Over the last few years I have dramatically reduced my meat intake and over the last few months I have started to follow a strict vegetarian diet for moral, health and environmental reasons.
I would just like to start a discussion about how Ozbargainers view the topic.
This isn't an attempt to convert anyone or a means by which to make vegetarians and vegans feel superior. Rather I would be interested to hear peoples opinions.
Please lets keep the discussion rational and civil! :)
Haha I really need to watch all the MP movies again!
It does not matter how ethical you find it.
It is more of how rewarding you find shaming non-vegans and the resulting social approval.
Hahaha spot on!
I'm literally in limbo on whether to become a vegetarian at the moment, after hearing of the slow bleed method of how pigs are "prepared" (very rare these days) it made me ill, add to that the environmental impact cattle farms have on the planet, it makes you question is it worth it? I think in time, animals would hopefully have a much greater quality of life and we'd feel alot less guilty but in the mean time I'll cut back on beef, pork and lamb considerably and eat more chicken and fish
Even just cutting back on meat consumption will have a positive impact so there is no need to cut it out all at once!
I think in years to come future generations will look back and be appalled at our current farming practices etc.
how is it unethical?
Killing animals was never unethical or immoral, eh.
its not about killing.its about food chain though..just google it what would happen if everybody turns vegetarian.
I think we should all move to eating farmed insects. High in nutriets and lower impact on the environment.
i think he needs a paddlin
I was reading this thread thinking whatva stimulating conversation everyone was having. Mature, insightful and thoughtful…. Then…
Wtf is your comment?
i dont eat meat coz of ethical and moral reasons - i dont take any supplements as well.
Research suggests that the health of Western vegetarians is good and similar to that of comparable non-vegetarians.
I think there is the real potential to be a vegetarian and be unhealthy though being vegetarian is not unhealthy if one takes the right measures.
Eating meat doesn't necessarily make someone unhealthy and neither does being vegetarian
How do you get sufficient protein without consuming a huge amount of calories? No doubt some veggies have protein in them, but at nowhere near the density of meat.
Legumes!! Soy has more protein density than most meat
I don't believe that is true at all. Certainly soy has protein, but to consume it (in a powder for example), it's is higly concentrated.
@thorton82:
And how do you know that?? any source ?
Straight off google without doing any research:
Soybean: Protein 36 g 72%
Beef: Protein 26 g 52%
In case you keep guessing
http://www.livestrong.com/article/240951-soy-protein-vs-meat…
The information on this seems quite varied, different sources have completely contradictory information. One thing remains constant though, is that soy is full of carbs where as meat has little to none. Eating the same amount of protein will make you fat, if you are eating soy.
@thorton82:
On the point of soy making people fat:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/08/160801093003.h…
and
International Journal of Obesity (2009) 33, 621–628; doi:10.1038/ijo.2009.45; published online 24 March 2009
".."Whether we like it or not, fats and carbohydrates in modern diets are supplying enough energy to meet our daily needs. Because meat protein is digested later than fats and carbohydrates, this makes the energy we receive from protein a surplus, which is then converted and stored as fat in the human body."
Mr You says there have been several other academic papers showing that meat consumption is related to obesity, but the authors have often argued that it's the fat content in meat that contributes to the problem. "On the contrary, we believe the protein in meat is directly contributing to obesity," Mr You says.."
@aerom: That's great, but it doesn't negate the fact that if you consume excess carbs, you will put on weight without exercising it off. By eating the same amount of protein in meat, you don't have those excess carbs.
So tell me.. What clothes do you wear, and were they produced using virtual slave labour in Bangladesh? Is your phone made by the company that has to hang anti-suicide nets around it's factory worker accommodation blocks? Are you wearing shoes or have a wallet made from the hide being peeled off an animal? Do you prefer to avoid flying in a plane running on fossil fuels made with technologies developed for war?
Thanks for the reply. Yes there are inconsistencies in the way we all live and we are all hypocrites to some extent. But what argument are you attempting to make? Because all these other unethical practices exist and I am supporting them that I should revert back to eating meat and add that to my list?
This is a strawman argument
Yes, we are all hypocrites to some extent - but some are bigger hypocrites than others.
