Hey guys I really want to eat meat but after watching VG's videos I keep feeling bad. Can people come up with LEGIT reasons why its ok for me and you to be omnivore?
NOT "cuz it tastes good xD", REAL reasons please...
>>37475034
also what the fuck, /fit/ marks a thread as spam if it contains v e g a i n _ g a i n s in it. Why.
anything? How do I justify eating animals, besides them tasting really good?
to avoid vitamin a deficiency (not beta carotene, actual vitamin a)
just generally easier to maintain a well rounded diet with meat, etc.
fuck off with this spam
>>37475094
Animals eat other animals. Humans are animals thus we also eat animals.
I think it's a good idea for people to experience killing or taking part in the breaking down of the animal they eat so they value it more.
Without humans, many of these animals would be extinct, over consume their environment and contribute to the spread of disease.
Your body was designed to ingest meat to coincide with the boime it evolved in. Forcing it out of this role creates an imbalance that causes more harm.
Be a good person anon
>>37475094
grow a pair of fucking balls
Because not having access to the entire range of dietary options is limiting to my pleasure and experience of food.
Unless you just don't buy anything and live a completely anti-consumerist lifestyle, you're participating in the awful exploitation of the environment and people in developing nations no matter what you're buying.
So if you're a vegan that loves to buy clothes, congrats, unless you're buying EVERYTHING responsibly-sourced (what low-wage worker picked the cotton for that shirt?) then you're still contributing to the shit that is our world.
You can't escape the system by just not consuming. So pick your indulgences wisely - food is one of the most enjoyable ones for me because it's an experience and not a thing (electronics, cars, clothes, etc.).
(Former vegetarian for 1 year)
>>37475034
Vegans don't research nutrition and end up vitamin deficient.
Your test levels drop the fuck out, which leads to health complications in males.
Your skin and teeth turn to shit and you end up sallow and jaundiced.
Animals don't feel guilt feeding off others, don't let the bleeding hearts cuck your gains.
You annoy the piss out of everyone at social gatherings, especially family. Even if they're too polite to say it.
Eat your fucking meat and let the stringbean bitches mire your mass.
>>37475034
Look m8, I've been vegan for 4 years because of muh animals and I quit because most vegans are mentally defected human beings. They're delusional. Being vegan will fuck you up, either through imbalanced diet, social awkwardness because you're enraged around meat eaters (and don't give me this bullshit that you're a chill vegan, try going to a bbq and acting normal)
Also
It's herbivore not omnivore you retarded cunt
>>37475034
Because meat taste good and morality doesnt exist senpai desu
>>37475034
Listen asshole: Nobody has to answer to YOU for anything at all. YOU are just some faggot shitposting on /fit/. YOU are a waste of skin. YOU are a waste of perfectly good oxygen. YOU are most likely a skinnyfat, weak manlet. YOU are never going to make it because of your severe case of autism. YOU aren't worth a plug nickel. YOU should fuck the fuck off, you fuckin' fuck, you.
In fact, YOU suck so much cock, that they made a wiki page about YOU: https://encyclopediadramatica.se/You
>>37475034
there is no non hypocritical justification.
The only time it is justified to take a life is to save your own or other's
The only time it is justfied to eat any corpse animal or human, is survival.
>>37477811
none of that is true. Apart from carnivores not feeling bad about eating prey... so you are basing your morals and ethics of wild animals
>hurr durr i think for myself
none of what you wrote justifies killing animals.
>>37477909
>morality does not exist
therefore rape is justified
The reasons humans became as intelligent as they are is from eating meat
Death is a part of the natural life cycle, if the animals aren't kept in shit conditions until they're killed than its not a big deal
I'm still pescetarian though
>>37477909
>meat taste good and morality doesnt exist
so now it is justified to kill and eat humans now?
>>37477888
OP is currently vegetarian and wants reasons to go back to eating meat... Also known as being an omnivore you dumb cunt
>>37479800
nope, they became intelligent from eating cooked foods, yes meat had its place in certain environments but how is that relevant now?
>appeal to nature fallacy
>death is a part of the natural life cycle
Nonsensical, how does that justify killing in any way?
>>37479821
Because humans are generally omnivores they're going to eat meat. A shot to the head is better than being mauled by a lion. Most livestock wouldn't even exist if humans didn't eat them
>>37475496
>Without humans, many of these animals would be extinct
It would be better desu. Living in a small cage, being tortured, infected and stressed is worse than death.
>Your body was designed to ingest meat to coincide with the boime it evolved in
Back in history we ate what we could. It was necessary to survive. These days you can pick your food, you have lots of options to do more ethical and ecological choices.
>>37477811
Bullshit. Just something you've heard from someone against vegans that you thought is true. Even if you are an omnivore, you still can lack vitamins, get heart/blood problems, diabetes and other problems because of your nutrition.
Its not even about killing an animal, its the best part about their life in meatfactories desu
>>37479836
So you don't have an issue if the animals are raised ethically and then shot in the head?
Because you can buy meat like that. It's just a bit more expensive
>>37479843
I think its a looot better choice. People just dont want to buy it because its more expensive. Nobody wants to be in the front line.
Still, the animals consume 40% of earths plant fields, and all the environmental issues are still there, even if we remove the ethical problem.
>>37479834
>humans are generally omnivores
is that meant to refute the fact you can thrive without animal products?
