@Zgarbas

If we eliminate meat, less (not more) plant food needs to be produced. This is because the animals that we eat need to be kept alive. They are constantly burning up calories, and those calories come from plants that we grow. It's pretty simple really. keeping 7 billion people + X billion cattle alive requires more food to be produced than just supporting 7 billion people.

"How is meat a luxury product? Vegetables are way more expensive than meat. "

if this is true (it isn't), then it is almost certainly because of subsidies...There is no way this could be true unless you're going out and hunting wild animals that stay alive on their own dime. Even if we hunted animals instead of factory farming, sustaining today's level of meat consumption would lead to the extinction of half these species. Just look at what's happening in the oceans.

please consider the amount of grazing land required to keep a grass fed cow alive.

This is presumedly why most cattle are in fact not grass-fed, but instead fed with calorie dense foods like corn.

nadiatims wrote:

This is presumedly why most cattle are in fact not grass-fed, but instead fed with calorie dense foods like corn.

Indeed, these days cows don't eat grass.  Corn is way more efficient than grass and cattle are fed a mix of corn, grain, soy, hay, etc.  The amount of grassland it would take to feed enough cows to satisfy all the beef consumers in the world is absurdly high.

(Actually, most of the corn you see growing around if you go to America is not for people.  If you tried to eat it you'd be disgusted by the taste.  It's a much less delicious type that's used to feed animals and to make high fructose corn syrup.)

Last edited by Tzadeck (2012 December 13, 1:39 am)

The other day I bought two medium tomatoes for ￥200. One was covered with mold and the other was on its way. I grumble and am told "that's what you get for buying cheap tomatoes".

I can't help but be for some change.

Last edited by dizmox (2012 December 13, 3:45 am)

First of all, sorry if I am going to repeat what has already been said, as other comments may have appeared in the meantime.

Zgarbas, you seem to ignore that* animals need to be fed (they are not just all cows browsing, and nowadays even cows are fed with other stuff, too. It's hard to imagine that in your country things are different... by the way, I guess the most popular meat today is poultry, not beef, at least in Western Europe, but I'm not sure). And for this special reason, a lot of plants already need to be cultivated (not grass, but grain, soy, corn etc.). Nadiatims is of course correct in saying that in the end of the day, we would consume much less plants in eliminating meat and other animal products, even if it seems paradoxical. You can impossibly nourrish as many people with meat/animal products as if you could do with plants. Another big problem are the huge amounts of dung (sorry, I don't know the exact English term for that, the dictionary contains too many) produced by livestock, which also leads to soil contamination. Of course, we're talking about large-scale livestock farming, and this has become a recognized problem, because it creates environmental pollution.

But you are right when you say that vegetarism or veganism is no magic cure for all the problems in the world. That's true.

*By the way, I don't want to come across as lecturing or arrogant or something, sorry if I don't always get the right tone. English is not my language, and I need more practice.

My grandpa is 85 and in perfect health (aside from some back aches caused by a bad fall a few years ago) whilst eating meat 3 times a day. So? Does that mean that just because one example of this exists then a sort of diet is good/bad?

I even know an old lady who is 102 and who eats meat thrice a day.
No no, I didn't want to say that you are not healthy when eating meat. As far as I know, there is no real evidence that nutrition has such a big impact on health at all (as long as you get all the necessary nutrients for which there are many possible sources).

But what I may have read into your comment (and other comments of this thread) is that you develop a nutritional deficiency when cutting out animal products (which is not true, and that has been proven). And for some cases, a vegan diet can actually be beneficial and meat/dairy products should be avoided (but that are special cases, certain diseases).

(or wait, are all these grandparents who are healthy eating meat just imaginary and nothing compared to the 20-year-old healthy vegetarians?)

Of course not. Health also has to do with pure luck, unfortunately. And it is normal that the body degrades. In my opinion, nutrition as a health factor is overestimated. Please note again that I didn't want to say that people get ill by eating meat or stay perfectly healthy by avoiding it. But know that there are also vegans who have been vegan for 40, 50, or 70 years... I wouldn't say that they are much healthier (or healthier at all) than omnivores, but there are not more fragile or anything. And there are still no long-term surveys that prove anything, no matter in what direction. The whole point is that you obviously don't *need* meat in order to stay healthy (vegetarism is nothing new, most people in India usually never eat meat etc.).
By the way, my father used to eat meat only once a week when he was a kid (50s-60s). It was normal then, because meat was very expensive at the time. Meat and dairy products are ridiculously cheap nowadays.

"I'm young and healthy enough to not need them and have enough time and money to cook alternatives?".

Just a few remarks on money, time and health: vegan food is actually cheaper. There are, of course, luxury products for vegans, too, but you are not obliged to buy them. And again, you can get all the nutrients you need with a vegan diet. It's not only for the young and healthy, quite on the contrary. And I don't see why more time is needed in order to prepare vegan or even vegetarian dishes.


<ot>
@Tzadeck: What'sd wrong, Anki session over? lol</ot>

vix86 wrote:

yowamushi wrote:

Another big problem are the huge amounts of dung (sorry, I don't know the exact English term for that, the dictionary contains too many) produced by livestock, which also leads to soil contamination.