There are plenty of people making lifestyle choices based upon their own ethics, and yet they don't seem to feel the need to yell about it from the rooftops.
I'm not yelling :(
Those issues don't negate vegetarianism
Just Bull, and I love it!! …nothing like a well balanced diet for proper health.
I always ask vegetarians why they don't eat kangaroo, as it is environmentally good and they live their life in the wild. I don't really receive a sufficient answer from most, it's mostly just sticking to an idea that they don't want to examine. All meat, vegetables and fruits have different impacts on the environment, amount of animals killed (if you eat vegetables some animals were killed in the process, either via poisoning, clearing land, tractors running over animal etc) and moral implications. I find the decision to be a vegetarian a simple and problematic solution, to a complex problem.
There is no reason we can't campaign for ethical meat. We have free range chickens as an ethical meat source, why don't we have any other avenues? Kangaroo isn't even marketed as an ethical option.
As for supplements, most vegetarians aren't very aware of what they need. I have talked to 10+ who claim to be very knowledgeable about their dietary requirements but none know that creatine monohydrate has a large impact on cognitive function and is likely to prevent anxiety and depression although further study is required. There have been several studies on cognitive function(decreasing), creatine and vegetarians. It should be a staple supplement.
Source: https://examine.com/supplements/creatine/#summary1-4
My personal reason for not eating any animals regardless of the way they lived their life or how they were killed is because I believe that it isn't my right to shorten their life just for my enjoyment, when I have the ability to easily not do so. Actually, this quote is what made me become vegetarian originally (10 years ago):
“Poor animals, how jealously they guard their bodies, for to us is merely an evening's meal, but to them is life itself.” ― T. Casey Brennan
However, in addition to this - an obvious reason for not eating kangaroos is the (in my opinion) unethical way that they are killed. Shooting a wild unrestrained animal has a relatively high rate of non-instant death (compared to other methods of killing). Also, kangaroos have complex social structures and it is cruel and unnecessary for humans to affect that by picking off individuals.
The pest side of kangaroos (and other wild animals) could be controlled ethically by reproductive controls, fencing and relocations.
The argument about animals being killed through fruit and vegetable farming is dumb because the same effect is multiplied many many times for animal farming, as they need to eat more of the same farmed feed. By eating the primary food source you are reducing that as much as reasonably possible.
Regarding supplements - overconsumption of meat causes many diseases, and most vegetarians are less likely to be deficient in anything than the average non-vegetarian as they tend to eat less processed foods (except for B12 for vegans). I honestly haven't heard of creatine issues before though, so I will look into that.
In regards to the quote, we all place certain values on different life forms. I guess the question is how and when do you draw the line? Do you hit that mosquito biting your arm? Do you take it even further like some monks have and have people sweep your path so that you don't accidentally stand on any sort of visible or invisible (to the naked eye), life form.
What about animals that die in the wild? What about animals that die from starvation? It seems that vegetarians believe that animals live in some sort of animal utopia, or zootopia (good movie).
Not sure if either fencing or relocations for Kangaroos would work, good luck catching them and we'd likely need a wall about as big as Trumps to keep them contained. There has been some research into decreasing fertility rates via drugs.
That's true in America but many animals predominately graze on land here. US documentaries don't necessarily apply here. At least for cows, which are the main animal vegetarians talk about. I'm now genuinely curious if animals such as chickens are fed grains that are fit for human consumption or just what would be thrown away. If you have any information I would be glad to look at it.
It's mostly a myth that meat causes cancers. Studies that say this are either misrepresented or correlational, this means that they basically do a survey, ask if you eat meat and see when you die. If you don't see the flaws in this it doesn't take into account many variables, namely exercise and obesity. As vegetarians consider themselves health conscious, they are more likely to exercise and less likely to let themselves become obese. When these variables are controlled for the trend disappears. In fact with nutrition, extreme restriction of food groups generally leads to health problems, including restriction on sugar, fat, salt etc. If both people are health conscious, it is far easier for the meat eater not to be deficient and also consume optimal amounts of nutrients.
Really @dmac ? Myth! Please enlighten me with evidence (don't forget to check funding and statistical over adjustments).
