# Are you, or is anyone you know vegan?



## Nesta (Jan 17, 2015)

I know 3 vegans, don't know their types. One is definitely a thinker, one a possible thinker and one a feeler type. My husband and I cook vegan at home but eat dairy and cheese when we are out sometimes. We are vegetarians. 

Looking at the 3 vegans we know, 2 are live and let live and are not very militant about sharing or forcing their views on other people. I mean we are aware that they do not partake in animal products but they are not pushy about it. It is a personal choice and they are ok and secure enough with it to not push it on other people. I love going out to eat with them because I know if they choose the restaurants, I will be able to eat there. 

The other vegan is militant in her views and quite vocal about sharing them with total strangers if need be. She has questioned why we won't be vegan and basically assumes that her way of eating and her lifestyle choices are the only correct way to be and should be embraced by everyone. I have caught her with incorrect information about what is not vegan (specific types of beer for example) but to be fair, she has been a vegan since the dawn of time so they could have changed their production to being vegan and she wasn't aware of it. 

Anyway, the point I am trying to make is that there are different ways to being vegan. There are different views in the vegan community about many things and what people will tolerate and what is unacceptable. For example, some are ok with having food cooked on a grill that is shared with meat. While they might view it as distasteful, they might think that it would do more harm to the cause to demand a meat free grill, realizing that if they are this picky, many restaurants might not offer meat free options because it is too hard to accommodate. Some vegans will only eat at places that offer no cross contamination. Some vegans are ok with keeping pets and some don't feel that keeping pets is vegan. There are a number of different views and places where people draw the line about being vegan. It is a very personal choice about what is defined as vegan, even in the vegan community.

I know reasonable vegans and vegans who seem less reasonable to me. The one who is more militant about it is intolerant about people's choices not related to foods and is the same way with most areas of her life.


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

@crazitaco
So everyone should just raise and kill the animals themselves now? That's even more stupid... That's all I'm saying. It's not fixing anything. It's not fixing the methane problem. It's not fixing the health problem. It's not fixing the knife problem. It's not fixing the resource and food scarcity problem (because flesh is created from plants, it's very inefficient and wasteful, not a logical way of nourishment for an intelligent species). Mass scale production for anything exists because it is way more efficient than just everyone creating all their own stuff. Imagine if everyone had to produce their own coca-cola, bananas, cars or iPads... You're just going backwards by farming your own meat. You only solve one problem, animal maltreatment (although you're still imprisoning and killing them...) while potentially creating new problems. You're going back to pre-industrial era instead of going towards post industrial technological era. Food can be solved easily technologically. All you need to do is just skip the animal kingdom (because it's too high up the food chain) and go to the lower food chain, mainly plants and micro-organisms. They're even working an lab cultured meat now. Why still slaughter when you can just create meat in a lab? There's too much hillbilly in your mind.

And please, stop using protein as an excuse for anything. Studies have shown the protein minimum to sustain an average human is just a measly 5% of your total calories. (although 10% recommended) Most plants got quite a bit more than that...


----------



## AshOrLey (May 28, 2016)

Dragunov said:


> Why are vegans able to drawn the line at plants? Are they not also life?


They are not sentient.



Dragunov said:


> But there is no other way to feed this many people.


World hunger is a complex problem. You may be right, or you may be wrong.



Dragunov said:


> Plant protein is scarce and the bio availability is low, not to mention mineral and vitamin deficiencies that have to be supplemented for much more so than with other diets


Vitamin D, b12 (and possibly iodine.) Many who aren't veg usually don't get enough of these vitamins to begin with. Especially magnesium. Many who go primal, for example, who end up drinking lots of raw milk, are forced to supplement with magnesium. Not saying raw milk isn't healthy. Objectively, who knows, but compared to pasteurized, I do know it's loaded to the brim with amazing nutrients. May also do wonders for your teeth.

Choline is debatable though. Same with omega 3s.

I think you're right about protein. Vegans should be careful to make sure they get enough.



Dragunov said:


> and where do you get fat from on a vegan diet?


Avocados and nuts have loads of fat

(I'm no nutritionist, take what I saw with a grain of dericious salt)


----------



## Lakigigar (Jan 4, 2016)

I don't know vegans. I feel like veganism is kinda rare in Belgium, some people are vegetarian, but it's like going against the current when you try to promote vegetarianism or even flexitarianism.


----------



## Dragunov (Oct 2, 2013)

AshOrLey said:


> They are not sentient.


Plants are by definition sentient. They can perceive and feel.

I agree the average diet isn't any better when it comes to vitamins.


----------



## AshOrLey (May 28, 2016)

Dragunov said:


> Plants are by definition sentient. They can perceive and feel.
> 
> I agree the average diet isn't any better when it comes to vitamins.


They can't feel pain, basically


----------



## crazitaco (Apr 9, 2010)

Zidane said:


> @*crazitaco*
> So everyone should just raise and kill the animals themselves now? That's even more stupid... That's all I'm saying. It's not fixing anything. It's not fixing the methane problem. It's not fixing the health problem. It's not fixing the knife problem. It's not fixing the resource and food scarcity problem (because flesh is created from plants, it's very inefficient and wasteful, not a logical way of nourishment for an intelligent technological species). Mass scale production for anything exists because it is way more efficient than just everyone creating all their own stuff. Imagine if everyone had to produce their own coca-cola, bananas, cars or iPads... You're just going backwards by farming your own meat. You only solve one problem, animal maltreatment (although you're still imprisoning and killing them...) while potentially creating new problems. You're going back to pre-industrial era instead of going towards post industrial technological era. Food can be solved easily technologically. All you need to do is just skip the animal kingdom (because it's too high up the food chain) and go to the lower food chain, mainly plants and micro-organisms. They're even working an lab cultured meat now. Why still slaughter when you can just create meat in a lab? There's too much hillbilly in your mind.
> 
> And please, stop using protein as an excuse for anything. Do you really want me to go list you a bunch of studies that debunk your silly nonsense? Protein is a dogma based on outdated myths that the masses have picked up on... Studies have shown you don't need more than 5% of your calories from protein to sustain average muscle. Most plants got quite a bit more than that...


LMFAO
So here's a rough summary of our conversation:
you: "Industrial farming is bad! you're bad because you don't do the dirty work yourself!"
also you: "how dare you say you'd do the dirty work yourself! You weren't supposed to agree with me! Industry is so efficient!"
also you: "protein/vitamin b12 is a myth"

Please, spare me the vegan propaganda. I've seen more than enough, I've argued with enough vegans in my days. You're barking up the wrong tree. You think I care about global warming? Suffering? About scarcity? Yes, I do a little, but I've also come to accept that so long as people and animals exist it is futile, you can't win against entropy. Especially global warming, we passed the "point of no return" in 2016. Get with the times. This is the result of human progress, a world unbalanced with the natural order. We fix one thing with science, and it breaks two more things. The only thing worth doing at this point is ending your own genetic line so that your children and their children won't end up starving on an unbalanced, resource depleted planet, or contributing to the deaths of animals that you care so much about.

Animals would be luckier to go extinct by the doing of an experienced hunter who will give them an immediate death, rather than having their balls eaten off by a lioness after they've made little wildebeests who will also get their balls eaten off by a lioness after they've made little wildebeests until there's nowhere to live and starve to death because vegans are encroaching on the their habitat because of all the human development and efficiency leading to a human population explosion.

And here's what I think my "hillbilly" ass needs to start doing, everytime a vegan calls me a name such as hillbilly I think I'll eat some veal. h: That's one already, please continue to call me names, I may even upgrade to something like buffalo wings, where they are so tiny that in order to be full I have to eat like 4 little chickens at once. h:


----------



## Dragunov (Oct 2, 2013)

AshOrLey said:


> They can't feel pain, basically


Plants know when they are being eaten and can release distress signals via gasses. Its not nervous system pain but its an involuntary response to a negative experience.


----------



## Cal (Sep 29, 2017)

AshOrLey said:


> They can't feel pain, basically


They actually can:


> According to researchers at the Institute for Applied Physics at the University of Bonn in Germany, [HIGHLIGHT]plants release gases that are the equivalent of crying out in pain[/HIGHLIGHT]. Using a laser-powered microphone, researchers have picked up sound waves produced by plants releasing gases when cut or injured. Although not audible to the human ear, the secret voices of plants have revealed that cucumbers scream when they are sick, and flowers whine when their leaves are cut [source: Deutsche Welle].
> 
> There's also evidence that plants can hear themselves being eaten. Researchers at the University of Missouri-Columbia found that plants understand and respond to chewing sounds made by caterpillars that are dining on them. As soon as the plants hear the noises, they respond with several defense mechanisms [source: Feinberg].


----------



## AshOrLey (May 28, 2016)

Dragunov said:


> Plants know when they are being eaten and can release distress signals via gasses. Its not nervous system pain but its an involuntary response to a negative experience.


That doesn't imply suffering. That is not pain. They do not have a nervous system, or a brain.

Since we experience pain, it bothers some people to inflict this pain (that we can relate with) upon other beings.


