111–120 of 152 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We're not in court. If someone clearly has an agenda then calling them a lobbyist is just fine
words have meanings and should be used accordingly
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"She was also criticized for being an ally of the meat and dairy industry. ". She's not a scientist (did an "American Studies" degree in college,) just a dirtbag who makes her money shilling for a murderous industry
What on earth is an "American Studies" degree?
Quoted post unavailable.
I'm able to differentiate any vegan product from a non-vegan one in under 5 seconds of checking. There is ALWAYS an ingredient list, which is always going to tell you very clearly what you're buying. It is also a good idea to do that to other products you're buying. The "food industry" doesn't really exist, but the meat industry is heavily lobbying for strict regulations, as well as producing more and more ads ("eat…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Finishing beef is what happens in the feedlot at the end to fatten them up. "grass fed" beef has in the past occasionally meant beef that fed on pasture all its life until it got to the feedlot where they stuffed it full of grain until it was well marbled. Grass finished means they only ate grass in the feedlot too. 100% grass fed has similar implications. You can pretty much tell. If the fat from the meat has a char…
I can't say I've found grain fed to be anything other than a bit bland and greasy. That being said, it's usually been Aberdeen Angus, which is okayish at best.
Quoted post unavailable.
I'm able to differentiate any vegan product from a non-vegan one in under 5 seconds of checking. There is ALWAYS an ingredient list, which is always going to tell you very clearly what you're buying. It is also a good idea to do that to other products you're buying. The "food industry" doesn't really exist, but the meat industry is heavily lobbying for strict regulations, as well as producing more and more ads ("eat…
Vegan = avoiding cruelty, suffering and exploitation as much as possible in a pragmatic way.
Veganism isn't a diet. It's a moral choice that people make, as they don't want to support an industry that's killing our biosphere and inflicting unnecessary cruelty - since in most parts of the world people don't need meat anymore to survive.
So your sentence doesn't really make sense. You'd probably want to replace veganism with 'pure plant-based diet'
Even if you raised a cow yourself - petted it everyday, cared for it, even played with it etc - how is it ethical to kill it to enjoy its flesh - if your survival doesn't depend on it?
Animals just like us don't want to die and they do everything to avoid pain.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it seems weird that you would talk about supposed shortfalls of plant nutrition and then in the next sentence talk about cheeseburgers (who considers these healthy?) and multivitamins (which are not considered a substitute for proper nutrition[1][2]) 1. https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-preventi... 2. https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/do-multivitamins-work
I consider a cheeseburger healthy. The custom of serving them with french fried potatoes and a milkshake or cola gives them a bit of guilt by association, but meat, some cheese, some vegetables, and a serving of bread? Don't see an issue at all.
Unfortunately meat is clearly bad for you in at least one but probably many ways. The most compelling evidence to me is that carnivorous animals have higher rates of death from cancer, see fig 2 of this fascinating study: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04224-5
This is only a study of raw meat consumption, which is comparatively rare among humans. If it turns out — and this study acknowledges this limitation — that the predominant causal agent here is cancer-casing viruses, that would have pretty irrelevant impact for humans. There are so many confounds here that it’s hard to draw conclusions for humans except maybe what’s worth future study. FWIW, I have no horse in this r…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, they are animals in human care. But the fact is there is a difference between carnivores and herbivores across various species and animal lifestyles, which is strong proof that meat is carcinogenic. What factors mitigate this in the wild are largely irrelevant. You can smoke and exercise and be a bit better off, but that doesn't change the carcinogenic potential of cigarettes.
> What factors mitigate this in the wild are largely irrelevant Why? If we find a link indicating exercise reduces or eliminates the cancer risk associated with eating meat, then it would just show another option for behavioral change to produce positive outcome. More options is not a bad thing.
I have often wondered: A - Are meats unhealthy, or, is it the food fed (grains on a foodlot) to the animal that negatively influences the health profile? [1] B - If meats are so unhealthy, why are the bushmen superfit and incredibly healthy into old age despite having a significant amount of meat ~25% in their diet? [2] & [3] I recognize that some animals raised on healthy grass-fed diets may have health profiles mor…
Regarding your point B, the current US government guidelines that the current article rails against as not being scientific enough actually say: > The core recommendations of the Guidelines state that a healthy diet for all Americans should include vegetables, fruits, grains (half of which should be whole grains), low or non-fat dairy, and a variety of protein foods, including seafood, lean meats and poultry, eggs, l…