@aerom:
I said mostly a myth, there is some evidence that points in that direction but it is largely overstated and not fully understood yet. Basically there are safe levels of meat consumption, it's dose dependent.
Here's a very thorough article with 20 scientific references https://examine.com/nutrition/does-red-meat-cause-cancer/
Here's a blog post the debunks "Red meat is as dangerous as smoking" headlines that were around
https://examine.com/nutrition/scientists-just-found-that-red…
Another article with 30 scientific references https://authoritynutrition.com/is-red-meat-bad-for-you-or-go…
Note: These websites are known for being non-bias in their research. They are not a pro-whatever website.
@dmac:
They are not studies. its a news article with reference to studies and some sensational headlines to grab attention.
I did go through those mentioned references and not one says correlation between meat consumption and cancer is a myth. (Which is you driving point). Correlation is not causation, but with nutrition studies it is almost impossible. That's why correlation is the best bet we have.
In case you/(or anyone wanting real information) really want to read other studies done over decades and over several countries (with sample size of hundreds and sometimes thousands) Here is a starting point:
http://traffic.libsyn.com/plantyourself/Proteinaholic_Chapte…
Nothing against you personally, just want to put real information out there and not opinions and what someone 'thinks' is true.
Nothing against you personally, just want to put real information out there and not opinions and what someone 'thinks' is true.
Oh please. For someone who just linked a book - not actual scientific studies as they request of others, I think you're being fairly rich. Hypocritical and condescending, even.
That's why correlation is the best bet we have.
Ah no. A correlation is a correlation. It does not equate to "MEAT CAUSES CANCER", as you're arguing.
I also like how you completely ignored dmac's point about safe consumption levels. As is the current prevailing opinion in nutrition, a balanced diet is the healthiest. Funny how information is only 'real' when it suits your point of view, huh?
@ProspectiveDarkness: This book is a collection of studies not just the book. And I did mentioned starting point. It has the references I was talking about.
But nothing in studies(atlest the one you quoted) say meat causing cancer is a myth!Isn't that the prevalent theme around us.
Safe consumption level is also quite extensively discussed in that book I mentioned (With references to back it up). Safe consumption level may reduce the cancer correlation but still not the same as a plant based diet.
I am not here to attack you. I just thought someone reading your comment should know the other end of the studies as well. And I am convinced that it will not affect your point of you view anyways.
If you want to ignore correlation of massive studies with sample size of thousands I have no issues against you. But Like I said before its for others to see the two sides of the story and not just buy the whole 'meat consumption causing cancer is a myth' theme.
This book is a collection of studies not just the book
Yes, and I question why the authors weren't confident enough in their writing that they didn't submit it as a scientific meta-analyses, rather than a book to buy on Amazon. Anyone can publish a book with a few references, but scientific literature is held to a much higher standard. Not to mention the closing lines:
Have we proved that we can cure or prevent prostate or other cancers by going vegan? Not yet. But where there is this much smoke, there has got to be a fre, and this one is a barn burner.
This is just not professional writing, at all, let alone on par with scientific studies.
I can't be bothered fact checking the entire thing, and I don't really care enough about the topic to do so. Just don't claim this is as a reliable scientific resource when it's hardly above reproach.
@ProspectiveDarkness:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.22170/full
A metanalysis of 19 other previous studies with 53 References.
@aerom: In one of the articles I linked they cited two meta analysis'. The author of the book is a surgeon, the authors of the two articles I linked are nutrition researchers. Did you try reading either of them before telling me I must be wrong and giving a link to a book (which is sold based on sensationalism)?
Aerom, I agree that processed meats seem to have substantial evidence that they are likely to cause cancer. Everything is dose dependent and this also doesn't look at white meat that has no links to cancer. Not all meats are the same and there are things you can do to protect from the dangers, including eating fruit and vegies, not over-cooking meat etc.
I encourage you to read the articles as it includes more information than just "Is meat good or bad?". Reality is more complex than a yes or no answer.
Well, everyone draws the line wherever they feel comfortable.
I'm a scientist, I look at the evidence and form my own opinion. My opinion is that it's not okay to kill and/or eat sentient animals, and I draw that line at animals that appear to have personalities. I don't eat fish, crustaceans, birds, mammals. However, I don't care about insects and other lower order animals - and will kill them as it suits me.
