Supplements

[Odinson]

Is EPO illegal? not even for medical conditions?

 

 

not even B12? 

 

 

well, I'm not a vegan, so what do I know. #meatheals

 

Aw, damn. You got me, bro! 

 

I'd happily pop a B12 once a week if it means not supporting the industries that are laying waste to this Earth and our health and causing the (until recently) untold and unimaginable suffering of billions of sentient land and sea animals for a moment's worth of taste. 

[Chingy182]

I thought the Rennies thing died years ago... do people still use it...?

Rennies contain Magnesium carbonate and Calcium carbonate, both of which help to reduce lactic acid build up.

People could have moved on to newer supplements, but it does not mean Rennies don't work or have been "Myth-busted" 

[TheEd]

Aw, damn. You got me, bro! 

 

I'd happily pop a B12 once a week if it means not supporting the industries that are laying waste to this Earth and our health and causing the (until recently) untold and unimaginable suffering of billions of sentient land and sea animals for a moment's worth of taste. 

 

Not to attack you for being vegan and, because I'm convinced to each his own...

 

But it would be interesting to see what global impact veganism/vegetarianism has on deforestation.  The assumption being that greater vegetable/plant consumption requires greater production of crops to feed both herbivorous humans and animals as opposed to feeding the animals which in turn gets eaten by carnivorous humans, and vegan and/or vegetarian diets consume more vegetable/plant based foods than a meat diet.  I'm just wondering and will happily accept defeat if proven otherwise.  A half-hearted consultation with the Google suggests I'm wrong, but those articles are based on opinions, not actual research...

[Odinson]

Not to attack you for being vegan and, because I'm convinced to each his own...

 

But it would be interesting to see what global impact veganism/vegetarianism has on deforestation.  The assumption being that greater vegetable/plant consumption requires greater production of crops to feed both herbivorous humans and animals as opposed to feeding the animals which in turn gets eaten by carnivorous humans, and vegan and/or vegetarian diets consume more vegetable/plant based foods than a meat diet.  I'm just wondering and will happily accept defeat if proven otherwise.  A half-hearted consultation with the Google suggests I'm wrong, but those articles are based on opinions, not actual research...

 

It's simple arithmetic. A great portion of all crop production (there are estimates of between 30-50%) goes into feeding animals that will eventually end up on people's plate and coat the inside of their arteries. Thus, you have wasteful indirect food production. Instead of feeding those crops to animals and then slaughtering the animals, people can simply consume the crops directly. This will result in a decrease demand for crops, arable land, fresh water, antibiotics, etc. 

 

Back in 1997 there was a study stating that the US alone could feed 800million people on the crops that they're feeding to animals. http://news.cornell.edu/stories/1997/08/us-could-feed-800-million-people-grain-livestock-eat

 

On the topic of deforestation, just keep in mind that pasture raising and cattle farming is the number one driver of deforestation in Brazil (that place where the Amazon is). https://rainforestpartnership.org/the-beef-industry-and-deforestation/

 

If this is something that interests you, take some time and read Livestock's Long Shadow. It's about 12 years old now, but is a seminal work on how animal agriculture is a major contributor to climate change and air pollution, to land, soil and water degradation and to the reduction of biodiversity. http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTM

[Prince]

Rennies contain Magnesium carbonate and Calcium carbonate, both of which help to reduce lactic acid build up.

People could have moved on to newer supplements, but it does not mean Rennies don't work or have been "Myth-busted" 

I knew there was a reason i always have a pack of Rennies with me.

[Jewbacca]

Not to attack you for being vegan and, because I'm convinced to each his own...

 

But it would be interesting to see what global impact veganism/vegetarianism has on deforestation.  The assumption being that greater vegetable/plant consumption requires greater production of crops to feed both herbivorous humans and animals as opposed to feeding the animals which in turn gets eaten by carnivorous humans, and vegan and/or vegetarian diets consume more vegetable/plant based foods than a meat diet.  I'm just wondering and will happily accept defeat if proven otherwise.  A half-hearted consultation with the Google suggests I'm wrong, but those articles are based on opinions, not actual research...

No dude

 

There are literally thousands of studies done on the impact of the meat industry and deforestation.

 

There are also massive studies done on the impact of methane gas in localised eco systems and the impact this has on plant production.

 

The meat industry is responsible for a LOT of really bad stuff. It is not an opinion poll.

[Odinson]

No dude

 

There are literally thousands of studies done on the impact of the meat industry and deforestation.

 

There are also massive studies done on the impact of methane gas in localised eco systems and the impact this has on plant production.

