Humans evolved to digest meat? If we ate it raw, we'd get sick. We can't even chew it raw. But EVERY OTHER meat eater on this planet doesn't have to cook their meat??? Every other meat eater is born with teeth and claws for hunting. And how is taking an action (eating meat) until someone demonstrates why you shouldn't, default? NOT TAKING AN ACTION is default. That's like believing in a god until someone demonstrates why you shouldn't. derp Matt
I am a vegan, for the not wanting to cause pain to animals thing. If there was a humane and more eco friendly way to kill animals then i might go back to eating meat. However from what i know it is more sustainable to be on a plant based diet. On that note with the internet i am not sure which facts that support veganism are facts and which are propaganda spread by groups like PETA.
And the environmental thing the guy meant , is that all the transportation of the animals (wich is also cruel) from such long distances, generates contamination that wouldn't generate if the food was local, all of the farming industry, generates a lot, so people chosing a product that is not local such a farmed animal meat, is contributing to it, If people chose to eat local products, it would be a different story, not that many people can chose, but still.That's a fact
I would have answered him because animal cruelty, I used to say, well yeah animals are killed, that's the process that has to happen to get what I eat. Animals just don't get killed, they are breeded for it, they suffer in the process of the growth, where they are fed with substances to make them unnaturally bigger, and the conditions they live in are just inhumane , it's not a way to live, and certainly they way most of them die, the only relief they have is, horrendous as well.
The argument on weather animals hunting animals is moral or not is interesting. Morality pends on the assumption on having a choice: we have the choice to cheat or not to cheat on a school exam, we have the choice to discriminate gay people or not to discriminate, we have the choice to be cruel to animals or not to be. Morality is an attribute to the choice that we make.
If we have no choice, there is not much to be discussed about morality: if I'm forced to eat meat it is irrelevant weather I'm moral or not about it. Sharks and tigers have no choice but to eat meat, they simply know no other way to survive. So it is irrelevant weather what they do is moral or not.
Here is a good reason not to eat meat: because it creates suffering of sentient beings.
The evolution argument is not consistent: we have not evolved to use computers, nor to live in houses, nor to take medicines or to live till we are 80, yet we do so.
@Evan2718281828 Rest assured, I don't think anyone is going to judge vegans based on this guy alone, unless they already have something against vegans to begin with. I'm not a vegan myself, but I respect the choice of people who are.
I agree with Matt that it's not so much the eating of meat that's unethical, it's the means by which you obtain it. However, I'd like to challenge Matt on how he obtains his meat. Do you wander the highways with a spatula looking for a roadkill dinner Matt? I suspect you buy some meat from the supermarket.
@devourerofbabies Good point and I am on Matt's side on this one, but I think he answered this question already in part one. He stated that he doesn't extend ethical laws to members of another species. Most of us don't either. The more intelligent animals are the less likely we are to eat them. We are biased towards intelligence. On second thought, we *do* eat pig...Oh well, if you taste good you are shit out of luck.
@thelordmemnoch But we do extend ethical laws to other species, we have laws against animal cruelty etc. It's a matter of how far you extend those rights. Matt and I (and you) do have ethical guidelines regarding species, we just differ on how far to take it.
@devourerofbabies Right and other than the pig, we don't make a habit out of eating intelligent animals which is why we can kill thousands of tuna, but if one dolphin gets caught, we are all outraged. I will admit that it gets tricky determining where the cutoff line is at.
@thelordmemnoch I don't think it has much to do with intelligence but with how much we like the animal in question. There are some countries where they eat cats and dogs but we find that repulsive. We eat a lot of beef, but in India they don't because they're afraid they'll eat Brahma by accident or something. Insects are stupid and lots of cultures eat them and they're more nutritious than mammals but we don't eat them because we think they're icky. There's not rhyme or reason to it.
Hussein, N., et al. Long-chain conversion of [13C]linoleic acid and a-linolenic acid in response to marked changes in their dietary intake in men. J. Lipid. Res. 46: 269-280, 2005.