----------



## Cal (Sep 29, 2017)

AshOrLey said:


> That doesn't imply suffering. That is not pain. They do not have a nervous system, or a brain.
> 
> Since we experience pain, it bothers some people to inflict this pain (that we can relate with) upon other beings.


So your ignoring actually studies, due to your own morals and beliefs?


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

Lakigigar said:


> I don't know vegans. I feel like veganism is kinda rare in Belgium, some people are vegetarian, but it's like going against the current when you try to promote vegetarianism or even flexitarianism.


Yeah, well that's how change goes. If no one goes against the current, then everything would remain static for eternity...


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

Cal said:


> So your ignoring actually studies, due to your own morals and beliefs?


I am vegan because I care for plants. Meat eaters kill more plants than plant eaters, because to make meat, you need to feed animals shitloads of plants. The carnivores rely on the herbivores, and they rely on the plants... And it takes quite a number of herbivores to sustain one carnivore (one carnivore requires 10 times more plants than a herbivore roughly speaking), so the carnivores are more resource intensive, hence why all the environmentalists are telling us to stop eat meat... The carnivore's purpose is to keep herbivore population in check, but we are doing the opposite. We are mass breeding herbivores artifically, increasing their population instead of reducing it... 
So let's just put it this way, the entire animal kingdom relies on the plant kingdom, so why not just go directly to the source and stop beating around the bush? Just because you want to think you're a badass lion, doesn't mean that's the case. And I always tell people who are so obsessed with being king of the jungle, that if actual lions were to become the most intelligent species on Earth, they would also eventually find a way to stop eating animals. It is just the most sensible thing to do to ensure your long term survival... There is no reason why humanoid talking lions should go and bite random stuff like their ancestors did. There is no reason why we should keep sacrificing animals just because our ancestors did so...


----------



## GuvnorsGirl (May 19, 2018)

Zidane said:


> Another -1 for humanity when people chosing taste over lives. Just imagine if we had upper class people eating lower class people. I bet you would be angry too!


There are no such people as upper class people or lower class people. We are all equal. I am just as good as everyone else and so are you. NOBODY is socially superior to me.

To answer the question, I am vegan.


----------



## Panorama (Jul 19, 2017)

Plants don't have a nervous system or brain.


----------



## SirCanSir (Mar 21, 2018)

If we take out the survival in the longterm all the last arguments are stupid. You are actually arguing about plants feeling pain just to keep arguing. 

When a point is dead just let it die. 
Everyone does what he wants and most people understand the consequences.


----------



## AshOrLey (May 28, 2016)

Cal said:


> They actually can:





Cal said:


> So your ignoring actually studies, due to your own morals and beliefs?


...Wat? Plants do not feel pain. Brain = nervous system. Nervous system = brain. Brain + nervous system = pain. 

Plants /=/ brain + nervous system. Plants /=/ pain. 

That has nothing to do with my own morals and beliefs. I don't even remember referring to them. Yet. I was about to, though.

All you posted was an over-sensationalized article that cited a random 18 year old German article which said the opposite of what you wrote:

"Though Scientists using the acoustic-ethylene method have not succeeded in proving that plants have feelings - which may come as a disappointment to plant-lovers - the chemical voices of flora allows them to distinguish between healthy and sick plants."

Bruh.


----------



## Cal (Sep 29, 2017)

AshOrLey said:


> ...Wat? Plants do not feel pain. Brain = nervous system. Nervous system = brain. Brain + nervous system = pain.
> 
> Plants /=/ brain + nervous system. Plants /=/ pain.
> 
> ...


plants are able to feel pain, though not in the exact same way as humans. Also, the statement that you wrote down does not imply the opposite. What you have copied and pasted was in reference to feelings, not pain. Another study, involving human anesthetic, found that plants may be able to feel pain too.


----------



## AshOrLey (May 28, 2016)

Cal said:


> plants are able to feel pain, though not in the exact same way as humans. Also, the statement that you wrote down does not imply the opposite. What you have copied and pasted was in reference to feelings, not pain. Another study, involving human anesthetic, found that plants may be able to feel pain too.


"Pain" and, "feelings" defined according to what a being experiences involving the brain and CNS, is not experienced by plants. It is by animals. 

It is not possible for gasses emitted by plants to be equivalent to "crying out in pain." That is over-sensationalized. Because the latter is using the context involving a brain and CNS, while the former has neither.


----------



## Snowflake Minuet (Feb 20, 2016)

I am a vegetarian (have been for ten years) and know a number of vegans. I would be a vegan too if I weren't afraid of losing too much weight in my case, though I'm alright with being vegetarian since I am very careful about getting dairy from good sources.

All of my friends who either are or were vegan say that they felt much better on that diet. 

Contrary to what has been said earlier in this thread, I think it is only rational given our planet's and animals' conditions now that the only good reason not to be a vegan/vegetarian is health (if for some reason you really need to eat meat).


----------



## SomeOtherName (Apr 17, 2018)

I can see veganism as a nice lifestyle when done correctly. I would never be able to myself, because I am borderline carnivorous and carbivorous, but I don't have a problem with veganism. That is, given said vegan;

1. Doesn't try to force veganism upon me. I know what I like and I will stick to it, thanks. You don't see me trying to make you eat meat, so stop trying to push me into your lifestyle. You mind your business, I'll mind mine.

2. They don't practice raw veganism while pregnant. I have heard of numerous women miscarrying because they were not providing their unborn child with the nutrients it needed. I'm not 100% sure how common this is, but I have also heard of many cases where women have their very young children (we're talking under a year old) on very strict vegan diets... that upsets me. A lot.

3. They don't do stupid things like put their dogs on vegan diets.
Dogs come from wolves. Wolves are carnivores. You cannot feed an animal that evolved from a carnivorous species a vegan diet. I do strongly believe that is a form of animal abuse. I once heard a story about a guy who kept his dog on a vegan diet. The dog died. He was distraught. What did you expect, buddy??

But yeah. All in all, yay veganism to those who can stick to it and not shove it down the throats of others (if it gets brought up in a conversation, fine. If it is a mutual discussion, ok. But please don't bring it up nonstop without reason.).

One last thing; I once read a quote, "Becoming vegan is a missed steak." I agree.


----------



## TeamPB (Aug 10, 2017)

>feminist
>fatty
>vegan
>certainly antiracist/antifascist as well
Yea, I know a vegan girl.


----------



## soop (Aug 6, 2016)

I know a couple of them. Ironically they are not preachy and chill af. The same cant be said of vegans on the net though. As a competitive wieght class strength athlete its not feasible for me. My diet is already extremely restricted as it is.


----------



## Panorama (Jul 19, 2017)

He said: "The most powerful animals are herbivores. The gorillas, buffalos, elephants, and now me.

"I just found myself thinking that if I would have to kill the animals I ate with my own hands I couldn't because I was to compassionate.

"I felt that I was fooling myself eating meat considering my inability to kill an animal so I just thought I'd better be honest to myself and stop eating meat."

Baboumian, who is also the face of animal rights organisation PETA, says thanks to his diet he has never been stronger.



















Others include tennis sister Venus and Serena Wiliams, who follow raw vegan diets during their seasons, and surfing champ Tia Blanco.


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

SomeOtherName said:


> 3. They don't do stupid things like put their dogs on vegan diets.
> Dogs come from wolves. Wolves are carnivores. You cannot feed an animal that evolved from a carnivorous species a vegan diet. I do strongly believe that is a form of animal abuse. I once heard a story about a guy who kept his dog on a vegan diet. The dog died. He was distraught. What did you expect, buddy??


Oh great, an anecdotal story. I can list you a whole bunch of stories where traditional diets have killed people and pets too...
Now, let's take the intellect +10 talent and let's see what's really going on here by virtue of science:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5035952/

"As evidence accumulates about the links between degenerative health conditions, farm animal welfare problems, environmental degradation, climate change, and causative factors—such as animal farming and the consumption of animal products—consumer concerns about the adverse impacts of traditional meat-based diets are likely to increase. Accordingly, interest in alternative diets—including vegetarian diets—is likely to grow. It is entirely possible for companion animals to survive, and indeed thrive, on vegetarian diets. However, these must be nutritionally complete and reasonably balanced, and owners should regularly monitor urinary acidity and should correct for urinary alkalinisation through appropriate dietary additives, if it occurs.

Those interested in vegetarian companion animal diets should be aware of concerns about the nutritional adequacy of some such diets demonstrated by a number of studies over a significant number of years. However, to ensure a balanced view, they should also be aware that similar concerns exist about commercial meat-based diets."

Fuel is fuel and nutrients are nutrients. It doesn't matter where it comes from. Herbivores eat plants because their teeth suck at tearing apart animals and swallowing them, but if you cut a nice steak into little pieces and put it on a BBQ they sure love them some nice meat too...
Same applies to carnivores, you can feed them plants if you proces it in such a way that it's comfortable for them to devour. Generally, the rule however is that plants are safer to eat because they aren't as contaminated but if you feed plants to an omnivore or even a carnivore you need to make sure to include possible missing nutrients... Whenever you hear one of these anecdotal horror story, you can rest assured they were complete fucking morons. Anything is possible. For an ENTP you sure aren't thinking too much outside the box... 

