Distasteful vegan TV ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Crizzy said:
If you're concerned about small animals and insects getting killed in fields, choosing a plant-based diet is still the more ethical choice. This is because it takes fewer crops to make plant-based food directly for humans compared to the large amount needed to feed animals, which give back only a small amount of food in return.

Veganism is about reducing as much harm as possible, it's not about completely avoiding harm as that would be impossible. We can only do our best within the limits of what's available to us.
Click to expand...
My health suffered massively eating plant based. I have had to eat meat to improve my health and reduce my own risk of dying. But at the same time I've given up owning a car which according to johno's figures means I'm actually doing 8 times less damage to the environment than him.

I've also bought land to raise my own food reducing my food miles to essentially zero for most things and everything else I buy in is less than 5. There are zero crops grown to feed the animals I eat, it's all grass fed/pastured/foraged with zero pesticides used.

So according to your metric here, I'm a better vegan than a vegan.

Everyone *could* give up their car.

The vegans in this thread are just virtue signalling, not willing to do anything meaningful. If they stuck to "I don't like the idea of eating meat" then that would be fine, the arguments over health and environment are pretty weak, and being portrayed as black and white when there is a whole load of nuance they want to ignore because it doesn't make them feel good.

The pre-packaged vegan food market is worth 26bn, but if vegans actually cared about the environment they would all be eating natural whole foods, the fact that companies are able to milk 26bn out of a relatively tiny percentage of people shows that if you tried to expand veganism to more people any "on average" saving would quickly be wiped out, because essentially humans are lazy and don't care anyway. So to keep banging on about it being better for the environment is just a nonsense argument.
 
Last edited:
Crizzy said:
Yes, I get your point, but we have to eat something, and choosing plant based causes less harm from the options available.
Click to expand...
So what are you going to do with the hundreds of millions of herbivores around the world who fart methane? Kill them?
 
andybird123 said:
My health suffered massively eating plant based. I have had to eat meat to improve my health and reduce my own risk of dying. But at the same time I've given up owning a car which according to johno's figures means I'm actually doing 8 times less damage to the environment than him.

I've also bought land to raise my own food reducing my food miles to essentially zero for most things and everything else I buy in is less than 5. There are zero crops grown to feed the animals I eat, it's all grass fed/pastured/foraged with zero pesticides used.

So according to your metric here, I'm a better vegan than a vegan.

Everyone *could* give up their car.

The vegans in this thread are just virtue signalling, not willing to do anything meaningful. If they stuck to "I don't like the idea of eating meat" then that would be fine, the arguments over health and environment are pretty weak, and being portrayed as black and white when there is a whole load of nuance they want to ignore because it doesn't make them feel good.

The pre-packaged vegan food market is worth 26bn, but if vegans actually cared about the environment they would all be eating natural whole foods, the fact that companies are able to milk 26bn out of a relatively tiny percentage of people shows that if you tried to expand veganism to more people any "on average" saving would quickly be wiped out, because essentially humans are lazy and don't care anyway. So to keep banging on about it being better for the environment is just a nonsense argument.
Click to expand...

That's fair, but my argument wasn't that it was better for the environment. You are correct that the situation regarding the environment and health is nuanced, I don't agree that the vegan position is weak. We've done our own research and come to different conclusions here.

My point was that if you are trying to reduce animal deaths, which will always be a factor in food production, then plant-based is a better option than meat as less crops are required overall for food production. Your situation of being able to produce all your own meat on grass fed animals is not representative of the population, for which this is not an option available.
 
Last edited:
Couldn't give up my car without giving up work we have literally no public transport and no shops whatsoever,ok in theory I could get an electric bike and go on the camel trail but ,............anyway it's not an eco thread it's about eating dead animals as people are stuck in the dark age and can't question things
 
Crizzy said:
Transition to veganism would take so long long that demand would slowly reduce, reducing the need for these animals to be bred into existence.

Btw - welcome to the forum :)
Click to expand...
Now that is the most sensible reply about this subject.
All studies that are done (for anything) show us different arguments and the outcomes change everytime. One day chocolate is bad for you then another it's good etc. We are lazy as has been said, mostly just going along with the flow so any change is to be measured in generation's.
 
moon man said:
Couldn't give up my car without giving up work we have literally no public transport and no shops whatsoever,ok in theory I could get an electric bike and go on the camel trail but ,............anyway it's not an eco thread it's about eating dead animals as people are stuck in the dark age and can't question things
Click to expand...
Most of society doesn't care I'll admit that, but you also won't get them to change on mass either, it is just how society as a whole works. Gentle movement is better than a big shove in this sort of case, give the population a chance to swayed. Go full on at them and they will just kick back
 
Crizzy said:
That's fair, but my argument wasn't that it was better for the environment. You are correct that the situation regarding the environment and health is nuanced, I don't agree that the vegan position is weak. We've done our own research and come to different conclusions here.

My point was that if you are trying to reduce animal deaths, which will always be a factor in food production, then plant-based is a better option than meat as less crops are required overall for food production. Your situation of being able to produce all your own meat on grass fed animals is not representative of the population, for which this is not an option available.
Click to expand...

At least your response isn't from most 'Vegans' point of view and more like my daughters.
You accept that Vegan food also slaughters billions of animals and in a lot of cases slowly kills them with pesticides etc, so which is better, a cow having a bolt through it's head or an insect slowly dying in pain?
Once you accept they are the same then you can argue that a Vegan diet is better for the World so I'm on your side with that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom