Vegetarianism

[jugfingers]

Jugfingers, I'm going to sponsor you.

lol I remember that from back in the day.

well if your going to sponsor me try to avoid cooking the meat as much as possible and especially make sure to eat the organs raw. it such a shame to let them go to waste.

@Anja

The meat industry is there to supply the masses with what society demands.
Food.

Is that bad?
No.
Is this a moral issue?
Somewhat.

Is is wrong?
For society, no.
Individually, that depends.
For the ecosystem, more than likely not.

The meat industry is meant to supply society as a whole with meat because it is food.
Same how we have apple orchards to feed people.

The "sacrifice" being made is obviously lost when it reaches the consumer.
That doesn't really matter as the consumer is the consumer.
They are the one's paying for the product. Not producing the product.
The consumer cannot be faulted for what it took for the product to be made.


Keeping that "connection" is hardly something that is expected to be kept by the consumer. Unless the consumer is in health or legal trouble as a result from the product.
"Instant gratification", "Ignorance is bliss" and the "Care less attitude" contribute to how much of America's society views how we get our meat.
On the flipside, that "connection" can still be kept if one obtains their own meat. But how strong that "connection" is depends on the individual (as is does with the consumer).

I don't see the meat industry as faulty in any of this. It has its role in society and accomplishes it. That's how I see it.




Personal preference is how I see it.
We have mollars and canine teeth which shows we are capable of eating both meat and plant stuff, but that sure doesn't mean we have to.

Being vegetarian is kewl if ya wanna do that. It's personal preference which isn't really arguable.
Personally, I can't bear to go through with it. Most all of the meals I eat have meat alongside with it lol

I think really the main issue with that meat industry, for those of you who eat meat, is the quality of the meat that is provided to society,

, most animals when slaughtered in large slaughter houses **** themselves and are completely covered in feces when they are processed, this can cause dangerous bacteria to grow on meat, plus its a corpse covered in feces, but anyways in the interest of time large slaughter houses don't clean meat properly, instead simply sterilize it with bleach which is much cheaper then spending time to clean it,

bleach is also being considered being added to hamburger filler to prevent outbreaks of ecoli.


so basically you end up with a feces covered bleach saturated pile of flesh which other chemicals are then added to to prevent spoilage and make the meat more plump not to mention the hormones and antibiotics already present

mmm tasty tasty murder. lol.



also Im not so sure its accurate to call humans natural omnivores



From "The Comparative Anatomy of Eating", by Milton R. Mills, MD

Facial Muscles
CARNIVORE: Reduced to allow wide mouth gape
HERBIVORE: Well-developed
OMNIVORE: Reduced
HUMAN: Well-developed

Jaw Type
CARNIVORE: Angle not expanded
HERBIVORE: Expanded angle
OMNIVORE: Angle not expanded
HUMAN: Expanded angle

Jaw Joint Location
CARNIVORE: On same plane as molar teeth
HERBIVORE: Above the plane of the molars
OMNIVORE: On same plane as molar teeth
HUMAN: Above the plane of the molars

Jaw Motion
CARNIVORE: Shearing; minimal side-to-side motion
HERBIVORE: No shear; good side-to-side, front-to-back
OMNIVORE: Shearing; minimal side-to-side
HUMAN: No shear; good side-to-side, front-to-back

Major Jaw Muscles
CARNIVORE: Temporalis
HERBIVORE: Masseter and pterygoids
OMNIVORE: Temporalis
HUMAN: Masseter and pterygoids

Mouth Opening vs. Head Size
CARNIVORE: Large
HERBIVORE: Small
OMNIVORE: Large
HUMAN: Small

Teeth: Incisors
CARNIVORE: Short and pointed
HERBIVORE: Broad, flattened and spade shaped
OMNIVORE: Short and pointed
HUMAN: Broad, flattened and spade shaped

Teeth: Canines
CARNIVORE: Long, sharp and curved
HERBIVORE: Dull and short or long (for defense), or none
OMNIVORE: Long, sharp and curved
HUMAN: Short and blunted

Teeth: Molars
CARNIVORE: Sharp, jagged and blade shaped
HERBIVORE: Flattened with cusps vs complex surface
OMNIVORE: Sharp blades and/or flattened
HUMAN: Flattened with nodular cusps

Chewing
CARNIVORE: None; swallows food whole
HERBIVORE: Extensive chewing necessary
OMNIVORE: Swallows food whole and/or simple crushing
HUMAN: Extensive chewing necessary

Saliva
CARNIVORE: No digestive enzymes
HERBIVORE: Carbohydrate digesting enzymes
OMNIVORE: No digestive enzymes
HUMAN: Carbohydrate digesting enzymes

Stomach Type
CARNIVORE: Simple
HERBIVORE: Simple or multiple chambers
OMNIVORE: Simple
HUMAN: Simple

Stomach Acidity
CARNIVORE: Less than or equal to pH 1 with food in stomach
HERBIVORE: pH 4 to 5 with food in stomach
OMNIVORE: Less than or equal to pH 1 with food in stomach
HUMAN: pH 4 to 5 with food in stomach

Stomach Capacity
CARNIVORE: 60% to 70% of total volume of digestive tract
HERBIVORE: Less than 30% of total volume of digestive tract
OMNIVORE: 60% to 70% of total volume of digestive tract
HUMAN: 21% to 27% of total volume of digestive tract

Length of Small Intestine
CARNIVORE: 3 to 6 times body length
HERBIVORE: 10 to more than 12 times body length
OMNIVORE: 4 to 6 times body length
HUMAN: 10 to 11 times body length

Colon
CARNIVORE: Simple, short and smooth
HERBIVORE: Long, complex; may be sacculated
OMNIVORE: Simple, short and smooth
HUMAN: Long, sacculated

Liver
CARNIVORE: Can detoxify vitamin A
HERBIVORE: Cannot detoxify vitamin A
OMNIVORE: Can detoxify vitamin A
HUMAN: Cannot detoxify vitamin A

Kidney
CARNIVORE: Extremely concentrated urine
HERBIVORE: Moderately concentrated urine
OMNIVORE: Extremely concentrated urine
HUMAN: Moderately concentrated urine

Nails
CARNIVORE: Sharp claws
HERBIVORE: Flattened nails or blunt hooves
OMNIVORE: Sharp claws
HUMAN: Flattened nails

 

[El Nino]

Is is wrong?
For society, no.

