We keep 10,000 chickens in a single huge building whose floor is literally layers of their old shit, give them just enough room to stand there and not move around, and leave it there without any environmental controls through the hottest days of the year. What do you mean disease is prevalent?
Meat industry: have to ramp up production because fucking idiotic people continue to breed uncontrollably and unsustanably
disease starts spreading and affecting the industry
Smug-ass cultist vegans: MuSt Be ThE mEaT eAtErS!!!1 Come on, my wife Moon Seashell, we need to get you pregnant again because our 14 malnourished kids isn’t enough!
True, increased demand for meat is one of the driving factors of ecological malpractise as it’s found in the meat industry.
Plant based diets and a lifestyle free of animal products provide a more sustainable and ecologically beneficial alternative. As does reducing the overall world population of course.
A lifetime free of animal products is not sustainable. Humans need at least some meat to survive. The average person eats too much which isn’t helping. Advocating a vegan (or even vegetarian) diet is ignoring science and how our bodies function. It causes long-term, serious harm to people who do not supplement their diet with at least some meat.
Pure veganism is a cult that ignores science, diet, and common sense. Nothing wrong with eating vegan meals (I love them) but completely cutting out meat is bad for you.
Ah yes humans evolved to eat everything. Now let me just cut a part of that diet out of my life.
We evolved to NEED to eat everything, plants AND animals. Basic science, vegan cultist. You’re a death cult and just as bad as religion, spreading unhealthy bullshit to people who don’t know any better.
You know what’s funny?
People say that like forever. And those “vegan cultists” we told that 3 decades ago (and we were waiting for them to die of malnutrition) are still healthy and happy while the average supermarket-joe got fat and unhappy or is long dead by now.
I’m no vegan btw. but why would i argue with science? Just because we evolved to be able to eat nearly everything doesn’t mean we should. We could probably survive a good while on just eating hoofs or tree bark. Doesn’t mean we should include it in our diet.
Science says meat contains proteins and nutrients that are incredibly difficult to get and get enough of in plants to live well.
In case you were unaware, it was the fact that we became meat-eating omnivores that is the REASON we evolved to become the intelligent creatures we are. Do vegans want to de-evolve into basic, stupid creatures? Seems that way.
I swear, people like you do nothing but spread misinformation and I’m fucking sick of it. Veganism is a laughable, horrible, unsafe, dangerous cult and you actually defend it.
Science doesn’t say we need meat. Also very specially not the crappy processed toxic waste the majority consumes as “meat”.
But ever tried a diet only existing of plants/fruits OR meat? Guess on which you’d live longer? Exactly.
And again, no vegan here. Just also sick of this super old “but science says we need meat”.
Humans need at least some meat to survive. […] It causes long-term, serious harm to people who do not supplement their diet with at least some meat. […] completely cutting out meat is bad for you.
That is not correct.
Advocating a vegan (or even vegetarian) diet is ignoring science and how our bodies function. […] Pure veganism is a cult that ignores science, diet, and common sense.
To the contrary. It is very much supported by science. Are you interested in the scientific literature? I’ll happily share.
It’s impossible to trust any sources these days because there are hidden agendas. The fact remains: we are omnivores and have shown to have used meat to evolve to current humans with high intelligence.
No amount of “scientific literature” can contradict actual, basic, fundamental science about who we are and what we are supposed to eat. Anyone who does has an agenda.
So precisely how long are vegans able to survive without suffering ill effects? Because I mean we’ve all heard of people who have lived on that diet long term, so at what point do the wheels start to fall off so to speak? Is there some kind of extended latency period where you are okay before you get sick, or are vegan influencers just pretending to be healthy?
Also your how do you propose we change our agricultural practices so that our food supply isn’t tainted by sick meat grown in poor conditions? There’s a lot of evidence that there’s not enough land mass on earth to feed everyone a diet of free range grass fed beef. Or do you propose we run full steam ahead with factory farming and damn the consequences?
No vegan has lived on a pure vegan diet long enough to not have severe issues. If you search you will find tons of former vegans who were forced off of their pure vegan diets by severe medical issues. People who call themselves “vegans” and are still doing well after a long time are either really vegetarians who eat a lot of animal-derived products to compensate, or cheat and eat meat here and there.
Yes i understand what you are getting at there, but my question is precisely how long does one have before the wheels fall off while eating a strict vegan diet? Are we talking a matter of days, weeks, months, years, or decades?
ignores science
Can you provide some links to that science?
Every single unbiased description of a human being ever. Don’t bother with your vegan-funded “health” organizations who just want to kill us.