Lamptey, M.S., and Walker, B. L. A possible essential role for dietary linolenic acid in the development of the young rat. J. Nutr. 106(1): 86-93, 1976.
Pawlosky, R. J., et al . Physiological compartmental analysis of alpha-linolenic acid metabolism in adult humans. J. Lipid Res. 42(8):1257-1265, 2001.
@rosepetal108 It's hilarious how DHA, B12, and protein intake get thrown around by people on a standard american diet. Assuming you have read every reference you provided...is there a single one that indicates adverse health effects of lower DHA intake? Because if there is, I would be very curious to know how you would explain the remarkable health of so many vegans who go without obtaining DHA from animal sources.
@monkeyfist529 The conversion of ALA to DHA/EPA varies widely in individuals. But in all humans it is very low. This is because naturally by design it never had to completely replace ALL animal sources. It only had to be enough to get through periods of game scarcity. We evolved as hunter gatherers. Sometimes hunting was scarce. In some humans the conversion rate is 0% because they were from genetic stock that never had to contend with long periods without animal sources.
@monkeyfist529 ===> "Humans on veg*an diets still thrive. How?"
Some do and some don't. Some actually die, or get forced off the diet by physicians, or must supplement. The reason is what I stated to you already several times. Conversion rates vary widely in individuals. 0% - 9 %. Now if your body converts at 0% and you maintain a 100% Vegan diet without supplements, you WILL die. If you have a typical <5% conversion you will have medical problems. Only a few can go their whole lives Vegan 100%
@monkeyfist529 ===> ".is there a single one that indicates adverse health effects of lower DHA intake?"
Yes, many of them do. Instead of reading the studies though (They are quite academic), I think it would be better to read many of the articles that use these and others as sources. There are many articles, Including published by Vegetarian/Vegan organisations that have written extensively on the dangers of not supplementing.
Francois, C.A., et al . Supplementing lactating women with flaxseed oil does not increase docosahexaenoic acid in their milk. AJCN. 77: 226-233, 2003.
Gerster, H. Can adults adequately convert a-linolenic acid (18:3n-3) to eicosapentaenoic acid (20:5n-3) and docosahexaenoic acid (22:6n-3)? Int. J. Vit. Nutr. Res. 68: 159-173, 1998.
Food and Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine. Dietary Reference Intakes for Energy, Carbohydrate, Fiber, Fat, Fatty Acids, Cholesterol, Protein, and Amino Acids (Macronutrients). A report of the Panel on Macronutrients, Subcommittess on Upper Reference Levels of Nutrients and Interpretation and Uses of Dietary Reference Intakes, and the Standing Committee on the Scientific Evaluation of Dietary Reference Intakes. National Academy Press, Washington , DC , 2002.
Burdge, G.C., et al. Eicosapentaenoic and docosahexaenoic acids are the principle products of alpha-linolenic acid metabolism inyoung men. Brit. J. Nutr. 88: 355-363, 2002.
Chan. J.K., et al. Effects of dietary alpha-linolenic acid and its ratio to linoleic acid on platelet and plasma fatty acids and thrombogenesis. Lipids. 28: 811-817, 1993.
Sources: Burdge, G.C., and Calder, P.C. Conversion of a-linolenic acid to longer-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids in human adults. Reprod. Nutr. Dev. 45: 581-597, 2005.
Burdge, G.C., and Wootton , S.A. Conversion of a-linolenic acid to eicosapentaenoic, docosapentaenoic and docosahexaenoic acids in young women. Brit. J. Nutr. 88: 411-420, 2002.
The ecological footprint of manyfactured meat is a fact, but the health side is a bit more confusing, as a large study recently indicated a lower risk of ischemic heart disease in occasional meat-eaters than vegans (which themselves had lower said risk than regular meat eaters). The risk was still lower in lacto-ovo vegetarians and the lowest in pescetarians.
The real ecological problem is the size of human population. I think we should at least temporarily lower our fertility rates.