Well, that's something for society to decide.

For the ecosystem, more than likely not.

It's true that nature is amoral. But industries of any type always impact the ecosystem in some way. The issue then becomes whether or not people can tolerate those ecological changes, and that depends on the other organisms that make up the ecosystem. Thus, human self-interest is not isolated from that of other living entities.

I don't see the meat industry as faulty in any of this. It has its role in society and accomplishes it. That's how I see it.

Also of relevance to this discussion: There was once an elixir sold in the U.S. on the pharmaceutical market. People wanted the drug because they believed it had curing abilities, and so the company continued to supply it. Thus, the drug company--like the meat industry--also had a role in society, one which it accomplished.

That drug was what is now commonly known as anti-freeze.

As far as morals go, well, we can't assume that there is only one ultimate system of morals. People value different things, and they build morals off of what they value. If someone values a rodent's life over that of a human's, that is neither right nor wrong as far as nature is concerned. In order to pass judgment on this person, you would have to apply a criteria to it, and that criteria is one based off of your own values, and "values" cannot be justified by logic.

Anyway, I think psychological studies have suggested that the majority of people base their moral judgments on emotion rather than reason. This most likely applies to both the moral vegetarians and the anti-vegetarians as well.

 

[REL38]

I think really the main issue with that meat industry, for those of you who eat meat, is the quality of the meat that is provided to society,

, most animals when slaughtered in large slaughter houses **** themselves and are completely covered in feces when they are processed, this can cause dangerous bacteria to grow on meat, plus its a corpse covered in feces, but anyways in the interest of time large slaughter houses don't clean meat properly, instead simply sterilize it with bleach which is much cheaper then spending time to clean it,

bleach is also being considered being added to hamburger filler to prevent outbreaks of ecoli.


so basically you end up with a feces covered bleach saturated pile of flesh which other chemicals are then added to to prevent spoilage and make the meat more plump not to mention the hormones and antibiotics already present

I was under the impression that cattle, for example, are killed via some electronic/Alien-viper-toungue-stabber-thing to the back of their necks or something of that matter.
I remember watching a video about how they slaughter cattle and I vaguely remember that's how they did it. I recall no feces.

I'd like to know where you got that info that says chickens, pigs and cows crap all over the place.
If this is true, the government is at fault (lol at blame gov)

Regardless, I've never eaten "Hamburger Helper".
Sounds like a bunch of extra meat gunk that's lower grade for a reason.
Yuck

mmm tasty tasty murder. lol.

inorite?
I like mine thoroughly cooked though

also Im not so sure its accurate to call humans natural omnivores


From "The Comparative Anatomy of Eating", by Milton R. Mills, MD

*SCIENCE STUFF*

Sure do your homework

I was using the teeth thing as an example of how humans are capable of eating both meat and plant.
The fact humans can consume both meat and plant with the body effectively utilizing the nutrients gathered shows how the human body is made to process both meat and plant.

A meatless diet leaves the body in need of many nutrients predominantly found in meats.
Vegetarians can compensate via suppliments, but back 2000 years ago there were no such things as suppliments.
To obtain necessary nutrients, meat would have been required to be eaten.


meh
messy response cuz it's late
>________>


@Nino

Society as a whole want meat.
The meat industry contributes to the economy.

I honestly cannot see cows roaming across the plains and chickens running about the woodlands.
Cows and chickens have become "crops".
Their only real purpose is to supply society with what they have to offer (milk, eggs, meat, extra stuff like cosmetics)
They no longer have any substancial affect on the ecosystem aside from humans.

The selling and consumption of today's anti-freeze back when is at fault from the producer/seller.
From a business standpoint, it's sell the product and not really care for what happens as long as no ramifications are recieved.

Morality applies heavily on beliefs which is where vegetarians and those who eat meat have their own standpoints.

"As long as someone else kills the chicken, I'll eat it"
Morally, the person may not like the idea of personally ranking the foul's neck, but they're a-ok if someone else does it so they can eat it.


btw
I'm not against vegetarianism.
What a person wants to eat is up to them.

 

[Ajna]

@Anja


The meat industry is meant to supply society as a whole with meat because it is food.
Same how we have apple orchards to feed people.

The "sacrifice" being made is obviously lost when it reaches the consumer.
That doesn't really matter as the consumer is the consumer.
They are the one's paying for the product. Not producing the product.
The consumer cannot be faulted for what it took for the product to be made.


Keeping that "connection" is hardly something that is expected to be kept by the consumer. Unless the consumer is in health or legal trouble as a result from the product.
"Instant gratification", "Ignorance is bliss" and the "Care less attitude" contribute to how much of America's society views how we get our meat.
On the flipside, that "connection" can still be kept if one obtains their own meat. But how strong that "connection" is depends on the individual (as is does with the consumer).

I don't see the meat industry as faulty in any of this. It has its role in society and accomplishes it. That's how I see it.

I suppose you believe an assassin has its role in society and accomplishes it as well?
Society demands than when its husbands cheat with a floozy from the bar even though you have 5 kids together... that cheating ******* should get capped.

