Vegan Snowflakes

[hutchst]

HustleRussell said:

It’s a complex issue but one thing is for sure, the developed world consumes far too much meat and red meat in particular which happens to be the kind with the highest environmental impact. This is a fact.

No it isn't, it's an opinion. Quantify 'far too much' on a factual basis.

[Wills2]

Game Changers is great watch on Netflix, I'm going to trial vegan for a few days a week and see how that goes, we all eat loads of vegan food anyway (fruit/veg/nuts/cereals etc...) for me it'll be about finding a meat substitute and swapping out cows milk for something else.

Doesn't sound that hard, eggs are an issue though oh and bacon.....

[Pan Pan Pan]

This topic is perhaps one of the reasons why Pistonheads is good, because even on a fairly simple subject vast amounts of debate (some of it heated or downright aggressive or just silly I will grant everyone) but it does bring a host of other view points, which may or may not have been known or considered before. I for one appreciate the way even a simple topic can be expanded upon.
No matter what the topic or what the view point, there will always be others with a different or entirely opposing view point, which is fine, although I sometimes get the impression that any of us here, might be able to start a heated argument with themselves in a sealed room.

[SamR380]

Wills2 said:

Game Changers is great watch on Netflix, I'm going to trial vegan for a few days a week and see how that goes, we all eat loads of vegan food anyway (fruit/veg/nuts/cereals etc...) for me it'll be about finding a meat substitute and swapping out cows milk for something else.

Doesn't sound that hard, eggs are an issue though oh and bacon.....

Sadly there isn't a replacement for processed pork products. Oatly 'whole' milk is really good though, even if it is twice the price of cow milk.

[otolith]

Thesprucegoose said:

otolith said:

to eating animals like bivalves which lack sentience. Which is clearly not the case.

For somone with a Phd, stating bivalves lack sentience, is a strong statment considering it is not fully conclusive. They posses ganglia, so they have less of sentience but do not fully lack it.

That's a strong position. If you want to argue that the nervous system of a bivalve is sufficient for sentience, you're going to have to bring some evidence.

[RemyMartin81D]

SamR380 said:

Sadly there isn't a replacement for processed pork products. Oatly 'whole' milk is really good though, even if it is twice the price of cow milk.

Oatly is so good I stopped buying cow milk months ago and exist on it 100% lovely in coffee and cereal. Ok in tea too. I should say I'm not vegan or even pretending to be. I just like the milk.

[ZedLeg]

mikiec said:

ZedLeg said:

Much better to keep an unsustainable population of animals that would've never existed in nature then. Even better keep them in confined conditions until the very second they hit a profitable weight then kill them anyway. Why not destroy natural habitat by the thousands of acres to stack them up in as well.

And no natural habitat is destroyed for crop production?
Ever thought instead of simplifying it to meat vs plant it would be better to focus on ensuring whatever you eat is sustainable, humane and has low impact to the environment. Because there is a lot of food that gets the vegan pass that does none of this.

I agree with you but the way our food supply system works just now makes it incredibly hard for a lot of people to make sure you eat that way.

Being vegan doesn't completely negate the damage done by modern farming but for me personally it's the easiest way for me to minimise my impact.

It's not going to be the same for everyone.

[21TonyK]

I watched Game Changers the other day and whilst I completely agree "we" eat far too much meat I am not convinced by a lot of what was said in the programme and I am sure for every scientist or Dr featured they is another who would disagree with them.

Take for example the bit about "fat in your blood". Here... eat a vegan wrap and its gone! Oh... and it's made your c*k bigger LOL

[HustleRussell]

HustleRussell said:

It’s a complex issue but one thing is for sure, the developed world consumes far too much meat and red meat in particular which happens to be the kind with the highest environmental impact. This is a fact.

Kenny Powers said:

It's fact if you follow the side of the story presented by payroll 'scientists' in the mainstream. Otherwise it is very far from a fact. Red meat consumption is also falling, yet apparently it's rising. Facts? Chance would be a fine thing

Didn't make any statement whatsoever as to whether it was falling or rising.

Yes, I do agree with the significant scientific majority. If you aren't agreeing with the significant scientific majority then...