It’s funny how every single vegan comes after me whenever I say the obvious fact that we need meat. Almost like they are a cult and want to hide the truth. The reason I come after vegans is because it’s dangerous and abusive and unhealthy, not because of some programmed agenda that has to be carefully hidden by a death cult.
As a meat eater, it’s shit like this which is why I’ve been buying more vegetarian shit. Every week there’s a new food recall. People are getting real sick and dying.
Same here. I tried out blackbean burgers, plant-based hot dogs, tofu and almond milk in my last couple of grocery runs, just to see what’s up. Turns out I really like tofu as a substitute for ground beef, and the veggie dogs tasted just like all beef franks to me. And none of these things were any more expensive than meat, so that’s also a big plus.
Which veggie dog worked for you? I can’t find one that grills correctly.
They’re from “Morning Star Farms,” though I was careful to only say that they taste right, haha – They don’t plump up when cooked, and are prone to scorching in spots on the grill. But the flavor is spot on!
It is in part a consumer issue. Consumers want things as cheaply as possible, and companies that produce as cheaply as possible sell more product. We’ve seen the same issue with apparel; America wants cheap clothing, and so the mills in the US have largely closed, and most production has been moved overseas in order to make the final products cheap enough.
And while it’s partly a consumer issue, the fact that wages haven’t kept up with productivity–that is, more and more money is being skimmed out of the system by investors and executives rather than going to the workers–has been the driver towards making consumer goods more and more cheaply, simply because people have less purchasing power.
In other words its not because of the consumers, but because of the greedy skimming off the top.
Look, no one decides that they want to work in the mines because it’s good for society as a whole to have consumer goods made from what they mine. Everyone expects to be paid in some way.
If I’m making jeans as an independent designer–which I tried doing, briefly–and I decide that my time is worth $20/hr, then I’m going to have to charge around $500 for a single pair of jeans after you figure in all the time needed to make a single pair that’s been customized to fit a single, specific person. (Maybe more; I haven’t done the math in a decade or so.) Almost no one is going to want to, or be able to afford to pay that. Am I skimming off the top? No, I’m charging a fair–and actually very low–rate for custom work. But just like when I tried to do that a decade ago, no one can or will pay for that.
Even if we capped profits of investors, and capped salaries of executives, and had most of the profits going to the workers, people would tend to prefer less expensive goods over more expensive goods. That’s how competition in the market works. In a sufficiently competitive environment, without legal constraints, prices have to drop. (Monopolies raise prices by reducing competition; a sufficiently competitive environment assumes that there is no single company dominating the market.)
i agree with everything you’ve said including your links between causation etc
except the final link you make that its the consumer, i note you said ‘partly’ a consumer issue, so its not a full attribution - perhaps i’m misinterpreting what % you’re attributing.
tbh my take is alot of people would like an option between paying $2 for a garment they know involved exploitation/slavery vs an accessible1 independent option that doesn’t cost $500/garment.
i don’t think people are still choosing the $2 option because they’re ok with slavery. but (tragically?) they’re more ok with someone else being the slave vs them being the slave - which is what they’d basically be if every piece of clothing cost them $500.
and i think we know the reason there’s very little accessible options in between is because the game is rigged, you (HelixDab2) can’t realistically enter the game without serious capital behind you (ie. wealth/connections) to reach the volume prices which might give us an option in between - the market isn’t fair, its been stitched up long ago, by the same people who don’t produce anything and greedily skim off the top.
the venn diagram of independent designers fairly charging $500 for their labor and the greedy skimmers getting fat without producing anything themselves is two separate circles - they’re worlds apart
1 Quick note on accessibility, there are ofc some scant options between $2-500, but what isn’t clear (ie. readily accessible) to the consumer is which of those options isn’t just some greedy bastard buying a $2 option and selling it on for $15.
tbh my take is alot of people would like an option between paying $2 for a garment they know involved exploitation/slavery vs an accessible1 independent option that doesn’t cost $500/garment.
I would have wanted to believe that too, but then you see things like Temu that promise clothing and consumer goods at impossibly low prices, prices that simply aren’t possibly without forced labor somewhere, and people eat that shit up. I think that most people have an out of sight, out of mind approach to it, and as long as they can’t directly see the exploitation, they’ll accept it.
1 Quick note on accessibility, there are ofc some scant options between $2-500, but what isn’t clear (ie. readily accessible) to the consumer is which of those options isn’t just some greedy bastard buying a $2 option and selling it on for $15.
I strongly suspect that this obscurity is by intent.
And, taking this whole thing a bit farther, as a designer that was paying myself $20/hr, I still can’t guarantee anything about being free of forced labor, because I have no way of realistically tracking everything in my supply chain. This is why there’s no ethical consumption under capitalism, so the best you can do is pick your battles.
