Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single biggest way’ to reduce your impact on Earth

[8ball]

Food fortification has been around for a while. Certainly since the 1950s at least.

No more Vitamin Donuts, though, sadly.

I think with fortified flour, pretty much ALL of our doughnuts are vitamin doughnuts.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

The importance of Vitamin B12, specifically, became clear iirc in the 50s/60s due to the work of Dorothy Hodgkin.

1957

https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196(11)62206-4/pdf

 

[Spymaster]

Even sensible vegans agree with LBJ on the need for supplements.

Do vegans need supplements? Here's what you need and why

Do vegans need supplements? It’s a contentious issue that triggers a heated debate amongst vegans. So, it’s time to settle the score...

www.veganfoodandliving.com

 

[ddraig]

That's your response?? seriously? Come on ffs
One post you say veganism not been around/possible until recently and another you post some 1950's cereal as evidence of your erroneous claim that you can't be vegan without supplements!
Was/is that cereal and other fortified foods just for vegans then?
Don't be so disingenuous

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Even sensible vegans agree with LBJ on the need for supplements.

Do vegans need supplements? Here's what you need and why

Do vegans need supplements? It’s a contentious issue that triggers a heated debate amongst vegans. So, it’s time to settle the score...

www.veganfoodandliving.com

I first read up on B12 and the various failed ways it's been attempted to get it from plants/fungi on a site by vegans for vegans. It needs to be there in a particular form so that it can be absorbed by the body. It's something vegans need to know tbh.

But it's added to a lot of things now. It's in marmite, for instance.

 

[ddraig]

So you are still claiming people can't be vegan unless they take supplements? And no meat eaters/non vegans take supplements? That huuuuge supplement industry just for the "tiny" percentage of people that are vegan? Is that what you're claiming? seriously?

 

[8ball]

So you are still claiming people can't be vegan unless they take supplements? And no meat eaters/non vegans take supplements? That huuuuge supplement industry just for the "tiny" percentage of people that are vegan? Is that what you're claiming? seriously?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I think with fortified flour, pretty much ALL of our doughnuts are vitamin doughnuts.

Do they have 25 units of vitamin B1, though? 25 units. That's not too shabby.

 

[lazythursday]

Define "less". You might say "20% less", but that's talking about "the average person" who doesn't actually exist and is a statistical chimera.

Also the idea of devoting actual arable land towards growing biofuels is the most fucking idiotic idea I've ever fucking heard. That's literally taking food away from peoples' mouths so cars can go vroom. Monumentally stupid.

I'm quoting from the Committee on Climate Change (official statutory body) Land Use Report. 20% less on average, yes, that's pretty clear isn't it?

As for bioenergy crops - just about every single model of how to get to a world without carbon emissions includes having to grow some level of energy crops. Even the National Farmers Union reports on climate change that try to play down any reduction in animal agriculture propose large amounts of biofuels. There are just some industrial and transport energy demands that can't be met by renewable electricity. Obviously it needs to be as small as possible but it isn't stupid. For example, read this page from the Centre for Alternative Technology, most of which slags off biofuels plans but finishes by explaining why some sustainable biofuels will be necessary: Biomass in Zero Carbon Britain: Breaking the Chain of Destruction? - Centre for Alternative Technology

 

[8ball]

Do they have 25 units of vitamin B1, though? 25 units. That's not too shabby.

I don't know.

 

[NoXion]

I'm quoting from the Committee on Climate Change (official statutory body) Land Use Report. 20% less on average, yes, that's pretty clear isn't it?

As for bioenergy crops - just about every single model of how to get to a world without carbon emissions includes having to grow some level of energy crops. Even the National Farmers Union reports on climate change that try to play down any reduction in animal agriculture propose large amounts of biofuels. There are just some industrial and transport energy demands that can't be met by renewable electricity. Obviously it needs to be as small as possible but it isn't stupid. For example, read this page from the Centre for Alternative Technology, most of which slags off biofuels plans but finishes by explaining why some sustainable biofuels will be necessary: Biomass in Zero Carbon Britain: Breaking the Chain of Destruction? - Centre for Alternative Technology

Clear as mud. I don't fly in planes or have any children (nor do I intend to), so I consider my part done. Any further measures should be focused on the industries responsible.

