• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

most googled questions on veganism 2019

Geordie_P said:
This in turn leads to ideas such as the 'meat tax',
Click to expand...
I thought that was suggested because of the amount of CO2 that cattle belch and other em missions they exude. Also the amount of land required to grow feed for the animals.
Although I've cut back on red meat a bit, it's beef stew Wednesday tomorrow and it's not changing for anyone. LOL
 
bulkbiker said:
For adults its fine, they are quite able to make their own choices, but when those adults cause their children (and probably pets) health issues and even death by following their dietary protocols I do start to wonder if it's similar to groups that refuse medical treatment etc because of their "religion". There have been more and more cases recently of young parents imposing restricted diets on their offspring which then lead to harm... Where do you stand on that and more to the point what should be done?
Edit to add I'll tag in @Pinkorchid as well.
Click to expand...
Having spent the whole of my working life as a social worker and manager in childrens social care, (including child protection asessment and treatment services) and then as a therapist and head of profession in children's mental health services, my stance on child protection is very very clear.
If there is suspiscion of a childs physical, emotional or mental health being damaged / compromised by the actions of their parents, any other adult ( or indeed child) in their lives then it becomes an area for investigation potentially leading to formal child protection proceedures being invoked, the end result of which may be the prosecution of the perpetrator(s) and / or the removal of the child
In all such proceedures, harm must be evidenced by medical examinations / asessments ( weight, height, growth charts, blood tests etc alongside social asessments etc etc. They must not ever be based on the personal beliefs / practices of the social worker / asessor etc. In that situation, as a social care professional whether or not I believed the family feeding their child a vegan diet was healthy or harmful, would be completely and appropriately irrelevant
 
Last edited:
Boo1979 said:
Absolutely nothing!
People can define and shape their diet however they want, within legal limits, as well as deciding what supplements from which sources they accept. For many vegans & vegetarians it is only “ sentient” animal life they decline to make use of / eat - some would argue that bacteria and particularly bacterial colonies ( such as those in our own guts or the ones from which B12 is harvested) have a degree of awareness, many would disagree.
For any non vegan ( Im not referring to Lucylockett here) to argue what does / does not constitute a vegan diet is as bonkers as a vegan saying what does / does not constitute a true carnivore diet ( e.g. that the carnivore tag only applies to cannibals and / or those who behave as a carnivore by hunting & killing their own meat
Click to expand...
I wonder how many MSP;s are vegan, and whether the Scottish Parliament is therefore qualified to discuss the vegan issue when it comes before them this year. I would say that a research of the Vegan Soc website will cover most of the questions that a non vegan may have as to what is or is not allowed in a vegan WOE.

So if it is only sentient animals, then why is honey off the vegan menu? Are Ants in carob allowed? It would seem they are notL
http://www.animal-ethics.org/sentience-section/animal-sentience/what-beings-are-conscious/

Edit to addL By corollary, is a venus fly trap sentient. Surely vegans would not be allowed to eat triffids.

There have been experiments that seem to show that plants and trees communicate with each other, which would make them sentient? ~Hoooom!
 
Last edited:
Oldvatr said:
I wonder how many MSP;s are vegan, and whether the Scottish Parliament is therefore qualified to discuss the vegan issue when it comes before them this year. I would say that a research of the Vegan Soc website will cover most of the questions that a non vegan may have as to what is or is not allowed in a vegan WOE.

So if it is only sentient animals, then why is honey off the vegan menu? Are Ants in carob allowed? It would seem they are notL
http://www.animal-ethics.org/sentience-section/animal-sentience/what-beings-are-conscious/
Click to expand...
Depends on where people are on the spectrum of people who self identify as vegan.
Ill lay money that many people who identify as vegan have never heard of campaigning bodies such as P.E.T.A. or the vegan society (both oft referred to on here) , let alone had anything to do with them - the recurring vegan debate on this forum keeps on and on and on reverting to talking about the extremist end of the spectrum and applying it to all.
Maybe people citeing things the vegan society or P.E.T.A. say as being “ vegans say....” “ vegans believe .....” etc is simply laziness, maybe its simply misunderstanding or maybe its a way to try and make a stronger ( but inaccurate) case - whatever it, its certainly annoying.
 