So in the wild, yes, carnivores have to kill to survive, but not necessarily when a human takes care of it. Because we humans, we can do crazy magic stuff, aka science. So these appeal to nature's are silly, because we keep on transcending nature over and over again. (Nature says you have to walk, we say, drive a car...) If nature says, oh, you are a carnivore and you need to put your teeth into a dirty pig, I say fuck that, I just look at what's in the meat that I might need and get that from somewhere else... I don't have to kill to survive in the land of computers and airplanes... The circle of life you say? Nono, I say, the circle of death and we should stop worshipping death because we get pleasure from it... Dick in vagina, that's what I call the circle of life, not knife in throat.

So let's just stop beating around the bush and just say what it comes down to. You're all snowflakes who have been shielded your entire lives from where your food comes from. You have absolutely no clue. As soon as you wake up from fairy land that you mistake as reality, you simply stop eating meat. Doesn't matter what personality type you are, unless you're a psychopath, you simply stop... That's what happens when you take the red pill. That's what happens when you visit a slaughterhouse. A slaughterhouse is a REAL LIFE HORROR MOVIE! Horror movies should not be reality in 2018, just entertainment... I don't know how else to put it anymore. THIS IS NOT A FUCKING JOKE! THIS IS SERIOUS BUSINESS, BLOOD AND GUTS! (which a bunch of lunatics are getting rich from because the masses are fucking retarded as shit and can't see anything more besides the tasty end product on their dinner plates!)


----------



## crazitaco (Apr 9, 2010)

Zidane said:


> Oh great, an anecdotal story.


Want some real stories involving human babies?
https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/wjqbem/judge-convicts-parents-after-baby-dies-from-vegan-diet

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa...fed-vegan-diet-hospitalized-for-malnutrition/


----------



## PiT (May 6, 2017)

When I was in college I knew a bunch. Now that I have left that world behind I no longer do. I find it amazing sometimes how much college forms a relatively contained subculture, even though so many people pass through it.


----------



## SirCanSir (Mar 21, 2018)

Zidane said:


> Oh great, an anecdotal story.


You are still going on about that? I never expected you to fight so much for vegan justice.
Eat a steak, that anger might go away.


----------



## contradictionary (Apr 1, 2018)

Panorama said:


> He said: "The most powerful animals are herbivores. The gorillas, buffalos, elephants, and now me.


I am not against veganism. Choices are free and respected. I also have nothing to say about other herbivore mamals. 

Just one note on gorilla and most advanced primates, they are not strictly vegan but rather opportunistic carnivores too. Shall there be meats or eggs within their reach they will eat them since they have urge on those proteins too. Heck even some of them primates went as far as being cannibals where they will eat their rival kin after winning 'tribal war'. Bizarre truth.

That's all i have to say on the primates matter. Please proceed with the rest.

Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## contradictionary (Apr 1, 2018)

Zidane said:


> Fuel is fuel and nutrients are nutrients. It doesn't matter where it comes from. Herbivores eat plants because their teeth suck at tearing apart animals and swallowing them, but if you cut a nice steak into little pieces and put it on a BBQ they sure love them some nice meat too...
> Same applies to carnivores, you can feed them plants if you proces it in such a way that it's comfortable for them to devour. Generally, the rule however is that plants are safer to eat because they aren't as contaminated but if you feed plants to an omnivore or even a carnivore you need to make sure to include possible missing nutrients... Whenever you hear one of these anecdotal horror story, you can rest assured they were complete fucking morons. Anything is possible. For an ENTP you sure aren't thinking too much outside the box...
> 
> So in the wild, yes, carnivores have to kill to survive, but not necessarily when a human takes care of it. Because we humans, we can do crazy magic stuff, aka science. So these appeal to nature's are silly, because we keep on transcending nature over and over again. (Nature says you have to walk, we say, drive a car...) If nature says, oh, you are a carnivore and you need to put your teeth into a dirty pig, I say fuck that, I just look at what's in the meat that I might need and get that from somewhere else... I don't have to kill to survive in the land of computers and airplanes...


But science is yet to be able to modify our jaws, teeths, larinxs, stomach, ilium, colon, pancreas, liver forms and also functions. Science explain that we are indeed equipped also to digest meat, no amount of moral arguments can change that.

But don't you worry since science also told us we can indeed *evolve*. So, let mother nature run her things 'to select' the most advantageous traits for future human kind. You may try but you can't decide, mother nature had the utmost privilege. 

It's all science on progress, maybe some day we may evolve to have ruminant multi compartment stomachs like cow. Who knows?

I can see it quite beneficial, imagine you can have all the day meal one time on breakfast and slowly redigest everything during the day while working. Could be time efficient, i love efficiency.

Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## Clyme (Jul 17, 2014)

I'm a vegan for ethical reasons.


----------



## crazitaco (Apr 9, 2010)

contradictionary said:


> I am not against veganism. Choices are free and respected. I also have nothing to say about other herbivore mamals.
> 
> Just one note on gorilla and most advanced primates, they are not strictly vegan but rather opportunistic carnivores too. Shall there be meats or eggs within their reach they will eat them since they have urge on those proteins too. Heck even some of them primates went as far as being cannibals where they will eat their rival kin after winning 'tribal war'. Bizarre truth.
> 
> ...


Chimpanzees in particular are not even opportunistic meat eaters, they are active hunters that have been documented to almost entirely wipe out local populations of monkies. Their hunting habits coincide with their mating season, and studies show that when the females have access to meat during that season there is a higher chance of their offspring surviving. The hunting is also a social display.


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

crazitaco said:


> Want some real stories involving human babies?
> https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/wjqbem/judge-convicts-parents-after-baby-dies-from-vegan-diet
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa...fed-vegan-diet-hospitalized-for-malnutrition/


Oh look, as expected your stories involve imbecilic parents who didn't even give their child soy FORMULA (that is properly supplemented with nutrients like B12), but just nutrient deficient wheat and oat milk. Even normal milk is not sufficient for infants. It needs to be formula! This is not the proper to raise vegan children. This is simply child neglect and irresponsibility.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11424546

"Appropriately planned vegan diets can satisfy nutrient needs of infants. The American Dietetic Association and The American Academy of Pediatrics state that vegan diets can promote normal infant growth. It is important for parents to provide appropriate foods for vegan infants, using guidelines like those in this article. Key considerations when working with vegan families include composition of breast milk from vegan women, appropriate breast milk substitutes, supplements, type and amount of dietary fat, and solid food introduction. Growth of vegan infants appears adequate with post-weaning growth related to dietary adequacy. Breast milk composition is similar to that of non-vegetarians except for fat composition. For the first 4 to 6 months, breast milk should be the sole food with soy-based infant formula as an alternative. Commercial soymilk should not be the primary beverage until after age 1 year. Breastfed vegan infants may need supplements of vitamin B-12 if maternal diet is inadequate; older infants may need zinc supplements and reliable sources of iron and vitamins D and B-12. Timing of solid food introduction is similar to that recommended for non-vegetarians. Tofu, dried beans, and meat analogs are introduced as protein sources around 7-8 months. Vegan diets can be planned to be nutritionally adequate and support growth for infants."

Just stop it. Accept you have lost the argument because I will keep on destroying you or any other defender of religious animal sacrifice over and over again with relative ease... (because I actually have science on my side)

And you're also distorting the facts about chimps. Their diet is more than 95% plant-based. They eat meat because they CAN and probably think meat tastes good (like you), not because they have to. Chimps are quite intelligent you know, but ofcourse not intelligent enough to understand that too much meat will end up clogging their arteries...

But it doesn't even matter in the slightest what our closest cousins eat. What matters is what you eat. We should not be doing what chimps are doing, do you not agree? We should not be doing what lions are doing, aka killing little lions so they can mate with the females... Animals are simply retarded as fuck, and their behaviour or food choice should not be any sort of "guideline" for us. Instead, we are the parent, we are the most succesful species on Earth, so if anything, we should be setting the guidelines. I already said to please stop with the appeal to nature fallacies, and yet, you carnists keep bringing this up over and over again. Probably because you have no real argument. Btw, NATURE SUCKS! (in case you haven't realized this yet)

However, if you are interested in what your actual ancestors were, it was not "hunter-gatherer", nono, it was "gatherer-hunter". http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...suggests-ate-fruit-wheat-barley-not-fish.html
And future humans will be entirely gatherer. There will be no more hunting going on, and boohoo to whoever likes to shoot or suffocate or stab stuff. I don't give a shit about an asshole's worthless opinions. And also boohoo to all the hedonists who like their delicacies, I don't give a shit about your worthless opinion either... Just go to rehab you addicted loser.


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

contradictionary said:


> But science is yet to be able to modify our jaws, teeths, larinxs, stomach, ilium, colon, pancreas, liver forms and also functions. Science explain that we are indeed equipped to digest meat, no amount of moral arguments can change that.
> 
> But don't you worry since science also told us we can indeed *evolve*. So, let mother nature run her things 'to select' the most advantageous traits for future human kind. You may try but you can't decide, mother nature had the utmost privilege.
> 
> ...


