Is anyone here a vegetarian or vegan? I've been doing a mostly-vegetarian raw diet for a little over a week and I must say, I don't know if it's placebo, but I've felt really good lately and have had an unwonted sense of well being. I actually feel a lot more energetic during the day and sleep better at night. My skin and hair feel very nice too

meat good

__________________

I could not live without delicious meat! Not to mention I drink a quart of fat free milk at coffee time every day (40 grams of protein?)

__________________

Nope, none at all.

What is your height and weight?

__________________

Weakling! LOL.

__________________

yeah i go through a lot of skim milk, i LOVE milk

__________________

I don't remember the last time I actually held a piece of fruit or vegetable, much less ate one. I can't stand them.

MEAT AND WHEAT 4 LYPH!

__________________

nothing better than a t-bone steak cut an inch and a half thick the size of a toilet seat

__________________

haha^^

I love meat, but are people really meant to eat meat?

__________________

I find that, besides being overcome with vague, poorly defined feelings of goodness, those new to such a lifestyle are also quickly overcome with delusions of superiority, unyielding pretention, and self-righteous hypocrisy. Anyone else?

__________________

Oh. God. Yes. Not only this, but the more stern they are on the subject, the more difficult they are to please and get a decent meal with. Especially if you make dinner and they can't eat it because of their dietary beliefs (oh, I was pissed).

I think its fucking ridiculous to be vegan. Towards what Blitz said: yes, we're suppose to eat meat. It's a very valuable source of nutrition that we're lucky to have available to us and, from what I understand, getting an equally nutritious meal solely out of greens can be a pretty ridiculous task which hints at the answer that meat is a good solution.

Life feeds on life. I agree on the sad fact that some of the methods to which animals are treated pre-meal is wrong, and that distancing yourself away from that is a good thing, but in reality now, with all the laws and strict regulation in force, its a low percentage. The delusions of superiority as mentioned by Chris spawns into a kind of disgusting mind state that takes for granted their blessed situation in life that allows them to have the choice not to eat me. Unless you simply dislike the taste of meat (unfathomable), then I'm forced to lay off as I understand as I fucking hate greens, but unless it's that: don't be a hippie. Eat delicious meat and be thankful.

__________________

I really wish I could add to that, but that's really the only counter argument to the culture that needs to be discussed. Everything else is just personal dietary preference.

More power to the people who can do it without being a tool and/or douchebag about it. But those who are snobs about it/walk around talking about it all the time are no better than the 15 year old kids who walk around talking about how totally awesome it is to be straight edge.

__________________

As I opened this thread, I was eating a delicious hamburger.

There is nothing better. Nothing.

__________________

my girlfriends a vegetarian, not one of the raving ones who hate what happens to animals, she just doesn't like the texture of meat. anyway, it pretty much means that when we're living together i'm mostly eating vegetarian foods. but damn i love a good steak.

__________________

Indeed. I myself am a vegetArian, but eeeeverybody in my social environment eats meat. My mother too, my dad I don't know, think he's dead. But anyway, you'll néver hear me bitch about how they shouldn't eat, and that I feel better without eating meat, how they could possibly do what they do, don't they have a conscience, ...
I'm not a vegetarian out of protest or some dumb shit, I just don't want to eat animals. And chickens and fish are animals too, yes.



Hell yeah, just because ONE person (or more) chose to not eat meat, doesn't mean the whole group has to find another restaurant. If there's nothing on the menu without meat, I just a) ask if they can't make it without meat or b) just order something with meat, then just take the meat out (it's possible trust me), and this way my company gets more meat. Win win.



I haven't eaten any meat in 8 years, and I've never felt especially sick, tired or weak. And I don't go out of my way to make up for the loss of meat in my food, I just eat what other people eat, but replace the meat with some vegetarian burger (NOT "vegetable-burgers". Helllll nah).

__________________

http://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/video...e_out&Player=qt

Peta is one of the most ridiculous organizations around. Do they realize how fucking stupid they are?

The human race has continued on throughout the years by eating animals, and fucking each other.

6 feet, 1 inch. 170 lbs


I'm by no means advocating a diet, in honesty, lunch is lunch to me no matter what anyone eats, and I'd be the first person to kill an animal for some awesome leather shoes. I've been eating raw fish either way, and I have no problem with eating meat, I just notice I [still skeptical of placebo also] feel better eating mostly raw, vegetarian food. Doesn't necessarily mean others will.

I've been a vegetarian for a little over 6 years now.

I feel great, it just takes a little more effort then just burning a bloody steak and eating it

Most veggy/vegans you hear about are indeed bloody zealiot anti-meat crusaders. But you know, it's the most vocal people you always hear about.

I feel it's a personal choice, and think it's up to everyone to decide if they eat meat or not. I just don't want any part of that industry

Annyhow, as much as I hear about people disliking vegatarians because they are supposed to push their morality on everyone, veggy's get attacked too.

It's just a damn waste to see how much humans can't accept different lifestyle choices or moralities.

