A Vegan No More • Hacker News Board

Re: A Vegan No More

#221

Post by lwhi » Tue, Nov 23, 2010, 4:40 PM UTC

lwhi wrote: post #189

I think this a case of the 'tail wagging the dog'. The author decided she wanted to be vegan for (possibly) superficial reasons. She then found she couldn't be vegan for health reasons, but rather than take a step back and hold on to some of the principles she claimed to have (and become an ovo-lacto vegetarian; and see if that worked) .. cognitive dissonance came into play and she shifted her entire world-view aroun…

Okay, maybe I'm being a bit harsh - but I did find the sea change in opinion a bit difficult to comprehend.

Some people might _need_ to eat animal derived products to function - but that should still be able to be compatible with a desire to ascribe to vegan ideals. When a person chooses involve politics in dietary choice, pragmatism should still be able to operate. Fundamentalism at any level is a bit wrong.

I don't see why the alternative - of becoming a fully fledged carnivore - was taken when there was an intermediate step.

Re: A Vegan No More

#222

Post by Xodarap » Tue, Nov 23, 2010, 4:41 PM UTC

pyre wrote: post #98

erikpukinskis wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with most of what you have to say, but I want to make a note about this: Opting out of meat entirely does nothing to change the industry, because most people will always eat some meat if they can afford it. I think opting out does a few things. It puts pressure on restaurants to offer alternatives to meat, so we're not all forced to eat it because it's the only healthy option. It pushes our culture to give pe…

Most of the animal products that are used in the growing of vegetables, are by-products of the livestock (meat,eggs,dairy) industries. If we were able to successfully eliminate those industries, then I highly doubt that they would be able to raise animals just for the creation of those by-products and still make it economical. Feel free to correct me as I haven't researched this extensively.

What animal products are used in the growing of vegetables? You mean fertilizer? Almost all fertilizer is synthetic; there are a few places that use manure, but they are the exception.

Re: A Vegan No More

#223

Post by Xodarap » Tue, Nov 23, 2010, 4:44 PM UTC

_3u10 wrote: post #124

pyre wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about 'rules' or 'regulations.' For some it's about morality. If I find it immoral to eat a dead animal, then why would it be 'ok' because it's 'only chicken broth?' I've still supported (with my money) the death of an animal. [ Please don't break down into some 'but animals die all the time in the wild,' argument. It's slightly different when we created the animal just for the purpose of killing it for meat…

I'll be downvoted into oblivion for saying this but there are lots of ways that the average vegetarian or vegan every day supports killing animals for their own personal benefit. Animals are killed every day so that we can live a better life. It's not a big deal. Get over it or get off the grid. I hope you don't drive on roads, or use anything produced by the petrochemical industry. Hell, somewhere between your compu…

Statement one: "It's impossible to be a perfect programmer, so it's stupid to even try."

Statement two: "It's impossible to never harm someone, so it's stupid to even try."

Surely you don't agree with statement one? So why does the argument hold for statement two?

Re: A Vegan No More

#224

Post by cjbprime » Tue, Nov 23, 2010, 4:46 PM UTC

kwantam wrote: post #212

I was glad to see the food miles metric[1] tangentially mentioned in this post (when she talked about importing exotic foods to keep herself healthy). This is a notion that, in my opinion, doesn't get enough attention: it doesn't matter how great the farming practices are if the food is then shipped three thousand miles to my door. (Yes, the food miles notion is imperfect, but it's at least a reasonable first-order a…

> it doesn't matter how great the farming practices are if the food is then shipped three thousand miles to my door. (Yes, the food miles notion is imperfect, but it's at least a reasonable first-order approximation of the environmental impact of your food.)

I don't think so. Transportation accounts for only 11% of the environmental impact of food[1], so that's not a first-order approximation of the true cost at all. It is not only possible, but is in fact often likely, that shipping food three thousand miles from somewhere where it was efficient to produce has less environmental impact than buying food with epsilon "food miles".

(Which means that the take-home message is: if you want to use food miles as a metric, you should generally only buy food that is grown as efficiently where you are as in the part of the world that grows it optimally.)

[1] http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es702969f

Re: A Vegan No More

#225

Post by Xodarap » Tue, Nov 23, 2010, 4:47 PM UTC

scythe wrote: post #97

pyre wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about 'rules' or 'regulations.' For some it's about morality. If I find it immoral to eat a dead animal, then why would it be 'ok' because it's 'only chicken broth?' I've still supported (with my money) the death of an animal. [ Please don't break down into some 'but animals die all the time in the wild,' argument. It's slightly different when we created the animal just for the purpose of killing it for meat…

>Please don't break down into some 'but animals die all the time in the wild,' argument. Yeah, let's not bring up a totally valid objection!

This is really not a valid objection. It is fairly well studied, and it's known as an "appeal to nature." You can see some info on it at these places:

* http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adnature.html * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature

It's largely ignored in philosophical discussions because of the issues mentioned in these pages (and more!).

