Vegan extremists

[LDN]

Rollin said:

LDN said:

Willy Nilly said:

LDN said:

Fair point. And so I could have said: ‘that’s not necessarily true’. The appeal to nature regard drinking the milk from a species other than our own, can only be based on the fact that it’s been the norm for so long. An appeal to tradition / history. Another can of worms. One of the reasons put forth; MANY a time regard eating meat; is that other animals do it. And so, the point was that; no other animals feed on the milk of another species. So... again, appeals to nature only when it suits, from those arguing vegan diets. Do you see what I mean?

As an aside; but related - whether it’s natural or not, is not related to whether it’s necessary. It’s certainly not necessary. The crux of my point in any case.

Ants milk aphids.

It's unnatural to drink beer
It's unnatural to have a weeks worth of food a few steps from where you sleep
It's unnatural for humans to fly
It's unnatural to any species to fly into space
There are lots of things you do, such as communicate electronically, that are unnatural.

Exactly. We are stating the same thing...

So, when people - on this thread and elsewhere claim that one of the reasons to eat meat is because ‘other animals do it’ - that’s been the ‘appeal to nature’ we have been talking about. But when I point out that drinking the milk of another species is NOT something other species do... to highlight the irony of the first appeal; that doesn’t fit their narrative and so is ignored. Surely you see how the two things don’t fit?

You said drinking the milk of another species was not natural to bolster your opinion that drinking milk was wrong. It wasn't in response to any other "appeal to nature'

The point was that appeals to nature, seem to be applied selectively by those arguing against a vegan diet. A diet that’s only one part of veganism, as it happens - and that happens to be healthy; and related to a lower risk of heart disease and cancer - as well as being favourable regard environmental impact and animal welfare. It’s a win win win situation from a logical perspective. The reason to consume animal products is, once again, because one can and one wants to. That’s where it begins and ends.

[DoubleD]

LDN said:

The reason to consume animal products is, once again, because one can and one wants to. That’s where it begins and ends.

You could say that about a vegan diet.

[LDN]

DoubleD said:

LDN said:

The reason to consume animal products is, once again, because one can and one wants to. That’s where it begins and ends.

You could say that about a vegan diet.

Yes, except one is based on the idea of improving one’s own health, the environment and side stepping; to a big extent, animal welfare issues. And one isn’t. If meat and dairy were necessary, then it’d be a hard(er) sell, that’s for sure.

[DoubleD]

LDN said:

DoubleD said:

LDN said:

The reason to consume animal products is, once again, because one can and one wants to. That’s where it begins and ends.

You could say that about a vegan diet.

Yes, except one is based on the idea of improving one’s own health, the environment and side stepping; to a big extent, animal welfare issues. And one isn’t. If meat and dairy were necessary, then it’d be a hard(er) sell, that’s for sure.

You can be very healthy having a balanced diet that includes animal products. You can have animal products and be kind to the environment. You can also have animal products and be kind to animals.

[LDN]

DoubleD said:

LDN said:

DoubleD said:

LDN said:

The reason to consume animal products is, once again, because one can and one wants to. That’s where it begins and ends.

You could say that about a vegan diet.

Yes, except one is based on the idea of improving one’s own health, the environment and side stepping; to a big extent, animal welfare issues. And one isn’t. If meat and dairy were necessary, then it’d be a hard(er) sell, that’s for sure.

You can be very healthy having a balanced diet that includes animal products. You can have animal products and be kind to the environment. You can also have animal products and be kind to animals.

You can do all of those things but one’s actions won’t be aligned properly with one’s morals in some / most cases. You can include some meat in your diet and be healthy - but, equally, you can have no meat in your diet - and be healthy. And so, if one is an environmentalist, animal lover, etc - which of those two diets aligns more with one’s morals, do you think? It’s not a trick question...

You can ‘have animal products and be kind to the environment’ is as vague a statement as I’ve come to expect from you. Of course; it has been talked on already at great length. We’ve discussed leather seats in cars, amongst other things. A simple snapshot is; you can’t buy a new fur coat and say you’re an animal lover (well you can, but logically, it’ll make little sense) - when the mink (or whatever) was bred and caged, and fattened. That’s ‘having an animal product’ as you put it - but it’s laced with cruelty and ethical issues. Then there’s another coat, not made from fur. Which jacket would align more with an animal lovers moral compass? The vegan perspective would be to avoid the jacket with real fur. Is that really up for debate here? I’m not sure what illogical swamp you’ll have us treading next!

[DoubleD]

Im glad you like my vague statement

[LDN]

DoubleD said:

Im glad you like my vague statement

Well, I’m used to them now

[Kenny Powers]

Thread summary;

Page 1: LDN makes assertion.
Page 2: Someone makes counterpoint.
Page 3: LDN says it’s already been decided on. Casual passive aggressive insult added. Return to page 1.

[LDN]

Kenny Powers said:

Thread summary;

Page 1: LDN makes assertion.
Page 2: Someone makes counterpoint.
Page 3: LDN says it’s already been decided on. Casual passive aggressive insult added. Return to page 1.

Not at all. That’s a perspective born from your own lack of any genuine, bonafide, evidence or logical approach to the debate. I’m having to lower myself to A, B, C’s here, with some posters; but if that’s what the thread requires...

The above post, by DD states a vague assertion with no boundary or evidence... there’s no counter point in there anywhere - it’s an example of the level of much of PH. But I enjoy the challenge.

[grumbledoak]

LDN said:

Yes, except one is based on the idea of improving one’s own health, the environment and side stepping; to a big extent, animal welfare issues. And one isn’t. If meat and dairy were necessary, then it’d be a hard(er) sell, that’s for sure.

