Veganism and organic foods

[Sriad]

Damn, too many quote tags...

[Alliance SpecForceTrooper]

Well...

back to the original point of the post. Might I suggest, if you want to look at an alternative to beef, but still want red meat, there is deer, buffalo and ostrich that are all great and have lower levels of fat than beef. Of course, you have to live in an area that either supports those industries or have a specialty butcher shop.

Farm raised deer is supposed to be far less gamey than wild deer. I've had buffalo (hot dogs no less) and it was damned good. The only one I haven't tried is ostrich, but supposedly it tastes very much like beef.

So, instead of going the VegiNazi route (apologies to those that are Veggies that aren't apeshit about the rest of us eating what we evolved to eat), there are still carnivorous options.

[Quadlok]

I own cows, jackass, and they aren't disrupting shit. The fact is, their helping the ecosystem, as otherwise the land they're on would just be another damned subdivision. Instead, its bird habitat. You're talking large scale, I'm talking small scale.

...so I'm a jackass because I'm looking at things on a large scale? Large scale is what a meat eating culture requires, not a couple dozen head of cattle kept by guys on the outskirts of town.

Even in the case of large scale grazing, whatever damage that is going to be done has already been done, and barring a few overzealous ranchers going after wolves and other predators, the animals that are left have adapted pretty well. A fence that holds a cow does not hold a deer, and the ecosystem was accustomed to large grazing herds already. True, there are still some issues, such as the enourmous amount of methane produced by cow farts or their tendency to foul water sources, and this should and could be cut back if we would all eat a bit less fast food crap.

Pigs are horrible, aggressive, cannibalistic animals, and cows aren't bright enough to know or care whats going on. But basically, they're all animals, and they would get eaten on a regular basis in the wild anyway.

So basically, much like humans in both cases?
Saying "it happens in the wild" isn't much of a justification for anything from my point of view, given that cannibalism, rape, and plenty of other behaviours generally accepted to be despicable occur in nature. (like sodomy! Oh noes! )

Except that in this case the species has evolved to be eaten on a regular basis and still sustain its numbers, for that matter, species have evolved to be cannibalistic. We are still animals, despite all our moral fancifications, and blatantly omnivorous ones at that.

So what? They've been bred for ten thousand years for that very purpose! And anyway, instead of an 8 year fight for survival and slim chance of mating, they get 2 years in which all they do is eat and screw around with other steers.

I see, "we've been doing it for a long time so it's okay" followed by the suggestion that being a herd animal for 1/4 of ones lifespan in the wilderness is a gift. Two points for your side!

Balanced out in large part by the females and bulls that live twice their normal lifespan. Its a mutually benificial relationship when looking at the species as a whole, instead of just the steers.

Morality very rarely enters into corporate culture

Certainly much more rarely than it should.

agreed.

and since we do eat what we kill, I fail to see what the second part of your point has to do with anything.

Maybe you should read it again? I said "not killing things you don't have to" because people don't need to eat cow to live, not because I think people are in the habit of killing cows and then leave them to rot or something similarly recockulous.

We wouldn't be the successful species we are today if we hadn't domesticated cattle, and before that begun to eat meat. Do we currently eat to much red meat, and should we reevaluate factory farms? Yes, but we sure as hell shouldn't give it up just because we could theoretically live off shit we scrape off the high tide mark.

And how is it lazy to say that the rule you mentioned doesn't apply to people unde rmost circumstances?

Because it does apply to people under many circumstances. An average person deals with all kinds of people from a position of patronism in an average week.

But not in any where near an equivelant situation to our relationship with livestock. Species typically treat their own members better than they do other species. It makes sense to do so. To draw comparisons between inter- and intraspecies behavior is absurd.

In other words, you decided to stir the shit.

Yea, I was feeling rusty. Too much aggreement going on except the occasional troll scuttling.

Just so we're clear on that. Oh, and bow before my correctly formatted quote tags and despair, puny mortal.

[Quadlok]

Well...

back to the original point of the post. Might I suggest, if you want to look at an alternative to beef, but still want red meat, there is deer, buffalo and ostrich that are all great and have lower levels of fat than beef. Of course, you have to live in an area that either supports those industries or have a specialty butcher shop.

Farm raised deer is supposed to be far less gamey than wild deer. I've had buffalo (hot dogs no less) and it was damned good. The only one I haven't tried is ostrich, but supposedly it tastes very much like beef.

So, instead of going the VegiNazi route (apologies to those that are Veggies that aren't apeshit about the rest of us eating what we evolved to eat), there are still carnivorous options.

The problem being that all of those species are harder to farm raise, and thus are more expensive, than cattle. Ostriches require personal shelters in cooler climates, and the fencing that must be maintained to keep in a bison or deer is much more extensive than that for a cow.

[Plekhanov]

The minimization of cruelty is bull too.

No it isn’t seeing as how vegans deliberately kill no animals and due to the inefficiency of meat production (iirc the ratio is about 10kg of vegetable protein to produce 1kg of animal protein) vegans do indeed cause significantly fewer wild animals to be harmed during the production of their food so they are indeed doing a great deal to “minimize cruelty” because far less food needs to be grown to support a vegan (or indeed a vegetarian) than a meat eater.

The numbers of animals that die from agriculture or are displaced because of it is blood on their hands too. You simply can't have a diet today that doesn't harm the ecosystem somewhere down the line. One day, one animal will die from harvesting your grain or something similarly disturbing to these people.

What a pathetic strawman, if this thread was about Jains you might have something of a point however it isn’t it’s about veganism and vegans & I’ve yet to meet any who claim to have totally eliminated their environmental impact upon the world simply by removing meat from their diets.