Animal dung, especially from cows and horses, is not a soil contaminate. Maybe the urea present in animal urine is but animal dung is used quite often as a fertilizer.

Yes, of course it is used as a fertilizer, but it depends on the amount, and it is just way too much in some regions. That's what (German) wikipedia says, too (okay, that doesn't have to mean anything, but it's the only source I have available now, and I'm also in a hurry). Maybe it's also a problem of terminology.

re waste:
i was about to say the same thing as yowamushi...
Depending on the quantities involved and what the animals are fed, I could definitely see animal waste becoming a contaminate. compare the density of wild herding animals on the savannah with a modern factory farm, and also remember that wild animals migrate and move about.

Animal waste from factory farming could easily become a contaminate, not just for soil, but also water if not dealt with properly (which would no doubt add to the cost).

"I don't know, isn't it a bit silly to assume that most people are healthy and wouldn't suffer from a vegetarian diet? Or assuming that the health disorders are caused by eating meat, instead of it just being kind of a thing that humans are prone to diseases?"

why? Chimpanzees, our closest relatives do fine eating 95% vegetarian. Gorillas and elephants grow big strong and healthy eating nothing but plants.

"Not to mention the fact that if dairy is still in your diet there still would be a dozen million cows, or more if dairy demands grow due to this new-found meatless diet."

Why would people need milk? If people require milk to live then why don't people continue drinking their mother's milk beyond infancy? Why don't chimpanzees go around milking zebras and buffalos? If humans needed the extra protein from cow's milk, why does human breast milk contain less than half the protein?

Last edited by nadiatims (2012 December 13, 3:31 am)

nadiatims wrote:

Anyway with the growth of online piracy, I wonder how long bs copyright laws can even continue to function.

Piracy isn't really the issue here with IP. Its the most salient issue to masses at large, but the toxin in IP right now is patents and DMCA-esque laws. The vast majority of patents being filed these days are being filed by large companies and are being used more as weapons to sue people instead of their original use. The growth in software patents and very broad & general patents, are what has caused the most problems. There have been a few reports which have stated that copyright/patent laws are hindering and causing innovation to stagger. Remember, there are not just patents on devices and software, but also patents on drugs and even your own genetic code.

BS Intellectual Property laws will go away the day money stops being important, because large companies use the law to protect their property and lock down having to actually continue to innovate.

The only thing we can really hope for is that the scummy politicians roll back the laws (lawl!). But that won't happen because these industries give millions in donations to their campaigns.

-------
EDIT: Also just thought of something as well. On the issue of animal waste. Much of it can be converted to biofuel. I had mentioned it a page or so ago, but there was a farm in Japan here somewhere that had been able to cover most of its energy needs using animal waste converted into biofuel.

Last edited by vix86 (2012 December 13, 4:36 am)

...And how exactly do you intend on pushing rations inside a consumerist society? If you're rationing meat then what's next?

IceCream wrote:

People in consumer societies are just going to have to come to terms with the fact that we don't have infinite resources, and that the currently developed societies don't have some imperviable right to use far more than their fair share of the resources we do have.

It doesn't have to be meat rations itself though, there are other strategies. Carbon rationing as a whole, for example.

Meat is expensive, whether it's subsidised or not. Considering all the processed rubbish people live on, it's probably one of the most nutrient dense things people still put into their bodies nowadays. How about getting supermarkets to clean up their act? This is obviously kind of dictated by economic/business factors, and I haven't seen any figures, but from my バイト some time ago, the amount of meat, dairy and produce - still edible in a lot of cases - that got thrown away was sickening. Plastics, cardboard etc and organic wastes are crushed together and dumped in massive volumes every day too. This is just at a single store in a single region of a single country. The global scale of this kind of waste is probably enough to feed the starving parts of the world.

vix86 wrote:

Tzadeck wrote:

and to make high fructose corn syrup

I'm deeply convinced that this shit is what is making America fat (on top of sedentary lifestyles). There have been numerous studies that show beyond simply being incredibly horrible nutritionally, it also short circuits the bodies satiation system. HFCS causes people to eat more because they don't feel as full. And if you look around, the stuff is in EVERYTHING in the US. If its sweet, it probably has HFCS in it.

As far as I'm aware, production is limited in Europe, so good old-fashioned sucrose is still the sweetener of choice, and we're catching up with US obesity rates at a respectable pace. I believe a lot of HFCS usually has a fairly even fructose-glucose ratio like sucrose, although there are kinds with more fructose, which would enhance the anti-satiety effect you mentioned.

I think the low-fat paradigm and lack of protein in most grains and processed foods does a lot to reduce satiety. Sit down with a 100g bar of 70% cocoa chocolate one day, and Hershey's/Cadbury's the next and see how far you get with each of them. Obesity is a complex picture though, and I don't think you can really pin it on anything. The craziest thing is how easily it can all be reversed.

Last edited by Javizy (2012 December 13, 2:05 pm)

Clearly I should try staying underwater for a while to verify if all those drowning rumors are true, eh?