How does that justify killing
>>37475034
>why it's ok to be omnivore?
we are omnivore whether it's ok or not.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/71/3/682.full
>Whenever and wherever it was ecologically possible, hunter-gatherers would have consumed high amounts (45–65% of total energy) of animal food. Most (73%) hunter-gatherer societies worldwide derived >50% (≥56–65%) of their subsistence from animal foods, whereas only 13.5% of these societies derived more than half (≥56–65%) of their subsistence from gathered plant foods.
An animal is classified as omnivore, carnivore etc. based on behaviour - human behaviour is omnivorous and wherever possible humans prefer to consume high amounts of animal food.
Humans are omnivores, that isn't something which is up to you to make a decision about. Whether you live a sort of synthetic omnivorism using supplements is up to you. I think the main question there is whether it's safe to rely on supplements that much (and you need a lot more than b12 in my opinion).
Most humans would rather eat naturally than use supplements because animal suffering isn't an issue.
>>37479879
>killing
why does it matter? they're prey animals. I understand they make noises etc which elicit sympathy but if you reflect on it rationally isn't it more likely your reaction of sympathy is evolved so that you look after your children and members of your tribe? By which I mean the ability of other animals to affect you is an example of shared evolutionary heritage, the same reason we have eyes which work the same way. It seems like you're making a superstitious leap by saying humans have an in-built reaction to care about all animals - in evolutionary terms that makes no sense.
You get more energy from meat than greens, so unless you're a cuck who does nothing all day or a wealthy enough dude to buy a shit-ton of greens and complements meat is the go-to for a healthy life
>>37475034
Because I don't think I'm somehow better than an animal. Needing to feel as if we have transcended our baser natures is a sign of insecurity. I'm going to fuck and eat, and all the effort I expend on being better than a beast will be put into something that benefits us all, not just my own ego.
>>37475034
On one hand you set yourself up to exclude yourself from the rest of society. If you point at everyone and say they are wrong, even if you are right, you will be seen as being wrong. Don't set yourself up for failure.
On the other hand I don't see livestock as animals really. They are not beings like those in the wild. We bred them to be that way and as it is, they would not survive a single day in the wilderness. Sparing their lives would change absolutely nothing.
Also, you have to think about all the jobs related to livestock and their resources. Animal products are more widely used than you think and once livestock was gone, we would be on a shortage for many cheap byproducs of meat production.
What I'm essentially saying. Veganism is not a bad idea, and if it makes you feel better about yourself, live by it BUT don't expect anyone to follow you, because at the moment it is probably not possible for most people.
>>37475034
it's cheap
it's convenient
it's what we've been eating for millions of years
>>37475290
I suggest you read The China Study. All the deficiencies and their solutions are explained.
>>37475451
Animals do a lot of things that we don't do. They rape, they murder, they lick their assholes, they throw up to feed their children. We are above other animals. This is only an argument if you believe humans should be allowed to do all these things, but if you don't, you're logically inconsistent.
>>37475496
So if you save something/someone you have the moral right to do whatever you want with that thing? We cause more harm to the environment by breeding said animals than they would ever do if they weren't in captivity.
>>37476214
This is only true for vegans, and not vegetarians. To eat an animal, it has to die, period. It's a direct action (even if not by you) that's required for said consumption of meat. But to milk an animal, or to grab it's eggs or whatever, does not HAVE to kill or hurt the animal. This is just a byproduct of the industry. This is a second-hand action. To be a logical consistent person you have to ask yourself where you draw the line, and first-hand actions seem to be the only viable option. If you were to avoid all second-hand actions in live you'd have to isolate yourself in a cave somewhere, which is not realistic. This is why veganism is fucking retarded, but vegetarianism just makes a lot sense.
>>37479773
This is true for some extent. If you live in a third world country and is extremely poor, and your only source of food is meat for some reason, it would be justifiable morally. But most of us are in a very privileged position where we can chose what we eat.
>>37481583
>they would not survive a single day in the wilderness.
Unless you have some evidence it looks like that isn't true - or only true sometimes
>Cattle have been domesticated since the neolithic era, but can do well enough on open range for months or even years with little or no supervision. Their ancestors, the aurochs, were quite fierce, on par with the modern Cape buffalo. Modern cattle, especially those raised on open range, are generally more docile, but when threatened can display aggression. Cattle, particularly those raised for beef, are often allowed to roam quite freely and have established long term independence in Australia, New Zealand and several Pacific Islands along with small populations of semi-feral animals roaming the southwestern United States and northern Mexico. Such cattle are variously called mavericks, scrubbers or cleanskins. Most free roaming cattle, however untamed, are generally too valuable not to be eventually rounded up and recovered in closely settled regions.
But apparently it only works for sheep if there are no predators:
>The goat is one of the oldest domesticated creatures, yet readily goes feral and does quite well on its own. Sheep are close contemporaries and cohorts of goats in the history of domestication, but the domestic sheep is quite vulnerable to predation and injury, and thus rarely if ever is seen in a feral state. However, in places where there are few predators, they get on well, for example in the case of the Soay sheep.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feral_animal#Species_of_feral_animals
Because IDGAF, that's why.
>>37479836
I'd rather live a shorty life than not live at all faggot
>>37481583
Does that mean pets, many of which are bred by humans and don't exist in the wild, are not animals and should not be treated as such?
>>37479808
Not the guy you were replying to, but
Yes. Problem is, other people will avenge the one you've killed.
You can go to a foreign contry though and kill people there, like, you know, people do right now...