We shouldn't interfere with healthy natural ecosystems, as animals killing each other is entirely necessary. Weak animals dying is also natural selection at work. However, if the animals are dying because of human influence (eg. feral species, animal injured/orphaned by a car) then we should step in and fix what we screwed up.
Only cows in Australia are primarily raised on the land, all other species are largely supplemented with additional food. I have spent time working on cattle, sheep, chicken and pig farms in Australia. I think they are all terrible, but intensive chicken and pig farming are completely revolting and if consumers were really aware of what's going on these practices would be abolished.
I think that beef is the most animal-welfare ethical meat to eat, as apart from the end of their lives they are pretty happy (in Australia). Of course, the flip side is that it's the worst for the environment. It's intensive pig and chicken farms that get me riled up.
I believe that it isn't my right to shorten their life just for my enjoyment
Would it be OK if the animal were accidentally killed by being hit by a car?
Yes, I think it would be acceptable. (not socially acceptable though https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsCapFx_fWk)
I don't think I'm unreasonable - I know that humans are more important than animals, I own land, I drive on roads. If I needed an organ transplant from a pig I would take it. If an animal was attacking me I would defend myself.
But I wouldn't eat an animal that was accidentally killed, because after ten years I just don't see the flesh of a dead animal as edible anymore, I see it as a corpse. The same way as you wouldn't see a dead human or your dead dog as food.
Meat consumption directly correlates to cancer rate (blue zone studies). There you go now it is balanced .. :)
Just wanted to throw something else into the mix here. I'd encourage anyone who hasn't seen the movie "More than Honey" to look it up. Vegan's eating almonds? Guess what they are pollinated by bee's and if those almonds come from the USA? Chances are they are pollinated by a commercial bee keepers who might not treat their bees "ethically". Some food for thought!
Q: How do you know if someone is a vegan?
A: Don't worry, theyll f**king tell you. 🍖
already told above :P
C'mon Tom. You can do better.
Apologise for my lack of pun in the vegan domain :-)
Jesus wasn't a vegetarian.
The Bible records Jesus eating fish (Luke 24:42-43)
and lamb (Luke 22:8-15). Jesus miraculously fed the crowds fish and bread, a strange thing for Him to do if He was a vegetarian (Matthew 14:17-21). In a vision to the apostle Peter, Jesus declared all foods to be clean, including animals (Acts 10:10-15). After the flood in Noah's time, God gave humanity permission to eat meat (Genesis 9:2-3). God has never rescinded this permission.
Romans 14:2-3 tells us, “One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him.”
Yeah but Vegans aren't imaginary or representing an imaginary belief system, mate.
Yes but Jesus is a mythical creature so I don't see how your points are valid in any way.
the easter bunny gives free chocolate eggs
I hope to God this was a joke post (see what I did there)
Thanks for the reply anyway lol
Don't worry, it's not like God is consistent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB3g6mXLEKk&spfreload=10
Well my magical cloud wizard of preference demands I eat a carnivorous diet, so see you in the afterlife buddy.
This is the most convincing comment I have read in this discussion…
Jesus wasn't a vegetarian.
But Hitler was.
A quick test. Go to the shops buy a steak. Put the steak on fire and eat it.
If you loved the taste, you're a meat lover.
If you thought it was bland and boring, needing some spice and other stuff, you're probably gonna be okay being veg.
another test.
kill an animal yourself. if you can do it and eat the meat then you're okay to be a meat eater.
if you can't kill it yourself well…
Reminds me of the time I caught a few pigeons nesting behind my old aircon unit. It's a pity I have no idea how to cook pigeon, because I had a few spare.
I don't think my council will allow it. General residential zones do not cater for this type of activity. I think you need a public sacrificial alter to kill the animal on, and then you can burn it.
That is like saying you cannot drive a car unless you build one and can dig, produce fuel yourself.
For most people we don't know how the proper procedure of killing an animal as harmlessly as possible goes.
I don't know why you rather let the animal suffer from us amateurs who might torture the animal until it is dead than trust the professionals to do it for us which will be a quite painless process for the animal.
