This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
I prefer not to "should" other's choices.
Many people are unclear about the definitions.
A [b]vegetarian[/b][/i] eats only plant foods, dairy foods, eggs and honey. Fish roe doesn't count because there's no way to obtain it without killing the fish itself. A person cannot be vegetarian "but have a small amount of seafoods and white meat." (Amazing how often people use that phrase.)
A [i][b]vegan[/b][/i] eats nothing from any animal source, not even honey or propolis.
A [i]fruitarian[/i] eats only foods that can be harvested without killing the plant.
[b]Arguments in favour[/b] of vegetarianism:
1. It is much [c=7700B2][b]cheaper[/b][/c] if one knows how to select the correct ingredients in the right proportions.
(It can be as expensive as you like if you want to include exotic ingredients like truffles.)
2. It's usually a much [c=7700B2][b]healthier[/b][/c] diet for most humans - especially for Westerners who tend to eat far more meat than they need, and not nearly enough vegetables.
Most diets containing fast foods, highly processed foods or prepackaged meals, sauces etc are actually unhealthy. They contribute to obesity and life threatening diseases in old age.
Vegetarian diets require mostly fresh foods freshly prepared at home. They encourage people to shift to a much healthier lifestyle.
It might not be right for some individuals due to specific differences in their metabolism.
3. It's[c=7700B2][b] better for the environment[/b][/c].
Growing plant foods is 20 times more efficient as a way to feed the 8 billion people on this planet. Felling forests (such as in the Amazon) to feed cattle results in critical loss of oxygen, contributing hugely to global warming.
Using flatlands for animals reduces the amount of arable land available for growing crops for humans.
Most animals used for meat are ruminants. The methane they belch contributes a high proportion of the methane that contributes to global warming. As a greenhouse gas methane is 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide.
4. It's [c=7700B2][b]better for global social justice[/b][/c]. More people could thrive across the world on a healthy diet with far less poverty. This includes the principle of localism, in which one eats as much as possible form foods grown as nearby as possible. This reduces food-miles and carbon footprint. It also frees up capital for trade in the commodities a country doesn't have or can't produce.
5. [c=7700B2][b]Reduces cruelty[/b][/c]. There are many facets of farming animals which are cruel. Abattoirs are mostly supervised on matters affecting bacteria and human health;[i] not[/i] to check on issues of cruelty. Most people are not aware of what happens when animals are shipped long distances to abattoirs; the numbers of broken limbs, the starvation in the last few days to empty the intestines, the callousness and carelessness of abattoir workers in the last moments of an animals life.
Raising animals in feedlots is always cruel - for the entire life of the animal.
(It also means no Omega 3 in the meat; animals can only produce Omega three from feed with living chlorophyl (algae in the sea or grass on the land).
Feedlot raised meat costs far more than grazing in terms of the crops that must be grown to feed them.)
6. [c=7700B2][b]Religion[/b][/c]. Some religions require vegetarianism as an aspect of "Thous shalt not kill" or "ahimsa (harmlessness); examples include Vedantism, the Brahmin castes of Hinduism and Jainism, some Buddhist sects, Seventh Day Adventists
For observant Jews and Muslims (moderate to orthodox) will choose a vegetarian dish to ensure that they don't offend against their dietary laws.
It is possible for most humans to live a healthy or even healthier life as vegetarians.
However, it does require studying nutrition; learning how to balance foods to get the 8 essential proteins (the ones we can't make for ourselves); being aware of the risks of insufficient B12, K2, low iron and/or low calcium taking precautions to ensure enough. Learning how to prepare and cook food, especially with enough versatility to sustain the diet long term.
[b]Arguments against[/b].
1. Some people have a higher need for animal protein: the very old, the very young, pregnant and people recovering from severe accidents or illnesses. Although it's possible to get enough protein without gaining too much weight. Too much cereal means too much energy absorbed in order to get the extra proteins. Or relying more on eggs because most dairy is too high in fat.
This can include people with celiac disease who, having to abstain from most cereal would find their diets far more restrictive, and harder to get 4 of the 8 amino acids.