>>37481623
Oh please tell me how a slow as shit cow or a pig would be able to survive. The only thing that would happen is, that predators would suddenly multiply because of the readily available and easy to kill prey. Also:
>dat female to male ratio among cattle
Even if they survived, they would not be able to procreate anywhere as effectively, that they will not die out in a short time frame.
>>37481656
>Living in a small cage, being tortured, infected and stressed is worse than death.
Yeah, i bet you would enjoy it
>>37481593
Morals are above money, conveniency and what we did as more primitive beings.
>>37481583
You make some good arguments, but also some bad ones. One should never try to impose his way of living on another human. One should only strive to educate and let people make their own decisions.
The livestock may not survive in the wild, but that's just because of their environment and how they grew up, nothing else. There's no difference between them and a wild animal, really, except for the genetic mutations to create abnormally big animals, but that's not your point.
Guess what, sparing your life or killing you changes absolutely nothing. This is not an argument.
>>37481548
Your ability to be self-aware and question your own existence disagrees.
>>37481374
Read The China Study. It doesn't matter what we are, because in terms of health it has been proven that time and time again it's more healthy to live off a plant based diet.
Animal suffering isn't an issue because you are not directly infront of if. Most people wouldn't eat their pets, but they'll gladly eat a pig that's even more like a human in terms of cognitive abilities, just because they aren't themselves faced with the reality of killing or hurting them.
>>37481661
Most pets were bred as companions for us. Killing a dog or a cat is nowhere as bad as killing a human but it's worse than killing livestock. It's all in the history. We didn't keep pigs around because they're fun to play fetch with, but because they're easy to raise and tasty. Dogs have terrible return on effort to raise them and make them fat for eating.
Dogs also were kept as companions for hunting and even today they are used for a multitude of purposes, which makes them our partners. They actually do something for us instead of just eating food until their ripe for eating themselves.
>>37481619
>things we don't do
>rape
>murder
>licking assholes
>>37481712
> Morals are above money, conveniency and what we did as more primitive beings.
buy RSPCA approved chicken then (if you live in australia)
>>37475034
I have vegan for health reasons but on occasion I eat meat. These are usually birthdays or party's or vacations. Why don't you try that op?
>>37481715
Okay, my bad. A lot of things that we see as immoral or below us as humans.*
>>37481374
>Whenever and wherever it was ecologically possible, hunter-gatherers would have consumed high amounts (45–65% of total energy) of animal food
That's not really how it works these days does it anon? If we all went back to hunting our own meat, we wouldn't have all these problems of the meat industry (pollution, destruction of rain forests etc.)
>>37481736
>>37481715
As a human, I believe that rimming is a good thing, so please take down "licking assholes" from that list
>>37481755
And as a muslim I see rape and murder of infidels as a good thing.
Please remove them from that list.
Nigger who fucking cares if you kill an animal. It's an animal, a dumb, stupid, tasty animal that would have most likely gotten eaten anyway if it weren't for you eating it. That's the law of the jungle my nigga, eat or be eaten.
>Animals do a lot of things that we don't do. They rape, they murder, they lick their assholes
Are you retarded? Humans literally do all of things already en masse. If eating animals was wrong we would not be able to digest meat. Now fuck off back to your elf forest, I've got gains to make and baby cows to eat faggot.
>>37481801
edgy
not even vegan
>>37481681
well the link gives examples of cattle surviving, it says they're still capable of being aggressive, even if they aren't as aggressive as the animals we domesticated them from - and pigs are relatively smart, they have similar intelligence to dogs.
>female to male ratio
I think one bull would impregnate a lot of females and by the next generation you'd have more males.
>>37475034
I hate animals and I love plants, therefore I eat meat.
>>37475034
things that are not intelligent and are not self-aware do not have lives of value.
this includes retards and toddlers.
>>37481689
I wouldn't enjoy but literally anything is better than being dead
>>37481712
>The China Study
I've heard that study was biased so I don't have any interest in it.
>wouldn't eat their pets, but they'll gladly eat a pig that's even more like a human
the reason they wouldn't eat their pets isn't because they're like a human it's because they're attached to them and most people can make the distinction between a pet and a source of food. I think the ones who are unable to make that distinction, who become animal rights activists etc. are probably lacking or out of touch with some instinct of how to set a limit of -my social group- vs. -not my social group- or they try to do it rationally like you are through cognitive similarity and other things. In my view group identification in humans isn't set according to rational criteria like that - hence why some tribes have no issue with cannibalism even though cognitive ability is a 1:1 match. Maybe those tribes are rife with ASPD but I've never heard that suggested - in my view all they need for it to be acceptable is to see the other person as "not on my team".
Meat gives complete proteins with all needed amino acids. Plant protein does not have this.
Red meat increases testosterone and is heavily rich in nutrients. Eating things like soy, beans, excessive nuts, ect. will raise your estrogen levels and stunt your growth if you are still developing (years 0-25. Yes, a man's body continues to fill out and develop till years 20-25 after the huge "puberty" stage)
A vegan diet can be disastrous for young children and preteens, will completely fuck up your skeleton and body type for your whole life with wide hips, skinny, malnourished bones, ect. VG himself has fucked up knees and bones. You should only become vegan after you are completely finished developing, if you are still so stupid as to be set on such a path.
