Discrimination based on species, interested to know people's opinions?

[Elsa Delyth]

It's natural, therefore good is fallacious. That something evolved a certain way therefore cannot change is obviously fallacious. Specialization is a death sentence in evolutionary terms, as it means reduced adaptability, so that when sources of food reduce, and one is bound to that food, it devastates the population.

"Omnivore" doesn't mean that it needs to eat everything, it means that its adaptable to a wide range of different food sources. Not needs to eat everything, but can survive on a wide range of vastly different diets.

The B12 supplement craze is misleading. Firstly, needing to supplement has more to do with modern longevity, and decreased ability to absorb important vitamins and nutrients from food as one ages. Everyone should begin supplementing their diet upon entering middle age, if they wish to maintain good metabolic and cognitive functions into old age.

Secondly, B12 could be procured from animal fertilizers (their poo) at any point in human history without having to kill them (which can be neutralized of harmful bacteria and parasites), and in most points in human history, people ate what was local, and civilizations were founded upon one, or two main staples which were subject to mass production, which they ate too much of, without much diversity, and were not getting optimal supplies of many vitamins. 

No one has a perfect diet, and veganism isn't supposed to be the perfect diet, in my view it is about having a compassionate, ecologically friendly diet.

[Kylo]

I don't believe in treating animals as if they are human beings and anthropomorphizing them, because they are not.

But I do believe in treating them with respect and as humanely as possible. I'm not against eating animals since every living animal will die and rot all the same whether we eat it or not. So long as it is raised in a decent environment and its death is as quick and painless or stress free as can be, I see nothing unnatural about eating animals.

I do have a rule of thumb though. I don't really eat any animal I wouldn't feel comfortable with killing myself. So I mostly eat fish or chicken because I'm fine with fishing and preparing fish and I know how to deal with a chicken. I don't eat red meat as I can't digest it well. It does bother me a bit when people like my aunt want to eat lamb chops practically every day but look away when a lion eats an impala on the TV because "nature is cruel".

I do discriminate based on my species yes. But at the end of the day it doesn't make much logical sense for me to treat a mosquito's life as equally important as my own, or if I was starving to death to treat a sheep as if it were equal to a human being and therefore not eat it to prolong my own life. I see myself as an animal too and part of this world's natural cycle. When I'm dead, something will be eating me, too.

[sparrow]

With rights come responsibilities.  Humans who cannot satisfy their social responsibilities have their rights taken away.  So it is with animals.  Only, we already know that they can't fully participate in human society, based on millenia of experience.

[Rainbow Bay]

Only, we already know that they can't fully participate in human society, based on millenia of experience.

Animals don't need to participate in human society, they have their own societies to participate in. Animal Rights isn't about giving animals human rights, like allowing them into universities It's about respecting their rights to live freely without being exploited for human entertainment or consumption.

Also, I've been vegan or vegetarian since I was a teenager, 15 years ago, and I don't take supplements. My iron levels and B12 levels are good, I get them checked annually. Humans can eat meat but they don't need to eat meat.

I think if people want to eat meat, then that is their choice. But please don't use the "we have always done it this way argument". Doing something for thousands of years doesn't necessarily make it natural or good. We are a species that evolves and hopefully progresses morally, that's what's exciting and great about humans, we can change.

[sparrow]

Humans can eat meat but they don't need to eat meat.

Are you so sure?  Pound for pound, the energy density of a vegetarian diet is atrocious compared to a carnivorous diet.  Paying attention to energy density is absolutely key to the preservation of human society, because everything must be shipped from the farms to the consumers -- low-calorie food sources like leafy greens, for example, produce massive amounts of pollution.  Additionally, shipping fruits, nuts, and vegetables around robs farming areas of precious groundwater.

If you think that the solution is a localvore diet... know that the localvore diet has been debunked.  It's hugely inefficient, and the ramification of global adoption would be mass starvation in nearly every major city worldwide.  Only the (global) 1% can afford a sustainable vegetarian localvore diet.  Animals can live practically anywhere, and are significantly better suited to reducing shipping pollution through a localvore approach.

