The Veganism Thread

[Eldron]

Veganic farming? It's called crop production.

As if that "Veganaury" wasn't cringe worthy enough.

 

 https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2017/03/veganic-farming.html

[Eldron]

Thanks Odi , I appreciate you trying to answer that.

 

I fully understand that times and business change and people have to try and swim with the current to survive.

But this is not a few lantern factories that had to adapt because the light bulb was invented. If almost 90 % of the worlds land area is not suitable for planting crops , and can only be utilized by grazing , you have to admit it’s a bit of a problem for a world of vegans ?

 

The problem that most vegans have ( and I mean this with respect ) is that they usually live in first world countries - and Also mostly in big cities . They therefore live in a bit of a “bubble” and don’t realize how most people in the world live.

 

People don’t realize what a privilege it is to be vegan by choice !

 

GMO is helping increase the arable number and is the obvious go to if the world starts eating less meat than the current meat supply.

 

Humans are pretty adaptable and as meat demand decreases I'm re people will find a way to use the old "meat land" profitably...

[Milkman]

GMO is helping increase the arable number and is the obvious go to if the world starts eating less meat than the current meat supply.

 

Humans are pretty adaptable and as meat demand decreases I'm re people will find a way to use the old "meat land" profitably...

The data I quoted in the previous post was from 2016 , so gmo had already been used for a while and was therefore included in the numbers. I am sure that with better developed crops you will see improvements, but I doubt they will be double digit type of improvements? But I might be wrong.

[Eldron]

The data I quoted in the previous post was from 2016 , so gmo had already been used for a while and was therefore included in the numbers. I am sure that with better developed crops you will see improvements, but I doubt they will be double digit type of improvements? But I might be wrong.

 

Im a supply and demand believer - outside of GMO companies trying to sell seed, a few NPOs and academia there arent a lot of factors driving GMO. IF meat production drops low enough GMO will be given much more freedom in my opinion.

 

It does bring some interesting conflict into pay though - beef and GMO are traditionally BAD but what if GMO can save animals by converting meat land into veg land???

[Milkman]

GMO is helping increase the arable number and is the obvious go to if the world starts eating less meat than the current meat supply.

 

Humans are pretty adaptable and as meat demand decreases I'm re people will find a way to use the old "meat land" profitably...

 

I agree that humans are adaptable ( suppose that’s why we are on top of the food chain ? ).

The problem is that most people in the world don’t have the luxury of choosing what they want to eat. Their primary concern is to try and get the most nourishment for the small amount of money they have.

They definitely won’t buy a bottle of soy milk if they can get it from their cow for free. Neither will they get some chia seeds to try and replace their eggs that they can get from their chicken.

There are a heck of a lot of people ( 3.2 billion , or 45% of the worlds population in fact -https://www.globalagriculture.org/report-topics/industrial-agriculture-and-small-scale-farming.html ) that live in rural areas. Most of those are subsistent farmers who are just trying to survive.

 

Now if you do the maths with the amount of arable land available compared to grazing land , it’s easy to work out how many people are reliant on animals for their very survival.

[Eldron]

I agree that humans are adaptable ( suppose that’s why we are on top of the food chain ? ).

The problem is that most people in the world don’t have the luxury of choosing what they want to eat. Their primary concern is to try and get the most nourishment for the small amount of money they have.

They definitely won’t buy a bottle of soy milk if they can get it from their cow for free. Neither will they get some chia seeds to try and replace their eggs that they can get from their chicken.

There are a heck of a lot of people ( 3.2 billion , or 45% of the worlds population in fact -https://www.globalagriculture.org/report-topics/industrial-agriculture-and-small-scale-farming.html ) that live in rural areas. Most of those are subsistent farmers who are just trying to survive.

 

Now if you do the maths with the amount of arable land available compared to grazing land , it’s easy to work out how many people are reliant on animals for their very survival.

My point of debate was only aimed at those that eat meat by choice (which is effectively everyone on thehub).

 

Those that farm to survive get carte blanche from me to farm whatever they choose to.

[Patchelicious]

My point of debate was only aimed at those that eat meat by choice (which is effectively everyone on thehub).

 

Those that farm to survive get carte blanche from me to farm whatever they choose to.

Mostly people who cycle for fun and are on the Hub have the means to become vegan if they choose, mostly.

[Odinson]

Milkman, the land/food security question you raised was actually addressed in the latest IPCC report. They postulate that in a vegan world with a population of ~9 billion people, adequate food production with less land than what is currently used.

 

I’ll try and find the exact quote, but navigating that report on an iPhone is an absolute shitshow.

[100Tours]

Shoes with attitude? 