People living in the Arctic circle where vegetables are not available for 9 months of the year.
There's also a theory (proabably another of those fad ideas) that people with blood type O need much more protein. I haven't checked the research and don't know if it's true.
2. Humans evolved as omnivores. We thrive best and most easily on the widest variety of foods. Meat, seafoods, dairy and eggs are the most convenient and efficient way to get the 8 essential proteins and the most bio-available Omega 3.
3. We only need as much protein per day as the volume of the palm of our own hand (except for special needs. So if we simply ate far less meat (and mostly home-prepared fresh wholefoods) we could make a big contribution to a better environment, and our own health and budgets.
4. We could buy our meats only from free range sources, and we could ensure that the meat is butchered locally and ethically - not travelled long distance to and from abattoirs. Consumer behaviour drives the changes. This means the animals most live with a decent quality of life and their death does not involve cruelty.
[b]Arguments concerning ethical integrity[/b].
Many people are inconsistent in the way they value life, and don't realise it.
An animal has far more sentience (feeling, awareness & intelligence) than a human zygote.
A human zygote who has not even a rudimentary nervous system with which to feel anything.
At what exact point of growth can the human capacity for suffering be said to outstrip and outweigh that of an animal - ? How would we apply same text to an oyster, a rat, a dog or cat, a pig, a horse, a dolphin, a chimp, gorilla or an orangutan.
An animal has clear emotions visible via her behaviour and testable in the hormones that surge through her body. She feels profoundly bonded to her herd mates and offspring.
She knows her own existence, can feel pain, fears death and wants to live in freedom.
If we value these things for humans, why would we value them any less for animals?
All life depends on other life. Fish, carnivores - all meat eaters have as much right to life and quality of life as do herbivores.
For an omnivore, there is no easy or pure choice - but one option is to reduce the amount of pain and suffering as much as possible - and accept the difficulty that comes with this choice.
~
Many people are unclear about the definitions.
A [b]vegetarian[/b][/i] eats only plant foods, dairy foods, eggs and honey. Fish roe doesn't count because there's no way to obtain it without killing the fish itself. A person cannot be vegetarian "but have a small amount of seafoods and white meat." (Amazing how often people use that phrase.)
A [i][b]vegan[/b][/i] eats nothing from any animal source, not even honey or propolis.
A [i]fruitarian[/i] eats only foods that can be harvested without killing the plant.
[b]Arguments in favour[/b] of vegetarianism:
1. It is much [c=7700B2][b]cheaper[/b][/c] if one knows how to select the correct ingredients in the right proportions.
(It can be as expensive as you like if you want to include exotic ingredients like truffles.)
2. It's usually a much [c=7700B2][b]healthier[/b][/c] diet for most humans - especially for Westerners who tend to eat far more meat than they need, and not nearly enough vegetables.
Most diets containing fast foods, highly processed foods or prepackaged meals, sauces etc are actually unhealthy. They contribute to obesity and life threatening diseases in old age.
Vegetarian diets require mostly fresh foods freshly prepared at home. They encourage people to shift to a much healthier lifestyle.
It might not be right for some individuals due to specific differences in their metabolism.
3. It's[c=7700B2][b] better for the environment[/b][/c].
Growing plant foods is 20 times more efficient as a way to feed the 8 billion people on this planet. Felling forests (such as in the Amazon) to feed cattle results in critical loss of oxygen, contributing hugely to global warming.
Using flatlands for animals reduces the amount of arable land available for growing crops for humans.
Most animals used for meat are ruminants. The methane they belch contributes a high proportion of the methane that contributes to global warming. As a greenhouse gas methane is 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide.
4. It's [c=7700B2][b]better for global social justice[/b][/c]. More people could thrive across the world on a healthy diet with far less poverty. This includes the principle of localism, in which one eats as much as possible form foods grown as nearby as possible. This reduces food-miles and carbon footprint. It also frees up capital for trade in the commodities a country doesn't have or can't produce.
