The Veganism Thread

[_David_]

I read that a A Dutch team from Maastricht University managed to grow a burger from the stem cells of a cow. Only problem it cost about £250,000. 

[Patchelicious]

So in you opinion what is the solution?

 

The solution to what?

[Patchelicious]

And then what?

Then we can look at the problems we face as one and from a more objective point of view I think.

[Patchelicious]

So in you opinion what is the solution?

Well usually I ignore them until they decide to debate like adults.

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

I read that a A Dutch team from Maastricht University managed to grow a burger from the stem cells of a cow. Only problem it cost about £250,000. 

Yeah, but that's the total overall cost of man hours, experimentation, research, equipment costs and so on, and that's for a single sample. 

 

If you scale that up to multiple samples over a long period of time, the avg cost per serving will come down extremely fast. 

[Odinson]

Then we can look at the problems we face as one and from a more objective point of view I think.

 

So, we should scrap all the research and ignore the facts as to the contribution of our food choices are making to the state of our planet because that is not 'objective'? 

[Odinson]

I read that a A Dutch team from Maastricht University managed to grow a burger from the stem cells of a cow. Only problem it cost about £250,000. 

 

One of the many companies in that field. 

 

Look into Memphis Meats, Aleph Farms, The Good Food Institute, Just Inc. Very interesting stuff. 

[Patchelicious]

So, we should scrap all the research and ignore the facts as to the contribution of our food choices are making to the state of our planet because that is not 'objective'? 

Is that what I said? I have ALWAYS said that plant based diets is good choice for the planet. I simply stated that above that going vegan will not solve the core problems on its own. 

 

The level of tolerance being displayed here for trying to look at the broader picture is not very reassuring. 

 

Do you simply want people who agree that vegansims makes you ethically sound, makes you healthier than any other diet and will also single handedly save the plant? Because that is simply not true. It is not a silver bullet. Why can we not acknowledge that?

Edited January 31, 2019 by Patchelicious

[Odinson]

Is that what I said? I have ALWAYS said that plant based diets is good choice for the plant. I simply stated that above that going vegan will not solve the core problems on its own. 

 

The level of tolerance being displayed here for trying to look at the broader picture is not very reassuring. 

 

Do you simply what people who agree that vegansims makes you ethically sound, makes you healthier than any other diet and will also single handedly save the plant? Because that is simply not true. It is not a silver bullet. Why can we not acknowledge that?

 

I've never made the claim that it is a silver bullet that it is going to solve all of these issues. What I've done is shared the science on why it's a pragmatic way for Joe and Josephine Soap to make a big contribution by making small changes. When a lot of people make the change, that's when you see results. 

[Patchelicious]

Here is a good quality study.

 

Take the time to read it. 

 

"Health effects of vegan diets" by 

 

https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/89/5/1627S/4596952

Edited January 31, 2019 by Patchelicious

[Chris_]

Is that what I said? I have ALWAYS said that plant based diets is good choice for the planet. I simply stated that above that going vegan will not solve the core problems on its own. 

 

The level of tolerance being displayed here for trying to look at the broader picture is not very reassuring. 

 

Do you simply want people who agree that vegansims makes you ethically sound, makes you healthier than any other diet and will also single handedly save the plant? Because that is simply not true. It is not a silver bullet. Why can we not acknowledge that?

 

What happened that you've resorted to absolutes? I know that you know this isn't a binary situation solution..

Edited January 31, 2019 by CBlake

[Goodbadugly]

Here is a good quality study.

 

Take the time to read it. 