 

https://qz.com/quartzy/1686773/doc-martenss-vegan-boot-business-is-thriving/

[100Tours]

Given that this thread is moving towards 'how do we save the world' (rather than manage our own health) the question I usually come back to is how do we address the growth in the number of people.

 

A population of 9 or 10 billion may be unsustainable, especially if we desire a biodiverse world. A population of 15 or 20 billion is almost certainly not (unless we GMO our food to the point of factory farming ourselves, which doesn't seem all that appealing).

 

As a world population we are guaranteed to lose the battle on climate change. We will see 2-3 degrees C plus in our lifetimes, and people will not give up cars or flying or electricity or intensive agriculture. Or war for that matter, which is also rather high in carbon it turns out.

 

The only real solution it seems is not having 10, 15, 20 billion people (educate and emancipate girls, and thus control fertility are solutions). And if you want that you should look at solutions like universal basic income grants to support better lives (and not our version of paying people to have kids).

 

If veganism is only accessible for a priviliged few then surely it solves nothing more than giving the practitioners something to feel good about.

 

Milkman, the land/food security question you raised was actually addressed in the latest IPCC report. They postulate that in a vegan world with a population of ~9 billion people, adequate food production with less land than what is currently used.

[Rocket-Boy]

So I was thinking recently about random stuff and one thought that popped into my head was around vegans/vegetarians and the impact of their diet on their health.

 

Lets assume that having a plant based diet increases your lifespan and quality of life.

 

There is an issue with that though, at the rate humans are being born vs mortality rates there is a serious overpopulation issue.

If the mortality rates are lowered you can be damn sure the birth rates are not going to decline.

This is in itself an issue because regardless of what you eat or how you recycle etc the impact of a human being alive is way higher than any eco friendly choices you can make.

 

Bottom line with that is that having a single child is more detrimental to the environment than anything you can do to conserve it.

[Imploder]

So I was thinking recently about random stuff and one thought that popped into my head was around vegans/vegetarians and the impact of their diet on their health.

 

Lets assume that having a plant based diet increases your lifespan and quality of life.

 

There is an issue with that though, at the rate humans are being born vs mortality rates there is a serious overpopulation issue.

If the mortality rates are lowered you can be damn sure the birth rates are not going to decline.

This is in itself an issue because regardless of what you eat or how you recycle etc the impact of a human being alive is way higher than any eco friendly choices you can make.

 

Bottom line with that is that having a single child is more detrimental to the environment than anything you can do to conserve it.

 

I read something recently: "If everyone in the world lived like a villager in a rural town, then the world could easily accomodate a population of 12 Billion. However if everyone in the world lived like the average middle class American, the world would not be able to accomodate even 2 Billion"

Population is not the problem, consumption is the issue. 

 

FYI:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/27/what-goes-up-population-crisis-wrong-fertility-rates-decline

 

https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/blog/concern-overpopulation-red-herring-consumption-problem-sustainability

 

11 Billion by 2100:

https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/world-population-prospects-2017.html

Edited August 15, 2019 by Imploder

[Mudsimus]

I read something recently: "If everyone in the world lived like a villager in a rural town, then the world could easily accomodate a population of 12 Billion. However if everyone in the world lived like the average middle class American, the world would not be able to accomodate even 2 Billion"

Population is not the problem, consumption is the issue.

 

FYI:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/27/what-goes-up-population-crisis-wrong-fertility-rates-decline

 

https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/blog/concern-overpopulation-red-herring-consumption-problem-sustainability

 

11 Billion by 2100:

https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/world-population-prospects-2017.html

Lowering quality of life just to make space for more humans doesn't make much sense. The problem is not diets and consumption but over population. Humans must simply breed less.

[Rocket-Boy]

Lowering quality of life just to make space for more humans doesn't make much sense. The problem is not diets and consumption but over population. Humans must simply breed less.

^This 100%

Its not possible to live like a rural villager unless you live in a rural village.

Travelling to work and home, flights etc all account for massive environment impact that you cant avoid.

[Eldron]

^This 100%

Its not possible to live like a rural villager unless you live in a rural village.

Travelling to work and home, flights etc all account for massive environment impact that you cant avoid.

As always the answer is probably somewhere in the middle. Here in Denmark recycling, waste reduction, environmentally based consumer choices, reduced dependence on fossil fuels are all standard. In SA they're not. Of course economics play a part but there are many things the average man in the street can do but doesn't.

[Patchelicious]

Lowering quality of life just to make space for more humans doesn't make much sense. The problem is not diets and consumption but over population. Humans must simply breed less.

Bill Burr - Cruise Ships, watch it