New £5 note angers vegans and vegetarians
- Thread starter darael
- Start date
Appearances matter.
A response is expected and saying **** off would not be appropriate.
Saying nothing is also just as valid.
I'd also like to make a good note of this.
New fiver: Bank of England looking to make note meat-free
mhm
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2016
- Posts
- 1,412
- Location
- Moonbase Alpha
Animal is just a creature, to eat or look after it has no real physiological purpose in our animal lives, so why is it in our animalistic life that you should not eat animals?
When did I say we shouldn't eat animals?
I'm not a vegetarian.
There is a whole spectrum of reasons why various vegetarians don't eat meat.
Last edited:
You eat fish? Then you eat meat.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2016
- Posts
- 1,412
- Location
- Moonbase Alpha
The media look for stories, for news, things that will take people's interest. The appearance of this in news is a function of the media, not the people who have taken an issue with the banknotes.
The story seems to have taken your interest, so the 'media' seem to have been right that it would take people's interest.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2016
- Posts
- 1,412
- Location
- Moonbase Alpha
I would posit to you:
Would you eat a chimpanzee, even if they were not endangered?
Perhaps you would, but many meat eaters would draw the line somewhere up the animal chain.
People draw their lines are drawn at different points.
Pescetarians may take the view that of all meat seafood meat is the least harmful from an ethical point of view.
Last edited:
Fish is still meat.
If we are talking ethically, they are more likely to be wild animal rather than farmed so you could conclude it's worse than eating a farmed pig or cow that only exists because it's farmed. And fish farming even at a small scale has on average more of an impact to the environment than land animal farming of the same scale.
So where the line being drawn depends on your point of view, knowledge and intelligence.
Last edited:
Animals eating other animals is a natural phenomenon, and like it or not, we are still animals...
Actually, IMO in a situation like this, that's the ONLY appropriate response
Probably not, but only because they don't look very tasty!
So you differentiate between fresh/marine animals?
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 22,499
- Location
- ST4
Why is it that companies/organisations always pander to this type of cretinous minority? Why do they simply not just ignore them, or better yet tell them to get a ****ing life and to jog on? What are the idiots going to do, boycott money?
Oh, and fish is meat. It's the flesh of a dead animal.
Oh, and fish is meat. It's the flesh of a dead animal.
fully agree, the response should actually be "**** off you attention-seeking ****wits."
Not sure why everyone is getting so upset about this, not having tallow in the £5 note isn't going to affect us is it?
So if it does upset a section of society (irrespective of whether you agree with it or not), and to the rest of us we couldn't care either way, if it's an easy change why not do it?
Funnily enough, a similar thing was one of the final straws that caused the Indian uprising and overthrow of British rule during the British empire
You have to be careful with these vegetarians!
So if it does upset a section of society (irrespective of whether you agree with it or not), and to the rest of us we couldn't care either way, if it's an easy change why not do it?
Funnily enough, a similar thing was one of the final straws that caused the Indian uprising and overthrow of British rule during the British empire
You have to be careful with these vegetarians!
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 12,776
- Location
- Leicestershire
I love the way that on the news they asked a Hindu church/chapel if they would accept the new £5 note as a charity donation.
"Yes, we have no problem with that."
"Yes, we have no problem with that."
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 12,776
- Location
- Leicestershire
Ps I also don't understand why, if it was so easy to change, it wasn't thought of in such a huge process as at least one of them has to be vegan or vegetarian or of a religious persuasion!?
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
And fish farming even at a small scale has on average more of an impact to the environment than land animal farming of the same scale.
So where the line being drawn depends on your point of view, knowledge and intelligence.
You are going to have to elaborate on this.
If it was fishing wild fish, then the environmental impact is greater but fish farming with methods from the last few decades is far more efficient in land use and feed. Fish are no longer fed fish meal and oils but rather vegetable oils and proteins.
Salmon. From the aquaculture side, let’s look at salmon farming. As carnivores, salmon historically were fed diets derived largely from fish meal and fish oil. With the rapid growth of salmon farming that started in the mid 1980s, it became clear that catching wild fish to feed farmed fish isn’t sustainable from either an environmental or a business perspective. As a result, salmon diets have changed dramatically over the last decade with fish oil and fish meal being replaced by vegetable oils and proteins, largely canola and soy, respectively.