I could easily argue that assassins do indeed have a necessary role in society.. but the point im trying to make is that we are looking at the same severity of moral issues as slavery during civil war era. We have been desensitized to the reality of the situation, so it seems like a very minor decision.
If you choose be vegetarian... that is the odd thing in society. weve been eating meat allll along (since youve been alive at least). So it would literally mean sacrificing something you enjoy (assuming you do if your still eating it) for a moral issue that youve been taking part of your entire life. Its easier for people to simply... not think about it. Just keep on enjoying those hamburgers, because they are 99 cents and fill me up with yummy.
The same applies to slavery..
If you grew up never having to till your own fields... pick your own crops... cook your own meals... clean your own house...
then all of a sudden some guy comes around town screaming... "slavery is wrong!! you need to do that stuff yourself!!"
Immediately in your mind, hes gonna be the town crazy. Because youve never experienced life where you have to do all of those things. theyve always been just handed to you.. why on earth would you give that up?
But if the intelligent person were to examine the situation.. they would see that its clearly a cut and dry moral situation. It takes an immense amount of strength sometimes to pry yourself away from something you enjoy that is readily available to you... i dont expect everyone to make that decisoin.. but I encourage everyone to TRULY educate themselves on the subject. (which takes more than a couple of youtube videos and an essay on wikipedia... then calling it a night)

 

[REL38]

I suppose you believe an assassin has its role in society and accomplishes it as well?
Society demands than when its husbands cheat with a floozy from the bar even though you have 5 kids together... that cheating ******* should get capped.

Except society heavily frowns upon murder.
Laws have been put in place to reflect this.

In American society, people care more for the lose of a human life. Not an animals.
That's the reality of it.

Humans value the life of a human more than an animal.
Individual viewpoints and beliefs may differ from this, but this is the mentality shared by society as a whole.

I could easily argue that assassins do indeed have a necessary role in society.. but the point im trying to make is that we are looking at the same severity of moral issues as slavery during civil war era. We have been desensitized to the reality of the situation, so it seems like a very minor decision.

Hitmen serve no purpose in society.
It is socially unnacceptable and illegal to make a living in killing people for money.

Slavery was seen as unethical, racist, immoral and illegal.

If you choose be vegetarian... that is the odd thing in society. weve been eating meat allll along (since youve been alive at least). So it would literally mean sacrificing something you enjoy (assuming you do if your still eating it) for a moral issue that youve been taking part of your entire life. Its easier for people to simply... not think about it. Just keep on enjoying those hamburgers, because they are 99 cents and fill me up with yummy.

This would fall under morality which differs from person to person.

Morality is what is keeping an individual from consuming meat.
Someone who eats meat is hardly at fault for eating meat.

They are not willing to sacrifice the consumption of meat because they do not share the same belief.

I don't believe in souly eating non-meat stuff.
Am I at fault?
No

That's my decision as to what I prefer to eat.

btw
99 cent burgers are always greasy with fake meat (lol McDonalds)

The same applies to slavery..
If you grew up never having to till your own fields... pick your own crops... cook your own meals... clean your own house...
then all of a sudden some guy comes around town screaming... "slavery is wrong!! you need to do that stuff yourself!!"
Immediately in your mind, hes gonna be the town crazy. Because youve never experienced life where you have to do all of those things. theyve always been just handed to you.. why on earth would you give that up?
But if the intelligent person were to examine the situation.. they would see that its clearly a cut and dry moral situation. It takes an immense amount of strength sometimes to pry yourself away from something you enjoy that is readily available to you... i dont expect everyone to make that decisoin.. but I encourage everyone to TRULY educate themselves on the subject. (which takes more than a couple of youtube videos and an essay on wikipedia... then calling it a night)

Slavery was proven to be unconstitutional.
Black people were already viewed as inferior beforehand so there wasn't much objection to begin with their inslavery.
Southerns didn't want to give up their virtual free labor "workers" and as such war insued.

Consumption of meat is hardly illegal.

Consumption of meat is a-ok for society as a whole.
Beef, chicken, pork and fish are socially and legally acceptable to be eaten.

It's normal to eat meat.
Wherelse being vegetarian is seen as abnormal for some reason.

Stereotypes contribute to people not taking vegetarianism seriously.

People can "educate" themselves on the finer workings of vegetarianism, but they can't be faulted for choosing not to.

Although I commend vegetarianists for their willpower and perseverence in not eating meat.

In my opinion, eating healthy is all that matters to me when it comes to food.
Something beef or fish can contribute to.

 

[El Nino]

A meatless diet leaves the body in need of many nutrients predominantly found in meats.
Vegetarians can compensate via suppliments, but back 2000 years ago there were no such things as suppliments.

I've known some lifelong vegetarians without health issues. I think it depends on what culture the vegetarianism stems from. I get the impression that American vegetarians are building a dietary culture from scratch, which is why they need supplements. Older vegetarian cultures in other parts of the world may have better luck, considering some of them would have had to have survived without the modern invention of vitamin supplements.

Society as a whole want meat.
The meat industry contributes to the economy.

Society also wants cures for all its ills. You could sell them a placebo, and they would buy it. I think the issue here is whether or not the consumer knows what they are buying and putting into themselves. And, also, would they continue to want it if they knew.

I honestly cannot see cows roaming across the plains and chickens running about the woodlands.
Cows and chickens have become "crops".
Their only real purpose is to supply society with what they have to offer (milk, eggs, meat, extra stuff like cosmetics)
They no longer have any substancial affect on the ecosystem aside from humans.

I almost minored in ecology.

To save you from reading another wall of text, I'll just say that nature does not recognize things like "purpose." Also, agriculture and other human activities do have an impact on ecosystems. Humanity is not an isolated bubble. The CO2 we exchange all goes into the air. The crops we grow take nutrients out of the soil. All those systems are highly complex, and we cannot escape them.

The selling and consumption of today's anti-freeze back when is at fault from the producer/seller.
From a business standpoint, it's sell the product and not really care for what happens as long as no ramifications are recieved.

Yes, which is why, if people are to take control of their lives and what they consume, they have to be the ones to start addressing these issues rather than simply letting the industry decide for them.