Your argument makes no sense. I'm using science to show that we can indeed thrive on fully plant-based diets, as almost all population studies show. It doesn't matter whether we can digest meat or not. I mean, obviously we can else we would not be getting fat from it... So if you are going to act like science says we need to eat meat to thrive (because we can digest meat? yeah well, we can also digest plants and fungi...), you are fucking retarded and you probably haven't even bothered to scan PubMed... I despise you pseudoscientist know-it-alls... 

So until you list me a study that shows vegetarians are dying sooner than meat eaters I will kindly disregard anything you say... I'm not going to engage with you in stupid herbivore vs omnivore dead end roads, all of that is clearly irrelevant. I don't deny we're an omnivore, that is great, that means we have a choice! But you somehow see that as not a choice but as a necessity for animal torture? Um, I think you confuse omnivore with CARNIVORE... We are clearly not a carnivore, lmao


----------



## contradictionary (Apr 1, 2018)

Duh. Why going ballistic?

Read again.I am not making moral/ethical statement at all, or saying this is right, that is wrong. Nope. 

I was saying we are what we are, right now, physiologically and genetically able to digest both plants and meats. 

But we may still change through evolution though. Maybe our future generation could 'adapt' (morphologically and functionalwise) to more plant diets and minimum meats (or even zero meats if they are so insist). But that simply hadn't happened yet.


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

contradictionary said:


> But we may still change through evolution though. Maybe our future generation could 'adapt' (morphologically and functionalwise) to more plant diets and minimum meats (or even zero meats if they are so insist). But that simply hadn't happened yet.


Yeah, my point is we already have adapted to that and you are denying that.


----------



## contradictionary (Apr 1, 2018)

Zidane said:


> Yeah, my point is we already have adapted to that and you are denying that.


Have adapted to? able to digest both since almost forever?

Humanity had survived through many severe famines over thousands of years when at those dire times they could not really have diets on conscientious ethical choice. In that sense, our digestive system 'flexibility' is one crucial key for our survival. We owe our lives to it. Don't ever deny that.

But anything is possible in the future. Just keep your hope high, maybe we are in the progress to that? :tongue:


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

contradictionary said:


> Have adapted to? able to digest both since almost forever?
> 
> Humanity had survived through many severe famines over thousands of years when at those dire times they could not really have diets on conscientious ethical choice. In that sense, our digestive system 'flexibility' is one crucial key for our survival. We owe our lives to it. Don't ever deny that.
> 
> But anything is possible in the future. Just keep your hope high, maybe we are in the progress to that? :tongue:


We have adapted to thriving on a fully plant based diet. Obviously, else vegetarians would be dying sooner than meat eaters. On the contrary, meat eaters got a whole bunch more problems on average. (I can eat most of my plants raw without much problems but imagine eating your meat raw that carnivores do, who don't give a shit about the parasites because their intestines are sterile and stomachs are more acidic, it almost seems like we have adapted to FIRE, not meat... Meat becomes possible for a mainly herbivorous creature to eat after it discovers FIRE. But does possible mean optimal? Ofcourse not. On top of that, it has been show that carnivores' metabolic system mimicks that of the diabetes pathology in humans. So why is not pathological for carnivores? BECAUSE THEY DONT EAT SUGAR. Humans become diabetic when they eat like a carnivore. It was never sugar that caused it. It was fat. Eating too much animal products confuses your metabolic system as it is trying to adapt to foods that it wasn't "evolved" to digest, as you put it... Sugar then becomes dangerous as carnivores rely more on the opposite hormone of insulin, glucagon. Their bodies never have to worry about high blood sugar so there is no reason to have a strong insulin regulating system. Whatever the body doesn't need, it discards for efficiency... The problem is, when humans stop eating plants, they get deficiencies because we for example can't create our own vitamin C. Oh, and did I forgot to mention heart disease?) 
So don't act like you know anything about evolution, because you don't. You even neglect the data that shows the longest succesful civilization on Earth (the ancient Egyptians) were predominantly vegetarian. Is that not part of our evolution? On top of that, all of our closest living relatives are predominantly plant eaters. And don't give me that shit that it's precisely our increased meat consumption that evolved our brains more than the rest of the primates, because that has been debunked...

(Oh I forgot to see that you talked about survival too. Any scavengers here? Anyone living in the forest here? HELLO STARVING CAVEMEN, COME ON OUT! You don't have to be ashamed if you hunt because you can't find any nuts for whatever reason. It's OK, I accept that...)


----------



## contradictionary (Apr 1, 2018)

Zidane said:


> We have adapted to thriving on a fully plant based diet. Obviously, else vegetarians would be dying sooner than meat eaters. On the contrary, meat eaters got a whole bunch more problems on average. So don't act like you know anything about evolution, because you don't. You even neglect the data that shows the longest succesful civilization on Earth (the ancient Egyptians) were predominantly vegetarian. Is that not part of our evolution? And why do you think you are so adapted to flesh eating if you're getting clogged arteries from it that STOP YOUR HEART! (In fact, it almost sounds like karma. Got a closed heart? Lack of empathy -> I eat meat because it tastes good, fuck the animals -> oops, my heart seems to be dying!)


Still hotheaded, eh. Only once all non vegetarian human had become extinct then you can claim your ultimate truth, noone will argue with you anymore by that time. But for now it's not happening so your arguments are mere wishful thinkings. You believe then you make right. 

Wait, that sounds very much like... religion :tongue:

Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## Panorama (Jul 19, 2017)

contradictionary said:


> Maybe our future generation could 'adapt' (morphologically and functionalwise) to more plant diets and minimum meats (or even zero meats if they are so insist). But that simply hadn't happened yet.


How about India? There are 1 million vegans in the US and nearly 8 million vegetarians. Wow, 8 million, careful, soon their vote will be enough and maybe they will shut down your slaughter houses..


----------



## contradictionary (Apr 1, 2018)

Panorama said:


> How about India? There are 1 million vegans in the US and nearly 8 million vegetarians. Wow, 8 million, careful, soon their vote will be enough and maybe they will shut down your slaughter houses..


Has they lose their canines? Has their pancreas and liver stop excreting enzymes when stimulated with meat input? And so on, and so on.

Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## Panorama (Jul 19, 2017)

contradictionary said:


> Has they lose their canines? Has their pancreas and liver stop excreting enzymes when stimulated with meat input? And so on, and so on.


Oh, the dreaded canine argument.. I'm completely at a loss.. flawless victory!


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

Panorama said:


> Oh, the dreaded canine argument.. I'm completely at a loss.. flawless victory!


:laughing:






(No seriously, the gorilla is a pure herbivore and his canines are way bigger than ours...)


----------



## contradictionary (Apr 1, 2018)

I've stated my position enough in this touchy subject. So please go just go on, roger and out. h:

Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

contradictionary said:


> I've stated my position enough in this touchy subject. So please go just go on, roger and out. h:
> 
> Sent using Tapatalk


Your position being what? We need meat for health? If that's your position, well then, you've just exposed yourself as a fool. If that's how you want to escape the discussion, I'm fine with that. Bye bye.


----------



## Cal (Sep 29, 2017)

SirCanSir said:


> You are still going on about that? I never expected you to fight so much for vegan justice.
> Eat a steak, that anger might go away.


Swedish meatballs and gravy are better at calming down people's anger. That with a side of milk!:wink:


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

SirCanSir said:


> You are still going on about that? I never expected you to fight so much for vegan justice.
> Eat a steak, that anger might go away.


I am not a nihilist.


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

Well, you mother fuckers with your smug laughs asked for it. Here is your swedish meatballs:






Does that seem funny to you?


----------



## Mick Travis (Aug 18, 2016)

contradictionary said:


> Still hotheaded, eh.


We vegetarians do get uncharacteristically animated over murder.


----------



## Mick Travis (Aug 18, 2016)

Zidane said:


> Well, you mother fuckers with your smug laughs asked for it. Here is your swedish meatballs:


I can never get meat eaters to sit through slaughter videos.






That's a live buffalo.


----------



## Sybow (Feb 1, 2016)

ISTP

Love meat.


----------



## Sybow (Feb 1, 2016)

> I can never get meat eaters to sit through slaughter videos.


Sounds like a challange. Nonetheless, I don't like animals being hurt for food, as I like their death to be as humane as possible.

Unfortunately, this doesn't happen everywhere.


----------



## mangodelic psycho (Jan 12, 2015)

Im not a vegan and I don't know any vegans. 

I think it's much more urgent and realistic for people to become more conscious and knowledgeable about where their food, meat included, comes from in general. I see people going to the supermarket and buying slabs of meat that they don't know where it came from, or bying shiny red tomatoes that are anything but healthy. Animals and crops are fed more shit, antibiotics, pesticides than you can imagine, that are proven to cause mutations, cancer ect.
All this is a lot more important than meat vs no meat.


