by boycotting the meat.

You say that the vegan/vegetarian diet causes the deaths of as many or even more animals than the so called 'normal' diet. Don't know if this is true or not, maybe it is. But don't the animals that die in the fields have better lives than the ones who are kept in captivity?
I understand both of your concerns, and yes, money is big driving factor in this industry. However, as I said before, there really are better ways of accomplishing this goal. I only wish I could find the article that I'm about to summarize for you, but unfortunately I seem to have lost it.

In some recent year, I believe it might have been 1997, a woman from an animal welfare organization approached a cattle farmer and asked if she could show him a better way to raise his cattle and get the animal rights activists off his back, and in turn, get more money out of his business, not less. He was very skeptical at first and it took persistence, but finally he complied and asked her to show him how he might do this.

She convinced him to take some of his freshly weaned cows and bring them out of doors, away from the stalls and into his land. Instead of feeding them hormones and bits of other cows, she convinced him to feed them fresh grass and water and other nutritional things. This cost the farmer quite a bit of extra money and he was a bit dubious by this point, but he went through with it to the end, and when it came time for him to kill the cows and sell them, he realized that he had some of the best quality, organic meat imaginable. He was able to sell it all for twice to three times the usual price, making up the extra money he had spent and then some.

He was so happy about this, he spent thousands of dollars getting the stalls ripped out and his entire farm replaced with an animal-friendly environment, going out of his way to make the cows as comfortable as possible when the woman presented him with an article that showed him that the cow's mental health, as well as physical, made for better meat. To this day, he is considered an animal-friendly, free-range organic farm, and the guy has more money than he ever dreamed of having in his business.

I walk around campus and see animal welfare organizations wanting people to go vegan and sign their petitions, and I can't help but think how much more good they would be doing if they attempted to contact that woman and ask for details on how she convinced the farmer to change. They could write up in-depth pamphlets with pictures and a written testimony from the farmer, send them to other campuses and organizations all across America, and then they could all take field trips out to farms, hand out the pamphlets, talk to the farmers and see if they can convince them. Even if only a few are convinced at first, that's more fodder to add to the campaign. If people really made the effort, this country could have maybe 30-40% more organic, animal-friendly farms within the next ten years, and that's a lot of farms.

Boycotting is a passive-agressive technique and few people respond well to it, especially cattle and chicken farmers who most likely have no idea why in the heck you're so opposed to their meat. They're more likely to think that it's some crazy new trend not to eat meat, rather than that harming animals is really offending a lot of people who would otherwise eat meat. After all, many of these guys live in rural areas where there probably aren't any vegans or vegetarians, so they have no way of talking to one and understanding where they're coming from. Some of them probably don't even notice that any boycotting exists.

If they get attacked by an animal rights group, well, no one responds well to an attack. PETA would do well to come up with better tactics than showing bloody animals to young children.

Farmers would respond much better to someone who approaches them, explains why what they're doing is bad for the animals, us, and them, and explains how they might fix it and make more money in the bargain. People respond well to negotiation, to the idea that someone is out for their better interests as well. I can only wish more people would do this.

As for me, I will continue to buy meat only from organic, free-range farms and encourage others to do so as well- for their own health, if not the health of animals.

Jenni The Hurja

April 8th, 2004, 11:17 am

Zee

April 8th, 2004, 8:08 pm

Do you mean to say that animal welfare organizations don't write in-depth pamphlets and give them to farmers? You see, the problem is that those pamphlets are very easy to ignore. If on the other hand people stopped buying the products of the farmers , the farmers would start losing money - and that's what could make a difference (along with the minor effect that the pamphlets might have on the broad-minded farmers who are courageous enough to experiment new things.)
Animal welfare organizations give pamphlets to farmers that tell them how cruel it is to treat their animals the way they do. They do not give them pamphlets showing them how they could make more money by treating the animals better, as I just suggested. You were the one who mentioned now important money is to this industry, right? Well certainly, no one's trying to contradict you. Many of these farmers could care less how happy their animals are as long as they're getting income. Animal welfare organizations are approaching this from the wrong angle.

As for losing money due to boycotts, you're still missing my point. Most of them are not loosing money, nor will they ever loose money. There are not enough vegans and vegetarians in the country for a boycott to have even near the kind of effect you hope it will. A farmer in California might notice setbacks, because they're in the thick of the vegan population. A farmer in Montana or Kentucky? They probably don't even know what vegan means. Most vegans live in urban areas, and the more rural farmers in states away from the coasts will never loose a single penny. You're certainly effecting the coastal industries though, which is probably not the wisest plan, economically.

This is why I suggested pamphlets that would play on a farmer's greed rather than sympathy. This is why I suggested that people actually go out, in person, to give farmers these pamphlets and explain how upgrading their system could improve their income by X%. Once you get a certain population of farmers to go organic and animal friendly, that's when the economy kicks in and does the rest of the work for you. Because they can charge more for organic, free range meat, these farmers can set the industry price. Other farms will eventually be forced to change or go out of business once free-range gets popular. Boycotting meat is going to accomplish about as much good as throwing a bucket of water at a fire. Attempting a comrehensive, direct change of policy within the industry by giving everyone what they want is much more akin to a fire hose.

While eating animals who are grazed rather than intensively confined would vastly improve the welfare of farmed animals given their current mistreatment, Davis does not succeed in showing this is preferable to vegetarianism. First, Davis makes a mathematical error in using total rather than per capita estimates of animals killed; second, he focuses on the number of animals killed in ruminant and crop production systems and ignores important considerations about the welfare of animals under both systems; and third, he does not consider the number of animals who are prevented from existing under the two systems. After correcting for these errors, Davis’s argument makes a strong case for, rather than against, adopting a vegetarian diet.
The "number of animals who are prevented from existing under the two systems?" ...He's arguing that it's cruel to keep animals from being conceived in the first place? Not only is that terribly oversensitive even in human terms- arguing the rights and welfare of something that hasn't even been born and never will be (I mean, I could have had a kid with a number of guys by now, does that mean I'm guilty of human cruelty because I didn't have sex with them? O_o)- but it's also terribly impracticle and hypocritical. Impracticle because you can't just let the cows you're trying to raise breed all over the place, because then you really wouldn't have enough room or food for them, would you? I mean, is this guy going to get on my case for getting my cats fixed? Why, just think of all the litters of kittens that might have existed (and probably died horrible deaths as feral or strays). It's hypocritical because this is probably one of the same guys that would argue how much food you could feed all the starving children if you gave them the grain you would otherwise be giving the cows. More cows means less grain for the starving children. I'm ignoring of course, that it wouldn't work anyway, because it's not the same grain. Cows don't eat grain of high enough quality for human consumption, another fact many vegans and vegetarians seem to be ignorant of.

Also, this argument against Davis's theory only works if you're not implimenting an animal welfare system at all. "...he focuses on the number of animals killed in ruminant and crop production systems and ignores important considerations about the welfare of animals under both systems..." This statement would be inapplicable if more farmers were already switching to cruelty-free methods of farming, as per my own suggestions. Besides which, an animal murdered is still an animal murdered, despite any conditions they may be living in (they're certainly dying more horrifically, if thet get hit by that combine). Davis's argument stands, because fewer animals would still be killed if people ate more meat rather than more grain, and that was his original thesis.

Jenni The Hurja

April 9th, 2004, 4:08 pm

Animal welfare organizations give pamphlets to farmers that tell them how cruel it is to treat their animals the way they do. They do not give them pamphlets showing them how they could make more money by treating the animals better, as I just suggested.
Where did you get that? Or is this some sort of a US thing, because here they sure do.

You were the one who mentioned now important money is to this industry, right? --Many of these farmers could care less how happy their animals are as long as they're getting income.
Right. And obviously.

As for losing money due to boycotts, you're still missing my point. Most of them are not loosing money, nor will they ever loose money.
Your point being exactly what? That being a vegetarian is a stupid thing to do since at this moment there are too little vegetarians. Here we go again. What do you mean they'll never loose money? Isn't vegetarianism getting more and more popular all the time, with mad cow's disease and all that?

The "number of animals who are prevented from existing under the two systems?" ...He's arguing that it's cruel to keep animals from being conceived in the first place?
No. He's saying that when Davis claims that utilitarians would prefer an omnivorous diet, he doesn't look at the big picture. Utilitarians would say that the total number of animals living is the way to go.

Impracticle because you can't just let the cows you're trying to raise breed all over the place, because then you really wouldn't have enough room or food for them, would you?
Does Matheny somewhere say that he's a utilitarian? Utilitarianism often is impractical.

Cows don't eat grain of high enough quality for human consumption, another fact many vegans and vegetarians seem to be ignorant of.

Really? Now that's a new one.

This statement would be inapplicable if more farmers were already switching to cruelty-free methods of farming, as per my own suggestions.
Yes, if. That would be great. And how do we get them to change their ways? Information and money losses. Some vegetarians would probably argue that an animal living in captivity would still have a worse life than one living free.

Davis's argument stands, because fewer animals would still be killed if people ate more meat rather than more grain, and that was his original thesis.
Any comments on that per capita part? Not that the sole reason to become a vegetarian would be the number of animals killed.

I and a friend of mine just discussed yesterday how we find it kind of amusing that many people start by saying that it's a personal choice to become a vegetarian, but they hate how we (as in vegetarians) force it on others. Then continue by saying that there's no reason to be a vegetarian and that vegetarianism is useless and that vegetarians are actually quite ignorant. We're looking forward to the day when we can start our meals without having to start debating over vegetarianism. 'What are you eating, do you think you're somehow better than the rest of us?'

Maybe I'll edit this later, now I have no time.

Zee

April 9th, 2004, 7:38 pm

Where did you get that? Or is this some sort of a US thing, because here they sure do.
Maybe it is just a US thing, but I've never seen a pamphlet like that. Are you in the UK?

Your point being exactly what? That being a vegetarian is a stupid thing to do since at this moment there are too little vegetarians. Here we go again. What do you mean they'll never loose money? Isn't vegetarianism getting more and more popular all the time, with mad cow's disease and all that?
No, my point being that being vegetarian or vegan is not going to have the sort of large effect you hope it will. It may help in small ways in certain areas, but to really make a difference, people need to look at the big picture, and go above and beyond the aspects of personal choice. They need to start being activist, but reasonably so, of course- I'm certainly not suggesting that anyone go PETA on us.

As for vegetarianism getting more popular, maybe it is in your country, but not in the US. Honestly, the only country I can speak for right now is the US, I haven't been to England or Germany in ages, so Europe is kind of a blank spot for me right now. Maybe the situation is better over there, in terms of boycotting and the effectiveness thereof.

No. He's saying that when Davis claims that utilitarians would prefer an omnivorous diet, he doesn't look at the big picture. Utilitarians would say that the total number of animals living is the way to go.
Yes, and I believe that was the original point. As I said before, Davis was not considering animal welfare in general, he was just considering the theory that eating more meat = more living animals. I was personally considering the two things seperate problems, animal deaths vs. animal living conditions. You seem to be coming from the standpoint that we should compromise between the two, with animal welfare having priority over animal deaths, whereas I believe they should both be in equal priority and we should not have to compromise between them.

Does Matheny somewhere say that he's a utilitarian? Utilitarianism often is impractical.
A lot of things are impractical, I'm just pointing out that Matheny's arguments can have as many holes as Davis's supposedly have. Of course, coming from the standpoint that Matheny and Davis are considering "least harm" to be two entirely different things in their respective articles, and it's no wonder. Matheny is trying to come from the angle of morality, while Davis is arguing practicality.

Really? Now that's a new one.
New maybe, but it's true. The grain fed to animals is generally low grade, coarse, and tough. A human being would have a hell of a time trying to turn that sort of grain into something edible. Frankly, it's meant entirely for animal consumption, and the higher grade stuff is left for humans. The idea that you could just stop eating cows and give all the grain you'd raise them with to starving children is a great Utopian concept, but unfortunately, Utopian concepts always seem to be flawed in one way or another. Not only is it not suitable grain for humans, but if you gave it all to starving kids, what would the cows eat? Where would all those cows go if they were cut loose in favor of planting wheat fields? Plus, whoever orignally came up with this theory seemed to conveniently ignore that you can't necessarily just plants veggies and wheat on land used for cow grazing. Not all land is fertile, and farmers don't always get to choose what they use it for.

Yes, if. That would be great. And how do we get them to change their ways? Information and money losses. Some vegetarians would probably argue that an animal living in captivity would still have a worse life than one living free.
As I tried to point out before, information and money losses don't work over large areas. It takes years for the information to spread, and the money loss doesn't always reach where one intends it to. As for an animal living in captivity still having a worse life than a free one, you could also argue that it's a lot more painful to die by having your bones slowly crushed and ripped apart by a combine than it is to have a stake suddenly driven through your spinal cord. It seems the idea of animal welfare depends solely on what particular people consider to be most important- the animal's life, the animal's death, or the number of animals left living. I still can't conceive of why all these animal rights activists seem to think it's okay to compromise between any of them, when they should be the ones most worried about all three. It's better to kill a free animal in a horrible way because it had a better life than the captive cow, killed quickly? I don't know about you, but that seems just a tad bizarre to me. How about all the animals be allowed better lives, as well as better deaths, with fewer animals killed in the first place? That seems like what the activists should be striving for.

Any comments on that per capita part? Not that the sole reason to become a vegetarian would be the number of animals killed.
The per capita argument is inherently flawed: "Davis suggests the number of wild animals killed per hectare in crop production (15) is twice that killed in ruminant-pasture (7.5). If this is true, then as long as crop production uses less than half as many hectares as ruminant-pasture to deliver the same amount of food, a vegetarian will kill fewer animals than an omnivore. In fact, crop production uses less than half as many hectares as grass-fed dairy and one-tenth as many hectares as grass-fed beef to deliver the same amount of protein." He assumes that crop production uses fewer hectares than ruminant-pasture, which is not necessarily true, especially if you factor in what he seems to be supporting. If people stopped eating meat and adopted a vegetarian diet, there would have to be more crops to go around, wouldn't there? That means a lot more fields, and the number of hectares used for crop production would increase dramatically. Consequently, so would the number of animals being killed. Factor in what I said earlier about not all land being equally as fertile, and you have another problem. If there isn't enough suitable land for growing crops within a growing vegetarian population, you're going to have a food shortage problem sooner rather than later.

I and a friend of mine just discussed yesterday how we find it kind of amusing that many people start by saying that it's a personal choice to become a vegetarian, but they hate how we (as in vegetarians) force it on others. Then continue by saying that there's no reason to be a vegetarian and that vegetarianism is useless and that vegetarians are actually quite ignorant. We're looking forward to the day when we can start our meals without having to start debating over vegetarianism. 'What are you eating, do you think you're somehow better than the rest of us?'
Becoming vegetarian is a personal choice, it's just not one that should be made in ignorance of any kind, and unfortunately it often is. Many vegetarians seem to put on rose-colored glasses and blind themselves to all the flaws there are in boycotting meat as a way to further animal welfare. Most vegetarians don't think about half the things I've mentioned in the last few posts- animals killed by combines, controlled hunts, differences in land and grain, etc. They don't nitpick and test at their own beliefs, much like a confirmed Christian tends not to question whether or not it's practical to believe in a God. Many vegetarians seem truly devoutly religious in their belief in their diet, and it's incredibly hard to argue logic with them when they're shouting out their perfect ideals. A vegetarian diet can certainly do some amount of good, just not the amount most vegetarians and vegans seem to think, and they can be surprisingly closed-minded about any and all opposing viewpoints.

You've been pleasantly open-minded throughout the entire debate, so be assured that I don't count you among them. There are just as many reasonable vegetarians as there are fanatics. However, you have to realize that many people have a negative viewpoint of vegetarians and vegans because many of them do try to act morally superior to omvinours. I've had people give me dirty looks when they see meat on my plate, and I just want to say "(insert explitive here) you too!"

You may be looking forward to the day that you can start a meal without having to defend your choice of diet, but guess what? So am I.

Jenni The Hurja

April 10th, 2004, 5:56 pm

Maybe it is just a US thing, but I've never seen a pamphlet like that. Are you in the UK? See location, In Europe, between Sweden and Russia (don't be offended if you knew that. It's just that many don't). It's nice though that you could actually think that English was my mother tongue.

