Vegan diet is ultimately healthier

[Holografix]

https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2023/11/twin-diet-vegan-cardiovascular.html

[Alby]

Origineel geplaatst door Caldari Military Sly Succubus:

Origineel geplaatst door Alby:

yeah no, that's fine. although of "all humanity" is arguable, i agee with the problem solving aspect. i was referring to the second video from holo's post. i stg people will tag any buzzword to a lifestyle or habit they don't agree with.

Ah fair fair then, I shall read back to see what I missed then I apologize

no worries friend. i probably should've tagged the video itself

[Funky Monk]

Nuh Uh
https://youtu.be/PJFSYY82NtI?si=tTl7REb3TPMOCp7P

[Holografix]

Origineel geplaatst door Alby:

Origineel geplaatst door Caldari Military Sly Succubus:

One does not define intelligent like that to start with, they define it by problem solving which if you want to actually think of it this way, the people who find meat substitutes for meat eaters to eat plant-based meats are ironically the smartest of both Vegans and the others of humanity as they put a solution to a problem.

yeah no, that's fine. although of "all humanity" is arguable, i agee with the problem solving aspect. i was referring to the second video from holo's post. i stg people will tag any buzzword to a lifestyle or habit they don't agree with.

Carol J Adams' "the Sexual Politics of Meat" is a really interesting book, that you can't just dismiss by claiming it's "all buzzwords now."

"The Sexual Politics of Meat argues that male dominance and animals’ oppression are linked by the way that both women and animals function as absent referents in meat eating and dairy production, and that feminist theory logically contains a vegan critique...just as veganism covertly challenges patriarchal society. Patriarchy is a gender system that is implicit in human/animal relationships."
-- from the link
https://caroljadams.com/spom-the-book

if you have any issues with the book, i suggest you email the author Carol J Adams.

[piedoorass]

Origineel geplaatst door potato:

no

https://youtu.be/qs3tM-vTgwo?feature=shared

[Morkonan]

Origineel geplaatst door Heitor Villa-Lobos:

...
This is also a very widely repeated myth.

Most grains today go to feed stock animals. If you just do the math of replacing the animals for more crops, yes, you'd need more space, but there is already 70% of all farmable lands being used to sustain the meat industry.

Also, there *are* a lot of sollutions out there already. There are thousands of high quality Brazilian articles proving agroflorestal farming can regenerate degraded lands and is economically better.

Still, every year our forests are being torn down to raise more cattle...

We need to apply the knowledge, not invent something new or mess with genes.

The way you worded this was suspicious...

"Most grains today go to feed stock animals."

https://www.wri.org/insights/crop-expansion-food-security-trends

I linked the article because it goes down the rabbit-hole of "land use for agriculture." It goes into all the different categories of "what people grow and what it is used for" too.

It's difficult to find concise number that I would trust to link, here. I wouldn't ever link something I knew was heavily biased. And, with these sorts of things, things get biased real darn quick...

So, I could reference US numbers and it would show around 55% of all US cropland is used for the production of food for humans. That doesn't drill-down to "grains" though... which is obviously a category your targeted for your numbers, right?

But, then, does the report I read separate out "how" that "human food thing" is separated out into categories so we know what it's being used for in the end? Nope... Which is why I didn't link it. :)

People massage the heck out of their numbers in this specific comparison of land use.

So, it's completely true for someone to say, given that mentioned statistic, "45% of land isn't even grown for human food." They'd be right, but what are they not saying that they leave for someone to imply in translation?

Not all of those feedstocks are crops you would be eating, yourself, nor would all that land be as ideal for human foodstuffs.

https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-economy/land-use-land-value-tenure/major-land-uses/

There's a table/report on land use in the US. More land is used for pasture than crops, this is true. However, then there's the issue of "conversion."

Most land in the World that is dedicated to farming is actually used for irrigation. (UN report, don't want a linkfest but can link it if I have to) That irrigation is necessary to support farmland. That includes, I presume, things specifically used to channel water to those croplands, like land used to expand rivers or dams, levees, and the like.

Converting pasture to cropland comes with caveats - It actually degrades the biodiversity in the soil, and increases run-off. It's pretty easy to see how that happens - Lots and lots of grassland becomes rowes of neatly planted corn with exposed soil in-between each. And, yes, you're going to have to use a lot of land just to move water to where you're farming... Or, truck it in with big ol' diesel trucks.

Don't forget - You have to use pesticides to protect crop yield. Mmmm... pesticides.

See? It's not so easy as just "use land for farming crops for humans." (PS: Not all cattle-farming is "industrial." A discussion vs open-range pasturing and industrial feeding and the hybrid methods in use... goes far beyond this post.)


I do agree that deforestation is a worldwide concern. It's a critical issue, especially in South America.

It is not a "Quick and Easy" solution. I do not agree that the solution that is popularly proposed, just "switching" efforts, is practical. It's a lot more complex than that. It is eventually "doable" if that's what we decided to do, but it would take a monumental amount of effort and restructuring.

What are you going to do with all the fertilizer run-off? Pesticides? What about all the nitrogen and phosphates causing algal blooms in the oceans? Crops meant for human consumption are going to have some increased requirements, so... wat do? We're talking about feeding billions of people by switching, world-wide, to a mechanism that has never been used at that scale. Where are some economies going to get the fishmeal they depend on for "natural fertilizer?" Do the butchers just learn a new trade? Cowboys? The companies that make fencing, tack, refrigerated trucks, leather, etc... It's a "Big Deal" to deal with.