Test for vegans, vegetarians. Plant fruits and vege from seeds and only eat that.
If you can survive the starvation before it bears fruit or grows large enough to eat, then you are ok to be a vegetarian/vegan.
I was simply polarising whether or not you can live with yourself for killing an animal. If you can happily do it then feel free to eat meat. If you cant obviously you see it as wrong and therefore should be more opposed to meat.
It had nothing to do with the animals suffering at all and more to do with ones own perception and self.
Killing something is easy. Everyone has done it. Unless you never step on a bug or slapped a mosquito.
Just because it is a larger being that cries then suddenly their live is worth more than the ant you stepped? (which might also cry and suffer before they die)
Most animals killed in good condition slaughterhouses have them stunned before sent to kill. The animal feels nearly nothing.
Simplistic animals such as cows, sheep, chicken etc also do not know their meaning of life is to be put on the plate. They live a pretty ok life until D-day.
Like I always say, if we found fruits and plants actually feels pain and suffer when we pull them from their soil. Do we stop eating them?
Humans needs to eat another life form to survive. Whether it be plants of animal does not matter. I like people doing the dirty work for me. Like how vegetarians like their dirty work done by farmers and harvesters
Killing animal 'harmlessly'?
Not really a valid test. I know several vegetarians who are disguised by the taste of meat. This is often because as children, their parents were vegetarians so they had limited exposure too meat. These people tell me the smell of meat puts them off. It's like beer. If you don't build up your tolerance, the first couple of sessions will be foul.
Not sure why you ask this question, human are born to eat both meat and vege, just look at our teeth. Just like lions are born to eat meat, try telling a lion to eat vege. So, yes, we are supposed to eat meat, but as usual, eat meat and vege in moderation.
my sister turned vegan.
i tell her if she is hungry there is plenty of grass clippings out the back.
always makes me giggle a bit inside but i always get the death stare from her.
reminds me of when the simpsons kids are all stuck on that island and lisa says they can all lick the moss off the rocks to survive, then it cuts to a scene where everyone is enjoying the tasty boar that was running around causing havoc while lisa is still licking the rock.
You don't make friends with salad you don't make friends with salad lol
thanks for leaving the good tasty meat for us :P
I think that many aspects of western life isnt 'ethical'.
Should you be burning fossil fuels?
Like many things you should avoid meat and even chicken and fish as much as possible. Keep these things down to a minimum and you're doing everyone a favour.
Not just western life.
Good friend of mines wife was pregnant and vego, baby was born under weight, malnurished and had serious health issues until the age of 3 when a carefully supplemented diet to get her back into good health again.
The 2nd baby they had she was levitating back towards eating meat but stayed a vego and was taking a lot of supplements but again had health issues but not so severe.
3rd child they went back onto eating meat, friends wife put on weight which she needed to support the baby and baby came into the world healthy and in the higher percentile in all aspects, height, weight…. so i have a good exposure on how the human body even though you can live without meat shows what a difference it can make.
my wife is vegetarian and has been since her 20s. all 3 of our children were above average in birth weight. my 2 eldest are in the 98th percentile for height - and are the tallest in the their year levels (my eldest eats only white meat occasionally, middle child is a strict vegetarian). the youngest is average height for her age.
and all 3 babies came into the world healthy and in the higher percentile in all aspects, height, weight…. so i have a good exposure on how the human body even though you can live without meat shows what a difference it does not make. -it's about having a reasonable diet and knowing what your body requires.
Good friend of mines wife was pregnant and vego, baby was born under weight, malnurished and had serious health issues until the age of 3 when a carefully supplemented diet to get her back into good health again.
Exactly the same thing happened to my friend's wife who was a thorough meat eater.
@hotkilbas Then India should be a country of retards for that many vegetarians :)
I find it unethical to eat vegetables. Onions etc have lives
For the record, a cow gets a good life doing sfa, with a paddock full of zinger burgers, no stress, sleep whenever, get your nipples pulled, and then out of the blue you are terminated
Might be a better life than humans have, struggling all the time
Paddock full of zinger burgers.
1 up.
Is it unethical to eat an animal that has been brought into existence and nourished throughout its life solely for the purpose of being eaten?