__________________

Yes. We really, really are.



Jesus Fucksocket Christ. Stay away from strong winds, we need you intact. I am exactly your height and exactly 55lbs heavier.

I have extensive opinions on this issue which I'll return to at some point in time, if anyone gives a fuck.

__________________

meat FTW!

__________________

Weird. I thought we killed you...?

__________________

I eat a shitload of everything, including meat and im about 165 lbs at 6foot1. I gained about 25 lbs in the past year though.

hardly any body fat at least

__________________

if vegans hadn't been so proud and narcissistic in the first place, they would have NEVER been given any shit for their choice to not eat meat

it reminds me of the "gay pride" thing. it makes as much sense as "straight pride". sexual preference shouldn't give anyone the feeling of being proud. (funnily enough, i suppose i am proud to have never had a dick in my ass ).

I'm actually the opposite. I'd never buy leather or anything like that because I feel as though we are at a state of advancement where we no longer have to kill animals for clothing and shelter. I'm not interested in killing for vanity, I can work out for vanity and continue to be so extremely handsome for vanity. On the other hand, eating animals is an integral part of who we are and what we've become. Indeed, increased carnivory among Hominids allowed room for reduced jaw size and increased brain size. In other words- meat = smart.



I don't really have a problem with that. I don't necessarily agree that a diet devoid of meat is a healthy one, but you do have fish meat in there, which would help negate negative effects so long as you eat enough. My real problem is with the aforementioned self-righteous, hypocritical vegetarians who cry for the pain of individual animals even as they drive collective animals into extinction through their ignorance and through their diversion of rebellious, youthful energy from environmentalism (which actually matters) to the animal rights movement (which does more harm than good).

__________________

You've been away far too long, sir.

__________________

I've seen that argument but I think it's something made up by over-zealous "meat heads" [hehe] that like to bash over-zealous vegetarians/animal rights activists. Think about it, carnivores tend to have much larger jaws/teeth/snouts [like dogs, bears, lions] that aid in killing prey. I think that anthropomorphic species were originally herbivores and as technology and the ability to kill prey developed, "humans" or some kind of predecessors were able to move to new environments that didn't necessarily support an herbivore diet; therefore, we evolved omnivore traits for survival. It's much healthier to live on an all-vegetable/all-fruit/i.e. vegan diet than to live on an all-meat diet.

Anyway, I'm just really mostly interested in eating completely raw food. I've been doing a lot of research into cooked foods vs. raw foods, and it really makes more sense to me to eat things raw [of course I'm not gonna go eat raw chicken, dirty raw ground beef, and raw pork].

I'm 6' 3" and 220 lbs I think if I don't eat meat... I may die.

__________________

Oh, you're going to get it now...

__________________

I bought two cows a year ago. I just sold one and made my money back and enough to pay for the other to be slaughtered. Short of the time involved waiting, I'm basically getting about 500lbs of free grain fed beef in 5 more days.

I agree it's kinda grim for the cows but they have been treated well. I made it clear that the one to be killed not suffer, be mistreated, or frightened when the time comes. It deserves a peaceful death. The place that does the slaughtering prefers to not stress the animals during the killing because it makes the meat taste better. They make one small cut on the neck and leave it alone for a few minutes. The cow just gets sleepy, lays down, and dies. To me it just seems like that is the right way. I suppose it's far better than what commercial beef gets.

I'm not trying to upset any vegans here. I'm just letting you know how I prefer to do things. You might think its wrong and thats OK. I don't like killing tame animals but its a part of the process.

__________________

That's the way to go anyway. I wish I had the means to do something like this. Getting grain-fed beef here is so exorbitant in price, it's not even worth it.

Anything evolutionary is speculative anyway. There's no pin-point way of deciphering the exact cause of a vague trait [or really even specific traits]. I like that theory, you like yours.

OOH CHRRRIIIISSSS

__________________

Indeed, I hate how some people think everybody should be the same. What a fucking boring world that would be

__________________

We didn't need larger jaws to kill because we had tools.



Hominids were originally designed as omnivores that ate considerably more plant matter than animal matter, as do our closest living relatives, chimpanzees and bonobos. We still eat more plant matter than animal matter, but it isn't quite as lopsided as it once was.



This isn't necessarily the case, but if it were, would strongly support my argument.



Completely raw food? Go for it if you must, but cooking is part of what increased our carnivory and brain size to begin with. Cooking allowed our bodies access to higher quality proteins and aids in the digestion process. This allows us to obtain proper nutrients much more easily than our closest relatives and allows us to eat with smaller jaws and stomachs. Chimpanzees and bonobos have larger jaws because they have to; they are required to spend a lot more time chewing their food than we do.

The only thing wrong with our food today are the secret bullshit hidden and approved by the FDA; the bizarre array of unnatural and unhealthy preservatives, colors, and similar chemical additives that permeate our food. Even these aren't likely to shave years off of your life, but can be avoided simply by switching to more expensive organic foods.