To raise a pound of a vegetarian salmon, one raised on a diet of canola oil and soy protein, the fish would consume 0.84 pounds of canola seeds and 0.69 pounds of soybeans. However, most of us eat salmon filets so, actually, we really only eat about 64 percent of the whole salmon. That means it takes about 1.3 pounds of canola seeds and 1.1 pounds of soybeans to put a pound of salmon on the dinner table.
Red meat. Beef and pork have diets that include many cereal crop ingredients. As a useful simplification, I combine them together as one entity: cereals. With that said, a pound of pork we eat consumes between 2 and 3 pounds of soybeans plus 5 or 6 pounds of cereal. Beef cattle, raised on feedlots starting at 500 pounds up to their harvest weight of 1,300 pounds, need about 10 pounds of cereal to provide a pound of edible meat.
Poultry. It takes 2 pounds of feed to raise a pound of chicken. Of that pound of chicken, about 50 percent is meat and skin, so it takes about 4 pounds of total feed to put a pound of chicken on a plate. However, chickens, as omnivores, have a more complex range of dietary ingredients including other animal byproducts. So, their use of crop plants is certainly less than 4 pounds.
As we consider resource utilization in our future food supply, quite clearly salmon offers the promise of producing a lot more food with a lot less input. This makes sense. For a few reasons, fish are the most efficient of farm animals. They don’t use any energy to maintain their body temperature as land animals must. Another energy benefit for fish is that they don’t spend calories working against mavity. Furthermore, the freedom from mavity also removes the need to spend energy building a bone structure to support their weight. So, we eat a much greater fraction of a small-boned fish than we do from large-boned land animals.
To raise a pound of a vegetarian salmon, one raised on a diet of canola oil and soy protein, the fish would consume 0.84 pounds of canola seeds and 0.69 pounds of soybeans. However, most of us eat salmon filets so, actually, we really only eat about 64 percent of the whole salmon. That means it takes about 1.3 pounds of canola seeds and 1.1 pounds of soybeans to put a pound of salmon on the dinner table.
Red meat. Beef and pork have diets that include many cereal crop ingredients. As a useful simplification, I combine them together as one entity: cereals. With that said, a pound of pork we eat consumes between 2 and 3 pounds of soybeans plus 5 or 6 pounds of cereal. Beef cattle, raised on feedlots starting at 500 pounds up to their harvest weight of 1,300 pounds, need about 10 pounds of cereal to provide a pound of edible meat.
Poultry. It takes 2 pounds of feed to raise a pound of chicken. Of that pound of chicken, about 50 percent is meat and skin, so it takes about 4 pounds of total feed to put a pound of chicken on a plate. However, chickens, as omnivores, have a more complex range of dietary ingredients including other animal byproducts. So, their use of crop plants is certainly less than 4 pounds.
As we consider resource utilization in our future food supply, quite clearly salmon offers the promise of producing a lot more food with a lot less input. This makes sense. For a few reasons, fish are the most efficient of farm animals. They don’t use any energy to maintain their body temperature as land animals must. Another energy benefit for fish is that they don’t spend calories working against mavity. Furthermore, the freedom from mavity also removes the need to spend energy building a bone structure to support their weight. So, we eat a much greater fraction of a small-boned fish than we do from large-boned land animals.
Not to mention the insane number of ways large scale meat production outputs pollution and how much it contributes to deforestation to accommodate for ranching and less efficient feeding. Cows are also famous for having a very large carbon footprint
I am no Veggie or Vegan and love both meat and fish but i accept that the lifestyle has an environmental cost.
I personally think that the average modern person in the west has been spoilt and that a lot of food wastage goes on due to unpopular cuts and parts of an animal being thrown away or only a fraction of unpopular parts used to make what we describe as 'cheap crap food' like nuggets or whatever. I love eating things like liver, kidney and such but for some reason eating the thought of eating these parts have no become unpopular and is viewed by many as weird food items. Not that long ago liver and mash was a normal item on English pub menu but generations of easy and cheap fast food/supermarket options have made what was a very normal part of a dish, a wasted part of the animal that is more often thrown than eaten.
So i take the stance of:
If you want to save animals, give up on convincing people to stop eating them and tell them to broaden their pallet and try more parts of their animals of choice so there is less waste.
indeed petition suggestions millions of vegans and vegetarians yet less than 150k care enough to sign a petition.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
Of those, how many sign because they feel snubbed due to finding out their ignorance, rather than they are doing it 'for the animals'
I mean really, tallow is a byproduct of the meat industry which is insanely huge.
Pfft I wish we all had so many notes that tallow was in so short supply that we need to farm it...