Additionally, consider the health, happiness and well-being of the animals you so deeply care about.  In their natural environment, animals starve to death.  They are brutally murdered and eaten alive.  They live in a continual state of distress, and they die horrible and traumatic deaths.  Is this really preferable to the life of a cow, who lives an idyllic life with plenty of food and regular visits with a veterinarian, nearly zero natural predation and the most humane death that society can convince cattle farmers to use?

And talk to any large-scale vegetable farmer... they kill animals.  For example, if a single deer shows up on your kale farm in the early spring, it will happily munch an acre of young plants.  Gophers destroy crops.  Insects destroy crops.  Vegetable farmers are at war with the animals in their environment.  And most farmers don't bother with humane methods to kill these animals, which are ultimately used for compost.

To me, it appears that ethics of a worldwide vegetarian diet are completely untenable.  I think that we do need to eat animals.  Primarily, we need to eat bugs.  But bugs are animals, and they have feelings, too!

Finally... animal by-products are in everything.  Removing these resources from the global economy would, for example, completely devastate the pharmaceutical industry, and hence modern medicine.  You know that quaint anecdote about the noble savage using every little scrap of the buffalo?  It's far truer of our global economy than it ever was of tribal societies.

I'm glad that you are happy with the ethics of your diet.  I'm happy with the ethics of mine after careful consideration of the worldwide impact of global adoption of my diet: on the environment, on the well-being of humanity, and on the well-being of animals.  I don't claim the moral high ground.  I'm aware that the system I participate in is fraught with problems... but it's slowly improving; and tearing the system down would be an unmitigated disaster.

But please don't use the "we have always done it this way argument".

If you read carefully, you'll note that I didn't use that argument.  What I said is that we've been watching animals behave like animals for millenia.  Don't expect a lion to put on a suit and walk into a board meeting.  Don't expect a lion to participate in your veggie diet.  Don't trust a lion to babysit your kids.  I'm glad to hear that you don't think these things.

[Laura_7]

Are you so sure?  Pound for pound, the energy density of a vegetarian diet is atrocious compared to a carnivorous diet.  Paying attention to energy density is absolutely key to the preservation of human society, because everything must be shipped from the farms to the consumers -- low-calorie food sources like leafy greens, for example, produce massive amounts of pollution.  Additionally, shipping fruits, nuts, and vegetables around robs farming areas of precious groundwater.

Well for 1kg of animal weight to grow the animal has to consume at least 10 kgs in plant mass.
There are especially plants grown to be fed to animals which could be directly fed to humans.
Including energy the agreed upon factor is x20 compared to plant growth.

Of course there are places where it does not make sense to grow plants for export.
Local places should be preferred imo, if possible organic.

Concerning animals and behaviour, many people compare them to children.
Ever asked an animal if they want to go outside, and they stood up and went to the door ?
I know of a dog that looks left and right and uses a pedestrian walk to cross a street.
I personally have seen cats look left and right before they cross a street.
Better behaviour than some people.
Of course they are not human. But they have an intelligence and understanding of their own.


hugs

[Rainbow Bay]

Are you so sure?  Pound for pound, the energy density of a vegetarian diet is atrocious compared to a carnivorous diet.  Paying attention to energy density is absolutely key to the preservation of human society, because everything must be shipped from the farms to the consumers -- low-calorie food sources like leafy greens, for example, produce massive amounts of pollution.  Additionally, shipping fruits, nuts, and vegetables around robs farming areas of precious groundwater.