Re: A Vegan No More

#226

Post by Xodarap » Tue, Nov 23, 2010, 4:49 PM UTC

fleitz wrote: post #130

thret wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All animals are in one way or another a food source for other animals. It is in no way evil if an animal suffers unless that suffering is intentionally caused by a human. Our sin is in the mass production and mis-treatment of livestock while they are alive, not in the actual killing or eating. Not eating mass-produced chicken or wearing leather makes sense, refusing free-range eggs or seafood does not. Not that there…

You're inferring the feelings of an animal to make your judgement. No one actually knows the living preferences of a chicken or a cow. Since you posit that huamn beings can infer the feelings of animals I posit that animals prefer to be factory farmed than spend what existence the animal has being constantly chased by predators. Therefore wearing leather and eating mass-produced chicken makes perfect sense and is in…

We can make some guesses. See e.g. http://philosophyforprogrammers.blogspot.com/2010/11/who-fee...

Re: A Vegan No More

#227

Post by mike-cardwell » Tue, Nov 23, 2010, 4:51 PM UTC

wiredfool wrote: post #106

cjbprime wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So if animals were raised and killed in humane manner would you be more willing to eat meat? Yes. It seems plausible to me that I'll start eating meat again within a decade or two, once industry practices improve.

So, don't buy industry. Buy local, humanely raised and killed animals. e.g., our turkey for thursday was processed today, at a family's small farm here. Our eggs come from the back yard. We've gotten pork from another local person who raises a few pigs on the side. FWIW, poultry seems to be the hardest to source for us, and maybe that's because the margins are so damn slim for the factory birds.

Does that scale? If everyone did it, would it work?

Re: A Vegan No More

#228

Post by alaithea » Tue, Nov 23, 2010, 4:53 PM UTC

mml wrote: post #45

lambda wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's difficult to find humanely raised meat? I just go to the farmer's market and buy it straight from the farmer who raises grass-fed free range cows. If I would like to verify, I can head to her farm and see how she raises the cows myself. Or I buy fish that are caught in sustainable ways, which have grown in their natural habitat and not subjected to any suffering beyond the catch (which is a necessary part of con…

The "tastier" organic myth is a myth in at least some cases. Double blind taste tests of 2 halves of the same product reveal that the half presented as "organic" is often chosen as being "tastier", despite being identical to it's other "non organic" half. IMHO, he organic food "movement" is marketing targeted at the guilty conscience of the well-heeled consumer of organic foods.

Every time I buy normal, mass-market chicken or eggs that are not in some way organic/cage-free/free-range/nataural, I am so disappointed in the result that I vow never to buy it again (until I'm sucked in by some sale months later). For me, the difference is too striking to be only a placebo effect of sorts.

Re: A Vegan No More

#229

Post by Xodarap » Tue, Nov 23, 2010, 4:54 PM UTC

lambda wrote: post #21

cjbprime wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Take the whole "meat is murder" slogan. There are, you'll be pleased to hear, many vegans with stronger ethical arguments than "meat is murder". Such as, in summary: * unnecessary extreme suffering is unjustifiable. * some non-human animals (notably the ones we eat most of) are as capable of suffering at the physical level as humans are. We shouldn't discount their suffering just because they aren't members of homo…

It's difficult to find humanely raised meat? I just go to the farmer's market and buy it straight from the farmer who raises grass-fed free range cows. If I would like to verify, I can head to her farm and see how she raises the cows myself. Or I buy fish that are caught in sustainable ways, which have grown in their natural habitat and not subjected to any suffering beyond the catch (which is a necessary part of con…

It's very hard to find humanely slaughtered meat. To quote Foer, who in turn was citing a review of some audits of slaughterhouses (emphasis in the original):

>[Grandin's report found] deliberate acts of cruelty occuring on a regular basis at 32 percent of the plants [slaughterhouses] she surveyed during announced visits in the United States. It's such a shocking statistic I had to read it three times. Deliberate acts, occurring on a regular basis, witnessed by an auditor - witnessed during announced audits that gave the slaughterhouse time to clean up the worst problems. What about cruelties that weren't witnessed? And what about accidents, which must have been far more common?

Re: A Vegan No More

#230

Post by Xodarap » Tue, Nov 23, 2010, 4:57 PM UTC

pyre wrote: post #75

ced wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the size of the vegan movement is totally out of proportion to its veracity. That's a weird statement. When is "movement size" ever a good indicator of truth? Anyway, veganism is not about "veracity", it's about a different set of moral beliefs, or a particular diet, or... You speak of vegans as if it was a monolithic group, and you paint it with a negative brush because of a few crazy individuals. That's like di…

> Really? All of the vegans I know care a lot > about eating a balanced and healthy diet (at > least, more than the average non-vegan). Not necessarily. I know a number of vegans that don't necessarily eat that healthy. The thing that irks me is when vegans proclaim that the 'vegan diet' will make everyone healthier, cure obesity, etc. There are plenty of unhealthy foods that are perfectly vegan. I say this as a vega…

Well, statistically speaking, vegans live longer, right? That does not necessarily imply that all the benefits come from the diet, and it certainly does not say that going vegan is guaranteed to make you live longer, but it does mean that if you choose a random vegan they will be healthier than a random omnivore.

So I think if you have to choose between the statements "vegans are healthy" or "vegans are unhealthy," there's not a lot of evidence to argue for the latter.