----------



## Sybow (Feb 1, 2016)

mangodelic psycho said:


> Im not a vegan and I don't know any vegans.
> 
> I think it's much more urgent and realistic for people to become more conscious and knowledgeable about where their food, meat included, comes from in general. I see people going to the supermarket and buying slabs of meat that they don't know where it came from, or bying shiny red tomatoes that are anything but healthy. Animals and crops are fed more shit, antibiotics, pesticides than you can imagine, that are proven to cause mutations, cancer ect.
> All this is a lot more important than meat vs no meat.


These days in our supermarket, there is a special label which goes from 0 to 3 stars or w/e, showing you how good the animals were treated. (However, this can probably still be bypassed with ease)


----------



## Mick Travis (Aug 18, 2016)

Sybow said:


> I like their death to be as humane as possible.


Confused much?


----------



## crazitaco (Apr 9, 2010)

Mick Travis said:


> I can never get meat eaters to sit through slaughter videos.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've watched a ton of slaughter videos, honestly. Still a meat-eater though. I find it amazing how quick a bolt to the brain can be.


----------



## Sybow (Feb 1, 2016)

Mick Travis said:


> Confused much?


Well yes, this does make me confused. Is it my word choice that makes you reply this?


----------



## Mick Travis (Aug 18, 2016)

mangodelic psycho said:


> bying shiny red tomatoes that are anything but healthy.


They don't even taste like tomatoes.


----------



## Mick Travis (Aug 18, 2016)

Sybow said:


> Well yes, this does make me confused. Is it my word choice that makes you reply this?


Murderers are in no way humane.


----------



## Sybow (Feb 1, 2016)

Mick Travis said:


> Murderers are in no way humane.


Then nobody is. We all murder wether its plants, animals or humans.


----------



## Mick Travis (Aug 18, 2016)

Sybow said:


> Then nobody is. We all murder wether is plants, animals or humans.


You are being disingenuous in an attempt to rationalize your behavior. 

I forgive meat eaters every day. I live with 2 of em.


----------



## Sybow (Feb 1, 2016)

Mick Travis said:


> You are being disingenuous in an attempt to rationalize your behavior.
> 
> I forgive meat eaters every day. I live with 2 of em.


I don't think its disingenuous. I think its hypocritical to say you don't eat meat because of murder, yet eat plants that live aswell.


----------



## Mick Travis (Aug 18, 2016)

Sybow said:


> I don't think its disingenuous. I think its hypocritical to say you don't eat meat because of murder, yet eat plants that live aswell.


I heard ya the 1st time.


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

Sybow said:


> I don't think its disingenuous. I think its hypocritical to say you don't eat meat because of murder, yet eat plants that live aswell.


There is different degrees of "murder". Stepping over a worm is definately not the same as suffocating a fish which is also not the same as stabbing a mammal with a relatively big brain which is also not the same as shooting a human. So Mick is definately right, in that you're just looking for excuse to rationalize your behaviour. It's actually insulting to the animals you're eating to equate their life with that of a plant...


----------



## Sybow (Feb 1, 2016)

Zidane said:


> There is different degrees of "murder". Stepping over a worm is definately not the same as suffocating a fish which is also not the same as stabbing a mammal with a relatively big brain which is also not the same as shooting a human. So Mick is definately right, in that you're just looking for excuse to rationalize your behaviour. It's actually insulting to the animals you're eating to equate their life with that of a plant...


I never said that stabbing an animal was anywhere near what I meant. All I said was that if we kill animals as food, we should do it as humane as possible.


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

Sybow said:


> I never said that stabbing an animal was anywhere near what I meant. All I said was that if we kill animals as food, we should do it as humane as possible.


Yeah, I'm not arguing with that. That's why I don't eat meat. I don't see anywhere where animals are being taken of their life humanely. This is supposedly the most humane method (since putting them to sleep like we do with our companions is obviously too costly):





Cmon, how hard is it to atleast try veganism? You might end up loving it. Look at the market trends. 600% increase in the last 3 years. If this trend continues (which it surely will), the market will be blooming with all kinds of tasty meat substitutes (which there already are quite alot of it). It will no longer feel like deprivation, because all the candy will be made from plants and fungi then. In fact, you might even be able to eventually taste panda and all kinds of exotic animal flesh when you support veganism because that's also more incentive for the lab meat industry, which is actually real meat but created from cells without any sort of animal abuse.


----------



## Rithrius (Jun 3, 2018)

(Just responding to OP here, don't mind me.)


----------



## Sybow (Feb 1, 2016)

Zidane said:


> Yeah, I'm not arguing with that. That's why I don't eat meat. I don't see anywhere where animals are being taken of their life humanely. This is supposedly the most humane method (since putting them to sleep like we do with our companions is obviously too costly):
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, I have to be honest. It doesn't really look as humane as I hoped. (Personally never researched about pig slaughter in general)

I know of cattle slaughter with a sort of pin shot to the brains, which seemed way more humane than gas chambers, because they don't suffer as much.


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

Sybow said:


> I know of cattle slaughter with a sort of pin shot to the brains, which seemed way more humane than gas chambers, because they don't suffer as much.


Cattle slaughter is even worse but that's just my opinion. (The bolt gun is a very inefficient method which definately hurts and often times doesn't even paralyze them well enough.) It's just that pigs are more like dogs which is why they irk me the most. They also seem to be the most intelligent of the farmed animals. The only reason why we chose them for food is because they are omnivores and they eat all the leftovers (and can get very fat). I definately do not think they deserve this destiny as a slave species for burgers. Just imagine, that could have been us if another species finished before us on the evolutionary race. The winners should treat the losers with respect.


----------



## Surreal Snake (Nov 17, 2009)

No


----------



## Mick Travis (Aug 18, 2016)

Zidane said:


> The winners should treat the losers with respect.


If I didn't, no one would board game with me.

5 cats live here. It's a bit sad to see a dying mouse treated like a toy.


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

Mick Travis said:


> If I didn't, no one would board game with me.
> 
> 5 cats live here. It's a bit sad to see a dying mouse treated like a toy.


Hehe, yeah, I mean brain in the sense of winner. Cats are too stupid to understand what they are doing. They're just as much losers as any other animal compared to us. Except, they are lucky we find them cute. 

Also, nice avatar


----------



## Mick Travis (Aug 18, 2016)

Zidane said:


> Cats are too stupid to understand what they are doing.


The cats here are pretty clever.


----------



## Wild (Jul 14, 2014)

I'm a vegan (for the most part - I do make exceptions), but it's not for morality reasons. I did it originally because I did my research and came to the conclusion that when done correctly, it's one of the best ways to eat. It gave me sort of a guideline to healthy eating, I guess. By being vegan, the vast majority of junk foods go off the table (there are vegan junk foods too, they just tend to be more out-of-the-way, I find). I've definitely seen my health improve, and when I go off temporarily (holidays with my very Texan family, lol) I rapidly start to feel lethargic again. 

I always feel like the first thing I have to do when I tell someone I'm vegan is make it clear that I don't give a fuck how they eat, because the initial reaction is some form of defensiveness 90% of the time. 

With that said, I do find the moral schism to be interesting. Maybe I've just met a lot of nice vegans, I dunno, but I don't believe I've ever encountered a "militant vegan" in real life. It seems more like a caricature that you would primarily encounter on the internet. 

I've had tons of people try to talk me out of it despite seeing the good it's done me, though. Usually coming from a place of genuine concern and ignorance, but plenty of people just hear the word "vegan" come out of my mouth and instantaneously lose it.

I could be wrong, but it feels to me like a lot of people who complain about vegans trying to force them into a different way of eating either 1) have never actually experienced it themselves and are just angry at the possibility of being preached to when they believe somewhere deep down that they don't have the moral high ground or 2) have brought it upon themselves by forcing a vegan into the discussion - usually by asking questions or prodding and being surprised/offended when the response involves some explanation of why the vegan thinks their lifestyle is better. I've certainly been lured into discussions like that more than once.

I dunno about other vegetarians/vegans, but I don't have the time nor energy to go around explaining to people why I think my diet is better than theirs. Usually, if I do choose to explain my reasoning upon being asked/provoked, it's taken as preaching or otherwise aggressive - and I'm generally pretty adept at toning myself down so as to not offend people. Maybe I'll just start saying I eat a "plant-based diet" instead so as to not hurt any feelings by using the word "vegan", lmao.


----------



## crazitaco (Apr 9, 2010)

Zidane said:


> Oh look, as expected your stories involve imbecilic parents who didn't even give their child soy FORMULA (that is properly supplemented with nutrients like B12), but just nutrient deficient wheat and oat milk. Even normal milk is not sufficient for infants. It needs to be formula! This is not the proper to raise vegan children. This is simply child neglect and irresponsibility.
> 
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11424546
> 
> "Appropriately planned vegan diets can satisfy nutrient needs of infants. The American Dietetic Association and The American Academy of Pediatrics state that vegan diets can promote normal infant growth. It is important for parents to provide appropriate foods for vegan infants, using guidelines like those in this article. Key considerations when working with vegan families include composition of breast milk from vegan women, appropriate breast milk substitutes, supplements, type and amount of dietary fat, and solid food introduction. Growth of vegan infants appears adequate with post-weaning growth related to dietary adequacy. Breast milk composition is similar to that of non-vegetarians except for fat composition. For the first 4 to 6 months, breast milk should be the sole food with soy-based infant formula as an alternative. Commercial soymilk should not be the primary beverage until after age 1 year. Breastfed vegan infants may need supplements of vitamin B-12 if maternal diet is inadequate; older infants may need zinc supplements and reliable sources of iron and vitamins D and B-12. Timing of solid food introduction is similar to that recommended for non-vegetarians. Tofu, dried beans, and meat analogs are introduced as protein sources around 7-8 months. Vegan diets can be planned to be nutritionally adequate and support growth for infants."