Hi Sparrow. I wasn't really addressing my comment to you in specific, I hope I wasn't being offensive. The whole "we need to eat meat because it is natural and normal" is something that I hear a lot and I don't think it is valid, that's all. I think eating meat is a choice and not eating meat is also a choice. Can you share some research that shows leafy greens are terrible for pollution, I have never heard this claim before. As far as water consumption goes though, eating meat is terrible compared to a vegan or vegetarian diet: 2,500 gallons of water are needed to produce 1 pound of beef, Californians use 1500 gallons of water per person per day and close to half of that is associated with meat and dairy products, and Growing feed crops for livestock consumes 56% of water in the US. I don't think I can post offsite links because I don't have a post rank of 'family' but PM if you want any research links, or just use google there's lots of research out there. And Cowspiracy is a great documentary that deals with the environmental impacts of meat and dairy. It's on Netflix.

Additionally, consider the health, happiness and well-being of the animals you so deeply care about.  In their natural environment, animals starve to death. They are brutally murdered and eaten alive. They live in a continual state of distress, and they die horrible and traumatic deaths.  Is this really preferable to the life of a cow, who lives an idyllic life with plenty of food and regular visits with a veterinarian, nearly zero natural predation and the most humane death that society can convince cattle farmers to use?

I think this is a bit of an exaggeration, wild animals seem to spend most of their time looking for food and breeding not living in a continual state of distress. If you have seen footage of factory farms it is certainly not an idyllic life for cows. They seem terrified when they are about to die. They live in confined quarters. They have their babies taken from them and killed so that humans can drink their milk, this is the whole reason veal exists. If you don't think they would be happy in the wild why don't we leave them in a nice open sanctuary and let them die of natural causes and keep their babies with them? Animals are farmed because they are used as commodities not because humans are trying to give them a better life. Personally though, I'd rather just be free.

And talk to any large-scale vegetable farmer... they kill animals.  For example, if a single deer shows up on your kale farm in the early spring, it will happily munch an acre of young plants.  Gophers destroy crops.  Insects destroy crops.  Vegetable farmers are at war with the animals in their environment. And most farmers don't bother with humane methods to kill these animals, which are ultimately used for compost.

I agree with this. Veganism isn't 100% harm free, nothing is, but I think it is less harmful and all we can do is try and reduce the harm and suffering that exist in the world. Just because something isn't perfect doesn't mean we shouldn't participate in it.

To me, it appears that ethics of a worldwide vegetarian diet are completely untenable.  I think that we do need to eat animals.  Primarily, we need to eat bugs.  But bugs are animals, and they have feelings, too!

I have read that bugs and crickets, mussels, oyster etc. are much more environmentally friendly as food source than traditional livestock and if you care about the environment and want to eat meat this is probably a good option.

Finally... animal by-products are in everything.  Removing these resources from the global economy would, for example, completely devastate the pharmaceutical industry, and hence modern medicine.  You know that quaint anecdote about the noble savage using every little scrap of the buffalo?  It's far truer of our global economy than it ever was of tribal societies.

Yes, maybe animal products will probably always be in some things. They're not in everything though. There's no animal products in any of the food from my vege garden (I just use my own compost, not animal fertilisers). Although humans are pretty clever so they might not always need to be. But even if they are it's about reducing harm, not necessarily eradicating it.

I'm glad that you are happy with the ethics of your diet.  I'm happy with the ethics of mine after careful consideration of the worldwide impact of global adoption of my diet: on the environment, on the well-being of humanity, and on the well-being of animals.  I don't claim the moral high ground.  I'm aware that the system I participate in is fraught with problems... but it's slowly improving; and tearing the system down would be an unmitigated disaster.

The system is never going to be torn down over night, change is always slow. Veganism is growing and it will probably continue to grow slowly.

Anyway, I hate confrontation but I feel I need to voice my feelings. I respect your choice to do whatever you want. I will probably not post in this thread anymore because these conversations make me anxious. I really do wish you well with your diet and everything else in life.

Also, there is a wonderful TED talk by Dr. Melanie Joy on Carnism that everyone should watch. And she is much more articulate than me.

Bay xxx

[sparrow]

Hi Sparrow. I wasn't really addressing my comment to you in specific, I hope I wasn't being offensive.