When you speak of "raw" food, is that what you are actually referring to?

__________________

exactly, complaining about how people think means you probally have a boring life...

__________________

chris you rule

__________________

Maybe the reason the chimps have bigger jaws is because they still have to bite other meat producing creatures that are attacking them? Just a thought.

5'8" and 175lbs. Time to get out the fatass chart from fbs again.

I like meat. If asked I'll offer opinions, but other than that it's like smoking or drinking, it's pretty much one's own business and that's it.

__________________

This would be, at best, a tertiary purpose. Primary is eating, secondary is male/male combat. Chimpanzees have very few natural predators (the most common being Panthera pardus), and their powerful jaws and large canines would be surprisingly ineffective against those they do have. Chimps generally utilize rocks and sticks to drive away predators as we would.



Smoking and drinking each introduce toxins into the body that the body wasn't designed to handle and wouldn't be analogous to meat ingestion. A more proper analogy would be Little Debbie's snack cakes or Twinkies, or any of the wide variety of cheap, processed foods that almost all of us eat regularly (comprising most of the diet of those in poverty).

__________________

so is the bigger jaw left over from a time long gone, or is it to do with say biting through the tougher of vegetation or nuts (one big nut that would be) etc.

__________________

It's for tougher vegetation and fruits. Chimps prefer tough fruit that we would find disgusting in flavor and rough in texture and supplement that with shoots, nuts, leaves and other vegetation, insects, and various small animals (with a strong preference toward smaller primates).

__________________

thats good but sometimes you need more than raw foods to keep you healthy.

you are gonna have to clarify, go into detail on this paragraph for me.


I just want to know how vegans and such "drive collective animals into extinction"?. most advocate reform of our entire agriculture sector.....as tho not being a vegetarian myself, I tend to agree. I don't think this would cause the downfall of pigs and cows, altho less would be bred for consumption.

Also a vegan diet combined with suppliments can be just as nutritional, more or less. Omega-3 can be found in grain.....and I would say people who are into the lifestyle at least try to understand not only nutrition(as tho it could be flawed or misguided) but cooking in general(which most people can't do reasonably at all and most restaurants don't either) more than the average joe.

Our entire agricultural sector is comprised(in the US)80% grain that feeds animals intended for consumption......combined with industrial farming and the slaughterhouse system it's all very wasteful, harmful to the environment and the FDA doesn't even have the authority to recall contaminated meat. The debate can skip over any real discussion on the conditions of American slaughterhouses, the vast amount of tariffs and protectionisms against our meat products from the rest of the world speaks enough on the matter.

Did you imply that the vegan movement is more harmful to the environmental cause?

explain.

__________________

That's good at least. Soy boosts the production of estrogen. I try to avoid it like the plague.

By diverting attention and effort away from important goals. Young people that should be legitimately outraged by the state of our environment and the organisms disappearing off this planet as though a mass extinction is approaching will be suckered into believing in this hopeless, formless, useless 'cause'. Their outrage will be diverted, as will their energy. This cause has no real goal. Oh, sure, there's a pretend 'goal', which they'll gleefully exhort some abstract bullshit, but they'll always do so without the benefit of details or a plan. There is little planning and no research involved.

How would the entire human race survive on a vegan diet?
How are we going to reach out to indigenous groups that prefer to live a more true, primal existence?
If this is possible, how is it going to effect the evolution of the human race?
How would this effect the world overall?

They don't have any answers. Simply an abstract fantasy. It's basically a John Lennon song or a psilocybin trip.



Where's the protein coming from, then? How would our alpha males obtain high levels of high quality protein? I can't wait to see what our athletes will look like.



I don't have to explain why the vegan movement is harmful to the environmental cause; you already did. Those of us genuinely concerned about the environment (and not the suffering of an individual goat on a farm somewhere) should be hard working toward a goal of minimizing, reducing, and eventually eliminating such problems as these. Animal rights morons (who honestly believe everyone should eat plants all fucking day) divert attention from legitimate avenues of advancement by extolling the virtues of nobody eating meat anymore... without ever once exploring the overwhelming detriments of such an undertaking.

Great. Where do all these animals go now? Well, we can't slaughter them. We can't feed them without keeping up this insane grain production. I'm sure many would advocate release into the wild ("go back into your natural home, man!"), greatly upsetting the balance of nature by displacing native animals.

In the meantime, grain production increases as we desperately seek to replace the hole in our diet left behind by meat. Great.

They haven't even looked this far, which is quite embarassing for their cause if they were smart enough to realize it. Not only do they not have solutions to these issues, they don't even see these issues. They are imbeciles.

__________________

The goal seems mostly doctrinal, spreading awareness about the pretty horrendous state of US slaughterhouses and advocating not only a diet that excludes animal products,but not buying anything else that contains animal products.