Matt is wrong here. I think he's fallen on his own sword here. He hasn't given any evidence for why he thinks the environmental side of vegetarianism is bunk.
seeing another animal kill another animal for food, I understand it, but im with tracie, it makes me cry..... I'm also with her on the food, I only on occasion eat beef. It's kinda screwed up how our world creates an amazing thing like life, but then it's destroyed so easy, but without it everything would die...It's either kill and reduce population or let live and everything dies from over population...It's kinda fucked up!!! I want everything to live but then everything dies!!!!
Wow, the male host's position is so full of logical fallacies and moved goalposts, it's hard to know where to begin. Not to mention his constant interruption of the caller and refusal to let the guy finish a line of reasoning. And his faith-based reasoning about meat's healthiness. Whew.
@HumaneHominid - how so?? I personally agree with almost if not all that he says. If someone wants to be a vegan, great good for them, I am not stopping them, but it is this whole badge of honor, superman, I am gonna save the animals and the world mentality that is flawed, and full of logical fallacies. I know ppl who eat nothing but plants who lack in health and ppl who eat mostly meat who are perfectly healthy. Every person is different and one cant say meat is unhealthy.
@paulcorda Your caller was not displaying that mentality at all, and you kept interrupting him to project that mentality onto him. That's the core of my objection. You wouldn't let him finish a thought, and kept moving the goalposts away from his original chain of reasoning. Based on that, I seriously doubt you've actually examined any secular arguments for veganism at all.
@paulcorda Actually, one can say that meat is unhealthy, and their is a preponderance of evidence throughout the literature that objectively demonstrates that eating meat and animal products is ill-advised. Concerning research and studies and your comments on why you "...do not find much use in them...", I would say that you have absolutely no understanding on the nature of how these studies work.
@monkeyfist529 - yes, to some meat can be unhealthy, and to others it may not make any difference. ALL of us are different and react differently to food. When I say I do not find much use in studies, what I mean is, if I were to take the side that meat is fine, then I am sure there are plenty of studies to prove that point as well. Basically if you believe something is bad, well then it is bad for you. but not for me.
@paulcorda "...there are plenty of studies to prove [meat is fine]..." Really. Show me one. "Basically if you believe something is bad, well then it is bad for you. but not for me." So if I believe that depriving you of oxygen for 24 hours will end your life, then for me it will end your life, but for you it won't end your life? There is no reason to eat meat. There is absolutely nothing beneficial in meat that can't be provided for by plants.
@monkeyfist529 - dumb analogy idiot, I'm talking about things that can be bad for you, not things that will kill you. Again, if I am the only person who eats meat their entire life, and when I die it is shown that I was healthy and only died of old age, then that is all one would need to refute all the "meat is unhealthy studies" In that case you could not assert with 100% accuracy the claim. Your badge of honor, superman stance is amusing though.
@paulcorda What is a "...badge of honor, superman stance"?
"Again, if I am the only person who eats meat their entire life, and when I die it is shown that I was healthy and only died of old age, then that is all one would need to refute all the "meat is unhealthy studies" In that case you could not assert with 100% accuracy the claim." You're not a scientist are you? And, how are you defining "health".
@monkeyfist529 - I will give you 1 great reason to eat meat though ---- IT TASTES GREAT AND I REALLY ENJOY EATING IT. As for animal welfare, I am definitely Pro - 1) the animals being treated very well and healthy (the better their health the better it will be for anyone eating them) 2) the animals being killed as quickly and painlessly as possible. As for the ecological well being of our planet, do you not think 6.5 billion humans have an affect on that? apart from the eating meat issue
@paulcorda You gave an excuse for eating meat, not a reason. So, if you knew that animals weren't being treated well or healthfully, would that prevent you from consuming them? The human population certainly has an effect on our planet - which is all the more reason to choose our food and our lifestyles responsibly. At our current rate, we won't be able to sustain our eating habits. Choosing not to eat animal products has more of an impact on our environment that anything else.
@monkeyfist529 - I would still say it is a reason not an excuse. I would still eat animals, like I said I would want to eat them under the pro conditions I stated before. I would also search to find those conditions if I knew that the opposite was what was happening. It seems like you think the whole world should be vegan. I cant stop u from having your beliefs, but all I will say is good luck with that. Maybe you could just be happy knowing you are doing you part to contribute.