Not at all... I really have no idea why I said so much.  I try to stay out of this sort of discussion!  I'm not offended.  I thrive on having my worldview challenged.  I was a bit worried that I'd caused offense too!

There's precious little unbiased data out there when it comes to food ethics.  Both sides skew the numbers to make a stronger point, and it just leads to more distrust and shouting.  One thought-provoking article on the topic of leafy greens is here.  I realize that most vegetarians don't eat tons of lettuce, and I may have fallen victim to confirmation bias on the energy density bit -- I recall seeing something that supported my claim, but I haven't been able to find it again.  Suspect.

However... energy density and food wastage are major concerns that often get left out of the calculus -- meat freezes well, so it  doesn't spoil like greens do -- greens have to be shipped at very specific temperatures.  It's denser, so it takes fewer trucks to ship it around.  It's also a more durable product, so there isn't as much waste due to customers handling it.  These losses add up fast.

I should say that americans (myself included) eat way more meat than is responsible.  And if we could grow animals that didn't have advanced nervous systems, I'd be way happier about it all.  I've tried to eat a vegetarian diet, and I'm never not hungry.  It gets painful.  I simply can't eat fast enough to keep up with my metabolism.  It sucks: whenever I visit my (vegan) cousin, I stuff myself at every meal I want to gnaw my own arm off an hour later.  And aside from the girls, I haven't an ounce of body fat (so, y'know, I've got like 3 ounces ).  I do my best to get ethically-sourced meat; I own a chest freezer and buy direct from small farms whenever I can.  As you said... the goal is to reduce harm.

[Kylo]

You do get more out of any given unit of land producing crops as opposed to meat, and it is less wasteful of resources, so I figure fairly soon meat will become prohibitively expensive for most people. If it isn't already in some parts of the world.

[sparrow]

This has gotten a bit sidetracked, so I'm going to try to bring this back to the topic of species discrimination.

Yes, maybe animal products will probably always be in some things. They're not in everything though. There's no animal products in any of the food from my vege garden (I just use my own compost, not animal fertilisers).

Acknowledging that this is a bit pedantic... insects are animals, worms are animals, spiders are animals... if you had zero animals in your garden, it would be a very sad garden indeed.  Having used worms for bait over the years... I don't actually think this is pedantic in the least bit.  It kills me a little every time I kill an animal... even a mosquito, even when there's West Nile going around.  But it kills me a little every time I pull up a plant, too -- except a few invasive species, which I kill with intent.  I value "all life", but all life must meet its end.

I kill.  I've killed a chicken because it was in tremendous pain due to an incurable disease -- it was a sad event, but ultimately the right thing to do.  I hit a deer with my car once, and I was too young to handle it appropriately -- it died that night, but it died a slow and agonizing death because I didn't think to go back and put it out of its misery.  That weighs on me to this day.

I've killed probably tens of thousands of animals... almost all of them being smaller than an ant.  So have you.  I try to minimize that, but I don't hide from the fact.  I know what life is, I kill discriminantly: I kill to eat, I kill for mercy, I kill by accident, I kill to protect myself, and I kill to protect the native species in the woods I love.  Everybody draws a line somewhere.  I've known lifelong vegans who reflexively and thoughtlessly stomp harmless spiders.  This is all discrimination based on species.  Discrimination based on species is a necessity of life.

[Kylo]

Maybe it needs to be more accepted that death is a natural part of life and cannot be avoided. I don't especially like killing, but I will do it if it needs to be done. I find a lot of this attitude from some vegans is to feel as though they are not personally responsible for things being killed in an abbatoir somewhere, or are not complicit in a cycle of death, but even if you're vegan you likely eat the produce of a crop field somewhere that in order to exist killed or made habitat-less millions of living things from insects to birds to mammals. There is no avoiding that being on this planet and being alive results in the death and displacement of something else. And when we die, we will be used and replaced by something else.

I do believe in minimising destructive impact. But even if I was as vegan and compassionate as they come I would still never avoid the fact my existence has a cost to something else.