VG is obviously biased and dishonest, and if you take what he says seriously, kys. His studies that he references in his videos are incredibly biased and falsified. For every one "meat causes cancer and will make you die in your 20's" study he cites, there are a hundred studies that proves that meat can be very healthy and beneficial in moderation.
If he would show one study where men that work out, are fit, and eat a steak or other meat several times a week get heart disease or cancer, then maybe I would believe him. But this isn't the case. I can guarantee that the studies he cites is full of fatass 60 year old rednecks that eat meat fried in butter every day. Not to mention that cancer is a result of many different bad habits. Saying that just because a person eats meat, he will get cancer is a correlation=\=causation fallacy. Also heart disease comes from being a fatass and inactive, not from meat. Another correlation=\=causation fallacy
Humans have always been eating meat. It is very healthy in moderation and when not pumped full of artificial hormones and chemicals. My ancestors did it and managed to survive, I will do it to. There is no reason to change something that is not broken.
>>37475034
Wait so are you vegetarian wanting to eat meat or vegan?
If you're vegetarian you aren't really doing anything, the egg and dairy industry are probably more cruel and unhealthy for you. If you're doing it for health or moral reasons eat meat but cut out dairy and eggs.
>>37481739
well I want us to return to a more natural way of life, so it isn't an issue for me.
>medication-resistant airborne pathogen when?
>>37479808
I don't know what's dumber. You or that comic
>>37481619
We essentially do all the things you listed, lmao.
I mean we use a machine to mush up baby food, but same idea.
>>37482075
A-are nuts really that bad?
What else should I snack on that's healthy but still has lots of ez calories.
>>37482645
Don't listen to that bullshit. Nuts are GOAT especially cashews.
>DAT monounsaturated fat
>DAT zinc
>>37475290
Your body converts beta-carotene into retinol, you dingus.
>>37481992
You must live a very sheltered life.
>>37481992
I bet i could make you wish for death in a few hours
Im that edgy
>>37475034
Eating meat is believed to be what drove our brains to develop the way they are. By eating meat you won't lack dietary nutrition like B12. Eating red meat generally isn't good for you, period. However, eating poultry and fish is healthy. If,you're concerned with how animals are raised, simply don't eat animals from those farms. You could even raise chickens yourself. If you've ever been around farm animals you know that they WANT to be milked. They love it , it relieves a lot of pressure on their body. The animals willingly walk into the milking stands when you take them out. Also, chickens are gonna lay eggs even if unfertilized. Being a vegan to me since I've been around farms seems like some new age city hippy mentality that's not really based off reason. Sure, don't support farms that abuse animals. But don't avoid all animal products.
>>37483117
I think the main thing is that's it not very sustainable with all the people on this earth. Also we consume a shitload. I agree with everything you say
>>37479879
>killing
fuck off moralfag
they're simply prey, welcome to the food chain you dumb whore
>>37482075
>Meat gives complete proteins with all needed amino acids. Plant protein does not have this.
Wrong.
>Red meat increases testosterone and is heavily rich in nutrients.
There are no studies that prove red meat increases your testosterone. It does contain estrogen though.
>Eating things like soy, beans, excessive nuts, ect. will raise your estrogen levels and stunt your growth if you are still developing
Wrong. Phytoestrogens have no effect on humans.
>A vegan diet can be disastrous for young children and preteens, will completely fuck up your skeleton and body type for your whole life with wide hips, skinny, malnourished bones, ect.
Only if you don't eat properly. A child eating meat and spaghetti almost exclusively is just as bad as a child on a poorly done vegan diet.
>there are a hundred studies that proves that meat can be very healthy and beneficial in moderation.
Since you call VG's studies biased, how many of those studies have been funded by the meat industry itself?
>Saying that just because a person eats meat, he will get cancer is a correlation=\=causation fallacy.
Cooking meat literally forms carcinogens though.
>Humans have always been eating meat.
Appeal to nature fallacy.
>My ancestors did it and managed to survive
They also lived shorter than people in modern times.
>>37483208
And you have to kill your prey.
Kill != murder
>>37483117
The cow wants to be milked because there isn't a calf to drink the milk so it's painful to not be milked.
You're making it sound like some good harmless thing, but the reason the cow has to be milked is because they had a calf and that calf is more often than not killed. Same with eggs, male chicks are profitless and nearly always killed as soon as they are sexed.
I grew up on a farm too, this is common practice, not just worst case scenario farms.
>>37482075
>Meat gives complete proteins with all needed amino acids. Plant protein does not have this.
You write a wall of text, but your first "fact" is already bullshit. Stopped reading there.
Source: https://www.sciencedaily.com/terms/soy_protein.htm
>Inb4 soy makes your tits grow
--> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20378106
>>37475034
Can you come up with LEGIT reasons to not eat meat.
NOT "cuz its evil to kill animals xD" REAL reasons please
>>37475034
So that you don't need to supplement your body with "naturally derived" pills and vitamins every god damn morning of your life.
Man the fuck up. Not eating meat won't save fucking anything. Animals will still be slaughtered whether you decide to be a vegan hipster or not.
>>37475034
Because you want to.
If you don't want to, don't.
It will make very little difference if you participate or not - much the same are the stories of climate change and globalization.
All the tosspots talking about morality in this thread take themselves a bit too seriously. The only reason I could find to eliminate beef (in particular) is to conserve water.
I saw a neat article about vat-grown beef - maybe that will be more up your alley.
>>37483301
Didn't they teach you these things in school?