Last edited:
Boo1979 said:
If there is suspiscion of a childs physical, emotional or mental health being damaged / compromised by the actions of their parents, any other adult ( or indeed child) in their lives then it becomes an area for investigation potentially leading to formal child protection proceedures being invoked, the end result of which may be the prosecution of the perpetrator(s) and / or the removal of the child
Click to expand...

So the children of vegans should indeed be monitored for possible harm due to poor diet?
Do Social Services have the resources for that?
 
bulkbiker said:
So the children of vegans should indeed be monitored for possible harm due to poor diet?
Do Social Services have the resources for that?
Click to expand...
Child health is monitored at primary care level by GP’s, health visitors and school nurses - all have a statutory responsibility to report any serious concerns about a child's health and / or well being to social care
No single group of children defined by religion, ethnicity, parental belief systems, diet etc etc ever would or should be singled out for monitoring without significant objective evidence of harm - that type of blanket monitoring would be the foundations of a fascist state.
 
Boo1979 said:
Depends on where people are on the spectrum of people who self identify as vegan.
Ill lay money that many people who identify as vegan have never heard of campaigning bodies such as P.E.T.A. Orvthe vegan society, let alone had anything to do with them - the recurring vegan debate on this forum keeps on and on and on reverting to talking about the extremist end of the spectru and applying it to all.
Maybe people referring to things the vegan society or P.E.T.A. say as being “ vegans say....” “ vegans believe .....” etc is simple laziness, maybe its simply misunderstanding or maybe its a way to try and make a stronger ( but inaccurate) case - whatever it, its certainly annoying and rather sloppy
Click to expand...
I am not sure if I am reading your post correctly, but you seem to be saying that the Vegan Soc [the people that started the movement and the first to give it formal recognition and indeed invented the very term veganism] is no longer representative of the movement, and so has no authority to speak on their behalf. Bit like Diabetes UK (DUK) is to us diabetics in a way.

But the Vegan Soc is now teamed with British Heart Foundation, the AHA, and DUK to actively promote the vegan way. There is also a tie up with the British Nutrition Foundation. Now these latter bodies are the ones the NHS and NICE and now the government is consulting with on health matters, so I would say that they carry a lot more weight than the 1% population that are vegan would normally carry, and this is why many of us here feel threatened by them. They are starting to dictate their WOE onto the world in general, and seem to command the Press and lawmakers to make it mandatory on all of us. This is a political movement, pure and simple.
 
Last edited:
Oldvatr said:
I am not sure if I am reading your post correctly, but you seem to be saying that the Vegan Soc [the people that started the movement and the first to give it formal recognition and indeed invented the very term veganism] is no longer representative of the movement, and so has no authority to speak on their behalf. Bit like Diabetes UK (DUK) is to us diabetics in a way.

But the Vegan Soc is now teamed with British Heart Foundation, the AHA, and DUK to actively promote the vegan way. There is alo a tie up with the British Nutrition Foundation. Now these latter bodies are the ones the NHS and NICE and now the government is consulting with on health matters, so I would say that they carry a lot more weight than the 1% population that are vegan would normally carry, and this is why many of us here feel threatened by them. They are starting to dictate their WOE onto the world in general, and seem to command the Press and lawmakers to make it mandatory on all of us. This is a political movement, pure and simple.
Click to expand...
What I am saying is that in the same way as not all people who follow LCHF / Keto etc diets for diabetes and / or other conditions have never heard of this website and so couldnt give a stuff about what it /we say, not all people who identify as vegans have ever heard of the Vegan society or PETA and dont give a stuff what they do or dont say
 
Last edited:
Boo1979 said:
Child health is monitored at primary care level by GP’s, health visitors and school nurses - all have a statutory responsibility to report any serious concerns about a child's health and / or well being to social care
No single group of children defined by religion, ethnicity, parental belief systems, diet etc etc ever would or should be singled out for monitoring without significant objective evidence of harm - that type of blanket monitoring would be the foundations of a fascist state.
Click to expand...
Parental belief systems??? Not sure this is sensible.
 
