Thoughts on eating meat and dairy?

[appleandbee]

"So the ~25% of people who are tolerant towards milk actually have mutated genes."
Tld;dr - drinking milk is not actually biologically natural!
"I see no difference between me, you, a cow, a pig, a chicken, a horse, an elephant. And that should not be taken as an offense. You may find being called an animal offensive, but I find it a compliment."
"Yes like you I'm against shark culling but I haven't thought about the cane toad culling...one one hand they are still animals and deserve to live, but on the other hand theey are literally bringing the entire ecosystem down. So I'm not sure."

I'm sorry, but comments like these shows you how ignorant you are in Biology. No one's going to take you seriously if you make absurd statements like these.

Yeah, especially the comment about being called an animal a complement as really off. Most people in society consider it rude and offensive (the people that say such things intended it to be). Since you claim to love debating, you should avoid polarizing analogies and examples as well as facts that aren't scientifically proven (actually an adjudicator my self btw).

[pi]

That's why I have the dilemma.

I think the real dilemma is that there are inconsistencies and logical fallacies in your beliefs. While some might say your views are very idealistic and "ethical" and could apply to some made-up fantasy world where cows and cane toads also go to school, drive cars and pay taxes, they couldn't possibly apply to the real world that we actually live in at all

Still interested on an earlier comment I made about taking medicines. Many, if not all, are tested on animals at some point (and those animals are "murdered" afterwards), and even when they get to human trials many more animals have been murdered in the process (accounting for drugs that don't pass early stages etc.). Are you in favour of boycotting Western medicines? From what you've said so far, I'm exepecting an "absolutely" in response, but interested to see if you have another "dilemma" here

[geminii]

Yeah, especially the comment about being called an animal a complement as really off. Most people in society consider it rude and offensive (the people that say such things intended it to be). Since you claim to love debating, you should avoid polarizing analogies and examples as well as facts that aren't scientifically proven (actually an adjudicator my self btw).

I did state that it was my opinion.

I think the real dilemma is that there are inconsistencies and logical fallacies in your beliefs. While some might say your views are very idealistic and "ethical" and could apply to some made-up fantasy world where cows and cane toads also go to school, drive cars and pay taxes, they couldn't possibly apply to the real world that we actually live in at all

Logical fallacies? Like what? I never said that cows and cane toads should go to school, drive cars and pay taxes.

[pi]

Logical fallacies? Like what? I never said that cows and cane toads should go to school, drive cars and pay taxes.

But why shouldn't they if they're on par with humans in your eyes? It's taking things to the extreme, but why not? If a human life = an animal life, what's the issue?

I made an edit to my above post which I'm keen to hear about too:

Still interested on an earlier comment I made about taking medicines. Many, if not all, are tested on animals at some point (and those animals are "murdered" afterwards), and even when they get to human trials many more animals have been murdered in the process (accounting for drugs that don't pass early stages etc.). Are you in favour of boycotting Western medicines? From what you've said so far, I'm exepecting an "absolutely" in response, but interested to see if you have another "dilemma" here

[geminii]

But why shouldn't they if they're on par with humans in your eyes? It's taking things to the extreme, but why not? If a human life = an animal life, what's the issue?

Because animals have their own lives, humans have their own lives. You want humans to live in the forests, go running around in the jungle? No. Just as horses shouldn't live in swamps, crocodiles shouldn't live on farms, etc. See how I'm not generalising 'animals' here? Every species is different. But overall, animals are meant to live without fear of persecution, just as humans. That's all I'm saying. Lol, I'm not saying their lives should be exactly the same xD Equal =/= same!

I made an edit to my above post which I'm keen to hear about too:

Nope, no dilemma this time. I am definitely against testing on animals.
See, eating things like meat (including chicken and fish) increase the risk of things like cancer, heart disease, etc. whereas eating foods like lentils, beans or peas decreases the risk. We kill animals to eat them, then get all these diseases, then harm more animals to find cures for these diseases, and it goes on and on. It's absolutely cruel in my opinion to test on animals, and then murder - yes, murder - them. *http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives/cancer-the-meatdisease-connection.html

[pi]

Because animals have their own lives, humans have their own lives. You want humans to live in the forests, go running around in the jungle? No. Just as horses shouldn't live in swamps, crocodiles shouldn't live on farms, etc. See how I'm not generalising 'animals' here? Every species is different.

I agree, they're different. Thank-you for proving my point.

That's all I'm saying. Lol, I'm not saying their lives should be exactly the same xD Equal =/= same!

I see...



Sounds like a big inconsistency in your beliefs.

Nope, no dilemma this time. I am definitely against testing on animals.

