Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Do angry vegans turn you against going vegan?

you clearly are bothered by vegans and their choices, why is that? what difference does it make to you?
 
Interesting study linked off of the J-Vine story: Turns out vegan diets aren't so good for the environment
oooh a study!! must be true eh

what you say about this graphic in the link you provided?

17300-1bg5mwe.png
 
Interesting study linked off of the J-Vine story: Turns out vegan diets aren't so good for the environment
And the conclusion:
The findings of this study support the idea that dietary change towards plant-based diets has significant potential to reduce the agricultural land requirements of U.S. consumers and increase the carrying capacity of U.S. agricultural resources. Future work is needed to determine the best way to share this productive bounty with the rest of the world, but potential for dietary change to influence land requirements and carrying capacity is clear. Diet composition matters.

Quality self-pwnage there. :D
 
Not actually a ‘study’, really.
Would be interested to see the input parameters.

Never heard of that journal, mind.
I just thought it was worth mentioning, but apparently that's not a credible reason to post something on aninternet forum with angry vegans aboard
 
I just thought it was worth mentioning, but apparently that's not a credible reason to post something on aninternet forum with angry vegans aboard

It’s interesting and a difficult thing to attempt to quantify. I’ve worked in a similar area and with something like this the initial assumptions will have a major impact on the result.

If it supports anything, it’s that reducing meat consumption will have substantial environmental benefits.
 
It’s interesting and a difficult thing to attempt to quantify. I’ve worked in a similar area and with something like this the initial assumptions will have a major impact on the result.

If it supports anything, it’s that reducing meat consumption will have substantial environmental benefits.
Indeed. But that's pretty much universally recognised anyway.
 
your entry and majority of posts on this thread claiming the vegan diet isn't sufficient

Nope you asserted that I was bothered by the choices of vegans. Hadyou bothered to read the thread you'd notice that on multiple occasions I said the complete opposite. Saying the vegan diet isn't sufficient is also not the claim I made. The claim I made was that you don't get enough nutrition from plant food alone. Clearly vegans supplement their diet so it can be sufficient, however that is not my preference or desire. Feel free not to jump to shitty conclusions about someone the first time you talk to them, it makes you look a dickhead.
 
Nope you asserted that I was bothered by the choices of vegans. Hadyou bothered to read the thread you'd notice that on multiple occasions I said the complete opposite. Saying the vegan diet isn't sufficient is also not the claim I made. The claim I made was that you don't get enough nutrition from plant food alone. Clearly vegans supplement their diet so it can be sufficient, however that is not my preference or desire. Feel free not to jump to shitty conclusions about someone the first time you talk to them, it makes you look a dickhead.
and it's been explained to you that you are wrong
any need for the abuse btw?
 
Indeed. But that's pretty much universally recognised anyway.

Yeah, I suppose on this thread it could be surprising to some that vegan diets don’t come out on top, though.

It does start from an assumption that patterns of land use etc. remain as they are, which is a weakness of the model. Then again, there are certain areas of land that are poor for growing crops but work for livestock grazing land.

It’s very complicated, but as you say, it supports what is “pretty much universally recognised”.

Although I think taken in the round it really isn’t pretty much universally recognised. Yet.
 
oooh a study!! must be true eh

what you say about this graphic in the link you provided?

17300-1bg5mwe.png

Do you have a better study? I'd be happy to take a look. I'm not entirely sure what your attitde is in service to but your instincts are off kilter.

What that basically says is that if loads of people gave up meat everyone would have more to eat. This isn't a controversial opinion even, because livestock eat grain and veg crops humans could be eating instead, and the return on that fodder investment in terms of meat, weight for weight, is very small.

The interesting stat there is that a fully vegan diet is less sustainable than a dairy-vegetarian diet. If it were true, I'd be interested to know why that was. It might be that surrogate milks use even more water to produce than animal milk does, but I can't be arsed to look up figures. Someone who cares more can do that.
 
What that basically says is that if loads of people gave up meat everyone would have more to eat. This isn't a controversial opinion even, because livestock eat grain and veg crops humans could be eating instead, and the return on that fodder investment in terms of meat, weight for weight, is very small.

The interesting stat there is that a fully vegan diet is less sustainable than a dairy-vegetarian diet. If it were true, I'd be interested to know why that was. It might be argued that surrogate milks use even more water to produce than animal milk does, but I can't be arsed to look up figures. Someone who cares more can do that.
I'm guessing it assumes that the dairy production employs the same high yield, intensive, extra-cruel methods currently employed which some may argue isn't truly 'sustainable'. But I can't be arsed to look it up either.
 
I don't think cruelty figures in the stats, but that is a bit of different issue than sustainability.
 
I don't think cruelty figures in the stats, but that is a bit of different issue than sustainability.
Of course not, but I was idly mulling whether such cruelty is sustainable in a world where animal welfare issues are becoming moot.


Moot. Now there's a word I haven't used for a while.
 
Again, I'll not be looking it up but instinct (that infallible pundit) tells me that free-range organic stock farming is almost certainly more sustainable than intensive/battery farming, as well as self-evidently being less cruel.
 
Back
Top Bottom