Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stomach of Dead Whale Contained 'Nothing but Nonstop Plastic'

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 372 posts

Re: Stomach of Dead Whale Contained 'Nothing but Nonstop Plastic'

#131

Post by close04 »

cageface wrote: post #116
josteink wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is such a mainstream statement that it seems to me entirely reasonable to omit a source Only in circles where alternative medicine is practiced, health-advice taken from unscholared internet-blogs and science is generally shunned. This very extreme claim certainly needs a source to have any sort of credibility.

4.5 million Jains in India would be happy to discuss this issue, just for starters. The world is full of healthy vegans and vegetarians.

You are omitting the fact that genetics plays a huge role in the success and efficiency of your diet.

More than a third of East Asians have a deficiency in one of the enzymes involved in the breakdown of alcohol (aldehyde dehydrogenase). They cannot properly metabolize it.

Inuits have mutations in genes that code for enzymes that desaturate carbon-carbon bonds in fatty acids. This means they can handle diets that are very high in certain types of omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids.

A mutation of the melanocortin-4-receptor (MC4R) leads to a markedly increased preference for high fat, but a significantly reduced preference for high sucrose food.

So what I'm saying is that blanket statements like "well if I/those guys can do it then everybody should be able to" have no real value. Diets are strongly influenced by and relying on genetics. Since we don't have the same genes we won't handle the same diet in the same way. Linking to statements that have since been withdrawn due to omissions also doesn't help.

Edit. Huh... getting downvoted for saying diet and genetics go hand in hand, with evidence that hasn't been retracted. If anybody was wondering why some people are never taken seriously, it's because they reject reality thinking this will change it.

Re: Stomach of Dead Whale Contained 'Nothing but Nonstop Plastic'

#132

Post by kmarc »

lnsru wrote: post #74
cageface wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't need to eat meat or fish at all to be healthy, and meat & fish are very resource intensive. We're better off redirecting all the resources we currently waste trying to feed 8 billion people this way into sustainable, plant-based diets anyway.

Western world throws insane amounts of food away: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/02/no-time-leftover... There are other real problems than plant-based diets.

I was surprised how much meat people smilingly throw away in NewZealand - when I was asked to "just throw it in the trashcan" around 30dkgs of perfectly delicious and cooked meal I simply refused and walked away.

My muscles were literally blocked to make that movement of my arms, swiping a plate of meal to the bin. Around ~25 other people did not have any problems with it, so I guess the problem is in me.

Re: Stomach of Dead Whale Contained 'Nothing but Nonstop Plastic'

#133

Post by mcv »

ehnto wrote: post #56
cageface wrote: post #35

These stories rarely mention this for some reason but the bulk of the plastic junk in the ocean is discarded fishing nets, not consumer waste. Reducing the plastic waste you personally generate is still a good idea, of course, but if you really want to have an impact then stop eating fish. https://www.onegreenplanet.org/news/ocean-plastic-made-disca... https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2018/03/great-pacific-ga...

I am not sure that is good advice. Fixing the fishing industry is important, overfishing is rampant as is plastic waste from it. But fish is probably one of the best alternatives we have to other environmentally unfriendly meats we currently raise. As populations grow it is proving to be key to keeping everyone fed. Farmed fish most importantly will soon be the majority of fish consumed. Getting ocean based fishing t…

Doesn't farmed fish undo some of the advantages of eating fish? The big advantage of fishing over farmed meat is that we do not feed fish food grown on fields that could have fed people (which is a big part of the reason why meat is so economically inefficient). Fish just roam the seas and we scoop them out, with very little investment on our part.

Of course the fact that fish is such a relatively efficient source of food is also a good reason why we should take better care of the oceans. We can't eat fish if they die to our pollution. We also can't eat them if we hunt them to extinction. Sustainable fishing and cutting back on our pollution are vital to our food supply.

For anyone not aware yet, MSC is a certification for sustainable fishing and ASC for sustainable farmed fish. I eat no fish anymore that doesn't have either of those two certifications. But that does nothing to stop this kind of pollution.

Re: Stomach of Dead Whale Contained 'Nothing but Nonstop Plastic'

#134

Post by mcv »

usrusr wrote: post #127
isolli wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was vegetarian for 20 years, vegan for 7, yet I started eating meat and fish about a year ago. Here are my thoughts: - I started eating animal products again for health reason; I believe many people can thrive on a vegetarian or vegan diet, but I couldn't. It makes me unhappy, but there I am. - Similarly vegetarian and vegan for a long time, my wife started craving animal products the minute she got pregnant. And a…

> limited consumption of animal products It would be more impactful get three people to reduce meat by 50% than to get one to reduce by 100%. Unfortunately, "meals that don't have a chunk of meat as their centerpiece but that are still far from vegetarian" does not have the same ideological zeal as veganism (speaking in the context of a western industrial background). When eating out (again: western cuisine), the mea…

I have a number of friends who eat meat only 2 times per week. I used to be vegetarian for about 15 years until I met my wife and we agreed to eat meat, but only organic/otherwise sustainable and only a limited number of times per week.