No, my point being that being vegetarian or vegan is not going to have the sort of large effect you hope it will. It may help in small ways in certain areas, but to really make a difference, people need to look at the big picture, and go above and beyond the aspects of personal choice. They need to start being activist, but reasonably so, of course- I'm certainly not suggesting that anyone go PETA on us. Exactly. I'm certainly not saying that vegetarianism is the only way to make things better, but I do believe it can have a big effect. If people only didn't think that it's useless to be one, 'cause not enough people will become vegetarians anyway. It could have a big effect, depends on the people whether it will or not. As for now, I still do feel that my minor contribution is worth it.

As for vegetarianism getting more popular, maybe it is in your country, but not in the US. Honestly, the only country I can speak for right now is the US, I haven't been to England or Germany in ages, so Europe is kind of a blank spot for me right now. Maybe the situation is better over there, in terms of boycotting and the effectiveness thereof.
More and more young people become vegetarians here. In my school (I live in a town of some 20 000 inhabitants), at least 10% is vegetarian. And in Helsinki, the capital of Finland, the number is often as high as 30%. But it obviously depends a lot on the school in question.

You seem to be coming from the standpoint that we should compromise between the two, with animal welfare having priority over animal deaths, whereas I believe they should both be in equal priority and we should not have to compromise between them. Yes, I do think that animal welfare should, to an extent, have priority over animal deaths. This is because I believe that as animals, we have the right to kill an animal. I do not, however, think that we have the right to store them in tiny cages not allowing them to practice their natural habits. Especially when estimating how many animals are killed in crop fields is just that, estimating.

A lot of things are impractical, I'm just pointing out that Matheny's arguments can have as many holes as Davis's supposedly have. Sure they do, both of them. You have to look at things from a wider perspective than from a utilitarian one.

New maybe, but it's true. The grain fed to animals is generally low grade, coarse, and tough. A human being would have a hell of a time trying to turn that sort of grain into something edible. Frankly, it's meant entirely for animal consumption, and the higher grade stuff is left for humans. The idea that you could just stop eating cows and give all the grain you'd raise them with to starving children is a great Utopian concept, but unfortunately, Utopian concepts always seem to be flawed in one way or another. Not only is it not suitable grain for humans, but if you gave it all to starving kids, what would the cows eat? Where would all those cows go if they were cut loose in favor of planting wheat fields? Plus, whoever orignally came up with this theory seemed to conveniently ignore that you can't necessarily just plants veggies and wheat on land used for cow grazing. Not all land is fertile, and farmers don't always get to choose what they use it for.
:p Oh no, I didn't mean that I didn't know that. I meant that I find it hard to believe that anyone could think that we are able to digest what cows eat.

As I tried to point out before, information and money losses don't work over large areas. It takes years for the information to spread, and the money loss doesn't always reach where one intends it to. Didn't you just say that people have to start being activist? Doesn't that mean spreading info and trying to make a difference by living in the way you feel is right?

As for an animal living in captivity still having a worse life than a free one, you could also argue that it's a lot more painful to die by having your bones slowly crushed and ripped apart by a combine than it is to have a stake suddenly driven through your spinal cord. It seems the idea of animal welfare depends solely on what particular people consider to be most important- the animal's life, the animal's death, or the number of animals left living. I still can't conceive of why all these animal rights activists seem to think it's okay to compromise between any of them, when they should be the ones most worried about all three. It's better to kill a free animal in a horrible way because it had a better life than the captive cow, killed quickly? I don't know about you, but that seems just a tad bizarre to me. How about all the animals be allowed better lives, as well as better deaths, with fewer animals killed in the first place? That seems like what the activists should be striving for. Sure it depends on how you view it. If you think that a life led in captivity, but in good conditions, is just as good as a life led free AND you find the deaths of creatures in the fields more horrible than those in a farm PLUS you think that the number of killed animals in a field is higher than the number of them killed for food - organic farms are for you. If you on the other hand believe that an animal living free has a better life than the one living in captivity yet in good conditions AND you don't think you can estimate the average pain felt by an animal killed in the field (when the death can easily be just as quick or as painful as one in a farm) PLUS you think that you should rely on the number of deaths we know of for sure (the animals killed for food) - no meat for you (or hunting it yourself maybe?).

I'm on two minds about this 'an animal living free has a better life than the one living in captivity' -thing. I think that it's true, yet getting totally rid of animal farms would probably cause the extinction of certain farm animals. I think it was a minister from the Green Party that was once asked what would we do with all those farm animals if everyone was vegetarian. He said that there wouldn't be any use for them anymore. Not that I think that that would ever happen.

He assumes that crop production uses fewer hectares than ruminant-pasture, which is not necessarily true, -- Factor in what I said earlier about not all land being equally as fertile, and you have another problem. Yes indeed. Just as Davis assumes the two use the same amount of hectares. They can't really be compared, as it depends so much on the area.

If people stopped eating meat and adopted a vegetarian diet, there would have to be more crops to go around, wouldn't there? That means a lot more fields, and the number of hectares used for crop production would increase dramatically. Consequently, so would the number of animals being killed. Erm, I don't really get this. If more people adopted a vegetarian diet the number of animals killed in fields would increase and the number of killed for food decrease. The number of animals killed per person would depend on the area where you live.

If there isn't enough suitable land for growing crops within a growing vegetarian population, you're going to have a food shortage problem sooner rather than later.Is there more land that isn't suitable for growing crops yet is suitable for grazing animals than there is land that is suitable for both? I don't know.

they can be surprisingly closed-minded about any and all opposing viewpoints.
And the same could obviously be said about meat-eaters.

You may be looking forward to the day that you can start a meal without having to defend your choice of diet, but guess what? So am I. Of course. It's just that so many people don't seem to realise that vegetarians surely aren't the only ones doing the criticising. "I hate it how vegetarians force their way of living on others *starts to rant how eating meat is the correct thing to do*"

I most likely won't visit this site very often in the future, as I'll start studying for Uni entrance exams. Especially when coming here has made my Finnish rustier.

XxIslandgirlxX

April 11th, 2004, 6:53 am

I wish I could just happily eat my meat and not care... but sadly, we live in a world where turkeys are bred to grow so fast their own legs can't support them, cows aren't always stunned properly, then left hanging upside down screaming while the workers take a coffee break. I don't mean to upset anyone, it's just the truth. Also, to me, it's just gross to chew on something that had a face... but if it doesn't bother anyone else, then what they eat is non of my concern. Vegetarianism is not for everyone. It's a lot of work to make sure you're getting all you need... protein, etc. If it's not the lifestyle for you, then I'm actually jealous that you don't have to mix tofu into everything you eat. :) I've just always been very conscious about what I eat, and can't help thinking about it. On the other hand, I HATE vegetarians that criticize meat-eaters while they're eating. Example:
"*to waiter* "Could I have chicken with that? Thanks...
" I can't believe you ordered chicken! So you know how they kill those!"
" Uhm... no... and right now I'm eating.. could we talk about this later?"
"Well first they cut off their heads..."
*gag*
That's just rude an immature. It's everyones decision, and this is mine. At the same time there's meat-eaters that remind me EVERY time I bite into a veggie burger just how many vitamins I'm missing out on... when there's are pros and cons to both ways of eating. Every food has it's baggage... tofu, beef, soy... whatever. In any case, it's just a choice, and whatever choice you make, it's no one's business but you own.

Angora

April 12th, 2004, 2:22 am

I'll just jump back in and address a few things that've gone by in the last few pages. Not directed at anyone in particular.

I won't repeat all the stuff I said earlier, but, basically, I'm one of the people that is a vegetarian because I feel it's morally wrong for humans to butcher other animals, whether we treat them really well beforehand or not. Before you roll you eyes, let me try to clarify why that is, a little bit. Ultimately, it's a philosophical question, like all moral dilemmas are, so, for anyone who's never seen me try to be philosophical before, brace yourself. It gets weird.

The difference between a plant and an animal: awareness. I haven't looked closely at the research, but I'm willing to believe plants feel pain. The reason it's different is that it's pain in a void with no entity there to feel it, or, if you like: pain but no suffering.

The difference between humans and other animals: Humans are the only animals on Earth (to our knowledge) that are capable of even conceiving of a moral right and wrong. And a big reason for that is that we're the only animals with our rational capacity. And it's not like an appendix. Our entire uniqueness and identity as a species hinges on that ability.

So, the question really becomes, if you are capable of knowing the suffering you inflict on another creature (and unless you're insane, you are) and you are capable of surviving for the next five seconds, or five minutes, or five years, or five lifetimes, without inflicting suffering on another creature (or having someone do it on your behalf), how could it not be immoral to do so anyway?

And I have never heard an answer to that question that would satisfy me from a rational, logical perspective. Because we can? Because it's fun? Because it tastes good? Because I don't want to bother taking vitamin pills? Because I don't like the taste of soy?

This goes back to what I said earlier, so I won't dwell on it, but the most amazing, special, mind-boggling thing about humanity is that we have evolved to the point where we can find a way around our problems, that other animals can't, because we're so gosh darn crafty. We can invent things like vitamin pills. We can create synthetic foods. We can organise ourselves across the whole world and trade food and supplies with each other. And, again, I won't dwell, but I think that if you have any love for humanity at all, then you're kind of required to seize the opportunity to be better when it's there. And there's no question in my mind that it's better not to be a party to suffering.

And it is philosophical, and maybe a little religious for some people, but just as you want your own life to be free of undue suffering, you are required by that, rationally, to want all lives free of undue suffering. And for me, where I'm standing, that's a very simple, obvious concept. And, yeah, sometimes I feel spiteful, or vengeful, or whatever else, but speaking in general, and recognising that those feelings don't put me in a good place to make judgements, I don't want animals to suffer. Humans, dogs, rats, fish, whatever. Doesn't matter if I like them, doesn't matter if they would want me to suffer if they were in my place, as a cold, rational, moral principle, I don't want them to suffer.

If you want to know what I mean by suffering, think of a fish. I hate fish. They wig me out. But fish have some of the shortest memories going. It's generally only for a few seconds. If you haul a fish out of water and let it suffocate, or stab it, or bash it's head in, it doesn't matter how fast you do it. From the first shocking second it gets yanked up until the second it dies, as far as that fish knows, it's entire life has been filled with pain and fear and confusion: suffering. And you did that. And that's terrible.

Do I think that my being a vegetarian ends animal suffering? Of course not. That's stupid. But I can't control what other people do. The only thing that I can control is what I do. And I'm not going to have undue suffering caused on my behalf. I understand perfectly well that it's still going on, but for the small, little, minuscule portion of the universe that I can control, known to you as Angora, it is not a thing that is willed and it is not a thing that is knowingly carried out. And that's all I can do.

That's all anyone can do. Is it self-centred? Yes. Is it all about me? Yes. And I think those things have to be self-centred. And they have to be all about me. Because I'm the one that has to live with myself. I'm the one that has to judge myself. I'm the only one who will ever know if I looked something in its face, thought that it was wrong, and did it anyway.

If you can honestly look at it, and honestly say "No, I don't think it's wrong" and that doesn't form a logical contradiction with any of your other moral principles, fine. From where I'm standing, I don't think that's possible, but it may well be.

Are there things that are horribly wrong with the way plants are harvested? Undoubtedly. But that doesn't have any bearing on whether or not it's right to eat meat. So, why stop eating meat instead of veggies? Because meat is the most direct link, and, from my perspective, given what I've already said, it's possible to harvest vegetables in a way that doesn't lead to suffering, but it's not possible to kill animals in a way that doesn't. So, while one can be reformed, the other can't.

And, without getting too much in depth, that's pretty much why.

XxIslandgirlxX

April 26th, 2004, 4:31 am

I'm a vegetarian also, for similar reasons to yours. But when you speak of our ability to make vitamins and synthetic meats, you fail to mention the cost of such things. To be a vegetarian is one thing, but to be a healthy one is quite another. Eating healthy isn't cheap. Going to McDonald's or Taco Bell is much more affordable than cooking tofu dogs. In a perfect world, we could all afford to eat vegetarian, and buy all the vitamins and food supplements we needed. But, realistically, this isn't so. Many people just can't afford to live this way. Buying my tofu and other soy products gets very expensive for me and my family, and both my parents and I work. Even is you get your protein through peanuts and other natural ways, it's still a high maintenance diet. Vegetarianism just isn't for everyone-- thought I would never go back to eating meat.

FateoMcSkippy

April 26th, 2004, 4:46 am

if God didn't want us to eat animals he shouldn't have made them out of meat.

XxIslandgirlxX

April 26th, 2004, 5:31 am

Well, technically we're made out of meat, too...

totalmuggle

April 26th, 2004, 6:03 am

ditto^^^^

Lupin_Lady

April 26th, 2004, 6:54 am

Oh, what I would give to be a Vegetarian again! But my body doesn't absorb Vitamin B12 and Iron naturally, so I have to eat lots of red meat *shudder* and have injections...

FateoMcSkippy

April 26th, 2004, 7:40 pm

Well, technically we're made out of meat, too...

hey, if it tasted good and you wouldn't be shunned for doing so, bring on the tender youngin's. :drool:

Pegasus

April 26th, 2004, 7:58 pm

HollywoodBob

April 26th, 2004, 8:22 pm

We all have things we do for our morals; for me, boycotting meat simply isn't one of them. I'll through an aluminum can or pile of newspapers in a bin if it's convenient, but I'm much more concerned about nutrition than I am about "animal rights". If my family is happy and getting a balanced meal, I'm doing my job.D@mn skippy. It's nice to be idealistic about what's on your plate, but when you're living on a small budget, or are feeding a family it's just not that easy.

[Off Topic]
Pegasus, have you ever watched where the blue box goes when the truck picks it up? Or followed the "recycling" truck from the recycling centers? I did when I first heard that they don't really recycle and was shocked to see my blue box go into the back of the garbage truck and the recycling truck pulling into the landfill. :wow: Then I just became mad when I realized I was paying extra to "recycle." :grumble: I can't say that what I've seen is the same everywhere, but I've read about it in several different locales. And if it's differen't where you live please let me know.

I don't recycle anymore, I've seen that what I recycle doesn't go where it should, so to do my part, I just don't consume so much. Admittedly I live alone, but it still takes me over a month to fill up my 40 gallon garbage can, plus I don't buy canned foods so I don't have any cans to throw out which can't hurt. [/Off Topic]

-HollywoodBob

Pegasus

April 26th, 2004, 8:53 pm

I've heard about that too, and I'm sorry it happens and people pay for it. But I know it doesn't happen everywhere. The biggest recycling project I've seen is at the university I go to when I get the chance (I sneak in a semester or two between my kids' needs now and then). They started their own recycling program about ten years ago. The last I heard, they had recouped the costs of starting the program and were already at the next phase. That's the only place I really see aluminum recycling cans, so it's the only place I've actually done it. On that campus, I know it's going to the right place. As far as newspapers go, it sometimes goes to help local schools and scouts, so that's how my parents do it. I personally don't get the newspaper--I prefer other ways to spend my time.
Back on topic: In a way, boycotting meat/dairy seems about as pointless as Hermione's boycotting food to help house-elves. It didn't do them any good; it just made her starve. There are other ways to go about justice in the world, and I don't mean through shock/violent tactics, either. Right now I'm focused on making a difference in my children's world, and I think that's the best use of my time.

Chrysalis

April 26th, 2004, 9:02 pm

Just because someone's veggie doesn't mean they starve or go without proper nutrients. No offence meant, but I'm sick of 'concerned' meat eaters asking me if I take vitamin supplements, because they believe that all I eat is lettuce. Honestly, I eat rice and vegetables practically everyday, and bread with cheese every morning, and pasta or other foreign dishes to occaisionally break the cycle. I do have an iron shortage, but that's due to an infection.

I don't see following a veggie diet as pointless. No matter how small your impact might be, it's nice at least to know for yourself that you are doing something right. If I boycott genetically modified products, I might not have much of an impact on society, but it makes me feel good to know that I'm doing the right thing(at least, to me).:) I don't see anything wrong with that.

Besides being veggie doesn't have to be expensive. You need to balance your diet differently, that's all. I rarely eat soy but I have no shortages.:)

XxIslandgirlxX

April 26th, 2004, 10:21 pm

And actually, there are far more benefits to a vegetarian diet than a meat-eating one. For example, a vegetarian's diet is protein controlled, meaning the risk of kidney stones is less. A meat-eater's chances of such things are much higher. Not to mention all the hormone and other things that are pumped into those cows before they're killed. And a veggie's chance of getting mad cow? 0%!!!!! And that's only naming a few... there was a study done on a town somewhere in Fiji several years ago. The people in this town were living extremely long lives, and people wanted to know why. So, they examined their diets. It turns out that they were eating VERY little meat.. and no red meat. Just some chicken here and there. I'm sure there are more examples, if someone were willing to look...