Most folks I know don't treat this like it's Christianity, they make mistakes, they make compromises, but they try. not everyone follows the hiz'bollah faction. Fundamentalist Dietary Supremacist Ideology.



arguably easier than what exists now. I never said industrial agriculture was inefficient, quite the contrary there. many parts of the 3rd world have bigger issues than whether being vegans or not......issues like making sure their people are fed and their is an economic system and an agricultural sector in which their people can continue to be fed.

The nation of Cuba is pretty damn close tho, the average citizen there hardly eats meat, not out of ideology tho.......it's pure economics and necessity due to the embargo and the lack of aid. fruit and vegetables are more abundant and cheaper to produce and import.



I think we can limit the debate to the industrialized, modern 1st world. People who can comfortably choose what food they want, what lifestyle they prefer. No one is going to begrudge an Inuit for hunting a whale down here.



biological evolution or social? the latter I can at least try to answer






peanuts have protein, beans have protein, google can provide that information. funny you mentioned athletes because alot of them, especially ones that compete in weight divisions, cut meat consumption out(or at least minimize it) of their diets to keep their weight in better control.





Most hardline environmentalist are vegan/vegetarian......two sides of the same coin, in the same way that the labor movement, formation of unions and the spread of communist/anarchist ideology occurred.

__________________

Yes, vegans mention this a whole lot without providing much evidence that the animals are being treated inhumanely. Are they being killed in a way that's less humane than other animals kill each other? Are they being killed in a way that's more painful than how we used to kill animals?

Other than sensationalizing by using words like "rape rack" (which is intended to draw a heartwrenching reaction, inducing images of intense physical and psychological trauma, without the benefit of actual evidence to indicate that rape racks induce a form of mating more violent or painful than that which would have taken place naturally), they provide virtually nothing.

I don't have to speak to the conditions of slaughterhouses, farms, and other such places where my knowledge is sparse. If those people really care, they'll go through the trouble of valid research to prove scientifically that the animals are being treated inhumanely. Not surprisingly, they don't.



Okay. Argue why. If vegans want such a massive wave of change to take place, they'd better be prepared to show why their way is better. Of course, they can't even prove it's feasible, but they wouldn't know because they haven't tried.



The efficiency of agriculture is a gravely serious issue; the methods currently employed neccessitate an extremely adverse effect on the environment and isn't ecologically sustainable. It's absolutely imperative that we come up with solutions both short term and long term.



Like most island and coastal nations, they eat a lot of fish and shellfish, which usually isn't reflected by generalist statements such as yours. That's not an attack on you personally, simply pointing out a common oversight.



Why? Isn't that the goal? To change the world? That's what I've been told by the vegans I've verbally outclassed so many times. They never tell me the goal is to change the US and other rich countries.



Then why can't I choose to eat beef? Chicken? Fish? Because the world doesn't get changed if people like the Inuits and the Aborigines and the Pygmys and I continue to raise animals for purposes of consumption (which, of course, we would).



Both. It would be too easy to narrow it down to biological because vegans don't give a shit about science (clearly reflected in their illogical and erroneous beliefs and crazy, unfeasible ideas for mass cultural change), but they don't seem to mind taking a stab at convoluted sociological ramblings. I'm guessing your ideas in this particular area parellel theirs.



Peanuts and beans? The proteins found in peanuts and beans are infinitely inferior in both quality and quantity to those found in meat. I've never heard of the linebacker who ate twelve cans of peanuts a day or the powerlifter who made sure to engorge a can of kidney beans after every workout.

This isn't a feasible solution.



Which ones? In what sports do they participate? Are there a lot of successful vegan football players? Baseball players? Basketball players? Hockey players? Soccer players? Even if you can find a couple, it wouldn't prove anything. Once it becomes a regularly occurence and athletes in the vegan population approach the same percentage as those in the normal population, then you'd have something. Not even proof, really, but something to get started with.



No, they're not. Hardline environmentalists involve themselves in serious and painstaking research, dedicate themselves to a movement that has produced a million metric tonnes of evidence to backup their goals and ideals, and actually put forth an effort to make a difference. Vegans whine about the rest of the world while indulging themselves in a facade of moral superiority; they put forth no effort to research scientifically the causes and effects of their purported 'movement', where it would take us and the rest of the world, or why any of it would be necessary or helpful to begin with. If they did, they'd be published in any number of legitimate scientific journals alongside the hardworking environmentalists.

__________________

Not taking sides, just pointing out a few of my POVs. Feel free to respond; I'm glad this isn't just turning into a "FUCK YOU MEAT IS FUCKIN' RAWWWWWW" vs. "OMG ANIMALS ARE PEOPLE TOO!!" argument. Anyway, using athletes to argue for a diet is pretty straw-man. If you've got a 6 foot 7 white dude that can't jump worth a shit, has no hand-eye coordination, and is slow as hell, all the high quality meat and nutrition won't allow him to outperform the 6 foot 2 ghetto-ass black dude with a 25 inch vertical leap that can sink a shot from anywhere behind the arc with his eyes closed who was raised on McDonalds and whatever else he could afford as a meal. Athletics is so much more genetic and training than diet. Furthermore, a lot of the sports you mentioned tend to have little to do with strength-to-weight ratio, etc. Sure a linebacker may need to be big, but that same 350 lb guy will NEVER beat the 120 lb Kenyan with a daily diet of half a yam. Even further, most "elite athletes" take so many bull shit supplements that play no important physiological role [and are tentatively BAD for one's health] such as a month's supply of creatine before every workout, steroids, adrenergic agonists, etc, etc etc so that diet is even more trivial.