[Alliance SpecForceTrooper]

The problem being that all of those species are harder to farm raise, and thus are more expensive, than cattle. Ostriches require personal shelters in cooler climates, and the fencing that must be maintained to keep in a bison or deer is much more extensive than that for a cow.

True. Just offering an alternative.

About Deer, I had forgotten about the enclosure. Here is what Florida-Agriculture.com says

Deer do not require expensive structures for shelter. Wooded areas adjacent to pastures can provide cover and security. However, some specialized equipment and facilities are needed to control deer when they must be worked and handled. Sturdy, woven fencing, at least 75 inches high, also is necessary, as much to keep predators out as the deer confined.

[Dragoness]

The minimization of cruelty is bull too.

No it isn’t seeing as how vegans deliberately kill no animals and due to the inefficiency of meat production (iirc the ratio is about 10kg of vegetable protein to produce 1kg of animal protein) vegans do indeed cause significantly fewer wild animals to be harmed during the production of their food so they are indeed doing a great deal to “minimize cruelty” because far less food needs to be grown to support a vegan (or indeed a vegetarian) than a meat eater.

The numbers of animals that die from agriculture or are displaced because of it is blood on their hands too. You simply can't have a diet today that doesn't harm the ecosystem somewhere down the line. One day, one animal will die from harvesting your grain or something similarly disturbing to these people.

What a pathetic strawman, if this thread was about Jains you might have something of a point however it isn’t it’s about veganism and vegans & I’ve yet to meet any who claim to have totally eliminated their environmental impact upon the world simply by removing meat from their diets.

In terms of nourishment though, meat(being a more concentrated source of food) will keep you going longer than an equal amount of vegetables.

[Plekhanov]

The minimization of cruelty is bull too.

No it isn’t seeing as how vegans deliberately kill no animals and due to the inefficiency of meat production (iirc the ratio is about 10kg of vegetable protein to produce 1kg of animal protein) vegans do indeed cause significantly fewer wild animals to be harmed during the production of their food so they are indeed doing a great deal to “minimize cruelty” because far less food needs to be grown to support a vegan (or indeed a vegetarian) than a meat eater.

The numbers of animals that die from agriculture or are displaced because of it is blood on their hands too. You simply can't have a diet today that doesn't harm the ecosystem somewhere down the line. One day, one animal will die from harvesting your grain or something similarly disturbing to these people.

What a pathetic strawman, if this thread was about Jains you might have something of a point however it isn’t it’s about veganism and vegans & I’ve yet to meet any who claim to have totally eliminated their environmental impact upon the world simply by removing meat from their diets.

In terms of nourishment though, meat(being a more concentrated source of food) will keep you going longer than an equal amount of vegetables.

100 grams of meat may well “keep you going for longer” than 100g of vegetable protein, but will it keep you going for longer than 1000g of vegetable protein which will be roughly what the deceased animal in question had to eat to produce to give you 100g of meat?

I never said meat wasn’t concentrated just that it is an inefficient (in terms of land needed to produce it) method of food production and that this inefficiency has negative effects upon the environment.

[Korvan]

On another board, a similar topic brought up an interesting point from someone who has raised chickens. Apparently, if a chicken didn't have to go outside to be fed, they would never voluntarily leave their coops. They absolutely hate being exposed to possible predators and suffer a great deal from stress on the free range.

A crowded factory where they don't even have to move to eat is a chicken's idea of hog heaven.

[wolveraptor]

But keeping them in coops still increases the risk of disease and is basically all-around poor sanitation.

As for free range, I don't see how a predator-less environment has more stress just because it's open-air.

[Korvan]

Well, I don't keep chickens myself, so what I know is just second-hand, but the chickens apparently prefer the coop, poor sanitation and all, to being outdoors. Maybe they're just agoraphobic.

Good point about disease though, I'd imagine a case of bird flu would sweep through a coop pretty fast. A friend of mine once took a temp job cleaning out coops, he quit after the first day, they were just that nasty.

[Broomstick]

only one I haven't tried is ostrich, but supposedly it tastes very much like beef.

I've had ostrich. Tastes more like something between buffalo and non-gamey deer than like cow. Too lean to be cow.

[Broomstick]

As for free range, I don't see how a predator-less environment has more stress just because it's open-air.

The problem is there's no way you can convince a bird an open environment is predator-free. 100 million years of evolution has hardwired "OHMIGOD SOMETHING WANTS TO EAT ME!!!" into their little pea brains.

How do I know this? I own birds. They live inside. They are pampered, well fed, sheltered.... and they're still nervous as all fuck. They react like prey, because that's essentially what they are.

Now, things like hawks might be different... but I wouldn't even try to raise hawks for food. Not only would it be stupidly inefficient - you have to raise animals to feed to the animals you eat, meaning it would then take 100 units of plant feed to make 1 unit of meat (compared to eating herbivores, where the ratio is 10:1), but predators are dangerous. Which is why we farm trout and catfish and not mako shark, as yet another example.

[Trytostaydead]

Just an addendum about B12:

The vitamin supplements of B12 are not all that great nor helpful if you're a long term hardcore vegan. The concentration in those pills is low, and your absorptive powers as a vegan is even lower. The best way to get B12 into your system is through SQ injection.

[wolveraptor]

*snip*

Actually, the reason we don't farm Mako is because their flesh is pretty toxic. [/nitpick]

[Broomstick]

*snip*

Actually, the reason we don't farm Mako is because their flesh is pretty toxic. [/nitpick]

Ah, but they taste so good....

But that's another reason not to eat off the top of the food chain - toxins get more concentrated the further up you go. For that matter, there are probably a lot of humans walking around that would be considered unfit to eat (even aside from that canabalism taboo) due to various toxins in them from diet and environmental exposures.

[wolveraptor]

Actually, for sharks it's special, because they store urea in the flesh, or something. It goes beyond the normal poison build up for predators.