• inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      If you think pigs, chickens and cows have the same level of awareness and perception as broccoli, tomatoes or potatoes than you’re the potato.

      Humans have to eat and with the exception of a few minerals like salt, everything edible to humans is alive on some level. Vegansisn is making an ethical choice about reducing what causes the most pain fear and suffering in another. If I were to develop cancer, a tape worm or a virus should I also allow those living things to thrive as well or does “Uh, now what?” also apply to antibiotics?

    • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Vegans consume fewer plants than anyone else. It takes a LOT of plants to raise a cow, pig, or chicken. From an economic point of view, meat is a way of refining mountains of cheap, plentiful, safe plant products into a scarce, harmful and addictive luxury product. This comes up a lot, you’d be amazed how many plants rights activists your average vegan runs into.

      • SupraMario@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Unless you count grass and non-human consumables and non-potable water…sure…until then that’s bullshit.

        • oce 🐆@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          How is that bullshit? I am not vegan, but that’s just a scientific consensus and a major reason why plant diet is way lower carbon than a meat diet. If you need to grow plant food for your animal food, eventually you have to grow way more plant food.
          Most animals raised for meat consumption are fed with crops, notably soy, not wild grass.
          Thinking animals raised for meat only consume resources (land (first cause of biodiversity loss), plants, water, energy) that would not be useful to humans anyway is undoubtedly wrong.

          Researchers Poore and Nemecek are a great source of meta-analysis information about those subjects. Check this summary here for example: http://environmath.org/2018/06/17/paper-of-the-day-poore-nemecek-2018-reducing-foods-environmental-impacts/

          Let me know if I misunderstood your point.

          • SupraMario@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            https://www.ars.usda.gov/ARSUserFiles/50901500/px-based_v3.2/educ-matrls/pdfs/HO_what-cows-eat.pdf

            We do not feed them food we can eat, it would be such a waste to do so. We literally feed them shit we cannot consume. Feeds are made from roots/stalks/inedible plants.

            The vegan industry doesn’t like this, so they say well that land could be used for other things, when in reality it’s already being used for the food that we eat.

            • oce 🐆@jlai.lu
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 months ago

              They are also fed grains and soy in varying percentage depending on regions and countries.
              There is also still the use of land, energy, fresh water and the methane emissions typical of cows.

              This is another break down of the above-mentioned study: https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets

              You can see that indeed, the USA does better than other countries on not dedicating crops to animal feed, but it is still about 14%, while the world average is around 40%. Isn’t that a lot that could be earned back?

              • SupraMario@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                10 months ago

                The majority of the land used for cattle grazing is not suitable for farmland. It’s either to hilly or rocky or just plain doesn’t have great soil. Not to mention the level of crops it would require to feed people and the amount of people who just cannot sustain on a all vegan diet. There is a reason we are omnivores and not herbivores.

                • oce 🐆@jlai.lu
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  This is also covered by the study and the article I shared above. It would require using more lands for crops that feed people, but that’s ridiculously small compared to the land that would be regained from stopping animal agriculture, which is 75%. Just removing cows would do the vast majority of that.

                  Crops for feed can be regained and if most pasture land is inappropriate for crops, some are, so we would gain from freeing those too. Furthermore, this land can be given back to biodiversity, which will also benefit us in the long term, if just protecting biodiversity for the sake of it is not a good argument for you.

                  Again, I am not vegan, I mostly advocate for reducing, not forbidding, consumption proportionally to ecological impact. If some people for medical reason require meat, I’m completely fine with it, this would likely be a small percentage of the current consumption.

                  Omnivore, not obligate carnivore except for a few exceptions maybe, so we could use a low meat diet or a fully plant based diet fine.

        • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          What figures are you basing your ignorance off of? The majority of the plants humans grow through crop-based agriculture are fed to non-human animals. Animal ag is one of the largest consumers of fresh (ie “potable”) water. There are ten animals living in human possession for every human on Earth. Without intensive plant agriculture, we could not possibly feed them all. Grass and run-off is not what is producing your food.

          And since we are specifically discussing the hypothetical suffering of plants, why wouldn’t you count grass? You’re triggered.

          • SupraMario@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            What figures are you basing your ignorance off of? The majority of the plants humans grow through crop-based agriculture are fed to non-human animals. Animal ag is one of the largest consumers of fresh (ie “potable”) water. There are ten animals living in human possession for every human on Earth. Without intensive plant agriculture, we could not possibly feed them all. Grass and run-off is not what is producing your food.

            No they are not. They eat the shit we cannot eat, they graze the majority of their lives and we use non potable water to water them. The feed we feed them is not made with anything that a human could consume. It’s roots/stalks/inedible plants. This bullshit that keeps being promoted by vegans that everything a cow can eat is bullshit.

            And since we are specifically discussing the hypothetical suffering of plants, why wouldn’t you count grass? You’re triggered.

            Because your entire point was that vegans consume less plants than anyone else, which is basically saying “vegans are still better than meat eaters” it’s more hilarious dick wagging from you chods.

              • SupraMario@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                Lol I’m butthurt? Lol you vegans are fucking hilariously ignorant bunch. You’re like religious zealots too, all high and mighty with an ignorant levels of information being spewed to you.

                • swim@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  This is the epitome of projection, FYI. All this wasted energy and impotent vitriol, railing against a non-existent evil (“the vegan industry?” seriously sad), defending the (actually malignant) status quo for free. It’s exhausting feeling so sorry for you

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            The majority of the plants humans grow through crop-based agriculture are fed to non-human animals

            That’s a lie. 2/3 of the world’s crop calories go directly to people. One third of the world’s crop calories go to livestock, but that’s as the other user is mentioning, mostly crop seconds or parts of plants that we can’t eat.

        • NFord@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Are you saying grass aren’t plants? Why would it matter if the plant is consumable by humans if vegans are trying to minimize suffering?

          • SupraMario@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Because they’re not about minimizing suffering, it’s about being morally superior to meat eaters and letting everyone know about it. The post I replied to, literally made that a point.

            • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 days ago

              It’s astonishing that a person can compose such a blatant strawman, such a crude caricature, and believe it so fervently despite having just constructed the idea themselves. This is delusion. Genuine delusion. What is motivating your insanity? I would love to know.

      • fsxylo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Vegans: we’ll have only a little vegetable cruelty, as a treat.

        Whatever keeps the high horse fed.

        • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          You’re going to have to unpack this a bit more for me.

          Edit: Ohhhh, you’re another one of those plant rights activists. Buddy, I eat plants for breakfast. You know what? Now I’m going to eat twice as many plants, just because it upsets you.

      • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Wouldn’t you need to decimate the population of cows, pigs, and chickens in order to reduce their environmental impact? This argument always invokes an image of Thanos wiping out half the universe in order to ‘save’ it, but the people making this argument never seem to be receptive to acknowledging this point and just hand wave this step away.

        • anar@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Meat eaters are already decimating populations, they are Thanos with a universe conveyor belt, clicking every second.