Are Vegans better for the environment than meat eaters?

[Jainarayan]

Please, just tell me, is it going to kill you if you stop eating meat? What issues do you have with a vegetarian diet that makes you not become a vegetarian/vegan?

And what am I going to eat? Spinach, kale and tofu? Beans and grains are high in carbohydrates... I am carbohydrate intolerant and insulin resistant. Yes, it could very well kill me eventually to not eat meat and become vegetarian. I tried it and I suffered for it healthwise. So you see, it's not all that cut and dried, which is why it pees me off when people crow about how easy it is to be vegetarian. In a word... it personally offends me.

 

[metis]

And what am I going to eat? Spinach, kale and tofu? Beans and grains are high in carbohydrates... I am carbohydrate intolerant and insulin resistant. Yes, it could very well kill me eventually to not eat meat and become vegetarian. I tried it and I suffered for it healthwise. So you see, it's not all that cut and dried, which is why it pees me off when people crow about how easy it is to be vegetarian. In a word... it personally offends me.

We're not all built the same way, and your problem is my wife's problem in that she cannot maintain a vegetarian diet for health reasons. As for me, I've gone months on end without eating any meat and with no noticeable negative side effects.

BTW, I did read somewhere several years ago the blood type A+, which is what I am, is most compatible with going vegetarian, but I have no clue as to whether that's true.

 

[Chakra]

And what am I going to eat? Spinach, kale and tofu? Beans and grains are high in carbohydrates... I am carbohydrate intolerant and insulin resistant. Yes, it could very well kill me eventually to not eat meat and become vegetarian. I tried it and I suffered for it healthwise.

I did not know this about you. Forgive me then.

In a word... it personally offends me.

And what personally offends me is when people do not understand what vegetarians and vegans want to accomplish.

We are NOT trying to make everyone vegan/vegetarian. People who have health issues and are living in harsh climates may need to eat meat, and we acknowledge that. What we do want to do is to make everyone who does not have a health issue or is not living in a harsh environment vegan or vegetarian, as that will benefit the environment and animals. But I suppose that's asking for too much. One step at a time.

So next time you have a dialogue with a vegan/vegetarian, please keep this in mind.

 

[Jainarayan]

We're not all built the same way, and your problem is my wife's problem in that she cannot maintain a vegetarian diet for health reasons. As for me, I've gone months on end without eating any meat and with no noticeable negative side effects.

Thank you! Another voice of reason!

BTW, I did read somewhere several years ago the blood type A+, which is what I am, is most compatible with going vegetarian, but I have no clue as to whether that's true.

I'm iffy on that too since I'm A+ also.

 

[Jainarayan]

What we do want to do is to make everyone who does not have a health issue or is not living in a harsh environment vegan or vegetarian

That is not your right to do.

 

[Chakra]

That is not your right to do.

What? We aren't going to force them, but going to provide information to them if they are interested. Like I said, one step at a time. And it's working.
Vegetarian Diet: Scientists Predict The World's Population Will Become Vegetarian By 2050

 

[Bunyip]

What!? You can grow plants without manure. It's called compost - look it up. Plus there are other farming methods than just land based. Look up aquaponics and hydroponics.

Sure you can grow plants without manure, but not on a suitable scale.

 

[Bunyip]

I think that's a straw-man argument. It's true that growing grain ( whatever ) results in the death of lots of small creatures, the point is that you need to grow a lot more grain ( and kill a lot more small creatures ) if you go down the route of feeding the grain to animals and then eating the animals.

You can't live on grain mate. Cows can.

 

[Thruve]

I clean the environment, but what keeps me alive is the fact that I get to play with healthy scat, which comes from my meat eater so.. no meat eating means im not cleaning the environment

 

[Sapiens]

You can't live on grain mate. Cows can.

Grain will get you a long way ... I think you meant grass.

 

[Bunyip]

Grain will get you a long way ... I think you meant grass.

No mate, it just feels like your life is dragging on forever

Grain will get you a long way ... I think you meant grass.

Thanks for the correction. My mistake.

 

[Bunyip]

I absolutely agree. Vegans generally will argue that the dairy industry is more evil than farming for beef. I tend to agree. I try to limit my dairy intake (it's very rare these days) and only eat eggs that friends who own their own chickens give us.

May I ask why chickens are ok for you to kill, but not other animals?

 

[Bunyip]

Could I also ask any vegans here if they refuse to use cars, or buses - and the goods transported on them. Given that tires contain animal products?

It does seem that some compromises are essential, so I mean no offense - I am just interested in where different vegans draw such lines.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I submit that if someone wants to be vegetarian, or carnivorous, omnivorous or wants to eat a diet of cow dung, it's their right to do it. I just grow tired of the "vegetarian is so much better spiritually and morally and ethically and better for the environment drivel". No one way is better than another because no one has all the variables or all the answers. Moreover, I'd like to see just one of these people give up their leather belts or wallets or boots. I'd like an answer as to when it becomes not OK to use any animal products... that is, is it OK to use a leather wallet but not eat a burger? Is it OK to use milk from a factory farm where the males calves are sold off for veal, and the cows are made into pet food when they can't produce milk anymore? Using that milk is really morally and ethically upstanding. Riiiight.

Yeah, I'm right there with you. Saying that vegetarianism is morally better or is better for the planet than an omnivorous diet is missing quite a few points. When my grandfather would hunt for deer, or have a side of beef from his own cattle he raised on his pasture, suggesting that his means of eating were not as earth-friendly as a vegan patting himself or herself on the back because of a purchase of quinoa from Whole Foods dismisses a LOT of factors. Namely, packaging and shipping and it's horrible environmental impact.