I'm not against vegetarianism.
What a person wants to eat is up to them.

I'm not against it either. I'm also not against the consumption of meat (at this point--who knows if that may change later), though I'm not into it myself. I think I just wanted to make the point that "morality" is not just one thing because a lot of people seem to say "morals" as if there is only one system of ethics. There are many systems and may sets of values between individuals and cultures and subcultures and societies. That's why these issues are so problematic.

And then I got sidetracked and forgot what I was talking about.

 

[SuperBowser]

A meatless diet leaves the body in need of many nutrients predominantly found in meats.
Vegetarians can compensate via suppliments, but back 2000 years ago there were no such things as suppliments.
To obtain necessary nutrients, meat would have been required to be eaten.

I've said it before in this topic and I'll say it again.

This is 100% false. I don't know why so many people think vegetarians are deficient in some way.

 

[Jim Morrison]

Soy is the main reason that the rain forest is disappearing. I would feel so bad to eat soy.

 

[GoldShadow]

I've said it before in this topic and I'll say it again.

This is 100% false. I don't know why so many people think vegetarians are deficient in some way.

Because studies have shown that vegetarians tend to be more deficient in many things relative to people who eat meat. I'll dig up that old vegetarian thread where I made a post about this if necessary.

Look, it is certainly possible to get everything you need with a vegetarian diet. And both diets (vegetarian or meat-inclusive) can be bad if you over- or under-indulge, just like both can be good if you eat right. But on average, vegetarians do tend to have more deficiencies.

 

[SuperBowser]

That's from poor eating habits.

There is absolutely nothing missing from a vegetarian diet to stop you living healthily. It would be like me claiming that dark skinned people are vitamin D deficient.

Sure, dark skinned people are more likely to be vitamin D deficient, but not all are. Provided they have a proper diet and go out in the sun every now and then, they'll be fine.

edit: on average, vegetarians also live longer. But we already know that it's not so simple.

 

[GoldShadow]

That's from poor eating habits.

There is absolutely nothing missing from a vegetarian diet to stop you living healthily.

Numbers don't lie. Vegetarians tend to be more deficient than non-vegetarians, on average. Also, you say "vegetarian diet" but keep in mind this is a huge, all-encompassing term. That still leaves a lot of room for creativity and choice in food. Some vegetarian diets do provide what you need. Others don't. On average, they don't provide everything in sufficient amounts. Again, this is not a jab at vegetarianism. All it means is that if you are vegetarian, you should make sure that what you're eating contains everything you need.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=2861782&postcount=62

 

[MunchieMan]

I have one Sister who eats absolutely no meat or meat byproducts. One Brother who eats no "Red" meat (whatever that means), but will eat dairy and fish.

Then, my other Sister and I eat pretty much anything, but she won't eat raw meat, as I do. I happen to love sushi of all kinds, including the raw stuff.

I would be perfectly happy to eat veggies all the time, but I think I would really miss the meat. I love veggies!

My fridge stays packed with a little of everything! There's almost nothing I won't eat, or at least try.

 

[Rappster]

Dude, i tried an all vegetarian diet, but had to give up. Vegetarians are way too hard to catch. And even if you do, they don't taste that good, cause they're so low in fat.
(jk)
But seriously, there is no reason we shouldn't all be vegetarians. it's better for the environment, cheaper, easier to eat locally, etc.
i'm not cause i'm lazy and don't control the food in my house, but when i do, i will probably become vegetarian.
Granted, on average, vegetarian diets are nutrientdeficient, but that can be attributed to lousy planning as opposed to any inherant problems.

 

[Moozle]

But seriously, there is no reason we shouldn't all be vegetarians. it's better for the environment, cheaper, easier to eat locally, etc.

I don't really see it that way. Sure, there a lot of markets and stuff around where I live (if that's what you meant), but it would still be easier to go to Wendy's or Taco Bell.

 

[SuperBowser]

Well I looked at some of the studies you provided because I've honestly never heard of vitamin/mineral deficiencies being common in vegetarians (at least for the UK).

The iodine study's results are debatable. There's not been many studies on this issue carried out and sample size problems/methodological problems have been noted in some of them. This 2004 American study http://www.tera.org/ART/Perchlorate/CFields.pdf would disagree.

''In studies of European vegans, for example, iodine deficiency was found mainly in those who were specifically directed to avoid iodized salt, seaweed, supplements and iodine-containing beverages.''

''For example, in two studies, subjects were directed to avoid iodized salt, fish, seaweed and kelp, and iodine-containing processed foods, while only iodine-free beverages were provided (Abdulla et al., 1981; Remer et al., 1999). The iodine intake of those individuals was generally inadequate. By contrast, vegans in two other studies were allowed, but not required to consume large amounts of seaweed and iodine supplements (Lightowler and Davies, 1998; Rauma et al., 1994). In those studies, iodine intake was variable and often excessive.''

''Among those who describe themselves as “vegetarian,” a substantial proportion actually eat meat, chicken or fish. And of those who do avoid meat, chicken, and fish, a large majority consumes dairy products. Thus the number of consistently practicing vegans is very small, probably less than 0.1% of the general population. It is that small group of vegans, not the much larger numbers of lacto-vegetarians and self-defined vegetarians, who might plausibly be at risk of iodine deficiency.''

Here's more studies on iodine intake and vegetarians that don't necessarily support your claim.
http://journals.cambridge.org/actio...276&jid=BJN&volumeId=87&issueId=01&aid=897264
http://journals.cambridge.org/actio...520&jid=BJN&volumeId=81&issueId=01&aid=886508
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/70/3/525S

I'm unsure how well the supposed reduced iodine intake correlates with actual clinical problems so this could all mean nothing anyway! The only study I could find with anything on this only looked at vegans (the last one I linked). Even then, the results were a little odd because the only vegans with problems were the ones taking supplements because they had too much iodine! Others didn't seem to suffer clinical problems despite a reduced intake.