You didn't really answer the question. So because Western medicines are tested on animals right now, you personally will not be using Western medicines if you get sick? And furthermore, you personally advocate people abandon Western medicines until they are not tested on animals? It's a yes or no question (to each) And if 'no', why?

See, eating things like meat (including chicken and fish) increase the risk of things like cancer, heart disease, etc. whereas eating foods like lentils, beans or peas decreases the risk.

I'm sorry, but various foods increase AND decrease risks of various conditions (eg. some may increase risk of cancer X but decrease it of cancer Y, etc.), and in moderation, are harmless. Get your facts straight. We're having a steak, not eating lard or uranium, calm down buddy.

We kill animals to eat them, then get all these diseases, then harm more animals to find cures for these diseases, and it goes on and on. It's absolutely cruel in my opinion to test on animals, and then murder - yes, murder - them. *http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives/cancer-the-meatdisease-connection.html

We don't "get them" from eating meat, what an absurd claim. They may increase our risk (and also decrease it in other areas)... as do billions of other things (eg. sitting down). It's a RISK, not a CAUSE.

Maybe if you actually go and read some peer-reviewed journals instead of click-bait articles some vegan with 10k followers is posting on Instagram aimed at people who are about 12 years old, you'll realise these things.

[ShortBlackChick]

Because animals have their own lives, humans have their own lives. You want humans to live in the forests, go running around in the jungle? No. Just as horses shouldn't live in swamps, crocodiles shouldn't live on farms, etc. See how I'm not generalising 'animals' here? Every species is different. But overall, animals are meant to live without fear of persecution, just as humans. That's all I'm saying. Lol, I'm not saying their lives should be exactly the same xD Equal =/= same!

I'm kind of imagining you living in the jungle or a forest though, because I sure can't imagine you living in a house. Like so many ants and worms and stuff would be killed in the making of your house. For all I know your life consists of standing in one spot eating vegetables because I cant imagine the murder you'd commit by moving around and living really.

See the thing is you're seeing the world in an entirely black and white manner, but in reality there are many many many shades of grey that obscure our morals. But most people seem to draw lines between what they perceive as right and wrong, but all we can determine from what you've said is that you've created some obscure bottomless hole of morality where you're going to end up with the argument that EVERYTHING you do is wrong, especially with your generalised statements. You havent drawn the line anywhere. Except for cane toads

[geminii]

I agree, they're different. Thank-you for proving my point.

Hey, no problem. But what you're saying is, because another being is of a different species, it's okay to torture and murder them as long as we get that momentary sense of taste-bud pleasure. What kind of messed up logic is that? What I don't understand, and what no one has answered here, is why you think it's okay to do this.
Think about this for a second - what if you were the cow/chicken/sheep/pig, etc.? Would you want this? If no, then isn't that just a *tiny* bit hypocritical?

I see...

(Image removed from quote.)

Sounds like a big inconsistency in your beliefs.

Nope.
Here's an example. Say if there were a class of students, and one was a really good student and the others were average. If the teacher decides to treat them all equally, she would make sure they were all marked using the same criteria, given an equal chance to succeed, and give them equal amounts of her attention. She would not, however, give them all the same mark, because then they are not treated equally.
If she gave them all the same mark, the average kids are being treated better than the smarter kid, so the treatment is not equal although all their grades might be the same. Make sense?

You didn't really answer the question. So because Western medicines are tested on animals right now, you personally will not be using Western medicines if you get sick? And furthermore, you personally advocate people abandon Western medicines until they are not tested on animals? It's a yes or no question (to each) And if 'no', why?

Actually, I don't use Western medicines very much at all (like panadol, etc.) I did when I was a kid. My family and I now use herbal medicines, green tea, and Ayurvedic medicine. All natural!

I'm sorry, but various foods increase AND decrease risks of various conditions (eg. some may increase risk of cancer X but decrease it of cancer Y, etc.), and in moderation, are harmless. Get your facts straight. We're having a steak, not eating lard or uranium, calm down buddy.

I've tried looking for evidence that meat can decrease the risk of getting cancer and have found none. Just out of curiosity, do you know of any examples?
Also, ever heard of the risk of cancer being increased by lentils? Beans? Peas, carrots, broccoli, spinach? Any of these? If so I'd love to hear of them!

We don't "get them" from eating meat, what an absurd claim. They may increase our risk (and also decrease it in other areas)... as do billions of other things (eg. sitting down). It's a RISK, not a CAUSE.

Maybe if you actually go and read some peer-reviewed journals instead of click-bait articles some vegan with 10k followers is posting on Instagram aimed at people who are about 12 years old, you'll realise these things.

You got me there!
Nah pi, this was just a typo. I'm trying to write quickly because I have to study for SACs soon. In my previous posts I have said 'risk' and not 'cause'. Excuse my mistake.