 

The meat industry is responsible for a LOT of really bad stuff. It is not an opinion poll.

 

So, the question is: what are folks going to do about it? 

 

Hint: change begins at the individual. 

[Jewbacca]

So, the question is: what are folks going to do about it? 

 

Hint: change begins at the individual. 

From my personal experience, absolutely nothing other than share a few things on facebook and make those cute little temporary profile pictures.

 

Most people love a good whinge but do almost nothing to make changes.

 

When it comes to the meat industry, most people choose to remain ignorant. In our culture, braai's steaks, burgers and tjops are a marker for manlymanness and status.

 

Virtue signal a few unhappy cows, share some video's and be exaggeratedly outraged at the inhumane behaviour but still look forward to a life of delicious meat in Jimmy sauce.

[andydude]

Rennies contain Magnesium carbonate and Calcium carbonate, both of which help to reduce lactic acid build up.

People could have moved on to newer supplements, but it does not mean Rennies don't work or have been "Myth-busted" 

 

[Breezer]

So, the question is: what are folks going to do about it?

 

Hint: change begins at the individual.

Ek sal my deel doen en al die koeie probeer opeet.

[thisismyotherbike]

It's simple arithmetic. A great portion of all crop production (there are estimates of between 30-50%) goes into feeding animals that will eventually end up on people's plate and coat the inside of their arteries. Thus, you have wasteful indirect food production. Instead of feeding those crops to animals and then slaughtering the animals, people can simply consume the crops directly. This will result in a decrease demand for crops, arable land, fresh water, antibiotics, etc. 

 

Back in 1997 there was a study stating that the US alone could feed 800million people on the crops that they're feeding to animals. http://news.cornell.edu/stories/1997/08/us-could-feed-800-million-people-grain-livestock-eat

 

On the topic of deforestation, just keep in mind that pasture raising and cattle farming is the number one driver of deforestation in Brazil (that place where the Amazon is). https://rainforestpartnership.org/the-beef-industry-and-deforestation/

 

If this is something that interests you, take some time and read Livestock's Long Shadow. It's about 12 years old now, but is a seminal work on how animal agriculture is a major contributor to climate change and air pollution, to land, soil and water degradation and to the reduction of biodiversity. http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTM

 

Spot on, the efficiency numbers are very straightforward.  It makes intuitive sense - plenty of calories are "lost" in the process of turning the calories in crops to calories in livestock.  This doesn't even count the secondary effects of water use/contamination and deforestation.

 

Now the other question looms...  What's your position on organic vs GMO?

 

Also just for fun:  Do you use almond milk?

 

Efficiency is the ultimate goal here.  Use the smallest amount of land, water and other inputs to yield the largest amount of calories.  This decreases environmental impact and suffering.

 

The push for organic is preposterous.  Organic crops yield far lower per hectare, use more water and require more labor.  Almonds are low yield and require large amounts of water relative to alternatives.  Same for another "superfood" fad, quinoa.

 

I'm 100% supportive of plant-based diets purely on the basis of minimizing environmental impact (yes health yes kindness, but good luck with spreading that message), but the logic needs to be applied consistently.  It obviously also goes doubly so for things like organic beef, which may be the greatest impact subset within the greatest impact industry.

 

You're obviously very well read so I'm not assuming you've missed anything I've mentioned in your own lifestyle, this is just my two cents worth regarding the stereotyped proponent of plant-based's arguments.  It all boils down to efficiency, not this alternative healthcare/superfood/organic nonsense.  NOISE detracting from the real potential.  We could throw away the Paris Climate accords in a year by switching to plants.

[Odinson]

Spot on, the efficiency numbers are very straightforward.  It makes intuitive sense - plenty of calories are "lost" in the process of turning the calories in crops to calories in livestock.  This doesn't even count the secondary effects of water use/contamination and deforestation.

 

Now the other question looms...  What's your position on organic vs GMO?

 

Also just for fun:  Do you use almond milk?

 

Efficiency is the ultimate goal here.  Use the smallest amount of land, water and other inputs to yield the largest amount of calories.  This decreases environmental impact and suffering.

 

The push for organic is preposterous.  Organic crops yield far lower per hectare, use more water and require more labor.  Almonds are low yield and require large amounts of water relative to alternatives.  Same for another "superfood" fad, quinoa.

 

I'm 100% supportive of plant-based diets purely on the basis of minimizing environmental impact (yes health yes kindness, but good luck with spreading that message), but the logic needs to be applied consistently.  It obviously also goes doubly so for things like organic beef, which may be the greatest impact subset within the greatest impact industry.