You couldn't see a double standard if it smacked you in the face. All throughout this thread you've been spewing misinformation about how meat diets are_ inherently_ awful, will kill us all, give us all heart disease! A POORLY DONE meat diet will certainly do those things. Just as a POORLY DONE vegan diet can kill babies! Who woulda thought, a bad diet... causes a decline in health?! A meat diet, especially a pescetarian one, done _in moderation, balanced, minimally processed and varied_ is the _optimal_ diet. And not once have I ever said that vegan diets are inherently bad or dangerous. I just think they're suboptimal, because it's somewhat true, that's why you live off of supplements. I don't want to live off supplements for personal reasons. I think your complete willingness to rely on supplements is a reflection of our culture's abuse of pills/drugs for everything. You should really rethink your life and stop eating shrooms for a change, drugs are bad for your brain mkay.

Supplements were never meant to be an outright replacement for food. A vegan diet can certainly be done properly and not lead to health problems, but the problem is that its tricky because nutrition is a poorly understood science and veganism is an _experimental_ dietary lifestyle. Humans have been using animal products for thousands of years, we survived just fine until recently without knowledge of nutrition because eating is intuitive. Except when its not, aka a vegan diet. To an extent it could be argued that it is unethical to push veganism on idiots/the general public because most are probably too stupid to get it right, they'll just harm themselves or innocent children.

What ticks me off the most though and inspired that post, is the mentality of those particular vegan parents who allowed their own children to suffer under their watch. Idiotic fucking vegan breeders who selfishly chose to cling to their emotional/moral needs over the wellbeing of the life they chose to create for selfish reasons. They chose the wellbeing of an animal over the wellbeing of their own child. It makes me sick. 



> Just stop it. Accept you have lost the argument because I will keep on destroying you or any other defender of religious animal sacrifice over and over again with relative ease... (because I actually have science on my side)


I'd love for you to teach me the ancient art of destroying an argument without even addressing it. In case you forgot, (maybe a memory lapse related to your lack of vitamin b12) my arguments were over here. Ranting towards my one-sentence reply does not make "destruction". You haven't even touched my antinatalist argument, why is that? Are you afraid that you'll realize creating life is wrong, do you secretly want kids of your own, are you just afraid to look the logical conclusion of antinatalism in the face? Does it clash with your values? Oh but muh nihilism is too hard for ur feeeeels, sorry about that. Not that I have a problem with feels, I'm a feeler in spite of my attitude here. 


* *




You think I care about global warming? Suffering? About scarcity? Yes, I do a little, but I've also come to accept that so long as people and animals exist it is futile, you can't win against entropy. Especially global warming, we passed the "point of no return" in 2016. Get with the times. This is the result of human progress, a world unbalanced with the natural order. We fix one thing with science, and it breaks two more things. The only thing worth doing at this point is ending your own genetic line so that your children and their children won't end up starving on an unbalanced, resource depleted planet, or contributing to the deaths of animals that you care so much about. 

Animals would be luckier to go extinct by the doing of an experienced hunter who will give them an immediate death, rather than having their balls eaten off by a lioness after they've made little wildebeests who will also get their balls eaten off by a lioness after they've made little wildebeests until there's nowhere to live and starve to death because vegans are encroaching on the their habitat because of all the human development and efficiency leading to a human population explosion.





* *




Vegan parents cancel out any good they may have done by repeating the indefinite cycle of life. At a minimum they double their environmental/ethical impact with no guarantee that their kid's future descendants will also be vegans. A single non-procreating meat eater ain't got shit on that. I eat meat, which brings me a little joy, then I die, and I take my meat eating habit to the grave with me. In the grand scheme of things the suffering I may have inflicted would be a tiny fraction compared to generations of vegans taking up land, resources, and taking part in the exploitation of other humans. And even yet, their children may _be_ the ones exploited.





* *




So bottom line, if you're not an antinatalist vegan then nothing you say holds any validity to me.





* *




veganism is about arbitrary symbolism.






> And you're also distorting the facts about chimps. Their diet is more than 95% plant-based. They eat meat because they CAN and probably think meat tastes good (like you), not because they have to. Chimps are quite intelligent you know, but ofcourse not intelligent enough to understand that too much meat will end up clogging their arteries...


Again, putting words in my mouth. I never said they _have_ to eat meat. I said they just do it during mating season, and it increases the chances that their offspring will survive, and also that its a social display. And it's true, they did nearly wipe out other colonies of monkies.
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150728-chimps-nearly-wiped-out-monkeys 

I'm not fact distorting, this is all true. They aren't "opportunistic" in the sense that they might passively snatch a living things because its close to them, they are "active hunters" in the sense that they form hunting parties, seek out prey, and risk the dangers involved in the hunt just like any predator does. 



> But it doesn't even matter in the slightest what our closest cousins eat. What matters is what you eat.


 Uh, no? I judge a person by the entirety of their actions, not just one arbitrary aspect of their character. 



> We should not be doing what chimps are doing, do you not agree?


I agree that we shouldn't be as savage as chimps, and we should atleast give our food a merciful death instead of slamming it against a rock....



> We should not be doing what lions are doing, aka killing little lions so they can mate with the females... Animals are simply retarded as fuck, and their behaviour or food choice should not be any sort of "guideline" for us. Instead, we are the parent, we are the most successful species on Earth, so if anything, we should be setting the guidelines.


Strongly disagree here. This is what keeps me from being a full on Efilist. We are _not_ the parents of this earth. We're like a slightly smarter sibling who is also retarded as fuck. We can't even take care of our own kind, let alone the whole earth. 26,000 orphans age out of foster care a year in america, homeless people walk the streets. "Technically vegan" palm oil is an atrociously unethical industry. Meat _could_ be far kinder and healthier if that was the world we lived in. But its not. You create global demand on such a scale as meat _or_ palm oil, have governments subsidize cruelty to maintain social stability, and _anything_ can become unethical. You've suggested we feed humans what we feed the cows, but that's a horrible idea. Not even cows are meant to live off of corn. Cows are meant to eat grass. Humans don't eat grass. See the problem here now? In a population-balanced world we would both have our crops and still have cows that could eat grass, it would be two viable sources of food that do not conflict. But resources are limited regardless if its meat or produce. Why is there scarcity? We could've solved world hunger hundreds of years ago if our population hadn't continued to grow as much as we optimized our resources. In a balanced world optimization would solve our problems, but in the real world, optimization is like throwing water on a grease fire. Sustainability is a myth and constantly out of our grasp because human nature is greedy. Uncontrolled growth is the real problem. Like a cancer, we consume and breed until there's nothing left, and then we continue to breed even as children starve to death or fester in an orphanage. Why? Cuz "MUH GENES". "MUH LEGACY" "I NEED A BABY THAT LOOKS LIKE ME" "I WANT A LIVING DOLL" "I NEED MY KIDS TO WORK ON THE FARM" "I WANT SOMEONE TO CHANGE MY DIAPER WHEN I'M 100 YEARS OLD" "I WANT, I WANT". That is the real root of the problem. That is why we're not that much better than chimps. But I guess that doesn't matter to you as much as the symbolism of animal-cruelty-free food. 








> I already said to please stop with the appeal to nature fallacies, and yet, you carnists keep bringing this up over and over again. Probably because you have no real argument. Btw, NATURE SUCKS! (in case you haven't realized this yet)


Nature does suck, but like it or not you're a product of it. You deny only one side of your nature, the savage meat-eating side, while ignoring the darkness related to the other side, that supports the selfish creation of life. I only deny one side of my nature as well... You have a lot more in common with me than you think, you just won't admit it.

My only goal here was to knock you off your high horse. I really don't have a problem with veganism until it causes people to get uppity. And don't forget we're just as ingrained in nature as all the stupid animals are. Again, we're stupid apes with a god complex. The only permanent solution to this problem is to end all life and find a way to prevent it from re-forming. But we can't do that can we? And even if we could, should we stay alive so that we could end all animal life and its suffering out of sense of responsibility for its suffering, but then what about ourselves? We have an obligation to our own kind too. 



> However, if you are interested in what your actual ancestors were, it was not "hunter-gatherer", nono, it was "gatherer-hunter". Were the ancient Egyptians VEGETARIAN? Carbon analysis suggests they ate fruit, wheat and barley - but not much fish | Daily Mail Online
> And future humans will be entirely gatherer.