Oldvatr said:
Parental belief systems??? Not sure this is sensible.
Click to expand...
Jehova’s witnesses - some people incorrectly argue that the children should be constantly monitored ecause the parental belief system poses a risk to children (mainly but no exclusively due to the beliefs about medical interventions)
 
Boo1979 said:
What I am saying is that in the same way as not all people who follow LCHF / Keto etc diets for diabetes and / or other conditions have never heard of this website and scouldnt give a stuff about what it /we say, not all people who identify as vegans have ever heard of the Vegan society or PETA and dont give a stuff what they do or dont say
Click to expand...
I am not aware of anyone who advocates the LC or Keto WOE as also calling for these diets to be made mandatory on the rest of the world Whilst we have sought to have the Eatwell guidelines modified to allow other diets to be considered, and have worked to get the Low Carb program up to a state where it can now be prescribed by HCP's I am not aware of anyone suggesting that it be made compulsory in schools, public eateries etc, No one in my knowledge has called for a Carb Tax, but we have in general supported the Sugar Tax but with reservations. Most of us are leading by example, by showing what advantages we get from our chosen WOE Yes, some are indeed more vocal than others, but the same can be said of our MP's
 
Boo1979 said:
Jehova’s witnesses - some people incorrectly argue that the children should be constantly monitored ecause the parental belief system poses a risk to children (mainly but no exclusively due to the beliefs about medical interventions)
Click to expand...
That is a recognised religion. I do not think of Veganism in the same light. It is NOT a religion (yet). Neither is Pastafarianism as was contested in the law recently.
 
Oldvatr said:
I am not aware of anyone who advocates the LC or Keto WOE as also calling for these diets to be made mandatory on the rest of the world Whilst we have sought to have the Eatwell guidelines modified to allow other diets to be considered, and have worked to get the Low Carb program up to a state where it can now be prescribed by HCP's I am not aware of anyone suggesting that it be made compulsory in schools, public eateries etc, No one in my knowledge has called for a Carb Tax, but we have in general supported the Sugar Tax but with reservations. Most of us are leading by example, by showing what advantages we get from our chosen WOE Yes, some are indeed more vocal than others, but the same can be said of our MP's
Click to expand...
Really? - some on here come **** close to it

Edited by moderator for offensive language
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brunneria said:
I have never understood why people single out veganism for criticism on B12 grounds, when numerous non-vegans need B12 supplements AND other ways of eating often need supplements.
As an example, many low carbers need magnesium supplements.
Click to expand...
Exactly many people take supplements for many different reasons there would be no need for Holland and Barrett if they didn't as that is what they sell most of
 
bulkbiker said:
For adults its fine, they are quite able to make their own choices, but when those adults cause their children (and probably pets) health issues and even death by following their dietary protocols I do start to wonder if it's similar to groups that refuse medical treatment etc because of their "religion". There have been more and more cases recently of young parents imposing restricted diets on their offspring which then lead to harm... Where do you stand on that and more to the point what should be done?
Edit to add I'll tag in @Pinkorchid as well.
Click to expand...
Would you take the same view of parents feeding their children a low carb diet which could be considered by many as not good for a growing child.....why just pick on veganism
 
Pinkorchid said:
Would you take the same view of parents feeding their children a low carb diet which could be considered by many as not good for a growing child.....why just pick on veganism
Click to expand...
Because no kids have died through eating low carb?
 
Vegans, carnivores, junk food addicts, low carbers, carb festers can all make stupid dietary choices making for a dangerous / deadly diet for thir children - some because they are uninformed, some becaue they are stupid, others because they are abusive, others because they are deluded - all diets can kill chilren ( particularly babies) if poorly administered.
The more restricive diets that cut out whole food groups - like veganism, LCHF, Carnivore, etc etc are all much more complicated to design in a way that is healthy so all have a greater potential to harm children.
This is fairly balanced journalism which cites sources that talk about risks of veganism for cildren and the steps resposible parents need to take
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...inerals-calcium-vegetarian-week-a7738906.html
 
Last edited:
Back
Top