Marie Lexis

July 5th, 2004, 8:37 pm

I'm alright with eating meat, drinking milk, and all that. Because to me God put animals on this Earth to feed us so we would not starve. As you can tell I'm a Christian and I follow the Bible.

However PETA is the most disgusting thing that I have ever seen and heard of. I don't understand why someone would listen to someone who even supports something that.

But anyway not eating meat is actually dangerous to someone's health. You may not think it is...vegetarians say that they have found alternatives...there is no alternative to meat.

XxIslandgirlxX

July 6th, 2004, 5:11 am

Marie Lexus, I have gotten professional help with my meal plan. I have a nutritionist who has assured me that being vegetarian is not only safe, but very beneficial. I know you may have your opinions, but professionals have done studies that show the benefits and perks to a vegetarian lifestyle.

Also, I'm a very strong Christian. I believe that God put animals on the earth for a different perpose than he put animals. However, God also tells to to take care of all of the earth's creatures, which slaughter houses fail to do. I won't go into the gruesome details (unless anyone wants to be completely grossed out) but I have see, first hand, the way these poor animals are killed. I don't think that's what God had in mind when he created life.

And as far a PETA, I completely agree with you. They go way over the top. Instead of helping animals, they irritate everyone to the point where they don't want to hear about the cause anymore... they tend to be rather obnoxious.

God did a wonderful job of creating the earth, and I just don't want it all the go to waste.

~Tonks~

July 6th, 2004, 5:47 am

Personally (and this is just my opinion so no offense meant) I think human beings show their egotistical side when they believe that everything on earth was put here for their use, whether it stems from religious beliefs or not. It's that sort of nearsighted attitude that leads to a lot of waste.

Vegetarians often have a hard time understanding me when I say that I don't want to be a vegetarian. The honest truth is that I enjoy eating meat. I really do like it. Does this mean I enjoy harming animals? No. I think they should be treated humanely and not subjected to the abhorrent conditions they're put through before being killed. I also think the human being who is stupid enough to go poking around a lion's pride or a bear's cave gets what he or she deserves as well. I don't eat it very often, but I like it once in a while, as well as a glass of milk with cookies. However I respect their choice not to eat meat, for whatever reason they have.

I'll never forget when we had to do a persuasion presentation in my business class on any topic we wanted. One girl decided to try to persuade us all to be vegetarians because eating meat hurts animals. Ironic how she made the presentation wearing a leather coat. And, when asked if she ever ate chicken, she said, "No, but I like fish a lot." Apparently "it’s okay to eat fish ’cause they don’t have any feelings." (Nirvana, "Something in the Way")

My best friend is a vegan but she always respected my choice, and even admitted she loves eating meat, she just doesn't want to do it because she's really into the vegan recipes. She even told off this one militant vegan when they refused to let me eat my turkey sandwich in peace...

XxIslandgirlxX

July 6th, 2004, 6:50 am

Very good points, Call Me Tonks.

Vegetarianism isn't for everyone. To be completely honest, the reason I originally became a vegetarian was simply because meat always made me feel sick after I ate it. I have a condition where eating a lot of visible fat is bad for my system, so a vegetarian diet was the right way to go. As it turns out, I love being a vegetarian, and feel much healthier and have more energy now. However, everyone's body is different. I believe what I believe, but I know that everyone else isn't going to feel the same. I just get a little tired of meat-eaters making fun of me all the time, thinking I only eat salads. Then Mad Cow rolls along, and suddenly they all want to join me in a tofu dog...

And kudos to you friend for sticking up for you! I hate vegetarians/vegans that act like they're better than everyone else. It's embarassing for the rest of us well-meaning veggies. What people eat is none of anyone else's business.

Chrysalis

July 6th, 2004, 11:07 am

I don't understand why everyone is bringing PETA into this discussion. Yes, we're vegetarians, so naturally we're militants, and support radical organisations who threaten people and use violence, don't we?:rolleyes:

Marie Lexis

July 6th, 2004, 4:59 pm

I don't understand why everyone is bringing PETA into this discussion.

Because PETA is so terrible. They support not eating meat, but they take it to far. They say that everyone who eats meat is a murderer. And that's why alot of people look at vegetarians so badly because of people like them.

Personally (and this is just my opinion so no offense meant) I think human beings show their egotistical side when they believe that everything on earth was put here for their use, whether it stems from religious beliefs or not. It's that sort of nearsighted attitude that leads to a lot of waste.

Well I'm not going to apologise for keeping my faith in God. And that was attacking religions. Even if you didn't mean to.

Marie Lexus, I have gotten professional help with my meal plan. I have a nutritionist who has assured me that being vegetarian is not only safe, but very beneficial. I know you may have your opinions, but professionals have done studies that show the benefits and perks to a vegetarian lifestyle.

There are still alot of doctors that have seen cases that have given up meat and has had something wrong with them. And you have your opinion, but doctors have done studies that show the downsides of not eating meat.

And also he gave us meat to eat, but he didn't want to treat animals the way that people are doing now. But I bet you would be eating meat if you lived before now.

they irritate everyone to the point where they don't want to hear about the cause anymore... they tend to be rather obnoxious.

Because I eat meat I'm obnoxious? And who said I didn't care about Animals? You are doing exactly what they do. Just because I eat meat does not mean that I don't care about animals. In fact I have been eating less meat because every time I try to eat a bologna sandwhich I feel like I'm going to throw up. So don't start putting down people you don't know.

Chrysalis

July 7th, 2004, 4:40 pm

Because I eat meat I'm obnoxious? And who said I didn't care about Animals? You are doing exactly what they do. Just because I eat meat does not mean that I don't care about animals. In fact I have been eating less meat because every time I try to eat a bologna sandwhich I feel like I'm going to throw up. So don't start putting down people you don't know.
Read what she wrote. She said that PETA was obnoxious, not meat eaters.

~Tonks~

July 7th, 2004, 6:47 pm

Well I'm not going to apologise for keeping my faith in God. And that was attacking religions. Even if you didn't mean to.

No one asked you to apologize. And not all religions believe that everything on earth was put here for our disposal either, so it wasn't attacking religions, especially since in my post I did say, "...whether it stems from religious beliefs or not." I'm not discriminating here. It doesn't take a religious person to believe that. There are some people who don't have an ounce of faith and still go along with that attitude. I think it's a turn off regardless of whether a Christian walks around thinking that or anyone else, because a lot of the time it leads to wasteful behavior.

I currently reside in Hawaii and my opinion on this matter was solidified when a very zealous religious man wrote in to the editor of our local newspaper on the issue of clearing away about 10,000 acres of rainforest on the islands to make room for an industrial center and processing plant. His argument was that we were given this earth and it's impossible for us to destroy it and God wants us to use it at our will and he will replenish it. This said despite all of the studies done that it would uproot x amount of endangered species and plants, as well as further disrupt the ecosystem and climate trends that have already been screwed up due to mass urbanization on Oahu, the volume of cars, and the Vog (volcanic fog, which is uncontrollable, but it doesn't make anything better.) If you lived here or have ever visited you'd know how beautiful it is and how ridiculous it would be to clear it off for an industrial center when we already have blocks and blocks of wasted space for something like that.

I'm not a religious person but the ones who are who want to take care of the earth their god gave them seem to make a lot more sense to me.

But this is all just my opinion.

XxIslandgirlxX

July 7th, 2004, 11:50 pm

Marie Lexus, there are ups and downs to every kind of diet. My point is, vegetarianism, when done right, can be very healthy. However, eating meat can also be healthy. Some people, for medical reasons, have to eat meat. Some, also for medical reasons, can't. Everyone's body is different.

I think that you have misinterpreted my (and others) comments. We are not attacking your religion or beliefs. I never said you (or meat-eaters in general) were obnoxious. **Thanks to Savoy Truffle for reading my post correctly :)** I do not doubt that you care about animals, and I'm very sorry you can no longer eat a bologna sandwich. And yes, perhaps if I lived long, long ago I would have needed to eat meat. But I live now, and I'm lucky enough to have options. **I'm also lucky to have parents who don't mind buying me fake meat. Thanks, Mom and Dad!** <--- I live with two meat eaters, and they're not in the least bit obnoxious! :cool:

PhoenixUK

July 8th, 2004, 1:34 am

Attacking other members for holding views different to your own will not be tolerated and you will be warned.
Please remember to keep the debate on the subject of vegetarianism and veganism rather than discussing individual members beliefs, either towards diet or religion. Thanks :).

~Tonks~

July 8th, 2004, 1:39 am

okay I have a question... why do some vegetarians still eat chicken or fish? Not criticizing at all but I don't understand it. I've heard of some people claiming to be vegetarians when they just don't eat red meat... how does this work out? Does anyone know? :huh:

XxIslandgirlxX

July 8th, 2004, 3:09 am

Call Me Tonks, I know a lot of "vegetarians" that do this also. :huh: I'm not sure I really understand it either. In my book "Being Vegetarian for Dummies" :cool: it says that there are different "types" of vegetarians, just like there are vegans and vegetarians. Also, apparently, fish aren't considered meat, though I can't imagine why that is. I guess it's just a matter of preference and beliefs. *shrug* I don't quite get it, but then I bet a lot of vegans don't get me.

Chrysalis

July 8th, 2004, 12:14 pm

This was a response to someone's post in the Animal Rights thread.

It's not the problem of eating vegetarian per sé, rather a sudden change of diet. The women you saw probably radically changed her diet for her pregnancy. Well, that's not good.

You don't even know how her diet was balanced. Maybe she didn't get enough of nutrients because she didn't have a clue as to how her diet should be balanced without the meat.

Really, when eating vegetarian, you don't even need tofu or anything of that kind. I rarely eat that. My daily diet consists of rice, lentils, yoghurt, and some kind of vegetable. For breakfast I eat bread with cheese or peanut butter and I drink tea twice a day. In between I eat fruits or some health snack like granola bars. It's definitely kept my weight down.

Actually, when arguing that it's not wrong eating cows, what's wrong with eating dogs and cats? But oh I understand, they're pets, and you can't cuddle cows, that makes all the difference in the world.

Dedalus Diggle

July 8th, 2004, 2:26 pm

I posted this in the animal rights thread, but it obviously is even more relevant here, so I cut and pasted this:

I have long heard the assertion by vegetarian promoters that one can get all the nutrients one needs from a non-meat or even a non-animal-foods diet. I am sure this is true for the well-studied nutrients, although a few are very difficult, such as zinc (Iron and calcium are both also harder than we are led to believe, because most plant sources of these have phytochemicals which render the minerals less available). However, new nutrients keep getting discovered. The variety of oils in the living world was scarcely appreciated twenty years ago, and it is found that many of the varieties have special health benefits. A good example is the Omega-3 fatty acids found in many cold dwelling fish. There are all sorts of other sorts of chemical components of foods which are being found to have benefits.

In addition, while it has often been said that the body can manufacture all the other amino acids it has a use for if it only gets sufficient quantities of the 'essential' amino acids, glitches in the synthesis system are not at all uncommon, so a person might get the essential ones and still be malnourished for the ones his particular body cannot synthesize. Consider the 'Lorenzo's Oil' situation, where the little boys body required a prodigious supply of certain oils in his diet which would be ridiculous excess to most people. Similarly, other people could need substances which most people's bodies synthesize, but that individuals body could not - and those things are devilishly hard to discover. But animal foods contain a much broader array of essential and 'nonessential' amino acids, and surprisingly, they are the ones that animal bodies need. They could also very well contain a number of other substances specially synthesized for the healthy functioning of animals which, for whatever reason, some or most people's bodies do not produce.

What I am saying is that we simply do not know all of the things that our bodies are assisted by which exist in the foods our bodies developed to use. Humans and our nearest kin (chimps and bonobos) naturally have animal sources of foods in their diets, although plant foods are predominant. I cannot help but be concerned that by artificially eliminating a type of food from one's diet, that one may cut off one's source of nutrients which may not even be identified yet, and for that matter may not even be a necessity (or at least an aid) for all people, but is a requirement for some.

Chrysalis

July 8th, 2004, 3:18 pm

I took a leaf out of your book and posted on both threads.:)

You know Dedalus, it is much easier for us, who have been fed vegetarian food right from their birth. Our bodies are so much adapted to eating mainly plants, that switching to meat would be a difficult task indeed. It would be the opposite of a meat eater going on a vegetarian diet. In both cases the meat should be slowly introduced to the food or taken away.

I went to the doctor only a couple of months ago. I had lost a lot of blood due to an infection. My doctor told me that I had slight anemia and she prescribed medication. Such a situation, though the risk of it is higher on a vegetarian diet, was unavoidable with my infection. Though, vegetables such as spinach and broccoli and tomato contain a lot of iron, and may I point out that by eating these plants the iron is absorbed much better than when swallowing iron pills. My aunt is a dietician/nutrition specialist and a vegetarian, and she recommended me to eat more of these vegetables.

There are, of course, situations, diseases, where eating meat is a must, because the body cannot process certain nutrients or needs more of them. But, I'm healthy, and you can all gang up and tell me that I'm going to die early because of my way of life, but it's not going to change my mind, as I've not seen any proof of it's negative effects on my body. Each to his/her own.

Dedalus Diggle

July 8th, 2004, 4:04 pm

Chrysalis

July 8th, 2004, 4:09 pm

Thanks, Dedalus.:)

BabyNorbert

July 8th, 2004, 4:47 pm

I've been a vegetarian for most of my life, because I can't stand the thought of eating something with thoughts and feelings, that can walk and feel just as humans can. I love animals, and I think that the way they are treated is awful. I think that animals and humans should be thought of as equals, because we are no better than them. We are just very different, and I think that the more people becoming vegans or vegetarians, the better!

Kirsten

July 8th, 2004, 5:49 pm

I think the fact that India and China have had millions of vegetarian Hindus and Buddhists for thousands and thousands of years suggests that it is possible to live a long and healthy vegetarian life.

Pegasus

July 8th, 2004, 5:58 pm

Savoy Truffle, I hope that you're able to raise your iron level sufficiently with just vegetables. I can't. I eat just as healthy as I can--yesterday is an example of a day when I was so tired I nearly forgot to eat entirely, and I paid for it--but my poor pregnant body needs every supplement it can, accompanied by the foods that help it to be absorbed, just to function. I had a blood transfusion after my first baby and sent home with mega-iron doses. I don't take chances, and I can't; even when I'm doing all the right things (I told you I crave melon, but I also eat so much broccoli I'm surprised I haven't sprouted roots) I have to have more.
I told you earlier that I recently found out my cousin is a vegetarian. I didn't tell you she recently had a perfectly normal baby. I know what you're saying is true, but as you said, it depends on the person's acclimation to the diet and how well that person's body processes nutrients, so what I said is true, too. For me, it would be deadly not to follow the food pyramid plus take all my supplements--literally. I've only told you a portion of why that's the case--and that's sufficient.;) (I try to spare people who haven't had children because everyone's different and it's not fair to scare people, especially when what has happened to be has a 1 in 1,000 chance of applying to them.0

free_girl

July 8th, 2004, 6:17 pm

Personally, I really don't eat a lot of meat because it taste gross anyway you cook it. My mom still makes me eat some once in a while for protein, even though there are other ways of getting protein. My friend is a vegan and she gave a speech in class on why you should become a vegan. She showed us pictures of calfs which is made into veel. The pictures were so gross and inhumane. It really made me think about all those defense less chickens. I mean what did they do to you? :sad: So I really don't want to eat meat now because I saw the pictures of salughtered animals for food. There are alot of other things to eat other than meat and lots of different fresh salads you can make that still taste good. :D

Pegasus

July 8th, 2004, 6:20 pm

Hmm...When I do get filled up on a salad, I'm hungry in about 20 minutes. As I said, to each his own...

free_girl

July 8th, 2004, 6:40 pm

Hmm...When I do get filled up on a salad, I'm hungry in about 20 minutes. As I said, to each his own...
Then there's always drinking water till your to bloded to drink anymore, nuts, crackers, veggies, fruit, noodels, pasta, soup, candy :tu:, grilled sandwhiches, no meat pizza, ice cream, yogurt, various types of bread, eggs, ceral, toast, jello, rice, gumbo, tofu, fettucine, casseroles, burritos, fruit pizza. That doesn't even scratch the surface. Just surf the web and you'll find more. The probaly even have a whole section in your grochery store dedicated for vegetarins and vegans. I just really like salads.