Vegetarian =/=vegan. I guess you don't care if I enjoy dairy so long as I eat a salad?
And you're wrong, future humans will be compost. Babies are just compost-in-training h:




> There will be no more hunting going on, and boohoo to whoever likes to shoot or suffocate or stab stuff. I don't give a shit about an asshole's worthless opinions. And also boohoo to all the hedonists who like their delicacies, I don't give a shit about your worthless opinion either...* Just go to rehab you addicted loser.*


DING DING DING! Winner winner chicken dinner! I guess you didn't learn the first time you called me names! I'll go out tomorrow and enjoy some fried wings. I think I'll upgrade to the 8pc wings even though I usually get 6pc.
That's 4 baby chicks that you're responsible for slaughtering cuz you didn't give a shit, you are clearly the pinnacle of ethical behavior! h:


----------



## Panorama (Jul 19, 2017)

Ban on Boiling Lobsters Alive Spreads to More Countries Along With Awareness that Crustaceans Feel Pain


----------



## Aqualung (Nov 21, 2009)

My niece has been a vegan about 15 years. I tried it several weeks on my doctor's recommendation, didn't get the results I wanted & started feeling tired after a month. May give it a second try with different food choices. I rarely eat red meat, I used to crave it. Mostly fish, chicken & dairy stuff now. I have an all vegetable protein powder I drink once a day, 30 grams of protein without feeling stuffed so I can hit the gym an hour later without barfing.


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

crazitaco said:


> You couldn't see a double standard if it smacked you in the face. All throughout this thread you've been spewing misinformation about how meat diets are_ inherently_ awful, will kill us all, give us all heart disease! A POORLY DONE meat diet will certainly do those things. Just as a POORLY DONE vegan diet can kill babies! Who woulda thought, a bad diet... causes a decline in health?! A meat diet, especially a pescetarian one, done _in moderation, balanced, minimally processed and varied_ is the _optimal_ diet. And not once have I ever said that vegan diets are inherently bad or dangerous. I just think they're suboptimal, because it's somewhat true, that's why you live off of supplements. I don't want to live off supplements for personal reasons. I think your complete willingness to rely on supplements is a reflection of our culture's abuse of pills/drugs for everything. You should really rethink your life and stop eating shrooms for a change, drugs are bad for your brain mkay.
> 
> Supplements were never meant to be an outright replacement for food. A vegan diet can certainly be done properly and not lead to health problems, but the problem is that its tricky because nutrition is a poorly understood science and veganism is an _experimental_ dietary lifestyle. Humans have been using animal products for thousands of years, we survived just fine until recently without knowledge of nutrition because eating is intuitive. Except when its not, aka a vegan diet. To an extent it could be argued that it is unethical to push veganism on idiots/the general public because most are probably too stupid to get it right, they'll just harm themselves or innocent children.
> 
> ...


1) The vast majority of vegan parents raise their children with utmost care, so your focus on these crazy news stories is insane to me. You might aswell replace these outliers with drug addicts.

2) If the animals weren't injected with B12, you wouldn't be getting it either! (It's something to do with cobalt depletion of the soil.) It's a standard practice in the industry, miss ignorant. We just take it directly, you inject it in an animal, and then you eat the animal. What's more efficient? Oh, did I forgot to mention the average vegan has a higher blood level of B12 because of this? And btw, I don't even take pills, I just drink a plant milk (which are always fortified with B12 and D including many meat substitutes) and I switch it up constantly. I have way more choice than just a cow's milk. Or maybe I get it from the Red Bull I drink, it has like 63% percent of the daily recommended value. Didn't know that did you? That Red Bull drinkers are less likely to be deficient in B12 than meat eaters?

3) The increased health experienced by vegans (when I talk about "meat" I'm mainly talking about land animals, and red meat in particular, I like people who chose fish over pig, that's atleast some degree of conscientiousness) who know what they are doing is not necessarily because of nutrient exchange (although I do think it helps), it's also because they're greatly cutting down on the bad stuff. Meat is just junk food. Saturated/trans fats, cholesterol, growth factors/carcinogens, salt, phtalates (= plastic, mostly in chicken, which are endocrine disruptors...), estrogen in some areas (like the US) where hormone injections aren't yet forbidden (to fatten them up! Cha ching, cha ching). I'm lying about heart disease? No I'm not, every heart surgeon knows the link between your LDL levels and fatty plaques in your arteries. (Now, there are other factors that also play a part, such as smoking and lack of exercise, ofcourse...)





4) Oh, you posted pictures of chicken wings. Am I supposed to be offended by that? There's meat eaters living under the same roof at the same dinner table here. There's meat eaters everywhere I go. I have clearly 0 emotions towards a steak. It is simply where it comes from... But in any case, thanks for resorting to childish behaviour. It's just shows your cluelessness.

5) Vegetarian used to mean mostly vegan ("vegetation"), it doesn't mean cow tit sucker necessarily... The vegan term is a relatively new term to split up the traditional vegetarians even more. And I'm not noticing any ill effects from making the transition tbh. In fact, I feel and look better. My running is better than ever. Cheese is in general even fattening than meat. Dairy definately does not help you health wise, else the dairy vegetarians would be beating the vegans on the population studies.

6) Are you going to argue that veganism is worse for the environment because of palm oil? Well first of all, veganism does not equate to palm oil, wtf. (Oils in general aren't very good for your health, are high in calories and they also taste like crap.) Although are you aware that the majority of rainforest destruction is not for palm oil, but actually to transform these grounds into cattle grazing grounds? Did you ever think about that? Yes, cattle require shitloads of land. That's trees that have to be cut down. And if you feed them grains (or soy) instead, well then that's the same story, because grains are also not grown in the forest. The point is simply that humans eating grains directly requires much less land than growing this stuff only to feed it to livestock and then eating that lifestock. What a wastage. So inefficient. (And if you say, well, we can't eat that particular grain, then you just grow the right grain, duh...) Personally, my solution to the grain growing problem is to grow them in vertical skycrapers. That doesn't require much land at all, just air. These are all so easy problems to solve, and none of these solutions include animals.

7) Oh, I didn't realize I was talking to a depressive efilist. That's so cute...

In any case, I don't really care which diet is healthier (although someone has to bring the science to the masses because the failure of the education system certainly ain't doing it), the argument is simply that if going meatless is not going to destroy your health, there is really no reason to needlessly devour animals. If taste is reason enough for you, then you are simply a nihilist. I just don't like nihilists that's all. Not giving a shit about anything is just "meh" philosophy to me...


----------



## crazitaco (Apr 9, 2010)

> If the animals weren't injected with B12, you wouldn't be getting it either! (It's something to do with cobalt depletion of the soil.)


The article I just pulled up seems to be in disagreement. Can you provide your sources on b12 in vegans? Or on b12 in meat eaters? 
From Vitamin B12 and the Vegan Diet - Today's Dietitian Magazine



> He reports that most vegans show adequate B12 levels to make clinical deficiency unlikely, but they may show restricted activity of B12-related enzymes, leading to elevated homocysteine levels, which has been linked to increased risk of heart disease and stroke. Thus, he warns that repeated observations of elevated homocysteine levels in vegans show that B12 intake must be addressed.
> 
> The VNDPG recommends the following B12 guidance2:
> 
> ...


Furthermore from what I read, this isn't necessarily true of all cattle. Just ones raised in the wrong places.

Supplementation of Vitamin B12 in Cattle and Sheep to Prevent Deficiency | VaVaVoom Vegan & Organic Recipes



> The amount of Cobalt available to animals varies as a result of several different factors. The amount of Cobalt occurring naturally in the soil varies according to the type of rock from which the soil is derived. The amount then available for uptake by the pasture is influenced by the presence of other minerals (e.g. Manganese) and supplements (e.g. lime), which can bind the Cobalt in the soil and prevent its absorption by plants.
> Rainfall can also play a major role, with high rainfall leading to leaching of Cobalt from the topsoil into the lower soil layers. This can be seen as a seasonal effect where rainfall is concentrated at one time of the year.
> The type and condition of the pasture can also pay a major role. In general, grasses take up less Cobalt than legumes and lush, fast-growing pastures absorb Cobalt at a lower rate than slower growing pastures.





> Oh, did I forgot to mention the average vegan has a higher blood level of B12 because of this?


Again, gimme some evidence and we'll see if this is bullshit or not.



> And btw, I don't even take pills, I just drink a plant milk (which are always fortified with B12 and D including many meat substitutes) and I switch it up constantly. I have way more choice than just a cow's milk. Or maybe I get it from the Red Bull I drink, it has like 63% percent of the daily recommended value. Didn't know that did you? That Red Bull drinkers are less likely to be deficient in B12 than meat eaters?


Red bull is terrible and you shouldn't drink it. It is NOT a good way to get your b12. Eat your damn cereal like a good boy and wash it down with black coffee if you have to. If you drink red bull on a frequent basis you're probably damaging your liver. I'll take my coffee with a little fortified milk thank you very much. Or just drink tea. The fact that you feel the need to constantly swap out your plantjuice suggests that it tastes bad. I've never in my life felt tired of milk or eggs.



