Incogni

How does this follow in any way? You know that the distinction of “supplement” and “regular part of the diet” is completely arbitrary, right? What’s the difference between regular supplementation and the requirement of “having to hydrate” or “eat your greens for your vitamins” to be healthy? It’s even less logical/relevant considering many replacement products add B12 etc on their own by now.

Also factory farmed animals are getting B12 fed as a supplement, which makes this argument even weirder. “Pills bad/not part of the diet”, but feeding the same pills to pigs and then eating their meat to get the same nutrients is suddenly “ok and natural/good diet”? Doesn’t make sense to me.

No, since the claim “veganism does cause intellectual deficiencies” is still wrong, because veganism doesn’t cause this, a lack of supplementation does. And most vegans supplement adequately. So saying that veganism “per default” causes this would be dishonest, because it implies that not properly supplementing is the default/intrinsic to veganism, which is not the case.

It’s like saying “drinking alcohol kills you” just because you have to be mindful of limiting your consumption and it can kill you if you don’t. An extreme statement that contains a kernel of truth, but is simply not correct.

Your response isn’t any better, to be honest. Yes, there is a certain risk of a negative impact on cognitive performance related to a large and long-time B12 or iron deficiency. But there is a large difference between “you have to take supplements to be healthy” and a blanket claim of “veganism does cause intellectual deficiencies”, especially considering most vegans supplement.

Side note: the B12 in factory farmed meat is also supplemented to those animals, otherwise their meat wouldn’t contain it, being produced under those conditions. Let’s hope the farmer didn’t skimp on the supplements for their animals either.

Langzeit-lurker hier. ich_iel ertränkt eh schon meine Timeline durch die Masse an posts relativ zu den anderen communities. Ich fand das bisher eher mäßig, aber mir dachte, dass man das ja “aushalten müsse” - Wachstum ist ja nicht schlecht für ne junge community.

Mir gingen die “signierten” Memes (mit Nudeln etc) schon etwas auf den Zeiger, weil das irgendwie so rüberkommt, als ob man sich unbedingt vom Rest der Community abheben will. Aber ok, kann man auch noch ignorieren.

Aber auf Meta-Kram, wo sich die Leute, die sich da selber ins Rampenlicht stellen dann auch noch “aus Spaß” gegenseitig als sexistisch bezeichnen, hab ich null bock. Erst selbst ungefragt zur celebrity ernennen und dann noch kontextfrei drama posten. ich_iel ist für Bildchen, die relateable sind. Wo ist das bitte relateable?

Ist auch nicht böse gemeint, ich glaub nur, das jetzt mal der Zeitpunkt wäre zu reflektieren, ob das, was gerade passiert überhaupt noch was mit ich_iel zu tun hat.