Biker 1 said:

I'm not going to give up meat any time soon. It's the most efficient way to take nutrition on board & tastes fking great!
How many acres of farmland/cow feed = 1 cow? How many acres farmland does it take to feed a vegan? Weight-for-weight, I wonder...

I'm not giving it up either. I don't see the value in your comparison between the land intensity of cows and vegans unless you are proposing to farm vegans for meat?

hutchst said:

No it isn't, it's an opinion. Quantify 'far too much' on a factual basis.

You have interpreted that selectively, although I admit it was poorly phrased. It is my opinion that 'we' consume too much meat. I have put the 'fact' part in bold for you.

I really didn't think that post was at all contentious. It reminds me of the day that I was in one of the XR threads and encountered people who didn't believe that human activity was a contributing factor to climate change. Even though it was only a particularly vocal few, it made me feel so at odds with the PistonHeads demographic.

Reading about the possible general election I wondered whether I may vote Green for the first time. I don't I think they would do a good job of running the country (I saw the aftermath of their appointment in Brighton and Hove). It is essentially a spoiled ballot which voices both my despair at the current political situation and my concern about the condition of our planet.

[gregs656]

Biker 1 said:

I'm not going to give up meat any time soon. It's the most efficient way to take nutrition on board & tastes fking great!
How many acres of farmland/cow feed = 1 cow? How many acres farmland does it take to feed a vegan? Weight-for-weight, I wonder...

Nor me, although I think your claims about efficiency are dubious.

Beef is resource intensive.

You could of course go and research some of this stuff prior to forming an opinion. Radical I know.

[Kenny Powers]

HustleRussell said:

Didn't make any statement whatsoever as to whether it was falling or rising.

Indeed. Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I was using that as an example to highlight that there are two facts regarding meat consumption. One fact says it is falling, and yet another fact says it is rising. We can take from this that sometimes facts are little more than parroted opinion. Even scientific 'facts' are almost always heavily contested by opposing groups of scientists. Which group we believe depends on a combination of who gets published, and who we want to believe because it aligns with our views.

[SamR380]

Biker 1 said:

I'm not going to give up meat any time soon. It's the most efficient way to take nutrition on board & tastes fking great!
How many acres of farmland/cow feed = 1 cow? How many acres farmland does it take to feed a vegan? Weight-for-weight, I wonder...

Wonder no longer:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/land-use-per-gr...





Edit to add...


Pretty clear to see that beef is a problem. Chicken, not so much.
I guess they haven;t included lamb because worldwide there isn't such a big market for it. Every other analsys I have seen shows lamb to be the worst of all in greenhouse gas emmissions.

Edited by SamR380 on Friday 25th October 13:09

[gregs656]

Kenny Powers said:

Indeed. Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I was using that as an example to highlight that there are two facts regarding meat consumption. One fact says it is falling, and yet another fact says it is rising. We can take from this that sometimes facts are little more than parroted opinion. Even scientific 'facts' are almost always heavily contested by opposing groups of scientists. Which group we believe depends on a combination of who gets published, and who we want to believe because it aligns with our views.

The conflict is probably people comparing numbers from slightly different questions.

We don’t need to eat as much meat as we do to be healthy thriving adults.

You should know better than most here that the human body is able to cope with a variety of diets.

[Kenny Powers]

gregs656 said:

The conflict is probably people comparing numbers from slightly different questions.

We don’t need to eat as much meat as we do to be healthy thriving adults.

You should know better than most here that the human body is able to cope with a variety of diets.

Indeed I do, and as we are all individuals, some are better equipped than others to deal with certain diets. Some people do indeed need to eat lots of meat to be thriving healthy individuals. It can be hugely beneficial to those with certain autoimmune conditions or metabolic dysfunction, for example.

But that is a massive conversation and wasn’t my point. I was merely highlighting that what people consider to be facts, are very often nothing of the sort. What people choose to eat is none of my business, but when contested data is presented as fact, it can expect scrutiny.

[HustleRussell]

gregs656 said:

Kenny Powers said:

Indeed. Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I was using that as an example to highlight that there are two facts regarding meat consumption. One fact says it is falling, and yet another fact says it is rising. We can take from this that sometimes facts are little more than parroted opinion. Even scientific 'facts' are almost always heavily contested by opposing groups of scientists. Which group we believe depends on a combination of who gets published, and who we want to believe because it aligns with our views.

