Live data from Hacker News

Tuna

granta.com

21–30 of 39 posts

Re: Tuna

#21
post #10

Ahh chinese traditional medicine, a blight on our poor animal friends.

> a blight on our poor animal friends. Let's not forget that most of the world kills and eats our animal friends when they can just eat plants instead. For most of us, animal products are no more necessary than Chinese traditional medicine.

Since when our species become herbivorous?

Re: Tuna

#22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Farming is vastly more destructive for ecosystems than animal husbandry. (For maximum efficiency we now combine both, of course, but it's indstrial farming that's the real killer, not cow farts.)

Animal husbandry is farming, isn’t it? Or is the dictionary definition getting a little stale?

"Agriculture", they meant.

Re: Tuna

#23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a blight on our poor animal friends. Let's not forget that most of the world kills and eats our animal friends when they can just eat plants instead. For most of us, animal products are no more necessary than Chinese traditional medicine.

Since when our species become herbivorous?

Omnivorous maybe

Re: Tuna

#24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a blight on our poor animal friends. Let's not forget that most of the world kills and eats our animal friends when they can just eat plants instead. For most of us, animal products are no more necessary than Chinese traditional medicine.

Farming is vastly more destructive for ecosystems than animal husbandry. (For maximum efficiency we now combine both, of course, but it's indstrial farming that's the real killer, not cow farts.)

The major destructive agriculture is the one that is done to feed animals not the one for humans.

If you get rid of animal farming you'll also get rid of a substancial amount of agriculture (not all of it if course, humans will still need to eat, but not as much as cows, pigs, chickens etc combined)

Re: Tuna

#25
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

skipjack is barely even a tuna. Pacific bluefin is absolutely being overfished, even if the much bigger threat is lack of feeder fish due to the triple threat of climate change, pollution, and overfishing.

> skipjack is barely even a tuna. In what regard? Culinary, or?

Not even in the same genus

Re: Tuna

#26
"Mitsubishi [the car maker], holds a tight grasp of a 40% share in the world market for Bluefin tuna"

"Is importing thousands and thousands of pounds of Bluefin tuna from the Mediterranean to Tokyo fish markets. They also have a massive freezer, where they have acquired a stock reserve of Bluefin tuna. As the number of fish reaches a record low, the price of tuna meat will continue to rise. Mitsubishi will be able to greatly profit off of the extinction of Bluefin tuna because of their reserve stock".

https://www.projectcensored.org/mitsubishi-profits-worlds-tu...

Any conservation effort will simply fail in this conditions.

Is a few hundred at most with stones and sticks against megacorp Goliath. Tuna will be either domesticated or extinct. And is not easy at all to domesticate.

Re: Tuna

#27
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a blight on our poor animal friends. Let's not forget that most of the world kills and eats our animal friends when they can just eat plants instead. For most of us, animal products are no more necessary than Chinese traditional medicine.

There's a massive difference between farming protein sources of domestic animals for nutrition and paying people halfway around the world to kill severely endangered animals for fake quackery and bullshit.

Ah, but paying people halfway around the worlds for fishing endangered animals for meat is so much better. All the destruction if amazon for beef pasture is worth it. You could gave eaten some beans instead.

In the context of industrial western narions, there is nothing behind this argument except arrogance and superiority complex.

Re: Tuna

#28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a blight on our poor animal friends. Let's not forget that most of the world kills and eats our animal friends when they can just eat plants instead. For most of us, animal products are no more necessary than Chinese traditional medicine.

Farming is vastly more destructive for ecosystems than animal husbandry. (For maximum efficiency we now combine both, of course, but it's indstrial farming that's the real killer, not cow farts.)

what is the basis for this exrraordinary doublethink?

Re: Tuna

#29
post #2

Would have benefited from mentioning nascent tuna farming, which is proving hard, and the probable use of whale catch as a distraction from wholesale tuna overfishing by japan: the opprobrium whale price being paid, the tuna profit is huge, flying under the radar.

There’s a pretty significant difference in tuna stocks between the Atlantic and the Pacific. Japan sources tuna from the Pacific, and for high quality fish that fetches astronomical prices, it has to be caught via long-lining. Purse seiners may turn up bluefin from time to time, but they’re not set up to store and deliver it the way a long-liner is. Anyhow, skipjack is the most common species of tuna in the Pacific a…

> Japan sources tuna from the Pacific

Japanese companies are buying a lot of net caught Mediterranean tuna also since 2000 at least

Re: Tuna

#30
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Farming is vastly more destructive for ecosystems than animal husbandry. (For maximum efficiency we now combine both, of course, but it's indstrial farming that's the real killer, not cow farts.)

The major destructive agriculture is the one that is done to feed animals not the one for humans. If you get rid of animal farming you'll also get rid of a substancial amount of agriculture (not all of it if course, humans will still need to eat, but not as much as cows, pigs, chickens etc combined)

You don't need to feed grain to domestic animals. Humans have raised cattle on natural grass for thousands of years just fine.
Post reply on HN