I haven't got time to look up iron intake right now, but I am pretty certain that at least in the UK vegetarians are not at an increased risk for iron deficiency anaemia. Maybe I'm wrong though.

 

[MCSR]

Humans have been eating meat since there were Humans.
Humans have been eating plants since there were Humans.
I choose to eat mainly meat with vegetables sometimes, because Cows are delicious, and carrots taste pretty good too.
There's nothing wrong with eating meat. Instincts from thousands of years ago say that eating meat is good. To not eat meat is going against said instinct.
But whatever, I don't really care. Eat what you want. As long as there are cows, people will eat them. Deal with it.

 

[Fuelbi]

Can't live life without meat. thats the end of it, you can find my full statement in that other vegetarian thread that got closed

 

[Pimpfish]

dueteronomy 12:15 "you must eat meat" or you hate God. therefor God hates vegetarians.

 

[Grandeza]

That's some interesting logic you got there

 

[Rappster]

I don't really see it that way. Sure, there a lot of markets and stuff around where I live (if that's what you meant), but it would still be easier to go to Wendy's or Taco Bell.

eat locally as in eat locally grown produce. supports local economy, reduces fossilfuel uese

 

[Proverbs]

dueteronomy 12:15 "you must eat meat" or you hate God. therefor God hates vegetarians.

Or how about what Deuteronomy 12:15 actually says in the New International Version: "Nevertheless, you may slaughter your animals in any of your towns and eat as much of the meat as you want, as if it were gazelle or deer, according to the blessing the LORD your God gives you. Both the ceremonially unclean and the clean may eat it."

You don't have to believe in the Bible, but at least be respectful of those who do by quoting things properly and not making things up.

Edit:

''Among those who describe themselves as “vegetarian,” a substantial proportion actually eat meat, chicken or fish. And of those who do avoid meat, chicken, and fish

Okay, I find a few things interesting there.

1. A substantial proportion of those who call themselves vegetarians eat meat.
2. Chicken is somehow separate from meat, but turkey isn't.
3. Fish apparently also isn't meat. A lot of people only eat fish, and still call themselves vegetarians. That I just can't understand. Fish are animals. You're still an omnivore if you're eating fish.

I support people who are really vegetarians and vegans, but I think it's also important to be honest with yourself. If you eat meat, you're not a vegetarian--be it chicken, fish, or anything else.

 

[jugfingers]

I was under the impression that cattle, for example, are killed via some electronic/Alien-viper-toungue-stabber-thing to the back of their necks or something of that matter.

@

uhhh no.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjSlOOYIkCE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aVGWPl7zlY


watch food inc, it def shows pigs covered in feces being slaughtered in the states, but those were some videos I just found on youtube just now.

, vegetarians do tend to have more deficiencies.

this is completely meaningless... considering that any nutrient that a vegetarian might be deficient in can be obtained in more than sufficient amounts without eating meat.

especially things like iodine deficiencies which kelp( a vegetable) has incredible amounts of.

or something like protein deficiency ( milk/ Whey )


I mean certainly meat is a nutrient dense food, especially liver and whatnot, but there are also super nutrient dense vegetarian foods, such as bee pollen, goji berries, coconuts etc.

vegetrians also probably get alot more of other nutrients that meat eaters do not such as vitmin c, k, beta carotene, magnesium, not to mentionantioxidants, such as rutin, quecertin, lycopene, lutein resveratrol ,anthocyanins ellagic acid etc etc

 

[REL38]

I've known some lifelong vegetarians without health issues. I think it depends on what culture the vegetarianism stems from. I get the impression that American vegetarians are building a dietary culture from scratch, which is why they need supplements. Older vegetarian cultures in other parts of the world may have better luck, considering some of them would have had to have survived without the modern invention of vitamin supplements.

Well, it actually occured to me to look at the back of a loaf of bread at the market and I remebered the food pyramid:

Looking at it, I realized I forgot how little of the pyramid the meat section takes up.
A smaller chunk of the pyramid.

I agree that different cultures have different diets which contribute to the health of the people in their respective cultures.

If someone is mal-nutritiened, that's due to not eating the proper foods.
Not eating meat at all doesn't have much of an impact at all on a vegetarian cuz meat only contributes a small amount to a healthy diet.
I would believe, however, that those who exclude anything made from animals from their diet (mostly dairy) may be more likely to some form of mal-nutritient if they don't compensate for it.

Society also wants cures for all its ills. You could sell them a placebo, and they would buy it. I think the issue here is whether or not the consumer knows what they are buying and putting into themselves. And, also, would they continue to want it if they knew.

Well, most people don't want to know how the meat they're gonna cook for Friday night came to be if it requires them watching the entire process of them being slaughtered to being packaged.
There are many who simply don't have the heart or stomach to know that.

A simple list of what's getting put into it may not necessarily suffice.

Regardless, I'm more so talking about the type of meat sold to be taken home and cooked. Not fastfood or lower rate meat (hamburger helper)

I almost minored in ecology.

To save you from reading another wall of text, I'll just say that nature does not recognize things like "purpose." Also, agriculture and other human activities do have an impact on ecosystems. Humanity is not an isolated bubble. The CO2 we exchange all goes into the air. The crops we grow take nutrients out of the soil. All those systems are highly complex, and we cannot escape them.

By "purpose", I more so meant their role in nature.
Cattle are herbivores.
Many herbivores are eaten by predators.

In this case, people are the primary "predators" of the modern day cow.
We only go about it in a far different manner than, say, a lion does.
We raise them, essentially fatten them up and kill them to supply their meat to the masses.

I fully agree with how our actions affect the environment.
Everything affects one another.

Yes, which is why, if people are to take control of their lives and what they consume, they have to be the ones to start addressing these issues rather than simply letting the industry decide for them.