@paulcorda You can say that eating meat because it tastes good is a "reason", but your actions are purely emotion driven which is what makes it an excuse. The fact is, there are no good reasons for eating meat. And by "reason", I simply mean, there is no rational reason to eat meat or any animal products. Everything that makes up a health and balanced diet can easily be obtained with a plant-based diet. All human beings should be vegan, after all, everything about our biology indicates this.
@monkeyfist529 - Look dude, I am not going to argue semantics with you. To your argument that it is an excuse, No sale, and never will be, so stop trying. If you want to be a vegan, like I stated before, Great, all the best to you and anyone else who wants that. Again, be happy doing your part and thinking that you are correct, that is your right. But guess what? it is also my right to completely disagree with you and think I am correct. So lets agree to disagree. cool?
@monkeyfist529 That's just a lie. Don't know who told you that but it simply isn't true. Even "taste" is a biological function to help us determine what is good for us to eat. Try eating oak leaves or grass and see how that tastes? Guess what? We cant digest them for nutrition either. Try feeding a cucumber to a cat. Guess what he cant digest that and it tastes bad to him. There are more important biological issues too, Like bioactivity of lipids and nutrients, all showing Man is an omnivore.
@rosepetal108 So you are saying that when I eat sugar and fat laden cookies, the delicious taste is letting me know this food item is good for me to eat versus the underwhelming taste I perceive from eating raw broccoli? Why does my brain prefer the taste of the food item that causes disease? I can't comment on whether or not humans can derive any nutritional value from oak leaves, but we certainly derive tons of nutritional value from eating other plants. I'm not sure what your point is?
@rosepetal108 "...bioactivity of lipids...", uhg, too easy. Well, eat polar bear liver. Due to it's lipid solubility across the blood brain barrier, hypervitaminosis A and central nervous system toxicity will likely occur, so it can be argued that Man isn't an omnivore. So cucumbers don't taste great to cats. Who cares? Cucumbers don't taste good to me either, what difference does that make. Cats go ape shit over catnip, and further, there are plenty of cats thriving on vegan diets.
@monkeyfist529 ===>"there are plenty of cats thriving on vegan diets"
Wrong. You can kill a cat on a vegan diet, and more than one crazy Vegan has been charged with animal cruelty trying to put their cats on a Vegan diet too. There are even Humans that have had their children die of malnutrition because they were radical cultist Vegans.
As far as taste goes. It is a general indicator, nothing more, in todays modern world we have bypassed that evolutionary function.
@rosepetal108 Uhh..."Wrong."? I know of several cats that have thrived on a vegan diet for over a dozen years. Animal cruelty...really? Can you give me that reference, I want to read the article. Sure, there have been people whose kids died, and yes, they had some ridiculous diet that happened to be vegan...so what? There are even Humans that take their children to KFC and allow their children to drink sugar laden carbonated beverages because they are fucking idiots.
@monkeyfist529 "hypervitaminosis A and central nervous system toxicity will likely occur, so it can be argued that Man isn't an omnivore."
That is another of your logic fallacies. Vegans you try to claim that since over eating something is bad so therefore you shouldn't eat any at all. Absolutely false. Eating all meat is as bad or worse than all Veggies. Neither is balanced. The proper balance is mostly veggies and meat / fish etc about 1-3 times a week. (varies dramatically by ethnicity)
@rosepetal108 "...another of my logical fallacies." What were the other ones? Eating polar bear liver is toxic. That isn't up for debate...it's academic. That's not a logical fallacy, it's one of those annoying facts you seem to want to avoid. Why isn't eating ONLY plants balanced. What is imbalanced about it? Please tell me...why MUST I eat meat to be balanced. YOU CANNOT NAME ONE THING A BALANCED DIET REQUIRES THAT CAN ONLY BE OBTAINED FROM MEAT, FISH, POULTRY OR DAIRY. I win. Thanks.