-40% of the farms go for animal food, and if you understand trophic levels, energy is wasted along the process
-It pollutes earth and waters. Its one of the main reasons for greenhouse effect
-Its cruel to raise animals in cages, cut their tails off, remove teeth etc. They get infections, they don't see vet, they suffer from anxious and stress while sitting in their own shit. Actually its worse if they are not in a cage, because then they are just stuffed together and some get trampled, all get biten / pecked and so on.
Also red meat has lots of saturated fat, not to talk about all the chemicals and antibiotics they pump to those animals
>>37475034
Morally, VGs' arguments all come from the pre-concieved notion that killing and eating another sentient being is inherentley 'wrong' (based on him acting as an absoloute moral superiority) and often compares eating animals to eating humans simply because animals have intelligence and are sentient. They're based on emotion at heart.
Firstly, there is no absolute authority when it comes to morals, only the moral authority that one is induced to in society and usually is supported by religion. Its ironic that VG is a little edgy atheist but adheres to the idea of absolute moral authority when it suits him and his cause. He justifies it by saying 'humans are intelligent so they should know no to eat meat and know that its wrong'. This is a false statement based on the assumption that eating meat is inherently wrong and simply because were intelligent we shouldnt do it.
Secondly, he equates killing and eating humans with killing an eating animals. There are three models that you really have when it comes to sanctity of life.
A: no life has any inherent value
B: all life has some inherent value but the value goes up based on some factor ie intelligence of that life
C: all life has equal value
VG seems to take option C or a mixture of option B and C seeing animal life almost equal or totally equal to human life. Taking this option would make him a directly and indirectly a hypocrite because he has definently killed an animal throughout his life by just being a functioning member of society. Im sure VG has stepped on a bug in his life, im sure the plastics used in his autistic figures has resorted in the death of animals before. The problem with taking option C (which most vegans do) is that you're automatically a hypocrite and are subject to your own absolute moral authority if you take it. Going back to the first point, to say that all killing is 'unjust' and then say this just makes the idea have even less logic to it.
>>37483519
Cant really say much about his scientific/health based arguments as all he really does is regurgitate abstract info from a couple of (possibly biased) studies. You can find a study to support anything you want if you look hard enough.
>>37475034
Because evolution gave you incisors and digestive enzymes specifically to eat meat, use them you contrarion vegan piece of shit
>>37483519
I'd like to add that his position of sayingeating animals is wrong as they are sentient beings with thoughts and emotions and thus killing them is wrong is hypocritical since these same animals he values kill each other for food all the time, and sometimes just for sport.
We can look at some animals that we can objectively say are intelligent in different ways, such as the crow family, dolphins, chimps and gorillas and some social animals with above average intelligence like wolves, dogs and lions, etc. All of whom will kill for food. Many kill their own species for territory it mating rights, kill even within their own social groups in some situations, and kill other animals for sport.
If he holds that all species should be treated equally then the species he cares about don't follow this system. If he says that humans should raise themselves above this killing then his argument that we are all equal is based off humanity being above all other animals, and thus self defeating.
>>37483692
>>37483519
>mfw two auts from /fit/ defeated VG in two posts.
>>37483064
I'm just not a faggot who gives up
>>37483636
So do you still live your life like your ancestors, hunting and gatherings whatever you can to survive in forests / savanna?
If not, then consider again the possibilities
>>37483692
>>37483519
>>37483714
You are now just thinking, that "killing" animals is the reason some people go vegan. Tbh, killing the animal is the best thing about their life in meatfactories. And its also the least important thing if we look at the ecological side. Pollution and waste of energy.
>>37482645
According to a study - I think it was the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries and Risk-factors study (2013) but I can't find a link to it at the moment - inadequate diet is the highest behavioural risk-factor for all-causes death, and a diet low in nuts and seeds is the third-highest of the types of diets they had listed - low in fruit was top and then high in sodium was second.
this suggests to me that nuts are important and we should eat more of them (there are some ways the data could be skewed for that not to be true but I doubt it).
>>37483782
I still live my life beating your mom's pussy up
>>37483819
Clearing forests for growing crops is a way larger contributor to 'pollution' than any animal farming. The problem isnt that the meat industry is too big, its that our population is too large to feed. This is also under the assumption of you going for the
>OMG were all gonna die in 10 years because of global warming/pollution quick shit in a hole and only ride your bike from now on
Al gore spoonfed theory of 'pollution'. The human effects of pollution are blown way out of proportion.
>>37483782
Its no longer nessicary for you to reproduce and carry on your genes anymore. Does that mean you're not going to do it? Yes, because humans are inherintly self-serving. You can cry
>muh appeal to nature
all you want but refer to
>>37483692
>>37483865
Nice, was she your first?
>>37483897
>Clearing forests for growing crops is a way larger contributor to 'pollution' than any animal farming.
And do you know what animals eat?
+ the fact that 15% of the greenhouse effect comes just from meatfactories
>Its no longer nessicary for you to reproduce and carry on your genes anymore. Does that mean you're not going to do it? Yes, because humans are inherintly self-serving. You can cry
This comment has nothing to do with the discussion mate, its just nonsense.
>all you want but refer to
Yeah but this isn't just about killing animals, its a relief for them
>>37483897
>Its no longer nessicary for you to reproduce and carry on your genes anymore.
If everyone stopped reproducing, the human species would die out. We both know niggers will never stop fucking, so this would only result in the extinction of the white race.