The conflict is probably people comparing numbers from slightly different questions.

It's probably something like;

Meat consumption is falling in the UK / Western Europe (widely publicized health and environmental concerns, increasing awareness of diet as an influencer on health and longevity plus increasing environmental conscience)

and

Meat consumption worldwide is increasing as increasingly wealthy people in hugely populous developing countries get used to meat with pretty much every meal as we have, rather than considering it a 'luxury item'.

[ZedLeg]

HustleRussell said:

gregs656 said:

Kenny Powers said:

Indeed. Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I was using that as an example to highlight that there are two facts regarding meat consumption. One fact says it is falling, and yet another fact says it is rising. We can take from this that sometimes facts are little more than parroted opinion. Even scientific 'facts' are almost always heavily contested by opposing groups of scientists. Which group we believe depends on a combination of who gets published, and who we want to believe because it aligns with our views.

The conflict is probably people comparing numbers from slightly different questions.

It's probably something like;

Meat consumption is falling in the UK / Western Europe (widely publicized health and environmental concerns, increasing awareness of diet as an influencer on health and longevity plus increasing environmental conscience)

and

Meat consumption worldwide is increasing as increasingly wealthy people in hugely populous developing countries get used to meat with pretty much every meal as we have, rather than considering it a 'luxury item'.

It's that. Meat consumption is growing quickly in Asia as the urban middle class also grows.

[hutchst]

HustleRussell said:

You have interpreted that selectively, although I admit it was poorly phrased. It is my opinion that 'we' consume too much meat. I have put the 'fact' part in bold for you.

I really didn't think that post was at all contentious. It reminds me of the day that I was in one of the XR threads and encountered people who didn't believe that human activity was a contributing factor to climate change. Even though it was only a particularly vocal few, it made me feel so at odds with the PistonHeads demographic.

Reading about the possible general election I wondered whether I may vote Green for the first time. I don't I think they would do a good job of running the country (I saw the aftermath of their appointment in Brighton and Hove). It is essentially a spoiled ballot which voices both my despair at the current political situation and my concern about the condition of our planet.

OK I gotcha. When you said 'one thing is for sure' you were just kidding.

[JuniorD]

The pain and torture caused by food is wide ranging

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/republic-o...

[Mothersruin]

SamR380 said:

Biker 1 said:

I'm not going to give up meat any time soon. It's the most efficient way to take nutrition on board & tastes fking great!
How many acres of farmland/cow feed = 1 cow? How many acres farmland does it take to feed a vegan? Weight-for-weight, I wonder...

Wonder no longer:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/land-use-per-gr...





Edit to add...


Pretty clear to see that beef is a problem. Chicken, not so much.
I guess they haven;t included lamb because worldwide there isn't such a big market for it. Every other analsys I have seen shows lamb to be the worst of all in greenhouse gas emmissions.

Edited by SamR380 on Friday 25th October 13:09

Lamb/Mutton, or even goat, is a staple in many markets. Odd that.

[MiseryStreak]

SamR380 said:

Edit to add...


Pretty clear to see that beef is a problem. Chicken, not so much.
I guess they haven;t included lamb because worldwide there isn't such a big market for it. Every other analsys I have seen shows lamb to be the worst of all in greenhouse gas emmissions.

Edited by SamR380 on Friday 25th October 13:09

Lamb is at the top with Beef - ‘Beef/Mutton’.

They haven’t included fish or shellfish on there. I’ve been a pescatarian for three years now after 36 years of eating meat. I didn’t do it for environmental reasons but saw this as a bonus. I was surprised to read that prawns (one of my favourite protein sources) have a higher CO2 footprint than chicken.

If anyone is considering going veggie I would highly recommend going pescatarian first. I couldn’t believe how easy I found it. I stopped missing bacon after a couple of weeks and now find the idea of eating a ground up pig quite disgusting.

I’m now thinking about going vegan for a month to test it out. I already drink oat milk so that’s tea and coffee covered. The hardest thing by far is going to eggs. I absolutely loved my poached eggs on a weekend. I might have to keep my own chickens and then I can eat the eggs as I know the chickens aren’t being tortured.