babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
I don't have time for this. I tried to cover most of these subtleties in brief by talking about "schools" and "vegetarianism and veganism".
I know Judaism is neither vegetarian nor vegan. I only meant to point to a strain in Judaism that sees that as "the divine intention" or ideal.
It's not arbitrary: it is based on a rejection of violence, specifically, violence towards animals and it's of a piece with other elements of these religions.
I don't think I am obliged to point to an overall culture, just to provide evidence that vegetarianism and veganism have ancient roots and those roots are not European. That, as I recall, was the issue.
But like a religious fundamentalist you just can't leave me to my own. I have no objection to anyone's lifestyle or beliefs, until they tip over into preaching that others are wrong- not different- but wrong. What makes it worse is when they are basing that preaching on falsehoods, misplaced assumptions and lack of knowledge. That is the fundamental difference. On the food issue that cuts both ways by the way.
I'm pretty sure you're not a moral relativist so this really makes no sense to me.
And yes when we disagree with people, we usually think it's because of their reliance on falsehood, misplaced assumptions, and lack of knowledge. that's the nature of disagreement and debate.
Well, I am no hipster, but I am in for the challenge
. Should be fairly easy since I haven't eaten any animal products for a couple years now. It IS better for my health, by the way. Much, much, much better. That has been confirmed by my general practitioner, my nutritionist, and my rheumatologist. As well as my scale, my skin, my blood pressure, and my cholesterol and RA levels.
I wish they hadn't called it a vegan challenge, I think what they are promoting is actually just a vegetarian challenge.
As for all that stuff about a vegan diet requirining exotic, expensive earth damaging foods....meh. During the winter I eat the spuds and root veggies I put up last fall, my own garden veggies I froze last fall, lots and lots of beans and legumes, and a huge variety of the very same stuff I ate when I was an omnivore. I just don't put the meat on the plate. How can it be so much more damaging to consume less of something?
Yes, I do still buy salad greens and tomatoes during the winter - but I don't think that is a strictly "vegan" thing. Even the most dedicated steak eater likes a little salad on the side. During the summer I eat from my own garden and from the farmers market. I occasionally buy spinach though, and avacadoes. Pineapple once in a while, oranges once in a while. Most people I know buy a certain amount of fresh (imported) produce, even in winter. Not just vegans. Yet whenever this topic comes up, someone invariably points out that a vegetarian diet is simply not sustainable, because you need vegetables for that, even when they are out of season! True, you do require vegetables to be a vegetarian. But you also require vegetables - the same imported large scale mass produced pesticide drenched crops - even if you are an omnivore.
Plants are necessary for human survival. Meat isn't.
I'm with you on factory and other industrial type farming. I'm also completely with the assertion that meat and animal product production as it generally sits now in both methods and the levels of individual and societal consumption is not sustainable ecologically in the long term. I also completely respect people who practice complete veganism or certain type of vegetarianism because of an ethical viewpoint about not killing or using animals for sustanance or other life products. I don't personally share that particular ethic as an absolute and have little interest in debating that aspect of the 'why of it' beyond just the general acknowlegement that all agriculture has an effect on animals in some form.
I do have interest in ecological arguments for it though because I don't see it as cut and dry or an either or choice which is why my comments are along those lines. Ecologically, in terms of long term viability it's a lot more complicated then a one or the other choice. There are a multitude of methods in producing food, multiple difference between regions and specific ecosystems (one method may be great ecologically in one area and devastasting for another) and of course climatic differences in what grows well where. For instance with the general current system of food production and North American diet, both animal and veggie the numbers are interesting. About 45,000 sqft per person with an average ominivore diet and about 10,000 sqft (including some types of organic) per person with a vegetarian/vegan diet. In terms of basic choice between meat or no meat in terms of land use the better of the two is obvious. However looking at different methods it's estimated that with things like bio-dynamic and other forms of more intentsive production the numbers run between 3000-5000sqft per person. This includes stacked systems like permaculture which may include some animals in the system.
No, I think veganism is pretty arbitrary. There's no talk about finding better ways to be omnivores, there's the binary choice to eat meat (or dairy or eggs, in the case of non-vegan vegetarians) or not. And the basis of this choice is placed on a set of, again arbitrary, moral assumptions - religious in the case of your examples (when is religion not arbitrary?), or philosophical in the case of our western environmentalista vegans.