But many people will shrug it off as it's, "not my job".
A mentality that's not necessarily good, but not bad either.

A college student trying to pay rent and books with a resturant job can't commit extensive time or role in changing how factories process their meat.

On the otherhand, the more people that are aware of how their meat is processed can collectively work to change this.
Which I'm seeing as being a large focus in vegetarianism.

I'm not against it either. I'm also not against the consumption of meat (at this point--who knows if that may change later), though I'm not into it myself. I think I just wanted to make the point that "morality" is not just one thing because a lot of people seem to say "morals" as if there is only one system of ethics. There are many systems and may sets of values between individuals and cultures and subcultures and societies. That's why these issues are so problematic.

And then I got sidetracked and forgot what I was talking about.

True

In America, consumption of meat is acceptable, but to certain extents.
Many people frown upon eating horse.
Something France still does.
Many people frown upon eating cats.
Done so in certain Asian countries.
Heck, eating rats, snakes and monkeys is unheard of in America.

Culture, individual moralities, social ethics, religion, personal events and more can all contribute to one becoming a vegetarian or being concerned with how the meat industry functions.

A group of vegetarianists may all find the consumption of meat as wrong, but it's very likely they all have their own individual beliefs as to why.

Such beliefs that can reflect vegetarianists in a bad light.
Something not so great.


btw
sorry if I'm rambling on.
I'm not even entirely sure what I'm arguing anymore


@Proverbs
Yeah!
Saved me the effort of looking into that
:D


Edit:

uhhh no.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjSlOOYIkCE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aVGWPl7zlY


watch food inc, it def shows pigs covered in feces being slaughtered in the states, but those were some videos I just found on youtube just now.

To address the statement, it's not like, say, the rump (the actual meat) is covered in feces during its processing.

In regards to the videos themselves, I feel the meat industry is more than capable of killing the cows in a more humane manner.
Gnashing their throats out is hardly humane, yet I do see why they don't choose alternate methods.

vegetrians also probably get alot more of other nutrients that meat eaters do not such as vitmin c, k, beta carotene, magnesium, not to mentionantioxidants, such as rutin, quecertin, lycopene, lutein resveratrol ,anthocyanins ellagic acid etc etc

How so?

 

[GoldShadow]

this is completely meaningless... considering that any nutrient that a vegetarian might be deficient in can be obtained in more than sufficient amounts without eating meat.

Okay. This does not change the numbers that show vegetarians tend to have deficiencies. Like I said before, if you're a vegetarian that knows how much and what to eat, that's great. This deficiency thing doesn't apply to you. I was referring to the numbers that show vegetarians have more deficiencies, on average, than those with a meat-inclusive diet.

 

[OmegaXXII]

Vegetables are people too and eating them is a crime. Just because they are unable to communicate doesn't mean we can eat them.

Animals however can communicate and have yet to raise any objections. *Eats a steak*

**Dies of Laughter**

Well yea, mic seems to have a point, plants are also living things y'know, they may not be able to communicate, but they are STILL living things so yea, you're also a murderer lol...

 

[Pimpfish]

Or how about what Deuteronomy 12:15 actually says in the New International Version: "Nevertheless, you may slaughter your animals in any of your towns and eat as much of the meat as you want, as if it were gazelle or deer, according to the blessing the LORD your God gives you. Both the ceremonially unclean and the clean may eat it."

You don't have to believe in the Bible, but at least be respectful of those who do by quoting things properly and not making things up.

Edit:



Okay, I find a few things interesting there.

1. A substantial proportion of those who call themselves vegetarians eat meat.
2. Chicken is somehow separate from meat, but turkey isn't.
3. Fish apparently also isn't meat. A lot of people only eat fish, and still call themselves vegetarians. That I just can't understand. Fish are animals. You're still an omnivore if you're eating fish.

I support people who are really vegetarians and vegans, but I think it's also important to be honest with yourself. If you eat meat, you're not a vegetarian--be it chicken, fish, or anything else.

i did not not mean any disrespect, i had quoted from the new world translation of the Holy Scriptures. i meant it merely as a joke. the unquoted part i made up , no one should take me seriously. i apologize lul

 

[Mr.Freeman]

So eggplants are apparently evil.

Disscuss..

 

[jugfingers]

How so?

because all the vitamins I listed are found in much higher concentrations in plants and the antioxidants I listed are only found in plants.

Okay. This does not change the numbers that show vegetarians tend to have deficiencies. Like I said before, if you're a vegetarian that knows how much and what to eat, that's great. This deficiency thing doesn't apply to you. I was referring to the numbers that show vegetarians have more deficiencies, on average, than those with a meat-inclusive diet.

my point is that "vegetarian" is a very vague term, it would be like conducting studies on people who only eat raisins and classifying them as vegetarian, and then using the data to prove that vegetarians are super deficient in vitamin A.

a study using "vegetarians" is meaningless

a study using "people who eat only A,B,C" would be an actual scientific study that might provide relevant information.

but since there is ample nutrition found in not meat sources a study of people eating "A,B,C" showing a deficiency is also meaningless when used as an argument against vegetarianism because why aren't these people eating "D,E,F,G,H,I,K" etc etc.

So eggplants are apparently evil.


Disscuss..

I like eggplant...


but I don't really like the ice climbers

 

[Pimpfish]

i am what i eat. all the beef i eat only eat vegetables. they are what they eat. therefor they are vegetables. im a vegetarian.

 

[XFadingNirvanaX]

So eggplants are apparently evil.

Disscuss..

Burn it!
Hang it!
Witchcraft!

 

[REL38]

@Jugfingers

That hardly means a vegetarian is healthier than those who include meat in their diet.
As both have ready access to these foods.

The only reason I can see a vegetarian being healthier than someone who includes meat in their diet is by how they cook their food.