A different perspective that might be interesting to include in analysis: Calories.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/foodfeatures/feeding-9-billion/

..Today only 55 percent of the world’s crop calories feed people directly; the rest are fed to livestock (about 36 percent) or turned into biofuels and industrial products (roughly 9 percent)....

We may be barking up the wrong tree... Maybe we need to, instead, look at calories per hectare? After all, we all want to live through to see the end of Anthropogenically Induced Climate Change.


All I am saying is that it is not as easy as certain proponents claim it is. I'm very much in favor of it, but am also aware of some of the practicalities and the negative impacts and big difficulties that some want to ignore.

[Alby]

Origineel geplaatst door Holografix:

if you have any issues with the book, i suggest you email the author Carol J Adams.

thank you. mrs. adams will be hearing from my lawyer

[Holografix]

Origineel geplaatst door Alby:

Origineel geplaatst door Holografix:

if you have any issues with the book, i suggest you email the author Carol J Adams.

thank you. mrs. adams will be hearing from my lawyer

always a joke, always a saving face.

it's ok to be genuine, you know. no need to hide behind humour about everything.

[Alby]

Origineel geplaatst door Holografix:

it's ok to be genuine, you know. no need to hide behind humour about everything.

why not? this is a discussion about veganism in a video game sub-forum. not everything has to be serious. it's okay to be humorous. no need to hide behind misogynistic meat

[Boblin the Goblin]

Origineel geplaatst door Holografix:

Origineel geplaatst door Alby:

thank you. mrs. adams will be hearing from my lawyer

always a joke, always a saving face.

it's ok to be genuine, you know. no need to hide behind humour about everything.

If you want people to be genuine, you first have to be genuine.

This thread shows otherwise.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Origineel geplaatst door Alby:

Origineel geplaatst door Holografix:

it's ok to be genuine, you know. no need to hide behind humour about everything.

why not? this is a discussion about veganism in a video game sub-forum. not everything has to be serious. it's okay to be humorous. no need to hide behind misogynistic meat

The irony is the inability to be genuine for this thread.

When any type of genuine discussion is attempted, it will either be ignored completely or twisted into something else.

There used to be a habit of quoting and striking through any argument made with a retort of "Wrong." and no explanation. Until bans started happening for antagonizing users because of it.

Now it's shifted to faking wanting a 'genuine' conversation but, as you can see never actually giving one and just saying "Email the author."

[Alby]

Origineel geplaatst door SlowMango:

Origineel geplaatst door Alby:

why not? this is a discussion about veganism in a video game sub-forum. not everything has to be serious. it's okay to be humorous. no need to hide behind misogynistic meat

The irony is the inability to be genuine for this thread.

When any type of genuine discussion is attempted, it will either be ignored completely or twisted into something else.

There used to be a habit of quoting and striking through any argument made with a retort of "Wrong." and no explanation. Until bans started happening for antagonizing users because of it.

Now it's shifted to faking wanting a 'genuine' conversation but, as you can see never actually giving one and just saying "Email the author."

absolutely agree. i chock most (if not all) threads i see in this particular sub-forum as either AI generated, bait, satire, or all three. hard to know what's actually genuine.

if OP is being serious, he can simply email me for a more engaging debate

[Boblin the Goblin]

Origineel geplaatst door Noxλ2:

Origineel geplaatst door SlowMango:

The irony is the inability to be genuine for this thread.

When any type of genuine discussion is attempted, it will either be ignored completely or twisted into something else.

There used to be a habit of quoting and striking through any argument made with a retort of "Wrong." and no explanation. Until bans started happening for antagonizing users because of it.

Now it's shifted to faking wanting a 'genuine' conversation but, as you can see never actually giving one and just saying "Email the author."

Glad you wanted you share what mentality over a certain subject that you recently google searched. Now read a textbook.

I wasn't talking about the mentality over a certain subject. But I can see a nerve was hit.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Origineel geplaatst door Alby:

Origineel geplaatst door SlowMango:

The irony is the inability to be genuine for this thread.

When any type of genuine discussion is attempted, it will either be ignored completely or twisted into something else.

There used to be a habit of quoting and striking through any argument made with a retort of "Wrong." and no explanation. Until bans started happening for antagonizing users because of it.

Now it's shifted to faking wanting a 'genuine' conversation but, as you can see never actually giving one and just saying "Email the author."

absolutely agree. i chock most (if not all) threads i see in this particular sub-forum as either AI generated, bait, satire, or all three. hard to know what's actually genuine.

if OP is being serious, he can simply email me for a more engaging debate

That's the fun part.

They aren't.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Origineel geplaatst door Noxλ2:

Origineel geplaatst door SlowMango:

I wasn't talking about the mentality over a certain subject. But I can see a nerve was hit.

This is evident of how your imagination has been corrupted by being raised from the internet filled with bots. Allow me to remind you that whatever you and the bots hide behind don't create much of an impact on any nerve on the strong minded.

You doing alright? You seem to be having a conversation with someone else and about something else entirely.

[Zara]

it's fascinating how easy it is to brainwash and manipulate some individuals.