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

Animals killed since opening this page

justone.earth

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 120 posts

Re: Animals killed since opening this page

#71

Post by ChristianBundy »

tempestn wrote: post #56

So, here's what I wonder about this. I think most people who think about it can agree that a lot of factory farming conditions are terrible. Cramped quarters, lack of outdoor time, space, exercise, poor food, etc. So working toward eliminating those problems seems incontrovertibly good to me. However, let's say hypothetically we're only talking about farms run with a focus on animal welfare. (And not just giving anim…

> I can absolutely understand why someone would therefore conclude it's morally wrong to use animals for food. I'm just not sure I agree.

Why not? Your comment makes it clear that industrial animal agriculture is wrong (not to mention ecologically disastrous), but then your last sentence makes a 180 out of nowhere. It feels extreme at first, but I'd like to assure you that reducing your consumption of these industries is possible (and sometimes even easy!).

Re: Animals killed since opening this page

#73

Post by delecti »

jodrellblank wrote: post #39

> Save the animals 50Bn chickens each taking 1 square foot of space in an endless battery farm makes an area about the size of Delaware. Per year. Save them, and then what?

The rough lifespan for a factory farmed chicken, from hatching to slaughter, is under 2 months. There's no plausible scenario where the entirety of America and everyone we export chicken to stops eating chicken in the span of 2 months. As demand drops, factory farms will stop hatching and raising chickens they don't expect to be able to sell. Even if it slowed within the span of a year, there would only be about 1/6 that 50Bn unless there were 10 months of absurd over production. More likely it will be a shift over many years or decades.

Re: Animals killed since opening this page

#75

Post by discordance »

nradov wrote: post #6

Why don't they count the bacteria killed to make cheese?

People who practice Jainism try their best to avoid consuming microorganisms[0]. Not sure how effective they are, but it’s the thought that counts I guess.

0: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jain_vegetarianism

Re: Animals killed since opening this page

#76

Post by samatman »

atlasunshrugged wrote: post #36

Maybe I'm being a techno optimist but I really am rooting for Beyond Meat and all the plant based alternatives here. I've tried to go vegan a few times for both the ethical and environmental reasons but have never maintained and end up a 'reduceatarian.' I just think realistically the best chance for animal welfare is that plant based meats become cheaper, tastier, and healthier and just replace the majority of them,…

I'll take the other side of that bet.

I think there's real pressure on nutrition science to overlook the utility of eating 'non-essential' animal nutrients such as carnitine, creatine, and cholesterol.

I was a vegetarian for most of my life, and won't ever do it again. I will accept muscle tissue grown in culture, happily, but don't believe that plant-source nutrition can replace animal foods in (my) healthy diet.

I'm sympathetic to animal welfare arguments: I refuse to eat factory-farmed pigs, and avoid factory chicken, and eggs which aren't pasture-raised. I'm firmly convinced of the necessity of meat to my good health, I've A/B tested vegetarian and vegan diets to my own satisfaction, and won't be changing my mind on this.

Re: Animals killed since opening this page

#77

Post by ChristianBundy »

hi41 wrote: post #64

I am not sure if veganism and vegetarianism as preached by some religions can be practiced everywhere on the earth. Places which are very cold during the winters cannot grow trees and vegetables, and the people there need to depend on meat from the animals for their survival. What are your thoughts on that.

Absolutely. Many humans throughout time and space have used animal agriculture to survive, and there's nobody arguing against that. The question is whether that's where we are right now.

My heuristic: when given the option to choose between a vegan option and a non-vegan option, choose the vegan option. There aren't any ways to reduce our dependence on animal agriculture (or human suffering) to zero, but it's pretty easy to reduce it most of the time. I'd recommend giving it a shot. Happy to answer any questions.

Re: Animals killed since opening this page

#78

Post by bproctor »

ChristianBundy wrote: post #71
tempestn wrote: post #56

So, here's what I wonder about this. I think most people who think about it can agree that a lot of factory farming conditions are terrible. Cramped quarters, lack of outdoor time, space, exercise, poor food, etc. So working toward eliminating those problems seems incontrovertibly good to me. However, let's say hypothetically we're only talking about farms run with a focus on animal welfare. (And not just giving anim…

> I can absolutely understand why someone would therefore conclude it's morally wrong to use animals for food. I'm just not sure I agree. Why not? Your comment makes it clear that industrial animal agriculture is wrong (not to mention ecologically disastrous), but then your last sentence makes a 180 out of nowhere. It feels extreme at first, but I'd like to assure you that reducing your consumption of these industrie…

I thought he explained why not in the second paragraph.

Re: Animals killed since opening this page

#79

Post by tempestn »

ChristianBundy wrote: post #71
tempestn wrote: post #56

So, here's what I wonder about this. I think most people who think about it can agree that a lot of factory farming conditions are terrible. Cramped quarters, lack of outdoor time, space, exercise, poor food, etc. So working toward eliminating those problems seems incontrovertibly good to me. However, let's say hypothetically we're only talking about farms run with a focus on animal welfare. (And not just giving anim…

> I can absolutely understand why someone would therefore conclude it's morally wrong to use animals for food. I'm just not sure I agree. Why not? Your comment makes it clear that industrial animal agriculture is wrong (not to mention ecologically disastrous), but then your last sentence makes a 180 out of nowhere. It feels extreme at first, but I'd like to assure you that reducing your consumption of these industrie…

As I said, I'm certain many of the current industrial farming practices are wrong. I'm speaking solely about the morality of killing animals for food, and questioning whether or not that alone is unethical, even if they are raised in good conditions.

Re: Animals killed since opening this page

#80

Post by nhlx2 »

tempestn wrote: post #56

So, here's what I wonder about this. I think most people who think about it can agree that a lot of factory farming conditions are terrible. Cramped quarters, lack of outdoor time, space, exercise, poor food, etc. So working toward eliminating those problems seems incontrovertibly good to me. However, let's say hypothetically we're only talking about farms run with a focus on animal welfare. (And not just giving anim…

> Obviously if we think in terms of humans, that would be horrific;

It’s horrific in terms of animals as well.

Post reply on HN