>>37483758
Yeah, inspirational quotes on a background of the grand canyon don't really prepare you for some of the shit in this world.
>>37475047
MODS!!!!!!
>>37483117
>Eating red meat generally isn't good for you, period.
except it has a much broader micro-nutrient profile than poultry and fish - non-essential nutrients but still, I think it's worth it.
I eat meat because its what my ancestors fought for. We humans werent always at the top of the food chain.
its muh privilege, no its my duty, to eat meat.
>>37483423
so eat organic, grass-fed venison and wild game wherever you can. It's more expensive, that's all.
that rules out all of your concerns except waste and pollution so the question is whether it's less wasteful and polluting to produce all the supplements you need to replace meat.
>>37475451
Animals rape other animals. Humans are animals thus we also rape other humans.
Nice appeal to nature fallacy faggot.
>>37475496
>Without humans, many of these animals would be extinct, over consume their environment and contribute to the spread of disease.
Your retarded, they cut down rain forests to make room to grow crops for animals. You wanna talk about spread of disease? How about the antibiotics resistant bacteria that cannot even be killed by our strongest anti-antibiotics spreading everywhere because of farm animals.
>>37476214
We can't solve every problem so we might as well give up solving any problem!
Nice appeal to futility faggot.
>>37477811
Citations needed.
>>37479800
We were able to have a large brain due to cooking because it allowed us to absorb more calories. There is no sound proof that eating meat had anything to do with it. Some of the smartest land animals today don't eat meat, elephants, birds, gorillas, ext...
>>37483519
It isn't hypocritical for a vegan to denounce eating meat as long as they are reducing all the ways they impact on the environment/other animals.
Saying "if you hurt one animal inadvertently or because you would die otherwise that makes it ok for me to slaughter as many as I want for whatever reason I want" doesn't make any sense to me. He specifically may be a hypocrit in terms of his action figures because he doesn't need them and they undoubtedly produce pollution but that isn't the same as saying his position is inherently hypocritical.
>>37483692
Those animals need to eat for food, a wolf wouldn't survive in the wild without meat unlike a human in our society.
And besides, we don't eat retarded humans even though some of them have lower IQs than the animals we eat. It obviously isn't about intelligence. It's usually about sentience, which is the ability to feel pain - and you don't have to be intelligent to have that ability.
So you're misreading his argument - he's saying humans should be moral because they're intelligent and animals should be included in that because they're sentient. Humans are more intelligent than animals on average by a large margin but most people see sentient as an absolute quality - either a species of animal is or it isn't, none are more or less sentient than any other.
>>37481619
>I suggest you read The China Study.
Why is anyone taking this bate? Seriously. No one can cite the most baseless tampered data bullshit of the 90's and not be a troll
>>37481593
It's only cheap because your government subsidizes the fuck out of it. If the government didn't do this you explain to me how it is cheaper to take 20 calories of plant food to make 1 calorie of meat (plus excess water for the animal and other costs).
If killing someone who you owed a debt to was convenient it doesn't make it right.
Holy shit can you fucking retards stop using appeal to nature fallacies, you look so fucking retarded. "HEERRR DERRR WE BEEN EATIN MEAT FOR MILLIONS OF YEAR SO ITS OK"
>>37481714
>Killing a dog or a cat is nowhere as bad as killing a human but it's worse than killing livestock
You can run over someones cat or dog no big deal. But if you kill someones cattle youre going to jail.
>>37484682
>the inherent futility of morality isn't a legitimate argument against it
>>37484727
>gorillas don't eat meat
except they've been observed eating meat and they aren't anywhere near human intelligence or ability anyway - early hominins were probably smarter than gorillas even before we had a boost to our brain size.
>elephants
elephants are huge animals altogether which I'd imagine makes it easier to support a large brain and they're still nowhere near as intelligent as humans
>birds
parrots and the crow-family are by animal standards remarkably intelligent but it isn't anywhere near humans.
>no sound proof that eating meat has anything to do with human intelligence
how about the tendency for humans to eat 50%+ of their calories from meat whenever they're able to do so?
>>37482075
this guy knows whats up.
>>37481714
>We didn't keep pigs around because they're fun to play fetch with
LOL
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AU7_Ar9C_iI
You could say the same about slavery, "we kept black people around because they are easy to raise to pick cotton and are strong, but we have white people as bros because they do stuff besides picking cotton."
>>37484773
>you explain to me how it is cheaper to take 20 calories of plant food to make 1 calorie of meat (plus excess water for the animal and other costs).
I'm not an expert in agriculture but it seems like there might be a number of reasons - like animals are able to use plant food which wouldn't be suitable for humans, like grass.
>>37481801
"If eating animals was wrong we would not be able to digest meat."
LOL, I hope your trolling
>>37484773
maybe they're not saying it's "ok" so much as it's "not something to be tampered with lightly".
>>37481971
This was a stupid shit post, but I hope you realize that animals have to eat plants to grow, like 20 calories of plants to make 1 calorie of meat.
>>37482075
I guess you know more than the American Dietetic association.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19562864
>>37484727
>There is no sound proof that eating meat had anything to do with it. Some of the smartest land animals today don't eat meat,
Well, butchery tools predate homo sapiens, farming is only about 10k years old, and how do you think humans managed to occupy the entire world? It isn't like we can hibernate.
I like how you through "land" in there, wouldn't want to look at dolphins.