60% of CO2 emissions are generated by power generation and industry. That's why I get so hacked off that the discourse on reducing carbon emissions is so fucking laser-focused on individual consumption, rather than mass production.

 

[ddraig]

So all can see that bullshit claims that can't or won't be backed up by a poster are just that, bullshit spoken with attempted and projected authority
Such as "you can't be vegan without lab made supplements"
It will happen again of course, and again and again

 

[mojo pixy]

bullshit claims that can't or won't be backed up by a poster

it's the Urban way

 

[WouldBe]

So all can see that bullshit claims that can't or won't be backed up by a poster are just that, bullshit spoken with attempted and projected authority
Such as "you can't be vegan without lab made supplements"
It will happen again of course, and again and again

Out of interest where do you get your B12 from?

 

[8ball]

Out of interest where do you get your B12 from?

Judging by that post, I'm guessing "nowhere".

 

[lazythursday]

Clear as mud. I don't fly in planes or have any children (nor do I intend to), so I consider my part done. Any further measures should be focused on the industries responsible.

60% of CO2 emissions are generated by power generation and industry. That's why I get so hacked off that the discourse on reducing carbon emissions is so fucking laser-focused on individual consumption, rather than mass production.

This really isn't about putting everything on the individual. There are large amounts of carbon emissions from agriculture and land use. That has to be tackled alongside that used in the energy and industrial system. That has implications for individual consumption. I'm not saying everyone needs to cut down on their meat and dairy because its their personal responsibility to - I'm saying we will need policies that force that shift to take place on a societal level. For example, that might mean subsidising plant based protein alternatives.

 

[8ball]

I'm not saying everyone needs to cut down on their meat and dairy because its their personal responsibility to...

However, if you wanted to do something on an individual level, cutting back on (at least) the worst offenders is reasonable and not very hard.
Looking at the proportions of what you eat is also useful. The per-calorie chart is a bit different to the "by weight" chart in the middle regions.

 

[ddraig]

Out of interest where do you get your B12 from?

"out of interest" yeah right!

donuts obviously, keep up at the back!

 

[NoXion]

This really isn't about putting everything on the individual. There are large amounts of carbon emissions from agriculture and land use. That has to be tackled alongside that used in the energy and industrial system. That has implications for individual consumption. I'm not saying everyone needs to cut down on their meat and dairy because its their personal responsibility to - I'm saying we will need policies that force that shift to take place on a societal level. For example, that might mean subsidising plant based protein alternatives.

Cool. Subsidies can be used to get the ball rolling, if the growth of solar power is any indication. Get rid of subsidies for meat production too.

 

[lazythursday]

Cool. Subsidies can be used to get the ball rolling, if the growth of solar power is any indication. Get rid of subsidies for meat production too.

The government's new subsidy regime, if it is implemented as has been proposed so far, is probably the best thing by far to come out of Brexit as it does reward farmers in completely different ways.

 

[8ball]

The government's new subsidy regime, if it is implemented as has been proposed so far, is probably the best thing by far to come out of Brexit as it does reward farmers in completely different ways.

I saw something about environmental something something in the land management subsidies. I assume from your post it looks good overall - does it look likely to come to pass?

 

[NoXion]

The government's new subsidy regime, if it is implemented as has been proposed so far, is probably the best thing by far to come out of Brexit as it does reward farmers in completely different ways.

What are they doing with it?

 

[campanula]

Painfully binary positions are always going to fail, on multiple levels. I absolutely endorse the need for a vast reduction in meat consumption but afaic, the problem can generally be summed up as a failure of capitalism, as a sustainable,moral, scientific theory for life on earth. There is always a cost to be borne...and under capitalism, it falls disproportionately on the poor. To be able to access the global wealth of our planet is to be supremely privileged - a choice simply not available to a huge number of people - many of whom will also be damaged by a division of resources which enable all of us in the industrialised, developed countries to take up spurious positions of moral superiority and have the freedom to basically chat shit on the interweb. Eating meat does not always equate to vicious intensive farming methods...and the modern vegan diet also carries a burden of exploitation and environmental imbalances. Since we all operate under a hierarchical principles , we have to accept a certain level of hypocrisy (prioritising mammals over insects, for example)t and we should be kinder to each other while acknowledging the complexities involved in feeding 7 billion people. Black and white positions of such unbendable purity solves nothing...only entrenches rigid, unhelpful positions ever deeper.