Chrysalis

July 8th, 2004, 6:46 pm

Yeah, I can understand perfectly that people like you for instance can't handle a vegetarian diet. It all depends on an individual's body, and on what kind of diet they were raised from birth.:)

By the way, it may sound strange, but my dad and his family used to own a few dogs, and they were never fed meat. They lived to great age. So did the dogs that my mum's uncle had. They were fed rice, yoghurt and eggs. So it is technically possible, at least to a certain extent, to have animals adapt to a diet without meat. Though I personally would never do it, if I owned a cat or a dog it could have all the steaks it wanted.:)

~Tonks~

July 8th, 2004, 6:50 pm

Hmm...When I do get filled up on a salad, I'm hungry in about 20 minutes. As I said, to each his own...

That's because the body works harder to digest greens. This is why, if you ONLY ate lettuce and nothing else, it wouldn't work. Your body uses more energy to digest raw leafy greens than it gets from the actual food. Neat huh?

XxIslandgirlxX

July 8th, 2004, 7:36 pm

free_girl

July 8th, 2004, 8:34 pm

I have a question. I've been vegetarian for most of my life, and know how to get the proper vitamins and minerals from foods other than meat. I understand how all of it works. But I've never even tried being Vegan (I admire anyone who does. I could never do that... I'm addicted to cheese!)and don't know much about such a diet. If there are any vegans on here, what do you eat to get protein and iron? I'm not criticizing, and I'm sure there a way to do it healthfully. I just don't know what that way is. I've heard that vegans buy a lot of manufactured fake foods, and that they're very expensive. Is this true? I'm just curious.
Yeah usually are expensive. To get iron and protein there's bannanna's. :eyebrows: But there are pills and shakes to get your proper nutrients. I use ProCel. It's a powder mix. I blend that together with bannanna's, vanilla extract, ice and strawberry's. Very good and healthy. :D There are other's to at GNC, that's a health store. But they can some times cost a pretty penny.

Kirsten

July 8th, 2004, 9:29 pm

Marie Lexis

July 8th, 2004, 10:17 pm

Read what she wrote. She said that PETA was obnoxious, not meat eaters.

The way she wrote it made it sound like I was obnoxious. And I did read what she wrote!

Actually, when arguing that it's not wrong eating cows, what's wrong with eating dogs and cats? But oh I understand, they're pets, and you can't cuddle cows, that makes all the difference in the world.

There are people who eat cats and dogs. I'm not really sure many people do...but that doesn't matter. And some people have cows as pets. Like on farms. Some like taking care of cows and pigs and sheep just as much as cats and dogs.

I love animals, and I think that the way they are treated is awful. I think that animals and humans should be thought of as equals, because we are no better than them. We are just very different, and I think that the more people becoming vegans or vegetarians, the better!

Alot, well actually most, people need meat. Simple as that. And to me more vegetarians isn't better because then you would have an over population on certain animals. And if you have an over population the only way to help it out is to kill the animals, so I don't see how that helps any.

But I would like to add that I am going on a vegetarian diet. Not because of animals but because of my health. Not wanting to throw up everytime I eat something and think where did that come from is not the reason that's just a plus. But I have a question. Can anybody give me some links to websites telling me how to transfer over? All I know is that you cannot just stop eating meat. You have to eat less and less everyday.

Dedalus Diggle

July 8th, 2004, 10:20 pm

It's much harder to get a balanced diet if you're vegan. The only people I know who tried veganism ended up with B12 deficencies, and had to get injections! Iron is available in leafy green veg and fortified cereal, and is more easily absorbed if you take a dose of vitamin C with it - a glass of orange juice, say. It is possible to get a balanced vegan diet, but it takes more work.

As I recall, mushrooms and dietary yeast (such as Brewers yeast) are also excellent sources of all of the B vitamins and a number of minerals which are usually lacking in plant foods (they aren't plants, they're fungi). I'm no fan of restricted selection diets, but I want my COS friends to be healthy - eat your fungi, please.

PhoenixUK

July 8th, 2004, 10:23 pm

This site (http://www.vegetarian-diet.info/vegetarian.htm) seems good, Marie Lexis.

Kirsten

July 8th, 2004, 10:28 pm

I grow my own!

Marie Lexis, most people do not need meat. Everyone needs the nutrients that are found in meat, but those are obtainable elsewhere, with a little effort. Millions of people are vegetarian across the world, and have been for thousands of years, with no problems. If you're planning to turn vegetarian, it might be worth taking an iron supplement for the first few months, because although your body adjusts to no meat in a few months, people do sometimes become anaemic while their body adjusts to the change in iron sources. There are plenty of websites which can give you the basis of a healthy vegetarian diet. And www.fitday.com allows you to input your food intake every day, and tells you what nutrients you're missing.

Marie Lexis

July 8th, 2004, 10:44 pm

Thank you I will try out the website. The only thing I know about going on a no meat diet is that you are not supposed to all of a sudden stop eating meat. Well anyway back to the debate.

Alot of people do need meat because, like you said it is not obtainable everywhere. And they need the nutrients found in them. It's as simple as that. I'm not saying going on a Vegitarian diet is not bad. Because my doctor is ordering me to. But he told me that once I am alot healthier then I am now then he wants me eating meat again. I have to do constant exercises and all that to help the diet become shorter. He told me that be a constant vegetarian for a long time is dangerous to people who have been eating meat just as long. Your body cannot handle the huge, and sometimes dangerous, transition. But I think that if you have been eating meat for a long time then you should not become a vegetarian. If your parents have raised you like that, then it's fine. But my science teachers feel the same way, because I had talked to both my Earth Science, Biology, Ecology, and Physics teachers, who have all studied stuff like this, before I left school they told me that I should not stay on a Vegetarian diet for long because I've been eating meat for so long. I don't know if that made any since because I'm in a hurry to get out the door to the store.

pepperimp

July 8th, 2004, 10:59 pm

MarcKal

July 8th, 2004, 11:06 pm

I eat meat. I couldn't stand not eating meat. Vegatarians can be left alone. No harm in not eating meat. As long as they don't torture animals or kill a lot, I'm fine. I eat meat everyday. If I don't eat meat for a week, then I go crazy.

Marie Lexis

July 8th, 2004, 11:11 pm

I am a vegetarian...

because, quite simply, I cannot stand the taste of meat. It has such a gross texture.... so this means I don't eat gardenburgers or anything. I do like chicken, but I literally have to cook so there is no moisture left in it, or else its too... "alive" for me to eat.

I do eat cheese and milk, though...

Then you are not a Vegetarian. The only way you can be a vegetarian is not to eat any meat at all and that includes chicken. It doesn't matter how much you cook a chicken it is still meat.

And that includes fish. Fish is meat as well even though people who say they are vegetarians eat fish.

Pegasus

July 8th, 2004, 11:37 pm

As I recall, mushrooms and dietary yeast (such as Brewers yeast) are also excellent sources of all of the B vitamins and a number of minerals which are usually lacking in plant foods (they aren't plants, they're fungi).
Ugh...My sister-in-law recommended Brewer's Yeast to me when I was pregnant with my first baby, and it made me so sick I gave the rest back to her! You have to be really dedicated to eating healthy to eat that stuff. I tried a green drink for a while once, too, and I can't believe how long I stuck with it. I'd much rather enjoy my food. Of course, everyone's tastes are different.

PhoenixUK

July 8th, 2004, 11:43 pm

A good source of vitamin B is through drinking real ale. That's kind of easier than drinking the yeast straight off, if it helps :D.

Pegasus

July 9th, 2004, 12:02 am

Oh, I have no plans of ever becoming a vegan/vegetarian or drinking alcohol, but thanks.:) I should probably stick my nose out of the discussion anyway, given that fact...

Dedalus Diggle

July 9th, 2004, 12:51 am

Ugh...My sister-in-law recommended Brewer's Yeast to me when I was pregnant with my first baby, and it made me so sick I gave the rest back to her! You have to be really dedicated to eating healthy to eat that stuff. I tried a green drink for a while once, too, and I can't believe how long I stuck with it. I'd much rather enjoy my food. Of course, everyone's tastes are different.
I've seen people with that green stuff, too - eeyuck. You're not supposed to take the Brewer's yeast straight you may as well eat concrete mix. When I was a bit of a health nut, I would use is as a soup thickener, and that worked alright: it just gave a kind of nutty flavor. My father was kind of odd about his health foods though - for years his breakfast was a heaping tablespoon of Brewers yeast straight, and then he would wash it down with a big swig of cod liver oil straight from a big bottle (and nothing worse happened to him the rest of the day! :lol: ) When my mother was nursing, her doctor told her that if she started to dry out, she should have a large unfiltered draft beer - that's how people got brewer's yeast back then.

Ana-Magus

July 9th, 2004, 5:22 am

Just as long as you are getting proper nutrition.... it's all about preference - what tastes good to you???

miss_flow

July 10th, 2004, 2:42 pm

I'm a vegetarian! But if everybody were to become vegans/vegetarians the population of animals would rise rapidly.

Kirsten

July 10th, 2004, 3:14 pm

mynameisrene

July 10th, 2004, 6:36 pm

Just a question, but why is it that some vegetarians still eat chicken and turkey? Aren't these things considered "meat" too?

MarcKal

July 10th, 2004, 7:24 pm

Yeah, they are. So, they really aren't vegitarians.

Marie Lexis

July 10th, 2004, 7:31 pm

Would that happen? It's not like we eat meat as a way of controlling the wild animal population. What would happen is farmed animals would not be allowed to breed and there would be fewer of them. The wild animal population would carry on as normal.

Actually there would be more animals. Because of no hunting and all of that. It would not carry on as normal.

Just a question, but why is it that some vegetarians still eat chicken and turkey? Aren't these things considered "meat" too?

If you eat any kind of meat you are not a vegetarians. In my opinion they say that because they don't see chickens and turkey's as animals. That's just me. And on a side note: Mountain Dew Rules!

Chrysalis

July 10th, 2004, 8:35 pm

Actually there would be more animals. Because of no hunting and all of that. It would not carry on as normal.
Ummm, no, actually proportionally there are far fewer animals killed(and eaten) by hunting than in factories. So the difference it makes would be quite marginal I think.

PhoenixUK

July 10th, 2004, 9:28 pm

Ah... the "If everyone stopped eating meat, we'd be overrun by pigs" argument. This is the biggest load of rubbish ever, and the only people who argue it have signifigantly less intelligence than pigs. Most meat is from factory farmed animals: that is, there's enough chickens/pigs/cows whatever to satisfy demand. If everyone became vegetarian, the meat industry would die out (to be replaced by tofu farming, no doubt), and there'd be less animals.

As for hunting, animal numbers regulate themselves depending on the amount of resources in the environment: i.e. if I go and shoot a rabbit, another rabbit will survive and consume the resources otherwise taken by that rabbit. That's why fast breeding animals such as rabbits don't overrun us: because they're naturally limited. The exception is when we hunt them faster than they reproduce, then the animal becomes extinct.

Trust me, "We'll be ruled by super-intelligent pigs!" is not a good argument against vegetarianism :p.

MoodyMania

July 10th, 2004, 9:31 pm

I respect vegetarians and/or vegans for their dietary beliefs but on the other hand I expect them to respect mine as well. I am a meat eater and I'm not ashamed of it either. That does not mean I am mean to animals or like to see them harmed. It simply means that I eat meat. Nothing more and nothing less.

One problem I have with a couple vegan friends is that if I go somewhere that they are, say a mutual friends house, they won't allow animal products to be consumed while they are there. They say it is insensitive of any that do use them because of their beliefs. I tell them they are being insensitive to my beliefs as well. But I never insist that they eat meat while with me so why should they insist I don't while I'm with them.

My policy is eat whatever makes you feel good both physically and psychologically. But also allow me to do the same.

Chrysalis

July 10th, 2004, 9:41 pm

You're right Kit.:) That reasoning is a load of bull.(I mean it as respectfully as possible:p)

Look, the people who say that have never even taken basic biology. Nature regulates itself best without human interference, and we've seen it go wrong as soon as we come into the picture. The trouble of possible overpopulation of deer comes only because it's natural predators have been removed unnaturally by human beings. But even then, nature establishes a balance on it's own. This is how it goes(an example from my biology book).

We have an X amount of mice and an X amount of owls in one year. The amount of owls however grows and in year two there are too few mice left. As a consequence in the third year, a lot of owls die, or they fly elsewhere to search for food. Then the population of mice is allowed to increase and soon the balance is set straight again.

See? The owls and mice can be replaced by any kind of animal of different rankings in the food pyramid. The amount of deer and rabbits will regulate itself. The lower an animal is on the food pyramid, the easier it multiplies. It has a higher need to sustain itself. Only when we human beings have begun interfering has the ratio become skewed, with far too few predators and too many prey. A reintroduction and observation of major predators would solve the problem.

So much for that biology lesson(sorry, I'm a freak:p)

Pegasus

July 11th, 2004, 2:02 am

I have to disagree with that to an extent. If we didn't have deer season around here, even more deer would be roaming the city streets and getting hit by cars than do now. We're in severe drought conditions, and it's hard for the animals to get enough food. I think it's better that the numbers be kept down by people using the meat to feed their families.

PhoenixUK

July 11th, 2004, 2:08 am

Pegasus

July 11th, 2004, 2:12 am

Well, it sure cuts down on car/deer accidents, and I definitely think it's better to be able to use the meat than have them cause accidents and end up as road kill.

PhoenixUK

July 11th, 2004, 2:15 am

Well, it sure cuts down on car/deer accidents, and I definitely think it's better to be able to use the meat than have them cause accidents and end up as road kill.
Just out of interest, do you have statistics to back it up? If anything, it should be the opposite: less experienced, younger deer are more likely to run out in front of cars...

~Tonks~

July 11th, 2004, 2:16 am

But, as I've tried to explain, it doesn't keep the deer numbers down: you'll have exactly the same amount of deer. It just means that less will die of starvation/whatever next year.

Human intervention doesn't change animal numbers unless you hunt a species to extinction. It's undebateable: it's a fact, any biologist will tell you it. It's why the hunting argument of "controlling pests" is largely flawed, because doing such a thing is an impossibility.

That's exactly right.

When I lived in California we had a huge problem with too many deer. So people stopped killing all of the mountain lions. Then guess what happened? We had almost no deer, because the mountain lions came back in amazing numbers and people were hunting deer, so then we had a mountain lion problem. They were eating people's pets and attacking people's kids....

Of course, I lived on the edge of a forest, but we kept our yard crystal clear... So the mountain lion didn't have anywhere to hide in our yard, plus I wasn't unsupervised when I was playing outside. In my opinion it's the dumb parents fault when they let their kid wander around out in the woods and it gets attacked by a mountain lion...

Pegasus

July 11th, 2004, 2:29 am

I heard the ecology behind what you're saying in my biology class in college, but I've seen what happens on the other end. We've never had mountain lion problems, though we have had a moose or two roaming neighbors built on the mountainside. It's a status symbol around here to live on the mountainside (these are the Rockies), and I realize that's part of the problem--but I live clear on the other side of the valley, where the only wildlife is weeds and bugs, so you can't blame me.:) As well as the road kill/accident causing thing I mentioned earlier, isn't it better to hunt for meat (we're not talking about hunting for sport) than to get your meat from one of these mass butchers everyone keeps talking about?
That said, I'd never have the heart to shoot anything myself, and I don't like venison. But I also know that my dad used to hunt in the fall and have food to feed his family of seven for as long as the meat lasted, and my family was very short on money, so it was quite economical.

MoodyMania

July 11th, 2004, 2:37 am

PhoenixUK and Pegasus, both of your posts are partially right I think. Hunting does keep the population controlable but as PhoenixUK says many of the excess would die of starvation anyway. Anytime man takes a hand in trying to save animals i cringe because it usually means another extinct species. Our track record isn't that good for helping them. We infringe on their living and hunting areas and force them into smaller and smaller areas. Then we are surprised when they start coming into towns and cities like Call Me Tonks posted.

nicolasa

July 11th, 2004, 2:38 am

Just a question, but why is it that some vegetarians still eat chicken and turkey? Aren't these things considered "meat" too?

I think they are considered meat too. Some consider themselves "semi-vegetarians" and just don't eat red meat or have meat sparingly. There are different types of vegetarians: Ovo-Lacto,Ovo, Lacto, and of course Vegan. I think either you are a vegetarian or you are not. I'm not a vegetarian, but I don't really care for meat all that much, but I do have it occasionally.