 

You're obviously very well read so I'm not assuming you've missed anything I've mentioned in your own lifestyle, this is just my two cents worth regarding the stereotyped proponent of plant-based's arguments.  It all boils down to efficiency, not this alternative healthcare/superfood/organic nonsense.  NOISE detracting from the real potential.  We could throw away the Paris Climate accords in a year by switching to plants.

 

How refreshing to read a post from someone who actually has an opinion. Not just a brainfart. 

 

Off the bat, I'd have to disagree with your position that "efficiency is the ultimate goal". 'Efficiency' is what's screwed humanity and the rest of the planet since the start of the Agricultural Revolution. Sustainability is what we should be striving for: how can we sustainably feed humanity, whilst minimizing our impact on the rest of the planet. The starting point would need to be a plant-based diet; there's no other way around it. 

 

Regarding the organic vs GMO question, that's something that an entire forum can be dedicated to. In principle I take no issue with GMO crop production to increase food output, but there are still many unanswered questions, i.e. long-term health effects need to be studied, the risks of the control of food production falling in the hands of a few GMO producers, use of harmful pesticides, etc. [Edit: I disagree with GMO animals such as pigs producing human-like breast milk and the like. It's creating a solution to a problem that doesn't need to exist] 

 

If there are farms who produce organic produce and sell it where they find a market, I take also take no issue with it. If it can be done sustainably, then why not. 

 

I buy almond milk on occassion, but more often oat or soy milk. Regarding quinoa, keep in mind that it is a niche crop and will most likely stay that way. 

 

An interesting book I came across recently, 'Drawdown: The Most Comprehensive Plan Ever Proposed To Reverse Global Warming', lists solutions to reverse global warming. A plant-based diet slots in at number 4, preceded by 3) reduced food waste, 2) on-shore wind turbines and 1) refrigerant management. That just goes to show how easily Average Joe can make a small lifestyle change (switching to a plant-based diet and reducing food-waste (although the food waste is also a big sin of producers) and make a massive contribution on their part to reducing climate change. 

[Odinson]

From my personal experience, absolutely nothing other than share a few things on facebook and make those cute little temporary profile pictures.

 

Most people love a good whinge but do almost nothing to make changes.

 

When it comes to the meat industry, most people choose to remain ignorant. In our culture, braai's steaks, burgers and tjops are a marker for manlymanness and status.

 

Virtue signal a few unhappy cows, share some video's and be exaggeratedly outraged at the inhumane behaviour but still look forward to a life of delicious meat in Jimmy sauce.

 

I agree with you (especially how meat eating is closely intertwined with (toxic) masculinity in SA), but it's also not productive to always hide behind such a defeatist position. 

 

Let me put you on the spot: now that you know of the evils of the animal agriculture industry, what changes are you going to make? Keep on supporting it or change? 

[Jewbacca]

I agree with you (especially how meat eating is closely intertwined with (toxic) masculinity in SA), but it's also not productive to always hide behind such a defeatist position. 

 

Let me put you on the spot: now that you know of the evils of the animal agriculture industry, what changes are you going to make? Keep on supporting it or change? 

Our house might not be Vegan, but we live mostly on sustainable green stuff and honestly sourced eggs.

 

We still eat fish, which we buy from the kalk bay harbour or the sushi shop. I don't even take biltong or droewors on AR races.

 

I went 5 years without eating meat until I cheated a year or so ago at an event because the vegetarian option was utterly horrible.

 

As a household we are generally better and have been for years and years. Not 'perfect' but we make a concerted effort to make better decisions.

 

My missus is a head chef, she is a food genius so I am pretty lucky

[Chris_]

 

Efficiency is the ultimate goal here.  Use the smallest amount of land, water and other inputs to yield the largest amount of calories.  This decreases environmental impact and suffering.

 

 

I feel this should be the other way round.

 

When the worlds population is 10, 15, 20 billion... We would have lost so much arable ground, potable water, and lost the seas to 'dead zones', then efficiency will become the goal. But this is a goal of consequence.

[Quagga]

Rennies contain Magnesium carbonate and Calcium carbonate, both of which help to reduce lactic acid build up.

People could have moved on to newer supplements, but it does not mean Rennies don't work or have been "Myth-busted" 

What do you mean with "Build up" Build up Where? Lactic is reduced the moment you lower your HR, your body is continually removing it and taking it to the liver. Can you explain the "build up" you are referring to please.

 

 

 

Studies have proven that cramps are NOT caused by Lactic "build up” but rather by undertrained muscles.