@monkeyfist529 "What were the other ones (logic fallacies)? Eating polar bear liver is toxic. That isn't up for debate...it's academic"
For every meat that is poison (very rare), there are 1000's of poisonous plants (very common). It is a logic fallacy to conclude, as you did, that Humans are not omnivores because polar bear livers are poison. That is just an ignorant statement.
@rosepetal108 That statement was used to point out how ridiculous your statement was, that since humans can't digest oak leaves, we must be omnivores. Why is your statement valid, and my statement ignorant?
@monkeyfist529 ==> "since humans can't digest oak leaves, we must be omnivores. Why is your statement valid, and my statement ignorant?"
Simple. That is a strawman argument. Another logic fallacy. I never claimed "since humans can't digest oak leaves, we must be omnivores" So claiming that I said that and then arguing against that is a logic fallacy. Quite rude too, if done purposely. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and let you claim ignorance instead of being rude.
@rosepetal108 "Try eating oak leaves or grass and see how that tastes? Guess what? We cant digest them for nutrition either. There are more important biological issues too, Like bioactivity of lipids and nutrients, all showing Man is an omnivore." This is your statement. You started with oak leaf digestion, and ended with "...Man is an omnivore.". What did I miss, and why would that be a straw man argument?...I merely quoted you.
@monkeyfist529 No plant makes the Omega 3 DHA which is required for you brain. Yet Humans are only capable of producing DHA and EPA long chain Omega 3's from 0% - 9 % efficiency. The vast majority of Humans average less than 5%. No plant produces B 12 either. Humans do not have "vat" stomachs like herbivores where bacteria produce B 12. These and other examples of the biochemistry of humans that prove 100% we are not carnivores or Herbivores either one. We are omnivores.
@rosepetal108 Are you actually going on record and definitely stating that "No plant makes the Omega 3 DHA which is required for (our) brain".? If you are actually...SERIOUSLY going to make that statement, then there is absolutely no point debating with you until you have checked your facts. I would love to read the peer reviewed lit you got that information from. It's comical, because you make that statement as though we live in a world where flaxseeds and walnuts don't exist. Explain.
@monkeyfist529 Flax and walnuts do have Omega 3's. They have the plant based short chain omega 3 α-linolenic acid (ALA). Many fruits and vegetables have ALA. They do not have the long chain Omega 3's EPA & DHA.
Herbivores have the ability to convert ALA into EPA & DHA , Humans however are VERY VERY limited in the ability to do this (many humans cant convert it at all). Yet we need DHA and EPA more than any other animal due to our larger brains. Restrictions of EPA & DHA will cause brain damage
You mentioned B12...I'm waiting for you to tell me that it must be obtained from animals. C'mon, tell me it has to be obtained from animals. There is not a single essential nutrient that humans need that can't be obtained from a vegan diet. We can and DO thrive on plants and bacteria alone. Humans typically can't thrive on meat alone (vitamin C comes to mind). Humans are vegan by design.
@monkeyfist529 "You mentioned B12 ... We can and DO thrive on plants and bacteria alone. Humans typically can't thrive on meat alone (vitamin C comes to mind). Humans are vegan by design."
Incorrect assumption. You said "by design" and the reason a pure Vegan diet is even possible, is due to cultured products replacing the naturally designed "fermenting vat stomachs" of Herbivores, This is NOT an evolutionary "design" but instead a man made cultural/scientific adaptation.
@rosepetal108 Plants are typically what make meat palatable. Take A1 steak sauce for examlel...it's completely vegan. It has orange juice, raisins, tomatoes, onions, garlic, and other spices and herbs. Humans don't salivate at the sight of other animals because we aren't hardwired to recognize them as food items. Even when they are dead, we don't associate road kill with dinner. We do however instantly recognize fruits and vegetables in their natural state as a source of nutrition.
@HumaneHominid - all our bodies react differently and we all have different tolerances to foods. As for "studies" I personally do not find much use in them because you usually find what you are basing the study about. Seek and you will find. Again if you are a vegan and have you reasons, great!. Tell them to someone else who cares, no one else wants to hear it. And if u need to have to world agree with you before you are happy and the animals are safe, well... ha ha ha good luck!!!