Chrysalis

July 11th, 2004, 9:34 am

Pegasus, what we are contradicting is the assumption that if everyone became vegetarian there would be too many animals. PhoenixUK already pointed out that the meat 'industry' would quickly die out. So that leaves us with wild, hunted animals. However, compared to the animals who are killed in the industry, this amount is fairly small, even worldwide. If humans started interfering, nature would balance itself out. And deer running in front of cars is inevitable. It will always happen in a place where humans and animals coexist. However the amount of deer that ends up as roadkill is not that great. See, I don't know about Utah, but over here, there are all kinds of restrictions and regulations for hunting, and as far as I know few people do actually hunt, and they don't do it for food. It's not a necessity here, because anyone can afford the supermarket, and if you can't, there's always the market. Anyhow, not much deer die at the hands of automobilists at all.

Look, we just discussed this past term at school. Study of ecology throughout history has shown that nature ALWAYS thrives better without human interference. The same goes for deer in Utah. Leave them alone, and see what happens.

By the way Call Me Tonks, if too many deer were killed by mountain lions and also hunted, the cougar population would drop drastically soon enough, because there is not enough food. However, because of hunting, the amount of cougars will always be more than the deer. The ratio is skewed, because normally there would be far more deer and far fewer cougars, but because the deer are being hunted it will be almost even, and maybe even less deer. That's why hunting is never good, in my opinion.

~Tonks~

July 11th, 2004, 9:36 am

By the way Call Me Tonks, if too many deer were killed by mountain lions and also hunted, the cougar population would drop drastically soon enough, because there is not enough food. However, because of hunting, the amount of cougars will always be more than the deer. The ratio is skewed, because normally there would be far more deer and far fewer cougars, but because the deer are being hunted it will be almost even, and maybe even less deer. That's why hunting is never good, in my opinion.

Oh believe me. Things went up and down like crazy for years. For all I know it's still doing that. I moved when they were still having problems.

Chrysalis

July 11th, 2004, 9:44 am

Yeah, I wasn't disputing your statement, merely adding some theory to it.:)

PunkRockGoddess

July 11th, 2004, 9:58 pm

I'm ok with eating meat. But sometimes I look at what I'm eating and think...'What if that could be Shadow?' and push it away. By the way Shadow is my kitten. He is so beautiful. With his big brown eyes and his black fur....um...excuse me. But anyway...I've have a question. If there are any vegetarians on here. I noticed that people have a hard time watching others eat meat and all that. But why do some people bother us about eating meat, but then you are eating organisms as well? And believe me I'm bothered by vegetarians during lunch. There is an entire organization at school.

Pegasus

July 11th, 2004, 11:12 pm

there are all kinds of restrictions and regulations for hunting, and as far as I know few people do actually hunt, and they don't do it for food. It's not a necessity here, because anyone can afford the supermarket, and if you can't, there's always the market.
Actually, there are all kinds of restrictions and regulations, but many, many people do hunt. We have here what we call "deer widows"--the women left behind when the men go out to hunt. And they do it for food. (I say "they" because my husband isn't a hunter--although I have plenty of family and friends who are.) They have freezers in their basements/garages where they store cleaned-and-ready-to-cook deer, elk, etc. They share their excess with families and friends. Combine this with growing your own garden and buying other food stuffs in bulk, and you're self-sufficient, prepared for any time you find yourself without the financial means to buy food, there is a shortage of food at the grocery store, there is any kind of an environmental disaster, etc. Isn't this better than supporting those with the terrible butchery practices you decry?
My personal beliefs are not for vegetarianism, they are for wisely using the resources that have been given to us. I'm simply trying to point out that hunting for food has its definite advantages. As for deer/automobile accident statistics, etc., no, I don't have the numbers to back me up. I just have personal experience from living near the mountains all my life and local reports from the local news.

DerHalfBlood

July 12th, 2004, 12:18 am

I am not a vegetarian or vegan. I have considered becoming a vegetarian. I'm not concerned with how animals are treating very much, but I do not like handling raw meats or the possibility of getting any diseases like mad cow. I think its great if people are vegetarian or vegan. I think vegan is stretching it because it really limits what you eat. A past girlfriend couldn't even eat a fortune cookie at a Chinese restaurant because it had egg in it. I think its great to stand up for what you believe in as long as you still get all your nutrients.

maryfinn

July 12th, 2004, 2:14 am

I'm really surprised. This is probably one of the most logical, non-antagonistic discussions about vegitariansim i have ever seen. I personally am a lacto-ovo vegitarian, for all the usual reasons, (caring about the enviroment, nutrition, animals ect.) but i respect the decision for people to eat meat. I myself am not into it i think it would be great if more people were vegitarians, but i think that more important than the diet is being able to make a choice without being attacked by different viewpoints.
so thats my opinion. hurray for free speech!

Chrysalis

July 12th, 2004, 9:16 am

Pegasus - I think you actually completely missed my point.

PunkRockGoddess - Read the whole thread please. This question has been asked again and again to normal vegetarians who don't bother anyone, till now they're tired of it.

Blackhawk0216

July 12th, 2004, 6:38 pm

Just to put in my two cents...I don't understand how anyone could not enjoy a good hamburger, hot dog, ribs, or steak? If we weren't supposed to eat animals, why are they made of meat? Being a vegaterian is something that i just could not do, and to me, if you are a vegetarian and you live in america, your not a true american. You can't celebrate the fourth of july without having a good BBQ. I'm not trying to offend anyone, this is just my opinion and i'm sure people out there will be angry with me, but oh well.

Azimuth

July 12th, 2004, 6:56 pm

Just to put in my two cents...I don't understand how anyone could not enjoy a good hamburger, hot dog, ribs, or steak?
People have different opinions. Different tastes.

If we weren't supposed to eat animals, why are they made of meat?
Meat can't just be eaten. It has to be cooked and properly prepared. We have taken meat and made it edible. It isn't "supposed" to be eaten. Anyway, humans are made of meat, so what's wrong with eating us?

Being a vegaterian is something that i just could not do
It's something I couldn't do either, but other people can. You should respect other people's choices and views.

and to me, if you are a vegetarian and you live in america, your not a true american. You can't celebrate the fourth of july without having a good BBQ.
This is utterly ridiculous. What you choose to eat doesn't change your nationality. Also, your second point - vegetarians all across America celebrate Independence Day without eating meat. Just because it's something you wouldn't want to do doesn't mean that other people shouldn't do it either.

Kirsten

July 12th, 2004, 8:11 pm

Just to put in my two cents...and to me, if you are a vegetarian and you live in america, your not a true american. You can't celebrate the fourth of july without having a good BBQ.
Sorry, but that's not even worth 2 cents. Are you suggesting that American vegetarians should be stripped of their citizenship and deported, or refused access to the country? Should they be treated as lesser citizens with fewer rights and no access to the rights and protection of the US constitution? Should vegetarians be carted off to Guantanamo Bay?

To suggest that veggie Americans are not true Americans is just stupid and ridiculous, and probably insulting. And by the way, it is possible to barbecue vegetarian food.

MoodyMania

July 12th, 2004, 10:10 pm

I would never go as far to say being a vegitarian is un-american. But I do have issues with some none the less. I have never seen a meat eater go up to a complete stranger who is a vegitarian and tell them they are barbaric because they are eating veggies. But I have seen the reverse.

Why can't people accept other peoples culture/customs/preferences without trying to force their own on them?

PunkRockGoddess

July 12th, 2004, 11:24 pm

PunkRockGoddess - Read the whole thread please. This question has been asked again and again to normal vegetarians who don't bother anyone, till now they're tired of it.

Well it's a good question. And I am not going to spend my entire day reading something on here. And I did skim through it, and twice someone asked and twice the question was ignored. I am bothered all the time at my school because I eat meat. I'm not bothering vegetarians because they eat plants, which does kill them, if not that, hurt them. And they are organisms. And I don't know if you meant to be, but that was kind of rude.

Blackhawk0216

July 12th, 2004, 11:41 pm

just to clear up what i said earlier,(some of you took it too seriously), i really just wrote that as sort of a joke. Like i said, i am not a vegitarian and never could be, but i respect people who are, i think it would be very difficult to do that and i actually commend you. So i appologize to those who were offended, but that really was a joke. The phrase, "If we weren't supposed to eat animals, why are they made of meat?" i saw on a bumper sticker and thought it was funny. So again, i appologize and am very sorry.

Chrysalis

July 14th, 2004, 7:44 am

Well it's a good question. And I am not going to spend my entire day reading something on here. And I did skim through it, and twice someone asked and twice the question was ignored. I am bothered all the time at my school because I eat meat. I'm not bothering vegetarians because they eat plants, which does kill them, if not that, hurt them. And they are organisms. And I don't know if you meant to be, but that was kind of rude.
I'm sorry if I sounded rude, but that question has been asked a zillion times. And maybe you don't bother vegetarians, but there are plenty of other meat eaters that do. I've had people bore me to death about how 'delicious' meat is and someone else told a whole crowd that he'd rather jump off a roof than be vegetarian, knowing full well that there were vegetarians in the vicinity, who had never bothered anyone before.

I'm sick of all vegetarians being accounted for the actions of a radical few. Most of us just like to get on with our lives.

Blackhawk - Azi and I were quite undecided about whether you were trying to come off as stupid on purpose, that's why I didn't respond. But thanks for clearing that up.:)

PunkRockGoddess

July 16th, 2004, 3:05 am

I'm sorry if I sounded rude, but that question has been asked a zillion times. And maybe you don't bother vegetarians, but there are plenty of other meat eaters that do. I've had people bore me to death about how 'delicious' meat is and someone else told a whole crowd that he'd rather jump off a roof than be vegetarian, knowing full well that there were vegetarians in the vicinity, who had never bothered anyone before.

How is it different from bothering meat eaters? You sound like vegetarians have a greater cause then meat eaters. In fact neither have a greater cause. I'm sure a few vegetarians would yell that they rather jump off a roof then become a meat eater. So I don't see the big deal in that really. You sound as if vegetarians have the worst of problems.

I'm sick of all vegetarians being accounted for the actions of a radical few. Most of us just like to get on with our lives.

And so would all meat eaters. Some might not realise that they are doing it, but most of those vegetarians who became vegetarians to help animals more do bother meat eaters even when they don't realise they are doing it. You might of commented and bothered meat eaters without even realising it.

Pegasus

July 16th, 2004, 3:19 am

Hmm...I'm a meat eater, but not a big one. I prefer chicken with pasta to steak any day. I've never been bothered about eating meat other than in these kinds of debates, and I don't have a problem with vegetarians--I don't like tuna or pickles, they don't like meat. So what?
It's a matter of mutual respect. If we all practiced it, there wouldn't be a problem.

Chrysalis

July 16th, 2004, 6:49 am

Most meat eaters are just fine. Nearly all of my friends eat meat and I never make an issue out of it. Why should I? It's not an important part of my lifestyle. Besides, each to his/her own.

The point I was trying to make it that I just hate it when vegetarians are always stereotyped as militant and forcing others to comply with their eating habits. I haven't offended anyone with anything I've said. I only mention my vegetarianism when we are going on a class outing to a restaurant or for my school trip. I never debate vegetarianism except on this board. And yes, I'd rather jump off a roof than eat meat, but I don't tell anyone that without asking for it. Yes I've said it now, just to clear things up. Satisfied?:rolleyes:

Pegasus

July 16th, 2004, 6:52 am

Savoy Truffle--I hope you noticed my post was similar to past comments--it was not aimed at you.

Chrysalis

July 16th, 2004, 12:57 pm

I know that, mine was a reply to PunkRockGoddess's post.:)

Pegasus

July 17th, 2004, 1:58 am

Thought so--just double-checking.

Kirsten

July 17th, 2004, 10:48 am

I just read Shopped by Joanna Blythman, about the behaviour of supermarkets and the effect they are having on the world's eating, and Not on the Label by Felicity Lawrence about what actually happens to food from growing to shelves. You know those bags of prepacked salad, washed and ready to eat? They're washed in chlorine solution. Think it's OK to eat chicken if it's organic? Organic chickens are generally processed in the same factories as non-organic. When chickens go through the plucking machine, they are squeezed at high pressure, which forces out the contents of their bowel onto the convyor belt - and then your organic chicken comes along the same conveyor belt, trailing through the campylobactor or salmonella infested poo.

I was so disgusted by what I read about the behaviour of supermarkets and the way our food is processed that I ordered this week's fruit and veg from an organic farm shop, who delivered it last night. I have carrots in my fridge which still have the roots on, still have soil on, tomatoes of different shapes and sizez, cauliflowers which are creamy rather than pure white. It's food like my Mum grows in her garden - it doesn't look perfect, but I can't wait to taste it. From now on, I will be minimising my use of supermarkets and using the farm shops as much as possible.

Lupin_Lady

July 17th, 2004, 11:03 am

Pegasus

July 17th, 2004, 7:52 pm

That seems strange to me--my brother raised and butchered chickens, geese, and turkeys for a Scout project, and the meat was never yellow. It looked just like the stuff we buy at the supermarket. Maybe it depends on the breed?

Dedalus Diggle

July 17th, 2004, 8:26 pm

I ate chicken today for the first time- it was straight off my unlces farm, and hte meat was YELLOW- Chicken meat is supposed to be yellow, but for commercial sale they bleach the meat... Ewww Factor!
Well, I can't vouch that the chickens are not bleached, but the color difference proves nothing. Chickens and other fowl are notorious for carrying much of what they eat in their meat: if you feed them lots of garlic, they will taste garlicky, if you feed them lots of carrots, the meat will be orange. "Free-range" chickens carry some of the taste and color of the things the chickens eat: insects, wild seeds, poop, etc. Factory raised chickens have little of this because they are fed grains and other stuff which carries little extraneious color or flavor.

SilverStar

July 17th, 2004, 8:29 pm

There is nothing wrong with vegetarianism/veganism but you need to make sure that you get your vitamins!

Kirsten

July 17th, 2004, 8:40 pm

Corn fed chickens are often yellow. It's like flamingoes - they have to eat certain crustacea to maintain their pinkness.

Pegasus

July 17th, 2004, 10:09 pm

Think it's OK to eat chicken if it's organic? Organic chickens are generally processed in the same factories as non-organic. Incidentally, I don't waste my money on "organic" foods. I'd rather clean my fruits and vegetables (like I would anyway if I could get them to grow in my garden year round) and fully cook my meat (not that I like my meat raw, mind you!) and have enough money to buy my kids shoes.

alliumsativu

July 18th, 2004, 7:40 am

There is nothing wrong with vegetarianism/veganism but you need to make sure that you get your vitamins!

... just like omnivores do. also, if youre eating a balanced vegan/veg diet youre getting enough vitamins unless you have other problems that affect absorption. if youre gonna worry about any nutrients while vegan (not vegetarian really) i would worry about omega fatty acids, vit b-12 and such.... which are both easily obtained in a strict vegan diet through the addition of flax, fortefied foods, seaweeds, nutritional yeast, and other things.

Lupin_Lady

July 19th, 2004, 9:25 am

True about the colour of chicken depending on the food- but I've been a chef, and it is true that chicken meat is SUPPOSED to be a little yellow-ish. With or without special foods.

nicolasa

July 19th, 2004, 1:15 pm

Originally Posted by Pegasus:
Incidentally, I don't waste my money on "organic" foods. I'd rather clean my fruits and vegetables (like I would anyway if I could get them to grow in my garden year round) and fully cook my meat (not that I like my meat raw, mind you!) and have enough money to buy my kids shoes. But you cannot wash off all of the pesticides that are on/in fruits and vegetables. Sure you can wash some of them off, but you can wash them for hours, even with special cleaners for that sort of thing, and pesticides will still be there.

Pegasus

July 20th, 2004, 11:10 pm

You know what? It doesn't bother me. I have to eat, and so do my husband and kids. There was a time when I let myself get caught up in the "scare" thing and I had trouble grocery shopping. No food--no eating. Not healthy. Now I just concern myself with variety, well-balanced nutrition, and finding ways to get my kids to try it so they figure out they like it. Everyone in my family is generally healthy. We rarely get sick. I have long, healthy lives in my genes. I've chosen quality of life over fear. I concern myself with more important things now.

Lupin_Lady

July 21st, 2004, 10:01 am

I agree with Pegasus-
I mean have they ever ACTUALLY proven that all the pesticides, additives and preseveritives are dangerous?
I know that the 'hippie' scientists have, but have credited ones like the CSIRO found evidence? NO. That's because there's nothing seriouosly wrong with these foods.
Foods that have things added- i.e. OJ with clacium added is beneficial for you. I know that you might be thinking that calcium is not an additive that bother's you, but what else went in to the jucie in order for them to be able to add the Vit C???