> The increased health experienced by vegans (when I talk about "meat" I'm mainly talking about land animals, and red meat in particular, I like people who chose fish over pig, that's atleast some degree of conscientiousness) who know what they are doing is not necessarily because of nutrient exchange (although I do think it helps), it's also because they're greatly cutting down on the bad stuff.


Cool, that's great to know you've been changing the definition of meat to fit your argument better and that you don't give a crap about sea life. Not very consistent in your values, are you? And just for the record I avoid eating pig when I can. Though I won't turn down an authentic flour tortilla made with pig lard, and I don't have a problem eating beef on occasion or or poultry on a regular basis. I eat a lot of fish for the healthy fats and because they don't seem to process pain, I eat it atleast 2-3 times a week when I'm not eating turkey.



> Meat is just junk food. Saturated/trans fats, cholesterol, growth factors/carcinogens, salt, phtalates (= plastic, mostly in chicken, which are endocrine disruptors...), estrogen in some areas (like the US) where hormone injections aren't yet forbidden (to fatten them up! Cha ching, cha ching). I'm lying about heart disease? No I'm not, every heart surgeon knows the link between your LDL levels and fatty plaques in your arteries. (Now, there are other factors that also play a part, such as smoking and lack of exercise, ofcourse...)


All this time we've been talking about b12, but there's actually a number of other things you should consider supplementing for, specifically the vegan problem areas are with EPA/DHA levels, iron, calcium, and zinc. A pescetarian is not going to have these problems. Honestly at this point I find it alarming that you take no supplements at all and get your b12 from red bull. How long have you been vegan, has your doctor ever told you anything?



> Oh, you posted pictures of chicken wings. Am I supposed to be offended by that? There's meat eaters living under the same roof at the same dinner table here. There's meat eaters everywhere I go. I have clearly 0 emotions towards a steak. It is simply where it comes from... But in any case, thanks for resorting to childish behaviour. It's just shows your cluelessness.


Gee, I guess it was wrong of me to assume you're a morally consistent vegan. 
Sorry for giving you the benefit of the doubt. You really don't care that your needless petty name calling makes me increase the amount of meat I eat just to spite you? I thought the goal here was to persuade people to reduce the amount of meat they eat, not eat more of it. 

I sure hope you don't plan of having children if you hate childishness.

And your reaction towards the chicken plate is funny to me. I thought you vegans are all about that visual kneejerking reactionary symbolic crap. You vegans pull that same shit all the time, oh noooo look at this HORRIFIC video of a cow getting its throat slaughtered upside down, look gore! Gore is icky! 
You really think _that_ offends me? I see roadkill every day. I watch videos of things getting eaten alive just for the reminder.



> Vegetarian used to mean mostly vegan ("vegetation"), it doesn't mean cow tit sucker necessarily... The vegan term is a relatively new term to split up the traditional vegetarians even more. And I'm not noticing any ill effects from making the transition tbh. In fact, I feel and look better. My running is better than ever. Cheese is in general even fattening than meat. Dairy definately does not help you health wise, else the dairy vegetarians would be beating the vegans on the population studies.


Don't care, the point is that the egyptians were not vegan, they did consume animal products even if it was small amounts, and no ancient society was ever truly vegan and survived.




> Are you going to argue that veganism is worse for the environment because of palm oil? Well first of all, veganism does not equate to palm oil, wtf.


No, I'm not blaming palm oil on vegans. Its an EXAMPLE of how a plant-based food can become extremely unethical once you factor in SCALE + DEMAND. 



> (Oils in general aren't very good for your health, are high in calories and they also taste like crap.)


What the hell do you even eat? Do you even cook your food? Last time I checked veganism isn't anti plant-based oils. 



> Although are you aware that the majority of rainforest destruction is not for palm oil, but actually to transform these grounds into cattle grazing grounds? Did you ever think about that? Yes, cattle require shitloads of land. That's trees that have to be cut down. And if you feed them grains (or soy) instead, well then that's the same story, because grains are also not grown in the forest.


Moot point because in your utopian vegan plant-based society we would still be destroying rainforests to make room for plantations.



> The point is simply that humans eating grains directly requires much less land than growing this stuff only to feed it to livestock and then eating that lifestock.


Did you ignore what I said in the previous post? We weren't designed to live off of grains, not even cows were designed to live off of grains. Cattle die from grain overload, and they are true herbivores unlike us. 



> What a wastage. So inefficient. (And if you say, well, we can't eat that particular grain, then you just grow the right grain, duh...) Personally, my solution to the grain growing problem is to grow them in vertical skycrapers. That doesn't require much land at all, just air. These are all so easy problems to solve, and none of these solutions include animals.


So why don't we already grow stuff in vertical skyscrapers? Maybe cuz its impractical and idealistic?
Why don't we stick animals in vertical skyscrapers? 



> Oh, I didn't realize I was talking to a depressive efilist. That's so cute...


I guess it doesn't piss you off when meat-eaters refuse to look at your animal slaughter videos or consider veganism cuz the reality is too "depressive". You're doing the same damn thing right now. 



> The argument is simply that if going meatless is not going to destroy your health, there is really no reason to needlessly devour animals.


That argument is virtually identical to the antinatalist argument. There is no _need_ to procreate either, no one dies because they didn't have a baby, and because the act of procreation leads to unbearable suffering in many, it is wrong to procreate. While the vegan advocates people eat plant-based foods because it is more ethical, the antinatalist advocates that those who want children foster/adopt because it is more ethical. If you're not an antinatalist vegan and want to have "your own" kids someday then you can't continue to use this argument, you have to admit that you directly inflict suffering on sentient life for the sake of your own personal fulfillment. You have to ADMIT to your own personal moral imperfections. This is no different that me eating meat because it brings me joy. Except I ADMIT that I am not a saint, I know eating animals is wrong but I still do it anyway simply because I don't care _enough_. Yes, that's cruel, but there is no life without cruelty to begin with, and I did not ask to be born a cruel human being in a cruel world, I just "am". Someone "am"ed me into existence. Why don't I care enough? Because I am a human, I can't _alter _my own emotions/psyche, I am only an observer of my own emotional states/inner world, I can't force myself to care anymore than I can force myself to love someone that I don't love. It is a limit of will-power, just as you probably have a limit of will-power to not screw over your own kids by hurling them into a hostile environment/global climate catastrophe. Humans are not 100% rational beings, and to ignore the massive influence of our less rational selves is, well, irrational.

Though I'd argue that my position is still far better than yours because I am a solo meat eater and you create an entire unending (till humans go extinct or your future ancestors end your genetic line) and unpredictable chain of humans experiencing suffering and causing suffering. And because, oh I don't know, I am not creating suffering for a child _I claim to love. _And yes, your child WOULD experience great suffering regardless of how much you tried to prevent it. If everything goes as it should, the best case scenario is that they will labor for the rest of their lives and when you die first they'll mourn your death. And then they'll die too. 

Your continued refusal to even consider the consequences of procreation when you yourself have admitted that "nature is terrible" reeks of hypocrisy. I guess your vegan propanganda did not teach you how to address a "depressive efilist" with customized arguments. I think about this shit all day, good luck dissecting the years of mulling over life and death and the nature of nature that has taken place in my head. Though you already said you disrespect my opinions solely because I eat meat, you can't change people's minds without a willingness to understand their perspective. As I've said early, you're morally inconsistent. If your goal is to persuade/inform others then you are doing a terrible job by acting the way you do.

I'm not going to argue with you about veganism any further so long as you continue to ignore _my _arguments. I've given you more than enough free-reign in this discussion thus far to make your case, and you've failed that task. The ball is in my turf. Play the game with me or go home.



> If taste is reason enough for you, then you are simply a nihilist. I just don't like nihilists that's all. Not giving a shit about anything is just "meh" philosophy to me...


I'm not a nihilist, I think nihilism is a lazy ass fucking philosophy that is, by its own decree, worthless. Antinatalists and efilists are not nihilists, we belive there is value in the absence of suffering. I don't "not give a shit about anything", I am very greatly concerned by _human _suffering. I am human-centric because I am a human. If a nihilst told me nothing matters, I'd kick them in the balls and ask them if their suffering did not matter to them. 

An efilist is typically an antinatalist who extends their philosophy to the animal kingdom instead of just humanity. For this reason a morally consistent efilist is _always_ a vegan. I am not an efilist because the wellbeing of humanity and the wellbeing of animals are naturally at odds with each other, so I prioritize the predicament of human suffering over animal suffering. I do think we should atleast avoid creating excessive suffering in the animals, but I don't believe it is inherently wrong to eat them. An efilist would be in favor of the extinction of all lifeforms through peaceful means and argue that humans are ethically _obligated_ to remain in existence until we solve the problem of suffering in all lifeforms. I do not believe humans are obligated to look after the animal world, and believe it would be a huge mistake to extend the duration of our own species' suffering to chase a potentially impossible task to resolve. But there's a great deal of overlap between the ideas of antinatalism and veganism, that overlap is the middle ground called efilism.


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

Lel this is thread is so funny xD


----------



## Highway Nights (Nov 26, 2014)

So uh, anybody in this thread smoke weed?


----------



## Miss Nightingale (Aug 10, 2013)

Nope.


----------