@paulcorda As for "studies," the case for plant-dominated diets being healthiest is a lot like the case for evolution: one study, one data point, neither confirms nor refutes it. It's built on a preponderance of the evidence, and to dismiss it as blithely as you did is pure faith-based reasoning. I don't care if you're vegan or not. It's just your knee-jerk refusal to let the caller make his point that I object to. It's terribly rude, and not really skeptical at all.
@paulcorda - Just to clarify, I am an observer here and not on the show. I am somewhat confused in your wording? It seems like you think it was me interrupting the caller etc... So again just to be fair and clarify, I am only watching this clip and it is only my point of view. I agree with not cutting ppl off and interrupting or just not being rude etc.. that being said, It is their show and this person is calling them, so in essence they have the control.
@paulcorda - but I would assume for many reasons they need to control the show. I would think for time, other callers, not letting callers ramble on and on for too long, amongst other reasons. Again if you want to be vegan great. I have no objections. I just mean I do not take great heed into studies. I am a meat eater and veggies etc.... If I go to the doctor and he says I am perfectly healthy ( which I am ) then that is all I would need to refute the original study.
@paulcorda OK, so your doctor says that you're perfectly healthy...so are physicians ever wrong? I'm a doctor, I don't always get it right. My daughter's PCP told me that she is failing to thrive. When I asked him why he thought that was the case, he said because we are vegan and that my daughter wasn't getting enough protein. He then proceeded to tell me about complimentary proteins. No one has seriously discussed combining proteins since the early 80's. Doctors aren't nutritionists.
@monkeyfist529 - sure physicians can be wrong, so that means they can be wrong about meat eating as well. Hope your daughter gets the nutrition that she needs. Again just what I said from before, she is a vegan and lacking in some health or nutrition. We are all different. If doctors are not nutritionists, then they probably should not be giving nutritional advice. Is the problem here the eating of meat, or animal welfare?
@paulcorda Wait, are you saying that vegans lack in health and nutrition. If that IS what you are saying, I challenge you to explain how that could be possible for every vegan. The problem here is 1) eating meat is unhealthy. That is academic, it's not up for debate; 2) non-human animal welfare is of course a major issue, and 3) consuming animal products puts you in direct opposition to the ecological well-being of our planet.
@monkeyfist529 - No I am not saying Vegans lack in health and nutrition, I am saying not all people who eat meat will be unhealthy. So even if there a a certain percentage of ppl who eat meat and are perfectly healthy, then you cant say eating meat is unhealthy and not up for debate. Again, I do not know how many times I have to make this point, EVERYONE REACTS DIFFERENTLY TO FOOD!!
@paulcorda Comments like these is why our planet is rapidly become an ecologically raped-to death "I don't give a fuck about other sentient creatures" pile of shit landfill, full of overweight-type II diabetics (e.g., Matt Dilahunty) who can't stop pissing & shitting in their fucking diapers for 2 seconds to take some accountability for their actions and the effects they have on us all.
@monkeyfist529 - wow, pretty bold statement to make. Accountability for what actions? eating meat??. I guess your insults can be directed to any meat eater out there. Again, if it is a health issue, then I speak for myself and probably many others when I say " Screw off and mind your own business". I'll worry about my own health thank you. If I want to eat meat, well then I am going to. I don't care about your health, that is your business. Do what you may.
@paulcorda "Accountability for what actions?" Are you serious? Every time you make a conscious decision to support the meat and dairy industry, you are directly supporting the wholesale destruction of our environment. Every time you purchase meat, you are funding the stripping of our land to make way for more cattle and of course further deterioration of our atmosphere from all of the methane output. Others health IS my business because part of my paycheck pays for their healthcare services.