Someone chooses to fry their fish and veggies on the pan are getting unneeded fats n' oils.
What good is eating a veggie if it's covered in disgusting grease?

 

[GoldShadow]

my point is that "vegetarian" is a very vague term, it would be like conducting studies on people who only eat raisins and classifying them as vegetarian, and then using the data to prove that vegetarians are super deficient in vitamin A.

I agree that vegetarian is a broad term.

Still, these studies do illuminate (on average) the effect that not eating meat has on nutrition. Yes, there is variation on an individual level. This does not mean, however, that the scope of the studies (ie, among populations not individuals) is not significant.

 

[jugfingers]

@Jugfingers

That hardly means a vegetarian is healthier than those who include meat in their diet.
As both have ready access to these foods.

The only reason I can see a vegetarian being healthier than someone who includes meat in their diet is by how they cook their food.

Someone chooses to fry their fish and veggies on the pan are getting unneeded fats n' oils.
What good is eating a veggie if it's covered in disgusting grease?

I never claimed being vegetarian is healthier, I was just using that example to show how studies of deficiencies in vegetarians provide distorted information and that the opposite could be true for other nutrients.

I've never said that eating animals is unhealthy, I was just stating that eating animals is not necessary to be healthy.


the fact that you included fish in your example of vegetarian cooking leads me to believe that you are very confused.

a vegetarian refers to someone who does not eat animals





and people who have posted about how killing plants is the same as killing animals should watch these videos

i did not become a vegetarian because of videos like this, but if you eat hamburgers, you should realize the needless pain and suffering you are causing to sentinent beings like yourself


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4shDSz8l2c

notice that the cow is still fully conscious after his throat has been slashed and trachea ripped as gallons of blood rushes out of his throat as he hangs upside down by chains.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjSlOOYIkCE


notice at 2:09 the cows trachea is hanging out of his open throat as he struggles to stand up slipping in his own blood.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MldlJVtBcfE&feature=related

after undergoing similar procedure as the two videos above, a cow having its blood drained is shredded alive still fully conscious as its screams of agony aptly point out

 

[Tomacawk]

http://www.viva.org.uk/goingvegan/index.php
vegan here to field any questions.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6361872964130308142&ei=TL5nS5qsDIToqALx7sDPCA&q=earthlings#

 

[jugfingers]

I agree that vegetarian is a broad term.

Still, these studies do illuminate (on average) the effect that not eating meat has on nutrition. Yes, there is variation on an individual level. This does not mean, however, that the scope of the studies (ie, among populations not individuals) is not significant.

Your missing the point that what your stating is completely irrelevent,


its like saying that there are studies that show that there are a lot of dumb people who live in the united states, therefore living in the united states is a bad idea if you don't want to be stupid.

however in reality there is ample opportunity to gain any type of information you want, or learn anything you want in america, it just happens that for whatever reason people enjoy being fat lazy and stupid in america.

just like there is ample opportunity to obtain all the required nutrition and many times more than what is needed from plants, it just happens that some/or lots of people do not know or care enough to eat sufficient amounts of certain nutrients. doesn't provide any useful information about plant nutrition as a whole, only the eating habits of certain people.

 

[GoldShadow]

I don't think you quite get the point of these studies or my posts, where I acknowledged what you just said.

 

[jugfingers]

I don't think you quite get the point of these studies or my posts, where I acknowledged what you just said.

I realize you acknowledged that these studies aren't conclusive proof that not eating animals will cause nutrient deficiencies.


yet you still felt obliged to say

I agree that vegetarian is a broad term.

Still, these studies do illuminate (on average) the effect that not eating meat has on nutrition.

which obliged me to repeat that this is a meaningless statement.

are we on the same page now? lol

 

[REL38]

I never claimed being vegetarian is healthier, I was just using that example to show how studies of deficiencies in vegetarians provide distorted information and that the opposite could be true for other nutrients.

I figured that's what you meant

I've never said that eating animals is unhealthy, I was just stating that eating animals is not necessary to be healthy.

My fault
This more so related to my first statement in my post

the fact that you included fish in your example of vegetarian cooking leads me to believe that you are very confused.

a vegetarian refers to someone who does not eat animals

My fault yet again >_<
I was referring to how eating meat usually includes a lot of extra oils and fats.

Obviosuly, I know what the name of this thread means
Poor wording structure on my part and my odd need to write in prose
>.<

and people who have posted about how killing plants is the same as killing animals should watch these videos

i did not become a vegetarian because of videos like this, but if you eat hamburgers, you should realize the needless pain and suffering you are causing to sentinent beings like yourself


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4shDSz8l2c

notice that the cow is still fully conscious after his throat has been slashed and trachea ripped as gallons of blood rushes out of his throat as he hangs upside down by chains.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjSlOOYIkCE


notice at 2:09 the cows trachea is hanging out of his open throat as he struggles to stand up slipping in his own blood.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MldlJVtBcfE&feature=related

after undergoing similar procedure as the two videos above, a cow having its blood drained is shredded alive still fully conscious as its screams of agony aptly point out

An apple feels stimulus.
As do all living things.

Tearing it off the tree is ending the apple's life (and harming the tree). Its only source of nutrients and sustinence.
It'll eventually die (fall off), but humans capitalize by hoarding these trees and taking the apples which ends the lives of said apples.


It's ending a life
Only much less bloody and messy


Anyways, I feel that the meat industry can kill cows in a much more effective and less agonizing manner, but that hardly kept me from eating a sirloin earlier today.

The consumer can't be blamed or faulted for how their product was produced.
We're the consumer
Not the producer

Personally, I feel bad for how the cows are made to suffer, but that's hardly my fault nor should I feel guilty in any way, shape or form.

The meat industry should be faulted
Those who consume their product are hardly at any fault.

 

[jugfingers]

An apple feels stimulus.
As do all living things.