5. [c=7700B2][b]Reduces cruelty[/b][/c]. There are many facets of farming animals which are cruel. Abattoirs are mostly supervised on matters affecting bacteria and human health;[i] not[/i] to check on issues of cruelty. Most people are not aware of what happens when animals are shipped long distances to abattoirs; the numbers of broken limbs, the starvation in the last few days to empty the intestines, the callousness and carelessness of abattoir workers in the last moments of an animals life.
Raising animals in feedlots is always cruel - for the entire life of the animal.
(It also means no Omega 3 in the meat; animals can only produce Omega three from feed with living chlorophyl (algae in the sea or grass on the land).
Feedlot raised meat costs far more than grazing in terms of the crops that must be grown to feed them.)
6. [c=7700B2][b]Religion[/b][/c]. Some religions require vegetarianism as an aspect of "Thous shalt not kill" or "ahimsa (harmlessness); examples include Vedantism, the Brahmin castes of Hinduism and Jainism, some Buddhist sects, Seventh Day Adventists
For observant Jews and Muslims (moderate to orthodox) will choose a vegetarian dish to ensure that they don't offend against their dietary laws.
It is possible for most humans to live a healthy or even healthier life as vegetarians.
However, it does require studying nutrition; learning how to balance foods to get the 8 essential proteins (the ones we can't make for ourselves); being aware of the risks of insufficient B12, K2, low iron and/or low calcium taking precautions to ensure enough. Learning how to prepare and cook food, especially with enough versatility to sustain the diet long term.
[b]Arguments against[/b].
1. Some people have a higher need for animal protein: the very old, the very young, pregnant and people recovering from severe accidents or illnesses. Although it's possible to get enough protein without gaining too much weight. Too much cereal means too much energy absorbed in order to get the extra proteins. Or relying more on eggs because most dairy is too high in fat.
This can include people with celiac disease who, having to abstain from most cereal would find their diets far more restrictive, and harder to get 4 of the 8 amino acids.
People living in the Arctic circle where vegetables are not available for 9 months of the year.
There's also a theory (proabably another of those fad ideas) that people with blood type O need much more protein. I haven't checked the research and don't know if it's true.
2. Humans evolved as omnivores. We thrive best and most easily on the widest variety of foods. Meat, seafoods, dairy and eggs are the most convenient and efficient way to get the 8 essential proteins and the most bio-available Omega 3.
3. We only need as much protein per day as the volume of the palm of our own hand (except for special needs. So if we simply ate far less meat (and mostly home-prepared fresh wholefoods) we could make a big contribution to a better environment, and our own health and budgets.
4. We could buy our meats only from free range sources, and we could ensure that the meat is butchered locally and ethically - not travelled long distance to and from abattoirs. Consumer behaviour drives the changes. This means the animals most live with a decent quality of life and their death does not involve cruelty.
[b]Arguments concerning ethical integrity[/b].
Many people are inconsistent in the way they value life, and don't realise it.
An animal has far more sentience (feeling, awareness & intelligence) than a human zygote.
A human zygote who has not even a rudimentary nervous system with which to feel anything.
At what exact point of growth can the human capacity for suffering be said to outstrip and outweigh that of an animal - ? How would we apply same text to an oyster, a rat, a dog or cat, a pig, a horse, a dolphin, a chimp, gorilla or an orangutan.
An animal has clear emotions visible via her behaviour and testable in the hormones that surge through her body. She feels profoundly bonded to her herd mates and offspring.
She knows her own existence, can feel pain, fears death and wants to live in freedom.
If we value these things for humans, why would we value them any less for animals?
All life depends on other life. Fish, carnivores - all meat eaters have as much right to life and quality of life as do herbivores.
For an omnivore, there is no easy or pure choice - but one option is to reduce the amount of pain and suffering as much as possible - and accept the difficulty that comes with this choice.
~
HoraceGreenley · 56-60, M
@hartfire
I vehemently disagree with arguments for a vegetarian diet.
I vehemently disagree with arguments for a vegetarian diet.