Chrysalis

July 21st, 2004, 11:07 am

Pesticides are definitely dangerous. Although admittedly we never buy food at organic stores(there isn't a single one in our area that we know of), they're danger must not be underestimated.

Their effects have also been proven. DDT, for one, is cancerous.

Honestly, something that is created with the intent to kill organisms, can't be anything else.

PhoenixUK

July 21st, 2004, 1:34 pm

DDT is illegal now, at least in the UK, though. Most pesticides in foods have to meet strict "maximum safety levels", set by the EU. Yes, in effect they're poisons, but because we have considerbaly more body mass than the insects they're intended to kill, the effects are unnoticable because they become very very dilute and hence ineffective in the human body.

Dedalus Diggle

July 21st, 2004, 7:09 pm

Most pesticides and herbicides interfere with bodily functions that are peculiar to the targeted species. They are specifically the ones chosen for manufacture because they killed only the pests. Many break down to benign components quite quickly (for instance Round-up herbicide is very quickly broken down once it reaches soil or water - it only works on the plants it is sprayed on). DDT was used before there was any realistic regulation of chemical use.

Of course, one wants to minimize the unnecessary exposure to unnatural chemicals, and particularly poisons, whether natural or unnatural. The herbal products indistry is plainly fraudulent when they say that their products are necessarily safe because they are natural. The natural world teems with very dangerous chemicals which living things make to fend off their enemies. And th use of chemicals, whether natural or unnatural, can enhance the safety of our food, by preventing the growth of dangerous microbes, fungi, etc. Also billions of people in the world eat a much better diet because the (hopefully judicious) use of chemicals allow bigger, cheaper harvests.

There are a lot of risks in the world, both natural and artificial. Neither is inherently safer or more dangerous, so a strict rule either way is not a health-based decision. Choose wisely.

codswallop

July 21st, 2004, 7:23 pm

i think you need a balance, I know several vegitarians who are diabetic because they eat too many carbs and do not have a good source of protein. How many chickens would populate the Earth if they weren't a food source?

Kirsten

July 21st, 2004, 9:57 pm

Eating carbs does not cause diabetes. Type 2 diabetes is generally linked to obesity, which is a result of overeating, not eating carbs.

And if hens were not a food source, they would not overpopulate the earth. Their numbers would be kept stable by predators, availability of food and other natural population balancers. Nature stabilises itself if left alone; it's man that mucks the balance up.

Benzo

July 21st, 2004, 10:48 pm

Eating insects would be a great source of cheap proteins, available for everyone. Yes, I am serious, it is much more healthy for the earth than poultry, pigs and beefs.

I ate some. Crikets with garlic and ginger are escellent as well as dipped in chocolate. Flour of larvae does good cookies but the caterpillar I ate was disgusting.

codswallop

July 21st, 2004, 11:34 pm

Eating carbs does not cause diabetes. Type 2 diabetes is generally linked to obesity, which is a result of overeating, not eating carbs. kirsten

My husband switch to a low carb diet for 3 days and had to cut his insulin in half. I recommend reading to Atkins book from cover to cover if you are convinced a high carb diet does not cause type 2 diabetes/

RELASHIO Rachel

July 22nd, 2004, 12:39 am

I've been a vegetarian my entire life (my Dad has been a vegetarian his entire life, and my Mom turned vegetarian when they married) so I was raised vegetarian. We're not vegan though. My brother stopped being a vegetarian in about eighth grade, and my parents don't really care. Honestly, I like being a vegetarian. No risk of Mad Cow Disease, a lot healthier (we get our protein from soy meat and cheeses.. Don't be fooled, soy meat is really good actually) and a lot less fat in my diet :D My Dad has always been a bit of a hippie (his upbringing I guess????) and really laid back, he's also Jewish, so I guess he just has respect for animals???? I also find it gross to be eating something that could once taste you as well as you tasting it.

Kirsten

July 22nd, 2004, 7:55 am

kirsten

My husband switch to a low carb diet for 3 days and had to cut his insulin in half. I recommend reading to Atkins book from cover to cover if you are convinced a high carb diet does not cause type 2 diabetes/
My ex is a doctor and he specialises in diabetes, and I worked with him for a while. Carbs do not cause diabetes. Being overweight is the major cause of type II diabetes. If your husband had to reduce his insulin, that's because he cut his calorie intake. Atkins is a dangerous diet, founded on bad science.

codswallop

July 23rd, 2004, 2:36 am

My ex is a doctor and he specialises in diabetes, and I worked with him for a while. Carbs do not cause diabetes. Being overweight is the major cause of type II diabetes. If your husband had to reduce his insulin, that's because he cut his calorie intake. Atkins is a dangerous diet, founded on bad science.

My aunt, Uncle, two cousins are all doctors. Atkins works. They are talking about scrapping the food pyramid in the US, Please read the book before you knock it, lots of studies have proven Atkins to be healthy.

In addition, I know many MD's who do Atkins because they have seen what it has done for their patiences. (Best friend growing up and two clients of my dad's)

My husband is Jain. He is the only member of his family who eats meat. Jainism and Vegitarianism go hand-in-hand, that is why I was so intrigued by this thread. As I watch their diets I am saddened by something so noble and religiously based as vegitarianism (if done improperly)can be harmful to their healths as I watch them take their medicines each evening.

Kirsten

July 23rd, 2004, 8:13 am

Are you seriously suggesting that vegetarianism causes diabetes?

codswallop

July 23rd, 2004, 6:34 pm

Are you seriously suggesting that vegetarianism causes diabetes?

I am suggesting that vegatarism done wrong, lots of refined carbohydrates and not balanced is dangerous, and can lead to type 2 diabetes. Non-vegatarians who eat an unhealty amount of refined carbohydrates are subject to the same thing. Every night I watch my relatives eat there high carb dinner and shoot up there insulin, it pains me.

I was going to do some links but there are too many....Much of the research on this site is from outside sources so please don't bother yourself looking at any thing internal:

http://atkins.com/ (http://)

I did a search on diabetes and over 700 documents of scientific reasearch came up and the site will also explain the link between refined carbs and diseases like diabetes. (If your a non-scientist like myself the book explains it very clearly.)

Nickel

July 24th, 2004, 12:30 am

Atkins is a dangerous diet, founded on bad science.

100% right. :tu:

codswallop

July 24th, 2004, 1:08 am

Originally Posted by Kirsten
Atkins is a dangerous diet, founded on bad science.

100% right.

documentation? studies? Links?

Pegasus

July 24th, 2004, 1:10 am

My aunt, Uncle, two cousins are all doctors. Atkins works. They are talking about scrapping the food pyramid in the US, Please read the book before you knock it, lots of studies have proven Atkins to be healthy.
Every test I've seen done with solid science proves that Atkins is dangerous. I've seen as many warning signs and articles pasted up on adult doctors' walls as I've seen warnings against trampolines and failure to immunize your kids in the pediatrician's office, or smoking in the OB's office.

codswallop

July 24th, 2004, 1:21 am

Every test I've seen done with solid science proves that Atkins is dangerous. I've seen as many warning signs and articles pasted up on adult doctors' walls as I've seen warnings against trampolines and failure to immunize your kids in the pediatrician's office, or smoking in the OB's office.

If you do Atkins correctly it is not dangerous and the evidence is coming in overwelmingly....

Hmmm my doctors are telling me that I need to cut down on my refined carbs and sugars. The US gov't is considering scraping the food pyramid.....Food companies in the US have completely change because of the demand for low carb products/

Pegasus

July 24th, 2004, 1:22 am

Where did you hear about scratching the entire Food Pyramid? I've never heard that, and I can't see any reason why they would.

codswallop

July 24th, 2004, 1:24 am

On cnn or fox news last week.

because the food pyramid is why the US is fattest nation in the world

http://my.webmd.com/content/article/61/67434.htm (http://)

Pegasus

July 24th, 2004, 1:43 am

HollywoodBob

July 24th, 2004, 2:05 am

Pegasus

July 24th, 2004, 2:10 am

Ah, yes...those super-size combo meals that America is addicted to. Statistically, the percentage of kids whose parents let them practically live on French fries and pop is astronomical; how are these kids supposed to grow up thin?

codswallop

July 24th, 2004, 3:12 am

The reason Americans are fat is because they put fatty meat at the bottom of the pyramid instead of putting lean meat towards the top and eat refined grains instead of whole--doughnuts are obviously going to be less healthy than whole wheat bread and brown rice. Also, most Americans don't comsume nearly the 5-9 fruit/vegetable recommendation. Most people who eat this way are extremely healthy and thin--as long as they exercise, too, which is also a huge factor. It's easier to sit around and drive everywhere you go. That's what most doctors blame the weight epidemic on.

The first sentance is just not true and rather insulting if you are an American. The reason we are fat is because we were told that we should increase our carbs and lesson are meat and essenstial fatty oils and we did, we started eating highly processed food bagels and cereal....and we became fat and we did this because we were told too, that this was healthy eating. To fatten cows, you feed them grains, not protein or fat. you might not believe me, tonight, tommarrow or next year, but everything we learned the past 20 years is wrong, that's why there is such in obesity issue in the US(i am american). The science is slowly waking up to this fact. The answer might not be Atkins per se, but a total revision of everything we learned in school about nutrition will be seen in the next 5 to 10 years.

i have no power to make other men see the truth or overrule the Minister of Magic--Dumbledore POA

Pegasus

July 24th, 2004, 4:35 am

I am an American. I'm as American as they come--I have ancestors who came over on the Mayflower. Most of the overweight and heart diseased, diabetic, etc. people I know practically live on meat and call everything else "rabbit food." The problem isn't the food pyramid--it's that most people don't follow it. If my dad lived on meat instead of carbs it would kill him--he already is on medication to keep his cholesterol in check because he lived most his love on the standard meat-and-potatoes diet. Which is what my highly overweight and diabetic in-laws have lived their life on. Food pyramid? Ha! It's hard to get grains, fruits, or vegetables (unless they're part of salad or dessert) when we stay at their house. I keep my weight down by following the food pyramid, walking, and doing weights--and when I'm not pregnant, I look pretty dang good, if I say so myself.

codswallop

July 24th, 2004, 4:45 am

~Tonks~

July 24th, 2004, 4:48 am

Plus lets not forget that the average american eats something like 3 times the amount of food as their asian or european counterparts. We're a nation of Gluttons, that's why Atkins is so popular. It lets people eat loads of food without feeling guilty, because they're convinced that eating a pound of bacon is healthier than eating an apple becaus the apple has carbs.

The facts about the Atkins diet are simple: the lack of glucose disrupts the functioning of your brain; an increased risk of colon cancer, liver disease and heart disease; bad breath; and constipation. Those last two should be plenty to put anyone off that diet.

If you want to lose weight, just eat less food and excercise.

Now, where's my waffle sundae. :D

Amen. Thank you so much for finally saying that.

I am so sick of going out to eat with friends and coworkers because they're always on some fad diet and I get chastized for what I order. "It works!" Whatever, you know, I don't care if it works or not, because eating less and exercising also works, and what you said is exactly right - Atkins lets people pig out on proteins.

I have an aunt who is horribly overweight. (Think Aunt Marge when she was floating around in the sky.) She's been to countless doctors looking for them to give her some miracle pill or reccommend a fad diet to her and not a one has muttered the word Atkins. Know what they tell her every time? Eat less, balance your foods, and get more exercise.

And we are a nation of gluttons. It's true whether people think it's offensive or not. My relatives from Canada came down here when my father passed away and they were disgusted at the portions served in our restaurants. They sat there overstuffed on a third of their meal, having skipped the salad and appetizers, and were terrified to see people at neighboring tables downing soups, salads, appetizers, and deserts in addition to cleaning their plates. People begin to whisper accusations of anorexia behind my back just because I don't help myself to a piled plate of fourth servings when I eat at someone else's house... it's ridiculous.

Obesity is costing us more and more in health care and frankly I am sick of it. Eat less, exercise more. I realize some people can't, they have medical conditions or irregular hormones or gland problems... but that's a small percentage, not the majority.

codswallop

July 24th, 2004, 4:51 am

Obesity is costing us more and more in health care and frankly I am sick of it.--call me tonks

so if Atkins works why not do it, if it helps obesity and keeps health care down.

~Tonks~

July 24th, 2004, 4:58 am

--call me tonks

so if Atkins works why not do it, if it helps obesity and keeps health care down.

I didn't say for people not to do it. If it helps people lose weight, fine. But it seems to me that a lot of people get the mentality of, "I'm on Atkins!" and because they actually go into it with the predispostion that they will lose weight, and they're exercising at the same time, which is a huge part of it, then of course they're going to lose weight. It's like a placebo. Take a pill being told it will help you and you'll start to think it will even if it has no medicine in it at all. Attitude is a major factor in everything. If someone really wants to lose weight they're going to do it.

The problem is that old fashioned exercise and not eating the entire contents of the fridge also helps to lose weight, but that's not exciting enough and no one wants to talk about a boring old diet and exercise routine. Sad to say but a lot of people are just looking for a quick fix or a trendy way to do it that will likely allow them to use it as the centerpiece of their social circle. My neighbor isn't overweight or unhealthy whatsoever but she and four of her friends have started dieting - two of whom only really need it. They talk about it every chance they get whether you want to hear it or not.

The thing I find most interesting about Atkins is that it's called a diet... a diet is usually something temporary one stays on to achieve a certain goal, and then once that goal is achieved, they go back to the way they ate before, only with a lot more moderation, and not nearly as much... so, I'm wondering if all these people who are Atkins crazed are really going to give up everything with carbs in it for the next 30 - 40 years of their lives, or until some new study comes out that Atkins is wrong. Hey, meat used to be the enemy too...

codswallop

July 24th, 2004, 5:04 am

As you lose weight and exercise more you increase your carbohydrate intake, but we were all eating to many carbs because that is what the establishment told us was healthy, I will probably eat pasta and potatoes again after I reach my goal weight but I be hard pressed to eat a doughnut.

Pegasus

July 24th, 2004, 5:12 am

i agree with the exercising, but you could not pay me to follow the food pyramid....It's too bad those relatives cant cut out the potatoes, they'd be much healthier, and the high cho. would go away....

(We did not come over on the Mayflower, but I am related to the grandfather of John Adams, and just had my second baby in January and Atkinsing and walking off the weight, which is much harder than with my first because unbeknowst to me I had a thyroid problem)
I was not saying that you were unAmerican, I was laughing at the comment that I was being highly offensive to Americans. I've seen the statistics and seen them in my loved ones.
Cut out the potatoes and the cholesterol would go away? Ha! When my dad sticks to his diet (no beef or ham, just small amounts of chicken and turkey, accompanied by fruits, vegs, and grains) his cholesterol stays down; when he doesn't, it goes sky high!
Okay, back on topic: I haven't seen a lot of overweight vegetarians in my life, have you? I personally think it would be a lot healthier than living on meat and cutting out the carbs--although I prefer to just eat what I want and be as well-rounded and careful about junk food as I can.
And yes--it's mainly exercise and cutting down portions that perpetuates weight loss and general health.

Chrysalis

July 24th, 2004, 6:28 am

Vegetarians can be overweight, if all they gorge on between meals is French Fries and cakes. However without the snacks a vegetarian lifestyle works very well to keep your weight down.

I will reply on Atkins in the other thread, since it is off-topic.:)

Adalbert Waffling

July 24th, 2004, 7:55 am

~Tonks~

July 24th, 2004, 8:19 am

I couldn't live without meat. And in answer to the question if we treat animals cruelly, most farm raised animals are treated well, and can be reasonably happy.

The people I REALLY don't understand are the ones that won't even drink milk. I forget what exactly you call them, but since when is drinking milk in-humane?

Well I have seen things about how the cows are fed hormones and their calves are taken away from them... etc. I drink milk, I'm just saying, there are things they do to continue that milk production you know...

Kirsten

July 24th, 2004, 10:52 am

To fatten cows, you feed them grains, not protein or fat
That's what you're basing your argument on? :rotfl: Why would you feed cows protein or fat anyway? Cows don't eat meat. Cows eat grass and other plant food. That's what they're designed to eat. Feeding meat to cows is almost certainly the reason there was a BSE epidemic in the UK. Many cows these days are fattened by pumping them full of growth hormone and antibiotic, which is a pretty good reason for not eating meat unless you know for certain it was grass fed.

....It's too bad those relatives cant cut out the potatoes, they'd be much healthier, and the high cho. would go away....
Potatoes have no cholesterol in them and have no link to blood cholesterol levels. If you want to decrease your blood cholesterol, lay off the animal fat and eat more oats. Porridge is great for decreasing cholesterol.