Also, the "high quality" vs. "low quality" protein argument is weak from a health standpoint. Sure, if I want to lift weights and get "my swoll on," I can gorge out on a bunch of "high quality" protein in the hope that my body will utilize some of it for muscular anabolism, but odds are a lot of it will lead to excessive uric acid and kidney stress. "High quality" vs. "low quality" is nothing more than the amino acid profile of a food. Big deal if I eat a bunch of meat that has a lot of "high quality" protein. If one consumes a relatively diverse diet of, not even beans and legumes, but just vegetables and fruits, he or she will effectively consume more than enough amino acids and "low quality proteins" and the body will have to work a lot less to break all of the strong bonds that hold a protein together as they will already be in an easy-to-use amino acid form.

Protein sells. Of course Mr. Big Whey Protein Company is going to tell you you'll look sexy in that new bikini if you cut the carbs and gorge on the protein. I've heard stuff as ridiculous as people needing 2 grams of protein per pound of body weight. That's Great for Mr. BWPC...if i'm consuming over 300 grams of protein a day and forgetting about those DISGUSTING FATASS CARBOHYDRATES, he's selling more of his HIGH QUALITY WHEY PROTEIN.

The American slaughterhouse system is hazardous and unsafe for workers, the feedlot system is germ warfare waiting to happen on the consumers and lastly there is no government oversight on the recall of contaminated meat.

Enough said, one needs not be a vegan to see the dangers.






Read "fast food nation", just for starters, I can talk to some friends about good reading material that's well researched and credible.




It's easier and more cost efficient to grow vegetables and fruit than to raise and kill livestock.





Yeah sure, they don't eat nearly as much meat/fish product as the rest of the world.

http://www.economist.com/books/disp...ory_id=11703074

read that.

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2005/04/0080501

huge article on Cuba, they had to reform their entire agriculture sector after the soviet collapse, so on and so forth.

My point with Cuba isn't an argument for veganism or anything.....just lessons to the US that food product can change here.





Aboriginal populations are completely fucking trivial as compared to the consumer base of the American public and those of the first worlds countries, those who constitute the vast amount of market demand in what we eat. If these populations are convinced and wholeheartedly embrace veganism/vegetarianism or just suddenly ate 1/3 of the amount of meat they usually do.......they change the market.

that's how things reform.




I have never met a vegan who's ideal dream is to prohibit the eating of meat against the populations wishes in much the manner alcohol was banned years ago. veganism is supposed to be embraced by people, not forced on them.



No need to get snide, dude.




Drink a protein shake or something. Are you seriously arguing that life is not sustainable on a vegan diet?







The ones in weight divisions, I have a friend who is a cagefighter and walks around 10-15 pounds heavier than the division he fights in.

It's very common that people in wrestling and combat sports having to eat a real frugal diet, that usually involves cutting out meat or minimizing the consumption of it. I never said they were vegans, just that thru necessity they eat sure as hell lot like vegetarians. My point was is that not all athletes have to eat meat........like it is some unavoidable prerequisite.




Wrong, scientists do research, climatologists do research..........environmentalists are activists, alot of which could be scientists.......but they are 2 completely different evocations. Science is objective.......the activism part is forming groups that educate the public and seek reform based on the data.

Dude I'm telling you........those ELF and Earth first people are vegans, most of them anyway. Animal rights activism and Environmental activists are the same crowd.

__________________

Ownnnnnnned. Don't fuck with this guy.

__________________

How does any of that mean that we shouldn't eat meat? Nobody said the meat producing industry was perfect. Contrarily, it's imperfections are glaring and need to be addressed, as with all forms of food production currently employed by advanced society.

You're right; one needs not be a vegan to see the problems with it, one simply needs to be a vegan to overexaggerate the problems and decide the only rational solution is to completely abandon our biological niche.



I'm not convinced and don't have tons of free time to throw away. If, in fact, legitimate scientific research has been conducted, it should be easy enough to find a link to shut me up. This research would consist partially of experiments conducted in a controlled environment and would accurately measure and depict the relative humaneness of our current popular methods of slaughter vs. other available options, vs. the way we used to do it, and vs. the way it is typically done in nature. This research would also be adjusted to consider that other animals do not feel pain in the same way that we do, something rarely, if ever, taken into consideration by 'moral' vegetarians and the like, who instead choose to anthropomorphise those same, simple creatures as having as wide a range of emotions as we do.