[pi]

Hey, no problem. But what you're saying is, because another being is of a different species, it's okay to torture and murder them as long as we get that momentary sense of taste-bud pleasure. What kind of messed up logic is that? What I don't understand, and what no one has answered here, is why you think it's okay to do this.

Everyone has answered you. We value meat's taste and nutritional value (eg. Vitamin b12 and mentioned earlier) over the feelings of animals which we believe to be humanely killed for our consumption.

Think about this for a second - what if you were the cow/chicken/sheep/pig, etc.? Would you want this? If no, then isn't that just a *tiny* bit hypocritical?

If you were a tree would you want someone cutting off bits of your arms (eg. apples)? It's irrelevant, I'm not a cow. I don't even know what cows think, no one does.

Here's an example. Say if there were a class of students, and one was a really good student and the others were average. If the teacher decides to treat them all equally, she would make sure they were all marked using the same criteria, given an equal chance to succeed, and give them equal amounts of her attention. She would not, however, give them all the same mark, because then they are not treated equally.
If she gave them all the same mark, the average kids are being treated better than the smarter kid, so the treatment is not equal although all their grades might be the same. Make sense?

Makes complete sense, in your example:
- People being treated equal = people being treated the same
- People not getting same marks = people not getting marked 'equally' = people not getting the 'same' mark

It's a definition mate.

Actually, I don't use Western medicines very much at all (like panadol, etc.) I did when I was a kid. My family and I now use herbal medicines, green tea, and Ayurvedic medicine. All natural!

Didn't give a yes/no (probably because you realised it was almost a suicidal stance to say "no"), but this explains soooooooooooo much. Given vaccinations are tested on animals you're no doubt anti-vax too? Now I know who I'm talking to, you're one of /those/ people

Explains why it feels like this to talk to you hahaha (edit: I'm the person):


For the record, did you know milk is commonly used in Aurvedic medicine. Milk, for your interest, is from animals. They also use animal bones commonly too, and usually they don't wait for the animals to die of natural causes. So much murder in Aurevidic medicine!

Also, hopefully using those sorts of "medicines" works out for your family, I honestly (not sarcastic) wish them luck if they hope to use nothing else

I've tried looking for evidence that meat can decrease the risk of getting cancer and have found none. Just out of curiosity, do you know of any examples?

Quick google gave me this from a highly reputable source: http://www.cancer.org.au/content/pdf/CancerControlPolicy/PositionStatements/PS_Omega_3_fatty_acids_and_cancer_May2006_update_August_2009.pdf

Also, ever heard of the risk of cancer being increased by lentils? Beans? Peas, carrots, broccoli, spinach? Any of these? If so I'd love to hear of them!

Honestly can't think of any, but the pesticides used on fruits have been associated with increased risks of cancer. Furthermore, many fruits contain a lot of sugar and this can be a risk for heart disease.

But like meat, in moderation, is a negligible risk.

[heart]

A good video on nutrition specifically on diets role in regards to cancer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0IhZ-R1O8g

[acinod]

Nutrition is very complicated -  http://www.vox.com/2016/1/14/10760622/nutrition-science-complicated

I wouldn't trust anyone who isn't either an accredited dietitian or a published scientist with a phd in the field. Tim Crowe is both and I strongly recommend checking him out: https://www.facebook.com/thinkingnutrition/?fref=ts

If you have your own religious purposes then I've got nothing to add.

For the record, I love my meat but I quit milk last year because I was advised against it by the head of nutrition at RMIT.

[ShortBlackChick]

I have a question.

Can vegetarians or vegans who are so for moral/ethical reasons, be pro-abortion?

[heart]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU7ggZbOR6k sort of relevant

[gstaah]

I have a question.

Can vegetarians or vegans who are so for moral/ethical reasons, be pro-abortion?

Not sure, but one of the questions that being vegan raises is, why? As I understand, they choose not to eat meat, dairy or any products derived from animals, but where is the line drawn between being alive, or not?  Are fetus's not sentient and alive? Are they not valued to the same standards they set for other animals? You can't think you value the life of all species if you think killing one, but not the other is ok. I would assume therefore, to be truly vegan you have to be pro-life. So in being pro-abortion would be hypocrisy.

[carver]

Hey everyone,

Today I felt like I wanted to have some healthy discussions about what you think about eating meat and dairy. Do you think it's healthy? Do you think it's ethical? Why do you do it? etc. Please be honest!
I'm a vegetarian so I'm going to be putting my points out there (against meat/dairy) as well so just remember I'm not attacking you! I just love debating a lot. But everything I say, I mean honestly.

Looking forward to hearing your points!!

Because lamb chops, barbecues and chicken wings exist