 

"Health effects of vegan diets" by 

 

https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/89/5/1627S/4596952

"Cross-sectional and longitudinal population-based studies published within the past 2 decades suggest no differences in bone mineral density (BMD), for both trabecular and cortical bone, between omnivores and lactoovovegetarians (40). More recent studies with postmenopausal Asian women showed spine or hip BMD was significantly lower in long-term vegans (41, 42). Those Asian women, who were vegetarian for religious reasons, had low intakes of protein and calcium. An inadequate protein and low calcium intake has been shown to be associated with bone loss and fractures at the hip and spine in the elderly (43, 44). Adequate calcium intake may be a problem for vegans. Although lactoovovegetarians generally consume adequate amounts of calcium, vegans typically fall short of the recommended daily intake for calcium (8, 45, 46). Results from the EPIC-Oxford study provide good evidence that the risk of bone fractures for vegetarians was similar to that of omnivores (46). The higher risk of bone fracture seen in vegans appears to be a consequence of a lower mean calcium intake. No difference was observed between the fracture rates of the vegans who consumed >525 mg calcium/d and the omnivore fracture rates (46)."

From the article

Edited January 31, 2019 by Goodbadugly

[Imploder]

I think all us humans need to acknowledge that you can't solve a human pollution problem with a dietary solution based on ethics.

 

Certainly the solution to pollution needs to be approached on many fronts, many pieces to a puzzle, so to speak. And as you rightly say we need a focused and targeted strategy - we are all building the same puzzle. Framing one of the pieces of the puzzle as an animal rights/animal ethics problem, distracts from the original puzzle we are building. 

 

So yes I agree. If we are saying we are solving a human caused pollution problem and science and research supports that we can positively affect the pollution problem by moving to a majority (or even complete) plant based diet, then that's how we should frame the issue.

 

An externality of the solution will be that less animals suffer and die. Perhaps that puzzle we solved forms part of a bigger picture....

[Patchelicious]

What happened that you've resorted to absolutes? I know that you know this isn't a binary situation solution..

I have displayed a level of hyperbole to illustrate some frustration that very little concession is being made on some parts. I also think it is fair to say, that I have displayed a level of patience that is not necessarily being reciprocated. 

 

On this thread I have maintained that plant based diets will contribute to the solving the problem. I will refrain from using the word 'always" if that will help keep you focused my message rather than semantics of my words.

 

I agree with 90% of what is being said here.

 

I agree that ethically vegansism makes sense for animal rights.

I agree that plant based diets are good for the environment.

I agree that plant based diets are better for humans that the current SAD.

 

Because of this, I am meat free 3 days a week now.

 

The things I disagree with are much more nuanced.

 

I do not agree that plant based diets are simply the "best diets" for humans.

I do not agree veganism will single handily save the planet.

I do not agree agree with the the approach some vegans take to the topic.

 

Veganism is not perfect, and the unwillingness to concede on even on small points, shows that when we mix emotion (animals rights) with other more data driven topics, its can muddy the water. 

 

But if you cannot even accept people who agree with 90% of the ideas on this thread, maybe just maybe that is a problem in itself.

[Chris_]

I have displayed a level of hyperbole to illustrate some frustration that very little concession is being made on some parts. I also think it is fair to say, that I have displayed a level of patience that is not necessarily being reciprocated. 

 

On this thread I have maintained that plant based diets will contribute to the solving the problem. I will refrain from using the word 'always" if that will help keep you focused my message rather than semantics of my words.

 

I agree with 90% of what is being said here.

 

I agree that ethically vegansism makes sense for animal rights.

I agree that plant based diets are good for the environment.

I agree that plant based diets are better for humans that the current SAD.

 

Because of this, I am meat free 3 days a week now.

 

The things I disagree with are much more nuanced.

 

I do not agree that plant based diets are simply the "best diets" for humans.

I do not agree veganism will single handily save the planet.

I do not agree agree with the the approach some vegans take to the topic.

 

Veganism is not perfect, and the unwillingness to concede on even on small points, shows that when we mix emotion (animals rights) with other more data driven topics, its can muddy the water. 

 

But if you cannot even accept people who agree with 90% of the ideas on this thread, maybe just maybe that is a problem in itself.

 

Well put, and fair points.

 

I was just worried that someone had kicked your dog (or Peckles perhaps) this morning.

[Escapee..]

I really hope you win Patch!

 

Beyoncé and JAY-Z are giving fans all the motivation they need to start living a new lifestyle with a new vegan challenge.

 

http://time.com/5517618/beyonce-vegan-challenge/