There's also the element of exoticism when westerners take on veganism based on a loose and often colonial understanding of some non-European religious practices - which again, speaks to style. We westerners are good at taking cool stuff from other cultures and adapting it to our own ends.
The idea that I am a hipster is pretty funny
I don't think "arbitrary" is really an argument. What it means is that someone invokes a consideration that you don't accept, a consideration that has force within their world view and not yours. I don't think that necessarily precludes debate. I'm just saying that "that's arbitrary" is not an argument.
I'm sure people have all kinds of stupid and objectionable reasons for being vegetarians (as they do for everything else, including things you yourself believe in passionately). If you are suggesting that those are my reasons, no, they're not.
And now I need to get to work.
Actually I'll have to disagree. It may be perfectly fine for a good many people in terms of health but it's not across the board. I'm an example of that, so is part of my family. I was veggie for a good many years and worked quite hard an making sure I was doing it well nutritionally. I ended up experiencing health problems. Took about a hugely frustrating year to work out why and what the foundation was. Ends up for me it's B12 and related nutrients. My levels, even though I made sure I was supposedly getting B12 from non-animal sources went down to practically non-existent in testing. Supplements didn't work, plant based foods didn't work. I worked with a nutritionist, naturopath and read more vegatarian based B12 info then I can remember. The only thing that worked was getting shots in the arm once or twice a month. At least until I finally broke down and added a bit of meat back into my diet. When I did that my levels went up and stabilized at an acceptable levels, without shots and my health issues disappeared. Both my sisters have experienced similar issues.
Now I suppose I might be some sort of rare case with some wierd genetic quirk but for whatever reason if I don't have a bit of animal product in my diet I have to get shots to keep healthy. It was a hard thing to swallow (pun intended) and made me rethink a whole lot of things. This is why I'm against any sort of declaration that there is a way of eating that would fit every single person everywhere. There are biological differences between people.
ElizaQ I think we have talked about this before, I remember your story. I do think yours is probably a rare case, from what I understand B12 deficiencies are rare, even among vegans. I am glad you worked it out though, and are feeling good.
I guess what I meant to say is that 99.9% of people can live without meat. Plants are required for everybody.
This is a one-week demonstration to make a point, and perhaps make some people think about some of our ingrained habits.
In that, I think it is a very good thing.
I wouldn't assume that it is about telling me I should stop using animal products altogether. If someone were to make that suggestion to me I would tell them what I think of that idea.
But on the question of how appropriate veganism is, I am not sure it is always a question of people. There are plenty of places on earth where the land cannot produce enough vegetables to sustain people, but it is just fine for raising animals.
I always find it interesting that veganism by choice gets such support from people who, in any other context, would see that it's not "nature's way".
Apparently, by choosing not to eat meat, we finally know better than Mother Nature. Boo ya! What would nature know about eating?
What makes you think that Mother Nature (?) intended humans to be meat eaters, Snert?
The challenge coincides with Earth Week, hence the early spring dates. Still: purple sprouting broccoli, new potatoes and asparagus. Not too shabby!
And I appreciate the respectful tone that has been struck. Let's try to keep it that way!
Snert:
I have quite a few friends who are vegan. And a great deal more who are vegetarian. don't see that it is a big deal.
But while I agree with the belief that too much animal consumption is bad for the health of people and the planet, I would argue there is nothing wrong with a balanced omnivorous diet.
But I certainly don't consider veganism a cult or anything. It's no one else's business what someone chooses to eat.
Son of a gun. I found kosher dill pickles in one of our two stores!
(our supply ship starts up with fresh supplies in mid-April)
Yes I think I talked about it before. :) I think we can at least agree that plants should be the largest part of a diet. I'd say mine is about 85% plant based and I am very conscious of where the animal part come from and it's produced from an ecological stand point. For instance I'm moving from eating chicken eggs to more duck eggs. Nurtrient wise they have more clout (5X more B12) and from an ecological standpoint my ducks are foraging on parts of my land which is just not suitable for growing other veggies. Right now they're in the swampy part having a grand old time just being ducks.