I couldn't live without meat. And in answer to the question if we treat animals cruelly, most farm raised animals are treated well, and can be reasonably happy.

The people I REALLY don't understand are the ones that won't even drink milk. I forget what exactly you call them, but since when is drinking milk in-humane?
You could live perfectly well without meat. Millions have followed a vegetarian diet for thousands of years with no problems. Many farm animals are not treated well. They are held in pens with little space and no chance to move, with food and water - often laced with antibiotics and hormones - dispensed at regular intervals. Sheep have to be kept outside, they don't thrive indoors or on rich farmland, but other than that most farm animals have miserable lives.

As for milk, humans are the only animals who continue to consume milk past childhood. All through the rest of nature, animals are weaned onto solid food and never touch milk again. Much milk now is full of hormones and stuff ("stuff" being a scientific term :rolleyes: ) which makes it an unhealthy choice and it is linked with skin complaints such as eczema, although obviously that doesn't apply to everyone. Animals reared for milk, which is mainly cows, are forced to have young more often than they would in nature, their offspring are removed, and the animal is treated with hormones to continue milk production for much longer than is natural.

HollywoodBob

July 24th, 2004, 3:43 pm

Animals reared for milk, which is mainly cows, are forced to have young more often than they would in nature, their offspring are removed, and the animal is treated with hormones to continue milk production for much longer than is natural.You've obviously never worked on a dairy. Since I lived next to one for 20 years and worked on it for several let me tell you how it was there. Cows were bred once a year, and when the calf is weaned at the appropriate age, the cow is sent in to the milking parlour where they are attached to a milking machine and milked twice daily, then let out to graze the rest of the day. It was the continuous milking that allowed them to produce milk, just like women who don't stop breast feeding can continue to produce milk. Then after a few months when the next batch of cows was ready to be weaned they were left out to pasture and allowed to dry up and to await their next calf and begin the process over.

-HollywoodBob

crucifix

July 24th, 2004, 4:06 pm

That's what you're basing your argument on? :rotfl: Why would you feed cows protein or fat anyway? Cows don't eat meat. Cows eat grass and other plant food. That's what they're designed to eat. Feeding meat to cows is almost certainly the reason there was a BSE epidemic in the UK. Many cows these days are fattened by pumping them full of growth hormone and antibiotic, which is a pretty good reason for not eating meat unless you know for certain it was grass fed.

That's not entirely accurate. The reason the epidemic occured was because of links to cannibalism. It wasn't necesarily that they ate meat, it was because they ate the meat of other cows. It has been shown in studies of certain African tribes that dieseases of the brain with the exact symptoms of Mad Cow occur with these eating habits.

At the same time, you can't argue that cows shouldn't eat meat because they weren't intended to in nature, and then argue that humans should be vegatarians. I am not sure if you know this or not, but humans are intended to be omnivores in nature, the most obvious characterisitc being flat teeth for grinding and sharp teeth for ripping and tearing.

Kirsten

July 24th, 2004, 6:28 pm

I disagree. Firstly cows are not meant to eat meat. They are vegetarian, mainly grass eating animals. As for human vegetarianism - carnivorous animals have extremely sharp teeth and short digestive tracts, so that the meat passes out of them before it can putrefy. Humans do not have sharp teeth - even our incisors and canines are not really sharp, and very long digestive tracts. We're designed to be plant eaters, with little, if any meant.

Pegasus

July 24th, 2004, 9:08 pm

As for milk, humans are the only animals who continue to consume milk past childhood. All through the rest of nature, animals are weaned onto solid food and never touch milk again. Much milk now is full of hormones and stuff ("stuff" being a scientific term ) which makes it an unhealthy choice and it is linked with skin complaints such as eczema, although obviously that doesn't apply to everyone. Animals reared for milk, which is mainly cows, are forced to have young more often than they would in nature, their offspring are removed, and the animal is treated with hormones to continue milk production for much longer than is natural.

Perhaps other things don't need the calcium?
As a pregnant woman with two growing kids, I can definitely tell you that milk is a necessity. It is by far the best source of calcium, and now that Vitamin D has been added, it's probably the best source of it, too. Have you noticed that countries that don't drink as much milk tend to have worse teeth? My husband, who spent two years in Japan, can attest to this--they think milk is for babies, and he saw a lot of nasty teeth.
When my daughter has leg aches/growing pains, I give her a glass of milk and a Tum. I do the same for myself. And if you want osteoporosis, taking all the milk products out of your diet is a great way to go.

codswallop

July 24th, 2004, 9:34 pm

To fatten cows, you feed them grains, not protein or fat. myself

I was really unclear on this statement, sorry. I just meant it to mean that grains fatten, as if we literally followed the food pyramid it would do to us....and they do eat grass, but they are feed grains to fatten not fat (whatever the source to fatten>)

Lincoln

July 24th, 2004, 11:03 pm

While I believe that we as humans should eat meat sparingly (and I should really eat less meat), I do not believe we should eat no meat.

Also, I have a big problem with people who believe themselves morally superior because they don't eat meat. Guess what -- eating plants kills animals too. Unless you only ever eat the vegetables you grow yourself (which can often be difficult when deer, insects, etc, come and eat your produce before you can), there'es a good chance that a grain harvester somewhere has been killing field mice and other similar animals to get that grain for you. Plus, why is it morally better to eat plants than animals? Plants are living things too, yet no one cries at the millions of plants killed all the time.

The fact of the world is that everything has to hurt something else to survive. If you just don't like the taste of meat, fine. If you eat it sparingly for health reasons, fine. But this "meat is murder" stuff is just ****.

codswallop

July 24th, 2004, 11:13 pm

Potatoes have no cholesterol in them and have no link to blood cholesterol levels. If you want to decrease your blood cholesterol, lay off the animal fat and eat more oats. Porridge is great for decreasing cholesterol.

Potatoes are extrodinarily high in carbohydrates, i was unclear here, however the point I was trying to make was if you lower your carbs you can lower your cholesteral, cutting out potatoes & other high carb product will lower your cholesterol

http://atkins.com/Archive/2002/5/14-586425.html

(this is a link to a third party site, the reasearch was not done by Atkins)

Kirsten

July 25th, 2004, 12:41 am

That link says monounsaturated fat lowers cholesterol. That means olive oil etc. That's been suggested for years. It says nothing about carbs.

That came out brusquer than I meant. I'm in the middle of a game of iSketch!

codswallop

July 25th, 2004, 1:29 am

sorry Kirsten try these, (some are not summarized)

http://atkins.com/Archive/2002/1/11-235251.html
http://atkins.com/Archive/2004/1/31-877645.html
http://atkins.com/Archive/2002/1/11-480934.html (http://)

Pegasus

July 26th, 2004, 5:02 pm

codswallop

July 26th, 2004, 6:15 pm

When test scores reveal high cholesterol levels, the doctor gives you a list of the best and worst sources of nutrients. Olive oil, for example, is superior to tropical oils, as Kirsten said above. Eating the recommended amount of whole grains (not refined--doughnuts are obviously not healthy), limiting your meat intake, getting enough dairy (low-fat is best if you won't eat/drink fat-free), and bulking up on fruits and vegetables has been proven to lower your bad cholesterol and raise your good cholesterol. It's been proven time and time again by people who regularly have their LDL/HDL tested for health reasons. Not doing this does just the opposite. Why does all this matter? One phrase: heart disease.
It has long been known that the problem with potatoes is not the potatoes themselves, but the butter, sour cream, fatty cheese, bacon bits, etc. we top them with. When people want to watch their fat intake, it is recommended that they top their potatoes with herbs, chili, etc. instead.

you are right, Pegasus. those methods can reduce cholesterol, but there is an alternative way to do it and that is Atkins or another low carb option. (then then bacon (limited) cheese and butter are Ok and the Potatoe is not.

What happens when you reduce carb is a metabolic change. Your body switch from burning carbs to using fat for energy. It is effective for lowering cholesterol and the risks for heart disease. (It will decrease your size faster than your weight)

(the cholesterol links are posted above and I will post the heart disease links below)

I tried the other way for years, and it did not work. Low carb works better for me, I am never hungry and have more energy. the only drawbacks for me is on a personal level, always having to have something around to counteract the bad breathe and it increases my food bill

http://atkins.com/Archive/2001/12/27-836486.html (http://)

(i chose this one because it was easy to understand than the one that talk about decreasing insulin levels causing the risk for heart attack to decrease, you have to have a higher scientific understanding of atkins to understand the relationship)

Kirsten

August 15th, 2004, 12:33 am

www.themeatrix.com tells you what meat farming is really like, and has useful links for people who would prefer to either not eat meat, or to buy more ethically farmed meat.

Dedalus Diggle

August 15th, 2004, 1:29 am

www.themeatrix.com tells you what meat farming is really like, and has useful links for people who would prefer to either not eat meat, or to buy more ethically farmed meat.
This is an openly avowed advocacy site - there is no reason to accept this as representative of the conditions of the industry.

Spew Member

October 10th, 2004, 1:55 am

I've been a vegetarian for eleven years, and a vegan for one. I follow a vegan diet for health reasons, although after being a vegetarian for a while I began to feel a lot more sympathetic towards animals. My family has a history of serious health issues, and the only one who has avoided them has been my Mom, who has followed a vegan diet for twenty years. Seeing the way that she is now, and seeing the way that her sisters are was eye opening to me when I began to have the same health issues that they all had. Basically I didn't want to end up like my Aunts.

LuvHP_001

October 10th, 2004, 2:18 am

Wow,people on this thread are just so inconsiderate!

I am a vegatarian and I believe that those who eat meat are selfish people. I am constantly ridiculed by my family who say that "You're only 13,you don't understand what you're doing" but I am very capable of choosing how I want to live my life and mature enough to understand my actions.

Way back in time in the cavemen era hunting for meat was a necessity because they didn't understand many things and they had no choice. I know meat help you grow and I DO need it at this age but I can buy products that are just as healthy and give me the same nutrition that is needed,and it doesn't include dead meat.

I don't know how you people can eat something that you KNOW was running freely in it's habitat a while ago and then butchered for YOUR selfish needs and carry it in your stomach with your gut having no problem with it. Put yourself in their shoes: Imagine being free and happy and than you realize your fate is being killed and eaten by a person. Just think about what it would be like if YOU were the animal and it was you.

Those who say these animals have no mind and don't understand anything are rude and ignorant. I don't know how you people can live with yourself. There is more and more selfish people in this world :rolleyes: and I am happy I'M not one of them.

grrliz

October 10th, 2004, 3:29 am

I sometimes jokingly call myself an "involuntary vegetarian", mainly because I don't eat a lot of meat. I won't eat red meat (I just don't like it) and I will occasionally eat other meats (ham, chicken, turkey) at large family dinners or on holidays, etc.

From my own experiences, there are two types of vegetarians / vegans (any references to "you" are in the generic sense):

1) The person who is a vegetarian / vegan for health reasons. These are reasons I can understand. You want to live longer? Eat healthier. This often includes not just cutting out red meats, but junk food, sugars, etc. It's not just an anti-meat thing, it's an anti-stuff-that-is-bad-for-you thing. It's about staying fit and healthy. I've always appreciated these types of vegetarians / vegans because I can understand their methodology.

2) The person who is a vegetarian / vegan for animal rights reasons. I don't usually understand this particular type of vegetarian / vegan because there are too many loopholes and too many contradictions in my eyes. I have met far too many animal-rights activists / vegetarians / vegans who condemn the unethical treatment of animals in the food industry yet walk around wearing leather shoes. It seems to me that if you're going to take one step towards the ethical treatment of animals by not eating meat, you sort of have to take the ethical treatment as a whole, don't you? Where do you draw the line? Is it enough to just not eat meat because you think it's wrong? Or does it extend to not wearing fur and leather? Do you make a point of not using products that have been tested on animals? Are you an activist for endangered species that are being decimated for reasons other than food? Are you making sure that wildlife habitats are being preserved so that the animals that live within don't start disappearing? etc.

There are so many issues that come with being an animal rights activist, and I applaud anyone who tries to cover all their bases. But I think it's unfair to call someone selfish or ignorant for doing something as simple as eating meat when there are so many other problems in the world. I'd rather we deal with human rights issues first and foremost before worrying if someone likes a steak dinner now and again.

Spew Member

October 10th, 2004, 4:00 am

My parents don't always like to be labeled as "vegan" and they do eat shrimp once a year (on Christmas.) Other than that, we don't eat any meat, dairy or oil. You can easily be a vegetarian or a vegan and be an unhealthy one. You can still call yourself a vegetarian and live off of chips, but that doesn't necessarily mean you are healthy. After being a vegetarian for so long, meat is really gross to me and I do feel bad for the animals and how they are treated, but I really can't call myself an animal rights activist because like grrliz said, I still wear leather and I go to the zoo and I like the circus, there are so many different aspects to being an animal rights activist. I really only do it for my health, and the not eating animal parts is a bonus.

I'm going to write out the main question that I get asked when I tell people that I'm a vegan, feel free to debate or ask me about it because I know that it really goes against what the American diet stands for.

How do you get your protein?
The problem with the American diet is excess and overindulgence. Protein is one of the most misunderstood nutrients in our diet today. Plant food really contains all of the protein that you need, plant foods have "complete proteins," meaning they have the "essential" amino acids. Scientists say that you need 2% of your calories to be protein, and to be safe the World Health Organization doubled that to 5%, with pregnant women needing 6% and nursing women needing 7%.Americans consume on average six to 10 times as much protein as they need, this causes kidney stones, osteoperosis, and several other serious problems.

If you look at countries that do not follow the American diet you'll notice the absence of high blood pressure, diabetes, cancer, inflammatory arthritis, heart disease, and obesity. There is obviously something that we aren't doing right.

Kirsten

October 10th, 2004, 10:53 am

I don't know how you people can eat something that you KNOW was running freely in it's habitat a while ago
Most slaughtered animals weren't running freely anywhere. They were cooped up in an unnatural environment and force fed to make them grow fast.

My parents don't always like to be labeled as "vegan" and they do eat shrimp once a year (on Christmas.)
If they eat shrimp once a year, they're not vegan.

Chrysalis

October 10th, 2004, 11:07 am

For the record, animals rights activists don't hate zoos...

Romy

October 10th, 2004, 11:24 am

Spew Member

October 10th, 2004, 3:53 pm

Most slaughtered animals weren't running freely anywhere. They were cooped up in an unnatural environment and force fed to make them grow fast.

If they eat shrimp once a year, they're not vegan.

Yes, that's why they don't like to be called "vegan." They only do it once a year for Christmas. Other than that they are very strict and don't eat any meat, dairy, or oil. People ask them about their diet all of the time, and the best way to describe it is vegan because of the meat and dairy, but they really are just eating healthy.

For the record, animals rights activists don't hate zoos...

I've met a few that do. They think that it's cruel to take animals out of their natural environment. Not all of them of course, but some.

Here's a link from PETA about saving wild elephants from the zoo.

http://www.savewildelephants.com/maggie.asp

and here's a link from PETA about using animals for entertainment.

http://www.animalactivist.com/entertainment.asp

LuvHP_001

October 10th, 2004, 5:33 pm

May I ask, do you eat gummy bears, jelly or take medicine? There is gelantine in all of it which is a product made from dead animals. These products are hidden in so many places that you cannot claim that no animal would have ever died for something you consumed.

I don't candy that I know has gelantine in it. I always look at the label and what indgredients there are. For example I was once on a campout trip with my class and we had marshmallows and I asked if there was any,so I'm pretty careful. Of course I will take medicine because I really do care for the animal but that is for health reasons only,what can I do,die? I just limit myself.

Romy

October 10th, 2004, 5:43 pm

I don't candy that I know has gelantine in it. I always look at the label and what indgredients there are. For example I was once on a campout trip with my class and we had marshmallows and I asked if there was any,so I'm pretty careful. Of course I will take medicine because I really do care for the animal but that is for health reasons only,what can I do,die? I just limit myself.There are many people who look down upon non-vegeterians and still consume products that have some small part of an animal product in it. You seemed rather radical about your belief so I thought I´d ask to what limits you take it.

Just for the record, I for myself, eat only eggs from non-caged hens and meat that has been farmed ethically (meaning no mass production and what you might call "happy animals"). That´s all I can tribute to the problem as I simply enjoy things that have meat on it. Humans have been eating animals for literally ever, as have other animals. I only think that one should make sure that the animals have not suffered due to modern means of farming.