Wide, sweeping generalization. To point, it generally is cheaper to grow vegetables and fruit than to raise livestock. The problem with such wide, sweeping generalizations is that they rely on the assumption that everything involved is 100% true and there are no variables. In the context of your side of your side of argument (whether you truly believe it or are simply playing the Devil's advocate) all 'research' has been from a biased to perspective to meet an end, a predestined conclusion; true science involves attacking your own idea to see how well it stands up. This would be done by researching potential negative impacts both long and short term, none of which has been done. To bring this back around to where we were, nobody has researched how agriculture would change if the entire human race adopted a completely vegetarian diet.

At what pace would we have to increase growth of vegetables and fruit in a desperate (and vain) attempt to replace the proteins lost in our diet? How long would we have to continue producing grain to feed all the livestock that, suddenly, we can't kill to eat anymore? It's easy to see that such production would actually increase greatly in the short-term and probably in the long-term, as well. After all, all these goats and cows and pigs and everything aren't going to be released in the environment without devastating impact, we can't kill them, and it wouldn't be humane to simply allow them to starve. Vegans don't have a solution for that because they haven't even looked into it that far. This abstract fairytale has yet to involve itself in serious science.



Nowhere in either of those articles does it mention that intake of fish and shellfish has decreased nor that it is lower than that of similar regions; fish and shellfish are never really addressed in either of those articles.



If it's not an argument for veganism, why are we discussing it? Anybody with a smidgen of ecological knowledge undestands that agriculture has it's imperfections and could (and should) be improved. You won't get an argument from me here, but it also doesn't have to do much with this discussion. Perhaps it's an interesting side note?



That simply isn't going to happen. Carnivory is ingrained deeply both in our instinct and in our culture, and it would be extraordinarily difficult to uproot anything out of either part of our psyche, especially when the only issue strongly pushed is a weak appeal to our sympathy for the purported suffering of the animals we eat. Even this would have no effect were it not for our cultural desire to anthropomorphise animals to being with.

Even if vegans went through the trouble of decadess worth of legitimate scientific research (haven't yet), and by some stroke of luck were able to prove their ideas were right, their methods were valid, could conceptualize their abstract visions for the future into rational and feasible plans and goals, and could decisively prove that those plans and goals WOULD change the planet for the better, they're still behind the eight-ball in changing the world. In other words, it will be a steep uphill battle even if they do the work and are 100% right.



Well, I must have had the bad luck that every vegan I've ever met has been a delusional animal rights nazi who are sure that the whole world NEEDS to be changed, some of whom have angrily referred to me as a murderer and rapist for my biological desire to consume animal matter.



I don't see where I was snide anywhere in there. If I was curt, it's simply because I've had this argument a billion times before and have heard almost all of these arguments already, with a few pleasant exceptions.



I guess I'm simply not willing to concede that, in the entire absence of any valid evidence or research, that life will improve or even remain the same if we were to uniformly adopt a vegan lifestyle. Life would definitely change, and I don't see how it would change for the better. You have no idea how such a huge change would effect the human race (and biosphere) long-term, and it's bizarre to ignorantly insist that it would be for the better.



Guys go to desperate measures to cut weight so they can fight in a weight class that isn't natural to them, and those athletes rarely conform to a strictly vegetarian diet. They generally include a great deal of protein derived from animal matter (be it shakes or meat itself; usually both), and there's a very good reason for that. A few guys might cut meats (especially fatty meats) to make weight; some also cut carbs, and neither (except fatty meats) are really beneficial. These athletes generally consume more chicken and fish than pork or beef, which is generally healthier and a diet I try to force myself into (I eat very little pork, beef is the only holdout). Most consume large amounts of chicken and fish, considerably more than the general populace.



Environmentalists are people who base their beliefs in decades worth of ecological and environmental research. Many are active scientists, and while not all are strongly knowledgable, have a vast array of evidence at their fingertips with which to back up their beliefs.



ELF are strongly associated with the ALF, both of whom are considered domestic terrorist organization. Both are fascist in their ideals, and while part of me begrudgingly admires a small portion of what the ELF stand for, that small portion is firmly rooted in overwhelming scientific evidence. The ALF and similarly fascist vegan movements (not necessarily constituting every vegan) can make no such claim, and are thusly ignorant and their ideals invalid.

__________________

You must see the logical flaw in this argument; the 6'7" white dude (not sure why he's white, but whatever) maximizes his potential as an athlete with both proper diet and training. How good he ultimately becomes is irrelevant. For what it's worth, the ghetto ass black kid might have unfortunately been raised on McDonalds (some of us could even afford that, believe it or not), but by the time he reached high school and his great level of potential was noticed, he had coaches and teammates helping him make better decisions with diet and training.



The detriment of outside supplements is as irrelevant to the discussion as myths and old wive's tales that athletes similarly believe will help their performance (see; slumpbusters, lucky shoelaces, etc.). It is known that the elevated level of protein in the diet of athletes helps them become as good as they can be. Here's why that is vitally important.