I've also gardened extensively, and composting with animal manure is FAR more productive than with green manure. To be veg while composting, a lot has to be shipped in for the compost to break down into fertilizer. To raise and process animals in an agricultural model (agrarian, not monocultural corporate) keeps resources local and closes the loop of production and decomposition while acknowledging the fact that animals...like us....reproduce.

After adopting meat back into my diet after nearly 10 years of being veg, and after volunteering on a local pastured-animal farm, I feel my dietary choices are far superior now than when I was a veg, given that I'm closely related to my food sources now and am respectful of all the beings that ensured there was a source-to-plate for me.

I do have a suggestion for all meat-eaters, though. At some point in your life, I think it is wise to take part in the slaughter of one of your food sources, if just to understand and face your ethics head-on, but mostly to be more intimate with your food source. I finally did just that, and the reverence I adopted for animals was personally much more than when I shunned meat for the welfare of animals.

 

[Penumbra]

I think pescetarianism, when done properly, is most likely better than veganism or vegetarianism in terms of reducing animal suffering and environmental impact.

-With veganism, almost 100% of human calories from the 7 billion people on this planet have to come from land, with the exception of the negligible amount of calories humans consume from seaweed. The oceans are 2/3rds of the world's surface, which is largely untapped when eating vegan. Pescetarianism, however, distributes the calorie consumption over the world's surface, meaning there is less concentration on land. Over-fishing is a practical concern, but when done properly, can be largely avoided. The Alaskan wild fisheries, for example, are considered some of the most sustainable in the world due to tight regulation. Fishing quotas keep the fish numbers intact, rather than allowing the short-sighted practice of over-fishing followed by periods of low fish counts. Augmenting land-grown food with sustainable fishing practices relieves a portion of the environmental pressure from the land.

-Eating plants, in a modern context, kills animals. One study estimated that for each hectare of wheat farmed, an average of up to 100 mice die. Then there are snakes and other animals unaccounted for that die also. And then there are countless insects killed from pesticides as well as the harvesting machines. And then a lot of the fertilizer drains into the soil, into the rivers, and eventually into the oceans, where it creates deadzones where fish die over a span of thousands of square miles. To reasonably compare life loss, we'd have to, for example, take an example of one wild-caught salmon that can provide 20 fillets (worth thousands of calories total), to the equivalent calories of wheat or another crop, in terms of how many mice, snakes, bugs, and fish die from the harvesting equipment, pesticides, and aquatic deadzones. Or, for example, there are mussels. Mussels can be farmed along coasts, and when done properly, are considered healthy and sustainable by sources such as the Monterey Bay Seafood Watch. Mussels are very simple creatures, probably comparable to insects, so one could compare the deliberate farming and consumption of mussels (which are healthy and a good source of protein), to all the countless insects that die as an uneaten byproduct of crop farming.

-Transportation has to be taken into account for all forms of diets- vegetarianism, veganism, pescetarianism, and omnivorism. All else being equal, a local diet is preferable, but sometimes not all else is equal.

And then as Mystic pointed out, omnivorism when done correctly can have certain advantages over vegetarianism and veganism. Nature is itself a balanced system. Animals fertilize plants, and the plants feed the animals. When humans separate the two, and farm only plants, and then farm animals in a big factory farm, they eliminate the balance and create problems. Suddenly, the waste from the animals becomes a problem, and food for the plants becomes a problem, whereas in nature, the problem of one becomes the solution to the other. If only plants are farmed, then a problem is how to get food for the plants. Fertilizer is needed, generally has to be shipped in, and runs into rivers and eventually creates deadzones in oceans that kill sea life. Plus, the world has an ongoing problem of shrinking arable land from intensive farming practices; trying to get as many crops as possible from the land in order to feed the masses and pay the farmers, and the cost of reducing soil quality and draining the nutrients out of it faster than they replenish. Some small farms simulate nature as closely as possible, where they have animals and crops that work in a loop that balances itself out fairly well.

That is why I switched from many years of vegetarianism to a more omnivorous, and typically pescetarian diet. I believe it to be healthier, and when most variables are accounted for, better for the environment and for animal suffering, compared to vegetarianism and veganism as normally practiced in a modern context.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

That's not true. Vegetables and fruits contain some of the best sources of vitamins and nutrients.

Some do. Others are basically the nutritional equivalent of wet paper (iceberg lettuce, for example).

 

[dust1n]

Definitely not vegan here, but I don't anticipate having kids ever, so I think I win in the not hurting the environment anymore contest.

 

[Madhuri]

May I ask why chickens are ok for you to kill, but not other animals?

I didn't say anything of the sort. Why did you take that interpretation?

 

[Bunyip]

I didn't say anything of the sort. Why did you take that interpretation?

Just in that if you eat eggs, chickens are killed. You need to breed new chooks and half of those bred will be cocks and must be killed. I'm just asking why eggs do not count as animal?

 

[Madhuri]

Just in that if you eat eggs, chickens are killed. You need to breed new chooks and half of those bred will be cocks and must be killed. I'm just asking why eggs do not count as animal?

I don't think it's such a bad thing to keep your own chooks that lay unfertilised eggs. You aren't killing anything at all. My mum is going to get her own chooks. There will be no killing involved.