Sigh. I can't even see over the snowbanks to the part of my yard where I think I left my gardens last year.
On the other hand, it is a good excuse to empty out the cold room and the bins and make room for next season.
My garden reappeared a few days ago. I got all excited and went out to play a bit. Then it all froze again....
Correction: the idea came from rabbletv and best of the net curator Anita Krajnc--not Noreen. This has been corrected in the OP. Mea culpa!
From the link in the OP:
"There are some great resources and films you can watch. See Paul McCartney's Glass Walls video at the PETA website: "MAKING THE CONNECTION" film highlights the impact of an animal based diet on climate change and water, air and land pollution. You can watch it for free on the web here. PETA also has a campaign which addresses the links between climate change and diet."
I have three words for Paul McCartney and PETA: Chicken Fried Steak.
(sorry, couldn't resist
)
I agree with Life and Timebandit.
I would also note that rice cultivation accounts for as much as 20 percent of world emissions of methane, which is 21 times more potent a green house gas than carbon dioxide.
Maybe the 60% of the world's population whose staple diet is rice could do the planet a favour by finding something else to eat instead? Of course not, but it makes just as much sense as thinking you can save the planet by giving up meat.
I listened to Neal Barnard on PBS talk about reversing type II diabetes with a vegan diet. I didn't realize how much fat we're ingesting with what I thought to be lean meats, poultry and fish like salmon. Impressive. Apparently even your eyesight can improve with low glicemic foods and a fiberous diet.
I'll be increasing my meat intake during this time to compensate for those on the challenge. No need to thank me.
Well, I can't digest cellulose, which pretty much all terrestrial herbivores (the animal word for vegan) can, for starters. And our nearest relatives in the taxonomy, the great apes, are mostly omnivores.
And then a quick look in the mirror at my canine teeth clinches it. Most carnivores have 'em and no herbivore needs them.
This isn't an attempt to persuade people to eat meat, or to not participate in the Vegan Challenge. I endorse people giving some thought to what they eat. But let's not pretend that we're not, by nature, omnivores.
Meat has been part of the human diet for about 2.5 million years.
Eating meat and insects was a prerequisite to the evolution of the human brain.
I know enough people with working farms that I can get all manner of animal products (except milk products - don't know anyone with a dairy farm) that're locally raised and produced, and don't employ factory farming methods. I'm fortunate in that in London we have very local farming communities. If you live in a big city and don't own private transportation, it's a lot more difficult to access the products of working family farms.
The vegan challenge is an excellent exercise in creating awareness of what we eat and its impact on the planet. I don't happen to think there's much moral high ground on any side of this debate. For those who are privileged to be able to choose what they eat, it's a matter of personal choice based on a variety of factors.
That said, I've been contemplating giving up pork products for good. There's something about eating another omnivore that just doesn't sit well with me.
Not if Rabble's writeup is any indication. It's all about lifestyle choices, personal environmental footprints, and animal welfare. It's not about the industrialization of agriculture, agribusiness multinationals, and the politics of food security, which is what people really need to become aware about. It's not going to be educating people about how the production of plant foods is destroying the environment even more than the production of meat.
Seriously? PETA and Paul McCartney? There are numerous babble threads outlining the sexism, racism and overall offensive ridiculous cluelessness of PETA. Paul McCartney is a multi-millionaire who regularly comes out here to the East Coast to bash the traditional lifestyles and diets and an extremely low-income population. Even though most still love his music, he is VERY unpopular in this neck of the woods.If you want to talk sustainable eating, go to a Newfoundland outport. There is still a large part of the population that cans their own food and relies mostly on local things.
Veganism is a privileged lifestyle, especially in Canada. The three territories, Labrador and Newfoundland would find it completely impossible and unrealistic. If if you live on a huge slab of rock or permafrost, where growing anything even for 2 months of the year is very difficult and whales, caribou, moose, seals, salmon, char, etc., etc., etc. are available...how are you to take this vegan challenge?
The B12 issue is also very important and may not be that rare polly. I have two close friends who were vegan and had the exact same issue as Eliza. One has gone back to eating animal products, the other one (and her two preschool kids) get the B12 shots twice a month.
I have nothing against people making their own food choices, but I am a little dismayed that babble considers this feasible or desirable for everyone.