Athletes represent the physical pinnacle of humankind; they are as good as we are, and as good as we can possibly get. The fact that they benefit and ultimately become what they are as a result from elevated protein intake is nature's way of telling us that the way our species improves from animal consumption.



I can stop you right there, because that sentence is the most important part of that paragraph and the one that hurts the argument for worldwide veganism. The problem with that sentence is that it underestimates or downplays the importance of those amino acid profiles. Animal proteins contain ALL of the necessary AA profiles that our bodies require and that our bodies are incapable of producing on our own. Plant proteins do not. They are essentially a mixed grab bag of AA chains, containing some, but not all of the AA sequences our bodies need. More importantly, plant (including legumes and such) contain less overall protein than animal matter. So, not only do you have to eat more plant matter than you would have to eat in meat to obtain the same content of protein, you then have to go out and eat more plants of a different kind to make up for whatever AA sequences were deficient in the last plant group you ate. How much more plant material overall would you be required to consume? I don't know, honestly, but it would definitely be a considerable amount, and something poorly researched by those extolling the virtues of a pro-vegan future. This difference would have serious agricultural consequences, of course.



You aren't going to find enough high quality protein in table vegetables and fruit to sustain any serious athlete. Even the few, fluke vegan athletes that make it would have to consume large amounts of legumes and cereals, which contain the highest ratio of protein among vegetable matter.

As far as digestibility, I've never read anything that indicates that low quailty proteins (such as vegetable protein) are more readily digestible. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I haven't read anything to that end, and you would help support your argument by pointing toward an article I could read. Whether or not you are right about that, it is well known by the scientific community that animal proteins (whey, milk, egg, etc.), once digested, provide a more complete and healthy amino acid profile.



No argument there. Those people have their own agenda just as do the soy protein people and the moral vegan group. These people have, however, more evidence to back their claims than either of the latter groups, and as overstated as their claims may be, I back the argument that makes the most sense. The whey protein industry has the strongest supporting evidence.

I'd also like to point out that the protein industry as a whole has little to nothing to do with an argument vis a vis veganism.

__________________

Chris, goddamnit, dont you have anything better to do than getting involved in stupid discussion-writing? Every post longer than your previous makes me doubt your social qualities.

nothing personal

__________________

Most of the meat we buy is made here, I've cut most forms of meat from my diet, I suggest others do too. I want to minimize any contribution to the industry, I hope others do as well. each dollar is a vote as far as I'm concerned.







It's a good book and it's well worth the read, a book that's not just an inside look on how meat is produced...it get well into the assembly line process of manufacturing cheap, low cost, highly processed food items of all variety, the flavoring industry, the environmental impact of agriculture, genetically modified foods and more.

It doesn't explicitly argue for veganism, but it can be.



this is why I mentioned Cuba, it's the closest real-world example.



Transformation would take time, it would have to coincide with market demand, not some all-of-a-sudden prohabition of meat production.





I mentioned it because it's a good real world example of a nation that's..........pretty much the closest to vegetarian as we can get, for a living example. I don't doubt they fish. It is interesting and I think it was relevant to mention. Cuba is what any vegan, who isn't a total baffoon, is gonna mention as the direction our country should move in........organic farming, home-cooked meals.......no factory automated cheeseburger bullshit, they capture the real ethos of the vegan/vegetarian movement just out of self-preservation.




I more or less agree, it just seems you encountered vegan folks who aren't making a good case for it.



Sure, It's more live-by-example with people I know, not being proselytes of some inflexible fundamentalist faith.



If they are high school/college aged kids then yeah, you are gonna encounter the "young idealists".





you keep on trying to draw me into what I can guess is your area of study, or expertise with the question of what such a diet would do, biologically, to the human race.




My point was not all athletes have to be big like NFL linebackers, I'll look around to see what's written on vegetarian/vegan athletes.......I'm sure some exist and I'm also sure even NFL players can get by as vegans.

__________________

You're fucking kidding, right?

I'm 100% with Chris, as a global change that large simply could not happen.

__________________

and why should it. people should just learn to accept whatever each other wish to do.

__________________

Obviously, but stupid "hard-line", idealistic vegan idiots don't share that simple concept.

__________________

There is still a decent amount of agriculture around where I live, and if I could afford to, it would be easy enough to go to local, small-town style butcher and buy beef that didn't destroy the Amazon first. My mother actually gets some decent deals on cold cuts (turkey and beef) from a butchery/corner store in Dartmouth, and there were a couple in New Bedford, too. There's probably a few here in Taunton, too, if I can find them.







I pretty much already know about the disgusting degree to which our staple foods are generally processed, and agree that organic foods (including meat) are significantly healthier and more ethically sound.



Nothing wrong with the idea of organic farming. At the same time, we need to reform our technologically advanced forms of agriculture and food production to minimize and eventually eliminate those problems we do face so that some day we may produce food more efficiently and with a minimal effect on the environment, which wide scale organic farming wouldn't be able to provide while sustaining large, developed countries.



