Guzzler
Master
- Messages
- 10,577
- Type of diabetes
- Type 2
- Treatment type
- Diet only
- Dislikes
- Poor grammar, bullying and drunks.
Peter Balerstedt has a couple of fantastic lectures on YouTube if you are interested.
Are there no farmers with Diabetes on this site to give us their perspective.
Unfortunately a tax rise on meat products will drive us to seeking cheaper sources of meat, and thus make intensive farming and agribusiness thrive rather than encourage good husbandry, Ecologically, more damage is being done to the forests by cultivation of palm oil, ground nut oil, and crops for biofuels so the 'meat farming destroys the land mantra' is false. Animals need fresh grass and borage to eat, and these crops help to replenish the oxygen amd fix nitrogen in the soil to make it fertile. The effluent produced also replenishes the nitrogen naturally, Although methane is a potential greenhouse gas, it remains at low altitudes and does not significantly deplete the ozone layer. One other ecological aspect often overlooked is that as vegetation decays at life end it releases the carbon as CO2 and CH4 those well known greenhouse gases. Nothing is wasted or lost, it all goes up in the air in the end. Thats true recycling.You are, in essence, right but look what happened with rates of smoking. We were given all the advice and knowledge and numbers fell but the decrease was sharper as the tax on ciggies was hiked.
Unfortunately a tax rise on meat products will drive us to seeking cheaper sources of meat, and thus make intensive farming and agribusiness thrive rather than encourage good husbandry, Ecologically, more damage is being done to the forests by cultivation of palm oil, ground nut oil, and crops for biofuels so the 'meat farming destroys the land mantra' is false. Animals need fresh grass and borage to eat, and these crops help to replenish the oxygen amd fix nitrogen in the soil to make it fertile. The effluent produced also replenishes the nitrogen naturally, Although methane is a potential greenhouse gas, it remains at low altitudes and does not significantly deplete the ozone layer. One other ecological aspect often overlooked is that as vegetation decays at life end it releases the carbon as CO2 and CH4 those well known greenhouse gases. Nothing is wasted or lost, it all goes up in the air in the end. Thats true recycling.
Do you think it's reasonable to distinguish between a) vegans who have made their choice for emotional reasons (e.g. 'meat is murder') so might be biased against evidence showing harms of veganism and b) vegans who made their choice based on their current scientific appraisal of the benefits of veganism?Possibly but we should also remember that the lead researcher is an outspoken vegan so the paper is written from that perspective and he references his own papers 2 or 3 times in the new piece. I'm afraid I can see where he is coming from only too well.
Does that make me an Eggaquarian?Most people call it pescatarian but I think vegaquarian is more fun
I don't say I am a veggie because I also eat fish.
I do not eat meat. This was a ethical decision I made 25 years ago when it was very difficult to get free range meat and I haven't missed it since. It has never been a health-based decision.
Do you think it's reasonable to distinguish between a) vegans who have made their choice for emotional reasons (e.g. 'meat is murder') so might be biased against evidence showing harms of veganism and b) vegans who made their choice based on their current scientific appraisal of the benefits of veganism?
Veganism is a lifestyle - because of the (as far as possible) eschewing of any use/exploitation of animals, including training them to do work. So if it’s just that you don’t eat any animal products you’d be following a “plant based diet”.Are b more Whole Food Plant Based eaters than vegans? I thought the whole thing with vegans was that it was about the emotional/moral (as they see it) reasons I have been told off here by people, now left I think, that veganism is not a dietary choice but a political one. Maybe Vegan and Wholly Plant eaters would be a better definition?
Veganism is a lifestyle - because of the (as far as possible) eschewing of any use/exploitation of animals, including training them to do work. So if it’s just that you don’t eat any animal products you’d be following a “plant based diet”.
Although "plant based" doesn't exclude meat or fish surely .. I mean the words don't although most people following that way of eating would probably assume it did. I think we need a new word/phrase for people who avoid food from the animal kingdom entirely but don't espouse the "politics" of vegan.Veganism is a lifestyle - because of the (as far as possible) eschewing of any use/exploitation of animals, including training them to do work. So if it’s just that you don’t eat any animal products you’d be following a “plant based diet”.
I'm guessing not and no avocados or honey either?No assistance dogs?
There would be no need to find new land to grow crops for people - the land currently used to grow crops for livestock could be used instead. In a lot of countries, manure has largely been replaced by artificial fertiliser.it just another way of taxing us, in the guise of being for our health.
there is a huge pro-vegan thing going on as people are realizing this planet cant sustain us all, let alone the future increase in population.
However, we cant feed all the people on vegan stuff either. Much land is not suitable for agriculture, and where will the manure/fertilizer come from? etc etc etc. no joined up thinking going on here.
I get the dogs and the honey but am struggling with the avocados. Does it take a duck to harvest them?I'm guessing not and no avocados or honey either?
I doubt most people would be happy to eat the quality of crop that is currently fed to cattle though and artificial fertilisers are hardly great for the environment. We would simply end up with huge monoculture farms producing low quality low nutritional value food. With decimated wildlife and no steak. Which in my view is a lose lose situation for everyone. Plus if the alleged health benefit of wholly plant diets are correct (which I doubt) then the world will be overpopulated within a few years and no amount of cropping will be enough to feed everyone.the land currently used to grow crops for livestock could be used instead.
No bees are apparently transported around to fertilise the avocado plants thus they are exploited.I get the dogs and the honey but am struggling with the avocados. Does it take a duck to harvest them?
No bees are apparently transported around to fertilise the avocado plants thus they are exploited.
Yes, plant-based would probably be a better label than vegan for (b), but some people will use the term vegan to cover both. From what I read, the lead author on the paper chose plant-based eating/veganism based on his interpretation of the science. http://www.oxfordtoday.ox.ac.uk/interviews/what-if-we-all-turned-vegan-2050Are b more Whole Food Plant Based eaters than vegans? I thought the whole thing with vegans was that it was about the emotional/moral (as they see it) reasons I have been told off here by people, now left I think, that veganism is not a dietary choice but a political one. Maybe Vegan and Wholly Plant eaters would be a better definition?
Apparently not, according to a hardcore vegan I was having an argument with. Or horse racing. No avocados because bees are transported to where they grow, so that’s exploiting them to do work. They got quite angry with me when I asked how they could use that argument yet watch Game of Thrones, which uses many animal actors.No assistance dogs?
Apparently not, according to a hardcore vegan I was having an argument with. Or horse racing. No avocados because bees are transported to where they grow, so that’s exploiting them to do work. They got quite angry with me when I asked how they could use that argument yet watch Game of Thrones, which uses many animal actors.
Theoretically, the land used to grow crops to feed animals could be used to grow crops to feed people. What people are willing to do is a completely separate question. I don't see why monocultures, decimated wildlife and artificial fertiliser would be any more of a problem than they are at present.I doubt most people would be happy to eat the quality of crop that is currently fed to cattle though and artificial fertilisers are hardly great for the environment. We would simply end up with huge monoculture farms producing low quality low nutritional value food. With decimated wildlife and no steak. Which in my view is a lose lose situation for everyone. Plus if the alleged health benefit of wholly plant diets are correct (which I doubt) then the world will be overpopulated within a few years and no amount of cropping will be enough to feed everyone.
There would be no need to find new land to grow crops for people - the land currently used to grow crops for livestock could be used instead. In a lot of countries, manure has largely been replaced by artificial fertiliser.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?