I have no problem with that.
Would you feel the same about humans who are killed at a certain age in order to harvest their organs for transplants?
No I would not because humans have rights entirely independent of the reason of their coming into existence.
What's the difference between your statement and mine though? Why are you opposed to one and not the other?
@Heracles26: Because one involves humans and one doesn't?
For most ethical issues there is a clear line between human and non human. Well, maybe you don't think there should be, but for most people there is and unless you're playing dumb, you should probably be aware that most people consider moral issues involving humans to be different to moral issues involving non-human animals.
What a thing to bring up.
Is that what you're ok with? Sure sounds like it.
How much will it cost?
It is a statement to get you thinking and to critically analyse your own views. Some may argue that there is a huge benefit to doing such a thing
Add a poll.
Cows, sheep, chickens etc. are fairly simple-minded lifeforms that can't fully process their predicament, that is they are being bred for slaughter. Eating more intelligent lifeforms such as whales, dolphins, apes, dogs etc. is frowned upon or outright banned in most places as they could potentially acknowledge this, which is definitely unethical.
Is it ethical to eat livestock meat? Depends where. In Australia for instance, the killing of livestock has regulations such as that the animal must be stunned before slaughter, since can in fact feel and acknowledge pain. Generally these regulations are followed but there are outliers.
In countries like Indonesia however, livestock are rarely stunned and in some cases the animals are tortured (remember that ban on live exports to Indonesia are few years back?), so if it's ethics that are holding you back, stick to livestock meats in first world countries.
Hi all,
Please know I am reading all the comments and will reply asap - really interesting discussion! :)
I think it comes back to a nature or nurture question. In this case, I think humans eating meat is just natural. Our bodies are designed to eat and digest meat and that's where lots of our nutrients come from.
Besides our relative level of intelligence and self-awareness, we're not that much different to other animals such as lions and tigers eating meat. They're unlikely to survive on meat, given they don't have the enzymes to break down the greens.
Should we go out into the wild and stop them from killing other animals because it's unethical to stand by and watch them kill other animals for food?
We humans can break down both meat and vegetables and we need the nutrients from both. We can't survive on just one or the other.
Although modern society has the ability to replace meat-eating with manufactured vitamins and minerals, I don't believe eating meat or not is a question of ethics - it's just nature.
Sometimes, I feel that these questions come about because we have too much time on our hands and we have nothing else to whinge about. I bet our ancient ancestors who lived in caves never had this dilemma when they were hungry!
Rape exists in nature, is rape good/ethical/moral?
What you have stated is a common argument but not all things are good simple as a virtue of being natural.
I am talking about the human species, I don't think anyone is saying carnivores like lions etc. shouldn't eat meat
And I could not agree more with your last 2 sentences!! Haha
Rape exists in nature, is rape good/ethical/moral?
LOL!! I'd say that rape is on a slightly different level because we won't die without actually raping someone! :P
Humans, just like some other animals, need meat to survive. That's the reason I've made the comparison.
Haha I was just using rape as an example but there are plenty of others! Look up "naturalistic fallacy" if you're interested
Humans don't need meat to survive, otherwise every vegetarian would b dead.
Who taught you that fact
@unclesnake: Well tbh Vegans and vegetarians probably need to consume more of something else or need supplements to gain what they're missing from not eating meat.
In our current age where we have the knowledge and alternatives to substitute necessary proteins and the such we can live easily enough.
Another time in history if people got the idea to be vegan/vegetarian you might have more problems health wise.
I'm no dietitian, just my 2 cents.
I think humans eating meat is just natural.
Naturalistic fallacy.
we're not that much different to other animals such as lions and tigers eating meat.
The main difference between humans and animals people say is their ability to control their instincts and work upon what are good and what are not. If humans claim this superiority over animals on this point then why not control their instinct to kill them as well, especially in this world of nutritional abundance.
Good ideas, morals and ethics, tend to shine in their own light and are timeless. Slavery was very common and accepted notion but we managed to eventually abolish it and we know how horrible it was now because we do not want to be in the position of a slave.
Does this mean that eating other people is okay?
And please, we need to think of the butcher's starving kids. We owe it to them to eat their meat.