Tearing it off the tree is ending the apple's life (and harming the tree). Its only source of nutrients and sustinence.
It'll eventually die (fall off), but humans capitalize by hoarding these trees and taking the apples which ends the lives of said apples.


It's ending a life
Only much less bloody and messy

lol wtf I do not believe you watched the videos I just posted.

if you did you are either the most heartless ******* I know, or mildly ********

how can you compare eating an....apple

to slashing the throat of a cow ripping out its trachea so that its head is barely attached to its body, either hanging it upside down to drain its blood, or letting it flounder helplessly in its own blood as desperately tries to escape, all while fully conscious in agonizing pain

and either saw its head off ,

or shred it alive with Giant Spinning Saws.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MldlJVtBcfE&feature=related


GIANT SPINNING SAWS!!!!


did you even watch it?? that's some straight up horror movie torture **** that would never believe a conscious being would ever have to endure



apples are meant to be eaten, animals/people eating apples are the method that apple trees use to spread their seeds. They are specifically designed to be consumed. they are not the tree itself.

there are wild tomatoes that grow on the galapagos island whose seeds will not germinate if they do not pass through the the intestine of a turtle. This is what fruit is for, to be eaten.

eating an apple is not hurting an apple tree in any way, especially if you consider that apples fall off of the tree when they are fully ripe, which does not damage that tree even slightly.

you are doing an apple tree a favor by eating their apples

Anyways, I feel that the meat industry can kill cows in a much more effective and less agonizing manner, but that hardly kept me from eating a sirloin earlier today.

The consumer can't be blamed or faulted for how their product was produced.
We're the consumer
Not the producer

Personally, I feel bad for how the cows are made to suffer, but that's hardly my fault nor should I feel guilty in any way, shape or form.

The meat industry should be faulted
Those who consume their product are hardly at any fault.

are you that detached from reality?

your logic is insanity at best!


by your reasoning someone who buys a furnace for their house from the major furnace company that has a monopoly on the furnace market and happens to use live 4 year old humans as fuel bears no responsibility on the horribly painful deaths of thousands of small children that are used to heat their house, bones melting and fusing to their muscles as the scream in agony nerves and hair melting in a terrible inferno.

 

[REL38]

lol wtf I do not believe you watched the videos I just posted.

if you did you are either the most heartless ******* I know, or mildly ********

how can you compare eating an....apple

to slashing the throat of a cow ripping out its trachea so that its head is barely attached to its body, either hanging it upside down to drain its blood, or letting it flounder helplessly in its own blood as desperately tries to escape, all while fully conscious in agonizing pain

and either saw its head off ,

or shred it alive with Giant Spinning Saws.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MldlJVtBcfE&feature=related

GIANT SPINNING SAWS!!!!


did you even watch it?? that's some straight up horror movie torture **** that would never believe a conscious being would ever have to endure

People would argue to say that "it's just an animal" so it doesn't really matter.
This is shown by how even the workers treat the cows.

I've already stated that the way that they kill the cows is hardly humane.
The meat industry needs to make a better way to do the job, not so agonizing for the cow.
It should be quick and painless.
Not agonizing and drawn out.

That's just terrible.

apples are meant to be eaten, animals/people eating apples are the method that apple trees use to spread their seeds. They are specifically designed to be consumed. they are not the tree itself.

there are wild tomatoes that grow on the galapagos island whose seeds will not germinate if they do not pass through the the intestine of a turtle. This is what fruit is for, to be eaten.

eating an apple is not hurting an apple tree in any way, especially if you consider that apples fall off of the tree when they are fully ripe, which does not damage that tree even slightly.

you are doing an apple tree a favor by eating their apples

Nature is the same.
Predators eat prey
Humans are no different

Only that we've become sophisticated enough that you aren't gonna see people eat a pig alive.
It should be killed in a humane manner where it's not needlessly suffering for absolutely no reason at all.
How they kill these livestock is what should be changed.

are you that detached from reality?

your logic is insanity at best!


by your reasoning someone who buys a furnace for their house from the major furnace company that has a monopoly on the furnace market and happens to use live 4 year old humans as fuel bears no responsibility on the horribly painful deaths of thousands of small children that are used to heat their house, bones melting and fusing to their muscles as the scream in agony nerves and hair melting in a terrible inferno.

Except you're using humans in place of animals.

People as a whole value a human life over that of an animals.

Why else do you believe the news doesn't cover the death of a dog?
They cover the death of a human because that gets audience views.

Dogs are seen as man's best friend, but people will still see the death of a human as much, much more important.
Because an animal has little to represent.
They have no aspiring dreams, deep intellectual thought, fully developed emotions or roles in society.

Humans do

I'm not being void of emotion
I sincerely feel that the manner by which they kill livestock is wrong as it brings about unnecessary suffering for a living being.

But I see the reality of the situation where I cannot be faulted by how my steak came to be.
If I choose not to eat meat anymore, that hardly keeps cows and pigs from being slaughtered.
Sure, it may save "x" amount of cows in the long run, but they will still meet their fate which is being slaughtered.
Something that cannot and will not be changed when the consumption of meat is so heavily strong around the entire world.

Being vegetarian may drop the amount of cows slaughtered, but it will not not keep them from eventually being slaughtered so the family of four can have their BBQ picnic at the local park.

Saying otherwise is denial.

Idealy, a vegetarian may want a world that is void of killing for meat seems great.
But I personally see it on par with solving world hunger.

Nothing more than a pipe dream that may never be accomplished.


Realistcally, people get what they want.
When alcohol was banned, people fought for it back.
Now it continues to kill countless of lives everyday just because people wanted their poison sludge back to get drunk and please their addiction.

I despise it, but I know that reality will keep alcohol readily available for the masses.
As will reality continue to keep cows being slaughtered for their meat for the masses and reality will prevent world hunger from being solved.

People want their sludge crap
People want their meat
People want to keep their greedy bellies full

That is the reality behind it.