It's not really an expertise, I have no degrees (in biology, anyway). It is my area of study, however, and would be inexpressibly, vitally important to consider before any huge mass change were undertaken. We HAVE to have some idea of how this could effect us long-term before we could commit to it. I would bet everything (and I never bet on anything) that long term effects would be negative ones; increased carnivory shaped us into what we are today.



No, but NFL linebackers do. I'm sure you can find a couple of outliers if you look hard enough, but they wouldn't represent a significant percentage of elite athletes past and/or present. It's important to note the difference between the best that a vegan can become physically and a person more in touch with their biological instincts can become physically when making these kind of decisions.

__________________

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080818/whittelsey

an article that ties in alot things we are taking about.

__________________

[QUOTE=low-tech]

There's a telling phrase: "get by".

It's perfectly possible to be a vegan athlete. That being said, I've met exactly none. Athletes, from professionals to half-arsed ones like me, have no intention of 'getting by'.

There's a few things written by Mike Mahler on being a vegan athlete... the lengths (not to mention the expense) he has to go to are more of a committment than most marriages.

__________________

some days i eat only vegetarian meals, or very little meat. I cant be a non-meat eater because my IBS is triggered by alot of veggies that are staples for vegan meals.

I try to get all my vegetable and fruit intake everyday, and what meat i eat is limited. Chicken, fish, shrimp, squid, extra lean beef on occasion, and the rare time beef ribs.

__________________

Still, it would be worth that and more - if Disney is right, which it isn't. There's a Swedish psychologist, David Eberhardt, who has written a book called - loosely translated - "In the land of the safety addicts", in which he presents a very convincing line of reasoning saying that Sweden, and to an increasing level many other countries as well, has become a nation addicted to safety, with a phobic fear of anything that might be dangerous or unpleasent. Such as eating Bambi. Get it?

__________________

Anyone who eats meat is a murderous fascist pig, dude. I'm a vegetarian, and it is my mission to convert any fascist, meat-eating, misogynistic, assholes into earth loving, feminist, pot smoking hippies.

I can smell the sarcasm

__________________

Just out of interest how do those posting with a moral opposition to eating meat feel about in vitro meat? I'm only talking about the moral side here, not the economical. If in vitro meat was economically viable, would you eat it?

It you are not familiar with the concept, you can start here for an idea.

Chris for the win.

My own view is that cattle and poultry would be subject to predation in the wild and would suffer more stressful deaths in such situations than in an abattoir. Are the natural predators of these animals murdering? No, because they eat to survive.

Humans also kill animals to survive. And before anybody says, I don't buy the "viable alternative" argument either. We as humans have an anatomy that is meant for the consumption of meat; it is therefore, natural, as it is in large parts of the animal kingdom, for us to eat the flesh of other animals.

By all means choose not to eat meat, but I will not be labelled a murderer for following one of humankind's most primal biological imperatives.

__________________

However, as I see it, there is a flaw in that argument, since it seems to assume that natural is the same as acceptable, which I'm not prepared to agree on.

On the other hand, as Chris - and myself in discarding disneyfication - has made abundantly clear, the whole idea of vegetarianism based on moral principles is untrue to fact. I will not call it irrationall - a person living indoors for his/her whole life and then being dragged outside at the age of thirty could hardly be called irrationall for getting a panic - but insofar as I have ever seen it is highly incomplete.

__________________

very close to my opinion.

If we didn't take cattle with us and keep them around for as long as we do. they would have been gone long ago. think about it, they are a DUMB large mammal that can't reproduce well on its own and we have to HELP the fucking thing reproduce and keep it safe from wolfs. fair fucking game.

__________________

Ah, but we have a generation who's subcounscious perception of animals largely comes from Disney-movies. Something of a poser.

__________________

I don't think cattle are aboriginal to the western hemisphere.

In the same way horses aren't. Could be wrong there though.

And anyway, Cattle can still serve a purpose even if they aren't eaten, but there would be alot less of them owned/domesticated.

Like used as a source for dairy. Hindus worship the god-damn things and view westerners eating them like we view Koreans eating cats and dogs.

Something that makes your head shake side to side like the world flipped upsidedown.

__________________

It's tentative to say we are meant to eat meat. Just because we can doesn't mean we're supposed to. As I said before, I really think our ability to consume meat is an evolutionary mechanism for increased survival. We can fight infection with immune defense...does that mean we're supposed to be infected? We can regenerate if injured...does that mean we should be cut and hurt?

We can survive on a completely vegetarian diet...we can't survive on a diet of only meat without supplementation.

Which, in effect, means we are supposed to eat meat. The only thing that dictates what we are supposed to do is where evolution has taken us. The same is true for every single other organism.



Yes, we are supposed to be infected and cut. It's a natural part of life and completely unavoidable. Otherwise we wouldn't have developed an immune system or the ability to regenerate damaged tissue.



Yes. We are designed to eat more vegetable matter than animal matter, something well understood in the scientific community and by most common folk. I understand what you're trying to say, it just doesn't mean as much as you're making of it.

__________________