LuvHP_001

October 10th, 2004, 6:04 pm

There are many people who look down upon non-vegeterians and still consume products that have some small part of an animal product in it. You seemed rather radical about your belief so I thought I´d ask to what limits you take it.

Just for the record, I for myself, eat only eggs from non-caged hens and meat that has been farmed ethically (meaning no mass production and what you might call "happy animals"). That´s all I can tribute to the problem as I simply enjoy things that have meat on it. Humans have been eating animals for literally ever, as have other animals. I only think that one should make sure that the animals have not suffered due to modern means of farming.

Of course there are those kind of people. What can you do? Well,of course that's your opinion. Glad to hear you stick to production of "happy animals".

Amina

October 10th, 2004, 6:12 pm

luvHP - you describe many people on here as 'inconsiderate'...i have to contend that i haven't seen that much evidence of 'inconsideration'...unless you mean toward animals. while what you do is a very noble thing, being so abrasive toward those who do eat meat will not help you situation; people will not listen and learn from what you say, but instead will raise their hackles.

as far as the vegetarianism debate goes, i'm along similar lines to someone else above, i think they phrased it as 'involuntary vegetarian'. i eat very little red meat...mainly only mince if i want bolognase, but that is on rare occasions. i mostly eat fish, some chicken, and a lot of veggies. can't beat a good ratatouille!

i have actually considered vegetarianism. it is a worthy thing to be...but i can't quite not-eat meat, and, must confess, hate myself for what i see as a weakness. but there you go...

LuvHP_001

October 10th, 2004, 6:16 pm

luvHP - you describe many people on here as 'inconsiderate'...i have to contend that i haven't seen that much evidence of 'inconsideration'...unless you mean toward animals. while what you do is a very noble thing, being so abrasive toward those who do eat meat will not help you situation; people will not listen and learn from what you say, but instead will raise their hackles.

i have actually considered vegetarianism. it is a worthy thing to be...but i can't quite not-eat meat, and, must confess, hate myself for what i see as a weakness. but there you go...

First of all,don't call that a weakness. Eating smaller amounts of meat helps too! :tu:

Second,I am sorry I came off quite harsh it was just a momentary thing (I'm not usually like that) but I was miffed off when I saw some people's replies. I'll take your advice and comments and try to apply myself to them. Thanks! :blush:

jo schmo

October 10th, 2004, 7:25 pm

i am not a vegetarian/vegan and i don't necessarily believe in it but i think that people should have their own beliefs and if that is what you believe in, good for you. this thread has the potential to turn into the hunting thread that we had in which many a person were very angry because of the killing of animals. anyway, i don't have anything against vegetarians as long as they don't try to force their beliefs on other people. if people want to not eat meat or animal products go for it, just don't get mad when other people don't follow your beliefs. people have been eating meat since the beginning of time and i doubt people will ever stop (everyone i mean).

Spew Member

October 10th, 2004, 7:25 pm

as far as the vegetarianism debate goes, i'm along similar lines to someone else above, i think they phrased it as 'involuntary vegetarian'. i eat very little red meat...mainly only mince if i want bolognase, but that is on rare occasions. i mostly eat fish, some chicken, and a lot of veggies. can't beat a good ratatouille!

i have actually considered vegetarianism. it is a worthy thing to be...but i can't quite not-eat meat, and, must confess, hate myself for what i see as a weakness. but there you go...

I think the problem is that most people eat way too much meat. My friends have meat in practically every meal, every day. Most people push the veggies on their plate aside and head straight for the steak. The closest thing to a potato that they eat is a French fry.

Tane

October 10th, 2004, 8:23 pm

I think the problem is that most people eat way too much meat. My friends have meat in practically every meal, every day. Most people push the veggies on their plate aside and head straight for the steak. The closest thing to a potato that they eat is a French fry.I eat lots of meat but when there are brussel sprouts on the plate I go for them first before the steak for example. I think part of the problem with people eating more meat today than they did in the past comes from what some of the main fast food joints have on there menu. Fast food places such as Burger King, McDonalds and KFC all promote meat as there main food sales and it is very rare that you see an advertisement talking about the vegetarian food they off. This probable brings up young children thinking that excessive amounts of meat are alright.

ravenfeather

October 10th, 2004, 9:00 pm

i've been meaning to post here for a while, but for some reason never got to it. so here i go.
i became a vegetarian at age 14. i had never been a big meat eater at all, anyway. unfortunately, i didn't know any vegetarians and didn't know the right way to go about this lifestyle and, as a result, became quite ill. i was also somewhat anorexic as a teenager and i'd like to offer this caveat to parents of vegetarian teens: support the decision, but do the research for them and watch them carefully. i can't stress this enough.
at age 22 i really started to learn about nutrition. i also began to research animal rights and what i found sickened and appalled me. i began to follow a vegan diet, with extra care to ensure adequate intake of essential vitamins and minerals.
several years ago, i began to work on a factory dairy farm. i have seen up close and personal the abuses and appalling living conditions these animals experience. i saw cows who 'split' (slipped and broke their pelvis) getting dragged out of the barn on the end of a chain and left in the snow to die. i saw cows with chronic mastitis having teats amputated in the milking parlor with an instrument like knife-edged pliers. i saw cows beaten with sticks and chains, attacked repeatedly with hot sticks because they were sick and could not get up. i saw 5 year old animals put on the beef truck because they were too big for the parlor or had dropped 15 lbs. in milk from their previous lactation or because they wouldn't load into the parlor. i saw hundreds of bull calves dying from scours (neonatal diarhea) because you can't use medicine on them (drug residues in meat). i saw the bull calves from other farms on the beef truck who had been born 3 days earlier and not fed, because they weren't worth anything anyway; they were left to try to survive on nothing until the truck came and took them away. i have seen downed cows and calves left for dead because no one had the 'time' to go out and put a bullet in them; a calf with bacterial pneumonia can live up to a month down, suffering, and unable to breathe properly.
cows are injected with synthetic growth hormones, are given numerous antibiotic shots over a lifetime (which is blessedly short), are subjected to ugly procedures with little or no pain relief interventions.
this does not even begin to touch on the pork or poultry industries. i know what i have read and heard, but i can't offer any first hand information.
i do not preach to those who choose to maintain an omniverous lifestyle, unless people ask for specific information, but i confess that, whatever i might say or not say, i have somewhat less respect for those who choose to eat meat or dairy or eggs. please, don't be offended. it's not really personal. for me, it's a bit like religion, vegetarianism. a devout person might not proselytize, but they may be secretly praying for your salvation! ;)
i have some more points to make, on the nutritional aspect, but this is long already, so i'll do that another time.

busy91

October 10th, 2004, 10:56 pm

Spew Member

October 10th, 2004, 11:31 pm

I was a vegetarian for about 2 years. It was very enlightning, I read a lot of books regarding it. One of the more interrrrresting ones was "Mad Cowboy".

I went back to eating meat about 2 years ago. My body did not react well to a vegetarian diet. I ate properly, got all the right suplements and was never hungry. But I grew sicker and sicker, so I went back to eating meat and I felt better, although I'm not wear I was prior. But this isn't to say being Veg made me sick, it didn't. I suppose there is some truth to the statement that some people need meat products, while others don't. I scoffed at it when I read it, it was something about eating for your blood type, but maybe there is some truth to it, I don't know. All I know is that for me it is true.

A lot of vegetarians get sick because they overcompensate for the lack of meat with dairy. The truth is, the FDA has found no evidence that proves that dairy decreases the risk of osteoperosis, in fact in a 12 year Nurses' Health Study involving 78,000 women they found that the relative risk of hip fracture for women who drink more than two glasses a day was 1.45 times higher than for those who drank one glass or less a week. Several physicians are in the process of petitioning the Federal Trade Commisions milk mustache claims because they believe the National Fluid Milk Processor Board and the Milk Industry Foundation have been disseminating scientifically unsubstantiated, purposefully deceptive, and harmful advertising. No other animal drinks milk after their mothers except for us. If you look at the top three countries that consume dairy products (Finland, Sweden, United States) they also happen to be the countries with the highest rate of osteoperosis.
If you are still worried about calcium then you can get calcium from vegetables. Brussel sprouts have 63.8%, mustard greens have 57.8%, broccoli has 52.6%, Kale has 50%, and Cow's milk by the way, has only 32% calcium. In 10 various studies of vegans, the calcium ranged from 437 mg/day to a high of 1,100mg a day, with an average of 627 mg/day.
Milk causes several serious health conditions, and unlike what the cute milk mustaches would have you believe, it's very unhealthy for you.

Fast food places such as Burger King, McDonalds and KFC all promote meat as there main food sales and it is very rare that you see an advertisement talking about the vegetarian food they off. This probable brings up young children thinking that excessive amounts of meat are alright.

It's sad, but in a recent study they found that on a Saturday morning, children see a commercial for food every five minutes. What makes it even worse is that there are absolutely no commercials that promote good healthy food. The Atkins company recently gave money to schools to "teach children about healthy eating." Which means they are really just going to teach them about Atkins. Big complanies (meat-dairy-atkins) need to stay out of the school system. They obviously aren't helping because 1 in 5 children are now overweight.

shamrocknroll02

October 10th, 2004, 11:41 pm

I was a vegetarian for little over a year, but I recently started eating meat again because I'm not buying my own food at this point, and can't afford, financially and healthily, to do it right. So I'm waiting till I'm on my own and buying my own food to do it again. That's the main key-you have to do it right for it to be healthy for you. Just cutting out meat and dairy products and not replacing them with a wider variety of fruits, veggies, grains, etc does not work. I started for health reasons, and because I've never had a huge appitite and usually prefer the sides to the main course. (My boyfriend says I eat like a bird. :lol: )
I know that if I don't eat the cow, someone else will, so I have no concern over that. I do think big-business farming needs to be changed (Mad-cow disease started by making animal feed out of the parts, including nervous tissue, of other dead cows. Gross, but true.) But I mainly started because eating lots of meat is just not healthy.

~Stacey :rave:

LuvHP_001

October 11th, 2004, 1:14 am

ravenfeather

October 11th, 2004, 2:07 am

I would like to clarify my earlier post. I would just like to add that people who are vegatarians should watch out. Some people who turn vegatarian become either anorexic or very sick and I think that if that happens they should start eating meat again because everyone's body reacts differently. For example, me being vegatarian does absolutely no harm for my body because I never get sick because of the lack of meat and I am surely not anorexic,if anything, I should excerise more. ;)

you can't 'get' anorexia by following a vegetarian diet, but many young people (mainly girls) do use 'vegetarianism' as a method of fulfilling the weight-loss desires inherent in this mental illness. these young women are not vegetarians, they are anorexics and all i meant was that if you are the parent of a young woman who
1)shows a sudden interest in vegetarianism which seems to be based in the desire to lose weight, rather than animal welfare or general health
AND
2)shows symptoms of an eating disorder

please be aware that this can happen and take appropriate steps to help your child. not all vegetarians are anorexics and not all anorexics are vegetarians. that should be obvious.

LuvHP_001

October 11th, 2004, 2:14 am

you can't 'get' anorexia by following a vegetarian diet, but many young people (mainly girls) do use 'vegetarianism' as a method of fulfilling the weight-loss desires inherent in this mental illness. these young women are not vegetarians, they are anorexics and all i meant was that if you are the parent of a young woman who
1)shows a sudden interest in vegetarianism which seems to be based in the desire to lose weight, rather than animal welfare or general health
AND
2)shows symptoms of an eating disorder

please be aware that this can happen and take appropriate steps to help your child. not all vegetarians are anorexics and not all anorexics are vegetarians. that should be obvious.

Wow,I feel more and more stupid by the second. :sad: :blush: I actually know a couple of people who were vegatarians and they suffered from anorexia,so I don't know.

ravenfeather

October 11th, 2004, 2:24 am

Wow,I feel more and more stupid by the second. :sad: :blush: I actually know a couple of people who were vegatarians and they suffered from anorexia,so I don't know.

sorry, my response wasn't intended to make anyone feel stupid!
but this is a classic anorexic response, because a poorly planned, badly followed vegetarian diet IS deficient in calories so it is an easy way to lose weight without it appearing that you're eating too little! ingenious, actually.

LuvHP_001

October 11th, 2004, 2:27 am

but this is a classic anorexic response, because a poorly planned, badly followed vegetarian diet IS deficient in calories so it is an easy way to lose weight without it appearing that you're eating too little! ingenious, actually.

I never saw it from that perspective. You're right,it depends how you take care of yourself.

Spew Member

October 11th, 2004, 3:36 am

I never saw it from that perspective. You're right,it depends how you take care of yourself.

Not all people are probably as careful as you are about the food that you eat. Like ravenfeather said, a vegan/vegetarian diet is very low calorie. I eat so much more now that I am a vegan than I ever did. Even though I eat a lot, when I first started I still lost a lot of weight. Now my weight pretty much stays the same. They probably had an eating disorder before they became vegetarians, and if not then they weren't eating enough food.

Chrysalis

October 11th, 2004, 1:36 pm

ravenfeather

October 11th, 2004, 3:18 pm

A lot of vegetarians get sick because they overcompensate for the lack of meat with dairy. The truth is, the FDA has found no evidence that proves that dairy decreases the risk of osteoperosis, in fact in a 12 year Nurses' Health Study involving 78,000 women they found that the relative risk of hip fracture for women who drink more than two glasses a day was 1.45 times higher than for those who drank one glass or less a week. Several physicians are in the process of petitioning the Federal Trade Commisions milk mustache claims because they believe the National Fluid Milk Processor Board and the Milk Industry Foundation have been disseminating scientifically unsubstantiated, purposefully deceptive, and harmful advertising. No other animal drinks milk after their mothers except for us. If you look at the top three countries that consume dairy products (Finland, Sweden, United States) they also happen to be the countries with the highest rate of osteoperosis.

another point to consider: people who consume a primarily dairy free diet (most often, the example given is the traditional asian diet, particularly the japanese) are almost completely free of osteoporosis and heart disease. it was long thought that this was due to genetics, but about 20 years ago, a study was done on people who immigrate from countries where dairy is not consumed (ex. japan) to countries where it is (ex. america) and who then begin to eat a diet rich in dairy. the study showed that the risk of heart disease and osteoporosis jumped to match the risk of the 'native' population. this means there is a direct correlation between dairy products and calcium deficiency and cholesterol. :shrug:

The vast majority of the world suffers from lactose intolerance.

it is the natural state of an adult animal to be lactose intolerant. with the exception of the rare infant with metabolic problems, all infants are lactose tolerant. around the natural age of weaning (which varies from species to species), the body begins to change its metabolic structure so that lactose is no longer tolerated. makes sense. after weaning, an animal doesn't need to metabolize lactose because milk is the only food which contains it. this is why household pets will often develop diarhhea when fed milk. also, a weaned calf, even though it might only be 9 weeks old or so and not necessarily too old to drink milk, will develop diarhhea and/or bloating if reintroduced to milk or milk replacer.

Spew Member

October 11th, 2004, 3:39 pm

The vast majority of the world suffers from lactose intolerance. In India buffalo's milk is considered much healthier. It is the only type of milk that is actually sold there. Funny, because it is the cow that is considered a holy animal.

You're right, here is the lactose intolerance among adults of:
Asian descent: 90-100%
Native Americans: 95%
African descent: 65-70%
Italian descent: 65-70%
Hispanic descent: 50-60%
Caucasian descent: 10%

But with all of the hype and the things you learn in school (which are taught to you by the way, because the Dairy industry pays for them to be taught) you would think that we need milk to survive.

another point to consider: people who consume a primarily dairy free diet (most often, the example given is the traditional asian diet, particularly the japanese) are almost completely free of osteoporosis and heart disease. it was long thought that this was due to genetics, but about 20 years ago, a study was done on people who immigrate from countries where dairy is not consumed (ex. japan) to countries where it is (ex. america) and who then begin to eat a diet rich in dairy. the study showed that the risk of heart disease and osteoporosis jumped to match the risk of the 'native' population. this means there is a direct correlation between dairy products and calcium deficiency and cholesterol.

Here are some other scary figures:

Daily calcium intake for African Americans: More than 1000 mg.
Daily calcium intake for black South Americans: 196 mg.
Hip fracture rate for African Americans compared to black South Americans:
9 times greater.
Calcium intake in rural China: One-half that of people in the United States
Bone fracture rate in rural China: One-fifth that of people in the United States.

Antibiotics found in cows milk: 80
Antibiotics found in soy milk: none
Average estimate when Americans were asked what percentage of adults worldwide do not drink milk: 44%
Actual number of adults worldwide who do not drink milk: 65%