You keep repeating these as if they were true. You could try reading "The Vegetarian Myth", but I'm quite sure you won't.

Anyway, sticking to your first point and my main interest here: health.

You could look at the charts of meat, sugar, and "vegetable" seed oil consumption over the past sixty years, and then look at those for obesity and diabetes for the same period. Red meat consumption down, sickness up. Bigly.

If you wanted to reduce the number of confounding variables you could focus on India, where they didn't eat a lot of red meat anyway. There they venerate the cow, because dairy products have been crucially important for their health for thousands of years. In the past sixty years they have had the same push away from saturated fats from dairy towards "vegetable" seed oils - vegetarians becoming more vegetarian. Heart disease and diabetes rates have sky-rocketed.

It isn't difficult to see what is happening. In fact, you would have to be willfully blind not to.

[Jack Mansfield]

Hi all - we welcome a healthy debate on here, but this is just a little reminder to keep things friendly. We don't want to step in if we don't have to!

Thanks,

Jack

[LDN]

grumbledoak said:

LDN said:

Yes, except one is based on the idea of improving one’s own health, the environment and side stepping; to a big extent, animal welfare issues. And one isn’t. If meat and dairy were necessary, then it’d be a hard(er) sell, that’s for sure.

You keep repeating these as if they were true. You could try reading "The Vegetarian Myth", but I'm quite sure you won't.

Anyway, sticking to your first point and my main interest here: health.

You could look at the charts of meat, sugar, and "vegetable" seed oil consumption over the past sixty years, and then look at those for obesity and diabetes for the same period. Red meat consumption down, sickness up. Bigly.

If you wanted to reduce the number of confounding variables you could focus on India, where they didn't eat a lot of red meat anyway. There they venerate the cow, because dairy products have been crucially important for their health for thousands of years. In the past sixty years they have had the same push away from saturated fats from dairy towards "vegetable" seed oils - vegetarians becoming more vegetarian. Heart disease and diabetes rates have sky-rocketed.

It isn't difficult to see what is happening. In fact, you would have to be willfully blind not to.

Nonsense. I’ve provided links to bonafide studies and data to backup the assertions that vegan and vegetarian diets are healthy, better for the environment and avoid ethical issues, to a larger extent. But you bury your head in the sand and just post up opinion as fact. Sorry but it won’t wash.

Post up the data on any worldwide meat consumption decline being linked to an increase in heart disease. The link that exists, to heart disease and meat consumption is that more meat = bad; and yet you’re stating the opposite. It’s quite simply bizarre.

[ZedLeg]

grumbledoak said:

In the past sixty years they have had the same push away from saturated fats from dairy towards "vegetable" seed oils - vegetarians becoming more vegetarian. Heart disease and diabetes rates have sky-rocketed.

It isn't difficult to see what is happening. In fact, you would have to be willfully blind not to.

India has also had a big explosion in consumption of westernised convenience foods. I bet that has nothing to do with a rise in the various health issues we all know junk food causes. The same thing has been happening all over Asia and the Middle East. Maybe not as much to do with vegetarianism as you think.

[Mr Tracy]

Canadian Gov. updated food advice

Eat plenty of vegetables and fruits, whole grain foods and protein foods. Choose protein foods that come from plants more often.

https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/healthy-food-choic...

[LDN]

Mr Tracy said:

Canadian Gov. updated food advice

Eat plenty of vegetables and fruits, whole grain foods and protein foods. Choose protein foods that come from plants more often.

https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/healthy-food-choic...

Indeed. One part of the global push, away from meat protein - to plant protein. The opposite of what goaK is claiming. Bizarre.

[otolith]

Appeals to nature are usually bad arguments, because they assume a generalised "nature = benign". They don't hold up well for death caps or deadly nightshade or grizzly bears. There are more nuanced arguments, however - for instance, the idea, before we had evidence to support it, that eating massively larger quantities of trans fats than would be found in nature might be a bad idea, because never before in our evolutionary history have we had to deal with that. Much of the bracket of so-called "diseases of civilisation" falls into this area.

There is also another argument which is not really an appeal to nature, more a reminder for human exceptionalists with tickets on themselves, that we ain't nothin' but mammals.

[Rollin]

Mr Tracy said:

Canadian Gov. updated food advice

Eat plenty of vegetables and fruits, whole grain foods and protein foods. Choose protein foods that come from plants more often.

https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/healthy-food-choic...

Let us know when a government recommends not eating any animal products.

Since when did eating healthy amounts of animal products become vegan?

[LDN]

Rollin said:

Mr Tracy said:

Canadian Gov. updated food advice

Eat plenty of vegetables and fruits, whole grain foods and protein foods. Choose protein foods that come from plants more often.

https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/healthy-food-choic...

Let us know when a government recommends not eating any animal products.

Since when did eating healthy amounts of animal products become vegan?

I know you struggle - but the point is that their recommendations have shifted massively; toward plant proteins over meat protein. It’s a big shift.

This is related to a poster now claiming that less meat leads to an increased risk of heart disease... which is the opposite of the truth. PH truly is full of absolute nonsense and it’s a reminder how many naive / wilfully ignorant people are on these forums; when people don’t just discuss the evidence, but claim the absolute opposite is true! Amazing stuff.

[Davos123]

Rollin said:

Let us know when a government recommends not eating any animal products.

Does the UN count? https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jun/0...

[Rollin]

Davos123 said:

Rollin said:

Let us know when a government recommends not eating any animal products.

Does the UN count? https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jun/0...

For dietary health reasons as was being discussed? No.