 

[lazythursday]

Basically the principle is that farmers will be paid for 'public goods' rather than for agricultural production. That means for looking after nature, rivers etc. Obviously farmers can still farm and make a profit and not bother claiming any of the subsidies for land management if they want, but if they want government money they need to be carrying out certain environmental functions. At least that's how I understand it, but it is still in pilot phase and may yet change (suspect a lot of lobbying is going on especially with the meat industry now in crisis over Brexit exports)

 

[editor]

This would be a better basis for a thread, but when it is actually a poorly-veiled religious screed then it's going to go off track pretty quickly.
But, assuming some honesty in your post, "cut consumption of beef, lamb and dairy by at least 20%" isn't really coherent given the big differences in impact between different products, and says nothing about the relative volumes of those products. Cheese comes out pretty heavy, but overall, beef is the clear big one. Cutting beef by less than 20% would have a proportionately greater effect than cutting out some dairy products by a lot more, and you have the big problems caused by a lot of very valuable (especially in terms of biodiversity, but in terms of other uses too).

And there are big issues in terms of parts of the world where meat demand (especially for beef) is currently growing. We could all go vegan in the UK and it wouldn't come close to offsetting that.

I'd really like to see some better labelling on products of all sorts relating to their carbon footprint (and animal welfare matters, where relevant). And some decent labelling in terms of the conditions of workers in the chain of production. It doesn't feel like things are moving in the right direction at the moment.

Maybe adding a photo on meat products depicting the cruel conditions in factory farms (with a few notes on disgusting industry practises) might help too. After all, it seemed to work for the tobacco industry

How graphic photos on cigarette packs help smokers consider quitting

A new study is the first to provide real-world evidence of the effectiveness of smoking warning labels that include graphic photos of the damage caused by regular tobacco use.

www.sciencedaily.com

 

[editor]

You clearly have missed the undertone from certain vegan contributors that anything other than a vegan diet is inflicting suffering on animals for purely frivolous reasons. You've come out with a fair bit of that kind of thing yourself. But we're obligate omnivores. A healthy vegan diet has only been possible in recent decades. Eating some animal products to stay healthy is in no way frivolous.

And given that at no point have I defended factory farming, it's a bit weird to start banging on about it in response to that point.

So what point were you trying to achieve by bringing up the topic of science being used in the production of food and why specifically tie it to vegan foods?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

So what point were you trying to achieve by bringing up the topic of science being used in the production of food and why specifically tie to vegan foods?

I've just told you what the point was. Certain posters have been banging on again and again and again about how frivolous meat-eaters are, gratifying themselves putting suffering on a plate etc etc etc. And that self-righteous shit pissed me off.

 

[editor]

Clear as mud. I don't fly in planes or have any children (nor do I intend to), so I consider my part done. Any further measures should be focused on the industries responsible.

60% of CO2 emissions are generated by power generation and industry. That's why I get so hacked off that the discourse on reducing carbon emissions is so fucking laser-focused on individual consumption, rather than mass production.

What an attitude. I won't do these environmentally harmful things but I'll just carry on doing these environmentally harmful things and won't acceptable any alternatives.

 

[WouldBe]

"out of interest" yeah right!

donuts obviously, keep up at the back!

I was being serious. But if you can't be bothered to read the above article, written by a vegetarian about supplements in vegigan diets then fair enough. Just proves my earlier point about "ignorance is bliss".

 

[ddraig]

I've just told you what the point was. Certain posters have been banging on again and again and again about how frivolous meat-eaters are, gratifying themselves putting suffering on a plate etc etc etc. And that self-righteous shit pissed me off.

Aww bless, a bit seen is it? So that's why you pull all the disingenuous shite out of your backside! Some kind of "revenge"/levelling up/attempt to muddy the discussion with anything, anything.
You could always, like, put the thread on ignore, you've said your piece with the 1,000's of words on it surely