When eating out, I still eat vegetarian unless I know where the restaurant got its meat from. Increasing numbers of restaurants in Amsterdam do care where their meat comes from, fortunately.

Re: Stomach of Dead Whale Contained 'Nothing but Nonstop Plastic'

#135

Post by mcv »

Yajirobe wrote: post #109
cageface wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not. The American Dietetics Association states as its official position that a vegan diet is healthful and adequate for all stages of life: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19562864 There's currently quite a bit of debate over whether or not plant-based diets are better than other diets, but not over whether or not they are healthy.

> for all stages of life Even for babies?

Though I normally encourage vegetarianism and admire vegans, I wouldn't stick to strictly a vegan diet during pregnancy.

From an economic/environmental perspective, severely limiting your intake of animal products is nearly as good as avoiding them completely, and nutritionally you're on much more solid ground.

Re: Stomach of Dead Whale Contained 'Nothing but Nonstop Plastic'

#136

Post by mcv »

kmarc wrote: post #132
lnsru wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Western world throws insane amounts of food away: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/02/no-time-leftover... There are other real problems than plant-based diets.

I was surprised how much meat people smilingly throw away in NewZealand - when I was asked to "just throw it in the trashcan" around 30dkgs of perfectly delicious and cooked meal I simply refused and walked away. My muscles were literally blocked to make that movement of my arms, swiping a plate of meal to the bin. Around ~25 other people did not have any problems with it, so I guess the problem is in me.

Not just in New Zealand. It hurts me when I see people not finishing their plate. I will eat myself sick before I will throw away food. Sadly, this has developed into a bit of a weight problem. And then there's restaurants and supermarkets which throw away enormous amounts of unsold food.

We should buy and cook less food, or maybe have a quick way of sharing left-over food with people who are hungry.

Re: Stomach of Dead Whale Contained 'Nothing but Nonstop Plastic'

#137

Post by chongli »

ovi256 wrote: post #104
fiblye wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fish farming generally uses ocean fish as feed. In terms of CO2, chicken is about as environmentally friendly as animal proteins get. Chickens also don’t really require any special diet and grow quickly. Dealing with chicken waste is a problem, but if you live in the US, chicken “litter” is fed to cows.

Among "Effective Altruism" rationalist circles, some of them prefer eating beef because a single cow produces a lot more meat than a single chicken, hence less suffering-year units per kilo of meat.

By that logic, we should be eating whales, not cattle. A single blue whale produces a lot more meat than a single cow.

Re: Stomach of Dead Whale Contained 'Nothing but Nonstop Plastic'

#138

Post by viraptor »

lozenge wrote: post #75
viraptor wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> global investment and adherence to never dumping plastics that are not biodegradable. Or not producing the unnecessary packaging in the first place. We really don't need every single cucumber wrapped in its own plastic film. (Like it's common in the shops recently...) Lots of other packaging is completely useless as well.

Those wrapped cucumbers last longer on the shelf and at home.

Take a canvas bag, wet it, put your vegetables in it, put the bag into the fridge - they'll last weeks. You can do this with a plastic wrap as well... but why?

Re: Stomach of Dead Whale Contained 'Nothing but Nonstop Plastic'

#139

Post by tyingq »

cageface wrote: post #35

These stories rarely mention this for some reason but the bulk of the plastic junk in the ocean is discarded fishing nets, not consumer waste. Reducing the plastic waste you personally generate is still a good idea, of course, but if you really want to have an impact then stop eating fish. https://www.onegreenplanet.org/news/ocean-plastic-made-disca... https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2018/03/great-pacific-ga...

The FB post mentions 40 kilos of plastic bags, so consumer waste seems a big part of this one.

https://facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=26893462877586...

Re: Stomach of Dead Whale Contained 'Nothing but Nonstop Plastic'

#140

Post by mcv »

ovi256 wrote: post #104
fiblye wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fish farming generally uses ocean fish as feed. In terms of CO2, chicken is about as environmentally friendly as animal proteins get. Chickens also don’t really require any special diet and grow quickly. Dealing with chicken waste is a problem, but if you live in the US, chicken “litter” is fed to cows.

Among "Effective Altruism" rationalist circles, some of them prefer eating beef because a single cow produces a lot more meat than a single chicken, hence less suffering-year units per kilo of meat.

Chickens are also often kept in tiny cages, often mutilated. Cows are too, sometimes, but on average I think cows spend more time outside than most other farm animals. Though this varies wildly of course.

Sadly, growing cattle costs enormous amounts of food that could also feed people. And they seem to contribute quite a bit to greenhouse gasses. So eating beef may be better than eating chicken when it comes to animal welfare, but worse when it comes to the environment.

Best just eat less meat in general.

Post reply on HN