>>37483117
The reason we need to supplement b12 is because modern water cleaning techniques kill the bacteria that produce b12 in the water. I would rather have clean water and take a b12 pill than dirty water. Btw your animals are supplemented b12.
>>37475034
Genesis 4
>2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.
>3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord.
>4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering:
>5 But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.
>>37484959
You can teach gorilla sign language, why would I compare such a smart species to a dumb one like dolphins. Comparing land mammals is the best comparison because that is what we are. Just because we found tools for butchering doesn't mean that eating meat is the exact reason we got the needed calories to evolve bigger brains. That is a very weak connection, the best guess is cooking like I said which allows more calorie absorption.
>>37475034
VG is a fucking autist for starters.
Here is a few reasons why being a omnivore with more focus on vegetarian oriented meals is a good thing.
>hormone balancing
Our body reacts to animal fat carbs in a much different way than it does to plant carbs.
Your entire b vitamin spectrum can be eaten in one meat portion, just one.
Something that takes quite a bit of vegetables to reproduce and/or doesn't produce the vitamins at all (other minerals/nutritional things are also easily gained from meat and not plants).
>your personal ecosystem
Let's be real, your body has an ecosystem in it made of thousands upon thousands of bacteria and your body regulates its ph and acidity perfectly for them to live in. Because we need these bacteria to eat food.
The more varied your diet, the more foods that these bacteria can thrive on and the more healthy bacteria that join the colonies or replace older/weaker bacteria.
Once again, a very small portion of various meats can achieve this.
>it's efficient
I don't have time to eat none stop, multiple vegetable meals, constantly throughout the day.
I have a life and goals.
Making meat sometimes an easy source for quick calories and protein.
>unreasonably expensive
vegan diets are faddish and unless you live in an area of the world where fresh, untainted produce grows naturally in your town in bountiful amounts. You'll be paying more for a healthy varied diet.
I can buy a cartoon of untainted chicken eggs for dirt cheap, per meal entire dollars cheaper than any vegetable meal.
A bag of broccoli wouldn't last me a day, a cartoon of these eggs will last me three. Both are the same price.
At the end of the day, I am supportive of people moving away from meat.
Not leaving it completely, 1st world countries eat too much meat, too much red meat if you really want to bring it into focus.
Fish should be your primary meat source, chicken is a safe second, and lean pork a nearby third.
>>37484842
I couldn't find anything on google about gorillas being observed eating meat.
I also couldn't find anything about humans eating 50+ percent of their calories from meat. Which do you think is easier to catch and eat, an animal that was bred to survive predictors, or a plant. And even if they did eat meat that does not justify doing it now.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19562864
The american dietetic association says that a vegan diet has health benefits and is suitable for every stage of human development.
>>37484883
It would be impossible to have enough grazing land to feed everyone meat.
>>37485028
Is that why you chose gorillas and not chimps?
And google "smartest non human animal" and the first hit is dolphin.
Explain how ancient man survived the European winter on a vegetarian diet.
>>37484896
not tampered with lightly? is that why the american dietetic association says a vegan diet is suitable for all stages of life and has health benefits?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19562864
>>37485113
I would like you to find me an animal smarter than koko the gorilla who can sign over 1000 words and understand over 2000 words.
Protip you can't
Stop using appeal to nature fallacies you look retarded.
The american dietetic association says that a vegan diet has health benefits and is suitable for every stage of human development.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19562864
>>37484929
The "American" Dietetic Association, who had to change their name to the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics because they don't have any governmental backing.
I don't think much of that review anyway. Every evidence I have seen is that plant foods are much less nutritionally dense than meat and seafood, by a huge degree. Sure, they say they're talking about a "well-planned" diet but how does a subjective term like that end up in a supposedly scientific recommendation?
All the signs are pointing to plant foods being inferior, so a review saying "it's ok, we calculated it and if you -plan well- you'll be alright!" doesn't reassure me of anything.
>>37485179
>animal smarter than koko the gorilla
The vast majority of meat eating humans
>Stop using appeal to nature fallacies
You are literally retarded. You brought up animal intelligence, you brought up ancient human survival. Your the fuckhead that listed a bunch of "vegan" animals that are smart while ignoring meat eating animals that are at least as intelligent.
And the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute promotes the DASH diet. Why should I give a fuck?
>>37484959
he said "some of the smartest land animals" so he excluded meat-eating chimpanzees and of the intelligent birds some of them eat meat anyway like the crow family.
>>37484968
>your animals are supplemented b12.
I eat wild game.
>>37485260
Plant foods being less nutritionally dense? You mean how animal foods on average have 64 times as less antioxidants than plant foods? When you cook meat it literally makes carcinogenic compounds. A whole foods plant based diet is the only diet clinically proven to reserve heart disease.
Keep being delusional you sheep.
>>37485310
Please reread what I wrote.
>>37485267
>DASH diet
The diet is simple: Eat more fruits, vegetables, and low-fat dairy foods. Cut back on foods that are high in saturated fat, cholesterol, and trans fats.
HMMMMM
>>37485316
>Nutritionally dense
>Antioxidants
Tell me about superfoods next.
>>37485028
it isn't only about calories, it's about high quality, rich food with a lot fat and a lot of nutrients specifically ones used by the brain and nervous system (ie. all the ones to supplement if you aren't eating red meat and seafood).
>>37485350
And to avoid nuts, seeds, legumes, fats, and sweets.
But as a vegan you can't help but be completely dishonest.
>>37485402
This is what came up on google you retard
>>37485445
So you are too fucking lazy to click on one of the links?
