51–60 of 118 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are these endangered sharks or a common species?
Does it change the fact that they are mass-murdered for cosmetics?
> Shark Allies, a nonprofit that advocates for the protection of sharks, projects that some 500,000 sharks could be killed if a coronavirus vaccine with shark squalene proves to be effective. Already, an estimated 2.7 million sharks are killed annually for their squalene to make cosmetics, according to the group. So, why the hell not petition harder against more frivolous uses instead? This is like going after impove…
Perhaps they did in the past but it was not newsworthy so you did not hear about that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This pretty much sums up humanity's stupidity and ignorance given the origin of this pandemic.
Could you elaborate? In what way? How would you proceed?
Kinda annoying how many people take this issue to mean "kill sharks or humans will die" when it's just about money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does it change the fact that they are mass-murdered for cosmetics?
Yes, a lot. Even if you're a die hard animal rights activist, can't you see that 3.2 million deaths from a population of a hundred million (say) is a much smaller deal than 3.2 million from a population of ten million? One means possible extinction of a species, the other does not.
Simple: ban the use for cosmetics. Should save 2 million sharks a year if those numbers are correct.
"They keep our fish stock healthy, they keep the food chain intact, they keep diseases out of other animal populations," she said. "Good luck trying to replace that when we lose them." Isn't human predation (fishing) a suitable alternative to shark predation for this purpose? I guess they eat a more wide diet of fish types.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you elaborate? In what way? How would you proceed?
Well, my understanding is that the virus jumped from some species, which was sold under absolutely miserable conditions in a wet market in Wuhan, to humans. I find it almost comical that someone would be completely fine with more animal exploitation given that this was the reason humans were infected in the first place.
Fish are very stupid animals without much brain. It is definitely worth it to kill 500k of them to help save a bunch of human lives.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But we only hear about it when less than 1/5 of that amount _might_ be sacrificed for human health. Stinks of agenda. Also, without context, is 500,000 a lot of sharks? How many exist in the wild? How many are needed to have a stable population? If we don't cull millions of sharks annually, what effect would that have? And what is "shark" in this context, anyway? There are dozens of fish species, at differing levels…
Mass-murdering sharks for cosmetics is unethical and evil. They feel the pain just like we do.
Many people seem to rationalize away much of the destruction that humans do to the world.
That’s probably why we will soon be drilling for oil in Alaska.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you elaborate? In what way? How would you proceed?
Use slightly more expensive other source of the same substance? It's like killing whales for oil just to burn it instead of using olive oil, or that stuff pumped from the ground and refined, or whatever. (as was done at various points in history) Kinda annoying how many people take this issue to mean "kill sharks or humans will die" when it's just about money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But we only hear about it when less than 1/5 of that amount _might_ be sacrificed for human health. Stinks of agenda. Also, without context, is 500,000 a lot of sharks? How many exist in the wild? How many are needed to have a stable population? If we don't cull millions of sharks annually, what effect would that have? And what is "shark" in this context, anyway? There are dozens of fish species, at differing levels…
> Stinks of agenda. Everyone has an agenda. I don't see an agenda of conservation of our ecology as one we need to resist. Especially when their conclusion at the end is not just "Save the Sharks", but a hope that we will research other possible ingredients instead of just running with the first working prototype.
The fact that you like it is no reason to not look at what's behind it.