Then call me a retard. Fuck you need some dha, your brain function is slipping.
>>37485080
>Let's be real, your body has an ecosystem in it made of thousands upon thousands of bacteria and your body regulates its ph and acidity perfectly for them to live in. Because we need these bacteria to eat food.
>The more varied your diet, the more foods that these bacteria can thrive on and the more healthy bacteria that join the colonies or replace older/weaker bacteria.
so this is something using supplements would not replace?
>not eating red meat
I think you need to look at the micro-nutrient profiles of the various meats again, although the information you're reading might be incomplete (ie. it only includes essential nutrients).
>>37485402
>>37485382
>>37485355
>>37485316
>>37485310
>>37485288
>>37485267
MFW meat eating is linked to poor arterial health, and poor arterial health is linked to erectile dysfunction.
Have fun getting cheated on later in life because you can't get your dick up LOL, eating meat is so manly.
>>37485568
>This is what you sacrificed for.
>>37485598
Average meat eating woman
>>37485089
>I couldn't find anything on google about gorillas being observed eating meat.
I'm not able to find that either - although I found something saying monkey DNA was found in their feces which some thought suggested they eat meat although it seemed like there were many other explanations. I'll revise that to we at least don't know for sure whether they do.
>>37485089
>I also couldn't find anything about humans eating 50+ percent of their calories from meat.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/71/3/682.full
>Whenever and wherever it was ecologically possible, hunter-gatherers would have consumed high amounts (45–65% of total energy) of animal food. Most (73%) hunter-gatherer societies worldwide derived >50% (≥56–65%) of their subsistence from animal foods, whereas only 13.5% of these societies derived more than half (≥56–65%) of their subsistence from gathered plant foods.
>>37485560
>so this is something using supplements would not replace?
Yes and no, it's really not that simple as bacteria do evolve within the spanning of years. Synthesized supplementing has from a history standpoint only recently come into creation (less than 100 or so years old) not even the lifespan of one human has passed entirely, to see the effects of it.
Let alone a human who has lived an entire life eating nothing but these supplements. We have no idea of the negatives or positives that come with this.
Steroids for instance have existed since the 1930s, but I don't know of a human who has lived an entire life on them from early childhood. We just don't know the effects.
as for the meat comment.
red meat is nutritionally better, but red meat is also very hard on your digestive system and the reason why it's such a common cause for cancer is because we eat way too much.
Red meat was a delicacy for thousands of years, a meal that you rarely if ever ate.
You might slaughter a cow one season or a goat, and eat its meat, but it quickly went bad, so you usually would try to trade it off for less perishable goods.
Fish however is a single meal scenario, chickens roughly the same.
The leaner meats were the type that the average person could actually eat daily in a realistic scenario.
As a fisherman might bring back an entire villages worth of fish back from his trip at the river.
We just aren't designed to eat large portions of red meat none stop, that's my only argument.
We eat too much red meat, not that the meat itself is inherently better/worst than any other food.
>>37485105
even if we reduced consumption to a reasonable amount? I mean something like 500g a week of red meat.
>>37485674
And you won't need to worry bout children.
Darwin will take care of them for you.
>>37484682
Anti-consumerism is a shitty form of lifestyle politics that doesn't address any of the systemic issues of consumption in global production. You're fooling yourself if you think you're solving ANY problem.
>>37481619
Milking an animal and harvesting its eggs does require taking away a great deal of autonomy and freedom of movement from these animals. Your distinction between first and second order evils are just as arbitrary as your moralism in general.
I would unironically much prefer >>37485674 to >>37485598
I like that high-test, though.
>>37485745
>cause for cancer
is it actually causally linked or is this another correlative link which might be the result of other factors like:
>the health-conscious eat less red meat (thanks to it having an unhealthy reputation)
>people who eat a lot of fast food also eat a lot of red meat because red meat is a staple of fast food
>people with low variation in diet eat a lot of red meat
none of which has anything to do with red meat causing anything, the causative is of red meat and the increased illness together - whether it's:
>being less health-conscious
>eating a lot of fast food (high in sodium, which is the second highest of the diets tested for their risk factor in that study, while a diet high in red meat was on the list but much lower)
>having low variation in diet (which might hit any one of those "risky diets" like low in fruit, low in veg
because I'd expect high red meat consumption to correlate with eating a lot of fast food and having low nutritional variety overall (and I'm not so one-sided I think it isn't important to eat a wide variety of plant foods) I would expect it to be linked correlatively even if it was the safest food source of all.
>>37485745
>Red meat was a delicacy for thousands of years, a meal that you rarely if ever ate.
>We just aren't designed to eat large portions of red meat none stop, that's my only argument.
What about this article? http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/71/3/682.full
>Whenever and wherever it was ecologically possible, hunter-gatherers would have consumed high amounts (45–65% of total energy) of animal food. Most (73%) hunter-gatherer societies worldwide derived >50% (≥56–65%) of their subsistence from animal foods, whereas only 13.5% of these societies derived more than half (≥56–65%) of their subsistence from gathered plant foods.
I would expect of those 73% of societies eating >50% of their energy from animal foods a lot of them are eating high amounts of red meat.
If your argument is that the animals which provide red meat like deer aren't one-meal animals and they aren't easy to store then I'd say that neglects to take into account that humans live in large tribes under natural conditions where I think they'd easily share a deer carcass around everyone in one meal.