@monkeyfist529 - Really, guess what genius, if everyone became a vegan, then the same land would need to be used to grow the tons and tons of new veggies and plants etc.. to feed everyone. As for your superman save the world badge of honor you are wearing. well, unless you live in a cave and eat berries, you as well, are doing all the same things to the environment you are accusing me of. Example, your car, home, other packaged products u buy, all your electronics etc...,
@paulcorda Replace "vegan" & "animals" in this paragraph with "anti-slavery" & "non-caucasian humans" respectively and it becomes obvious why your comments sound like someone who places no value on the world around them.
"The term "vegan" was coined in England in 1944 by Donald Watson, co-founder of the British Vegan Society, to describe a vegetarian who doesn't consume dairy or eggs on ethical grounds. It extended its definition in 1951 to mean "the doctrine that man should live without exploiting animals," and in 1960 H. Jay Dinshah started the American Vegan Society, linking the movement to the Jainist concept of ahimsa, the avoidance of violence against living things."
"Ahimsa means kindness and non-violence towards all living things including non-human animals, It is an important tenet of the Indian religions Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism."
"Additionally, there is a belief that meat consumption is generally detrimental to physical health.Nonviolence is a common value in all the vegetarian traditions of Hinduism"
"Jain doctrine teaches that Jainism has always existed and will always exist" (ie.. vegetarianism)
How something taste, whether or not something is "natural" (what ever that is suppose to mean) or more healthy is all non-moral arguments and are totally irrelevant to the question. The only thing that is relevant is the question and position to suffering. If you want to minimize it or not.
And Matt; eating meat is not a default position, you are smarter then claiming that. Eating meat IS a positve claim that eating meat is right, so it is your responsability to moraly justify it.
@OwlwoodProduction There is no moral issue unless you are Vegan. Veganism is a religion. Make no mistake about it. Part of Veganism is the religious doctrine "ahimsa". This religious belief "ahimsa" is what makes the moral and ethical judgement that eating meat is wrong. So if you are Vegan, yes eating meat is morally wrong. But if you are not a follower of the religious doctrine ahimsa then eating meat is a natural part of life without moral judgement either way.
Definition of religious belief: "a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny"
Veganism is a chose of diet which can be a chose of multiple and different reason. You are probably the only person in the world that are unable to identify eating meat as a moral question, regardless if you think it is right or wrong. Calling veganism a religion shows that you obviously no nothing about this matter. I was an atheist vegan for 10 years so I DO know.
@OwlwoodProduction Then you should know that the main difference between a strict vegetarian and a Vegan is the religious doctrine "ahimsa".
It is no secret that the American Vegan Society was founded by a Jainist and that the official publication was even called "Ahimsa Magazine". In fact that is why Vegan is a religion. Because it has adopted the religious doctrine ahimsa and applied it to vegetarianism for a moral basis.
Your post is correct if you say vegetarian instead of Vegan.
For the last time; Veganism is a DIET which can be a choise of MANY reasons such as; health, enviromental, political, animal rights, human rights and yes even religious.
The simple fact that me and loads of my friends and every single vegan I have ever met has not been Janist or Hindu shows that you are wrong. Go back and watch American idol, you are definitely are in over your head in this discussion.
Not only are you an idiot, you are also ignorant. I wrote "Hindu" as in Hinduism not Buddhist.
Even if I should buy your definition, veganism is still a DIET (as in what you eat and digest) not a belief. Wrong again... It must be tough being wrong so much so I must ask the obvious question; nephilimfree is that you?
There can't be two people equally stupid on youtube.
@OwlwoodProduction Who is ignorant? Hinduism has Gods and Buddhism doesn't, neither does Jainism.
All three plus Veganism use the basic doctrine of Ahimsa, but Vegans Jainists and Buddhists either say there is no God at all, or simply make no comment and allow each individual to decide.
So obviously it is you who are ignorant. I chose very carefully what I said for a reason.
Again, since I turned vegetarian after being vegan for 10 years I actually KNOW the answer compared to you.
Vegetarian; Comes in different styles but to make it easy. You exclude eating the flesh of all animals. You can be lacto-vegetarian which means that you do drink dairy products or lacto-ovo-vegetarion in which you also eat egg.
A vegan exclude all products that comes from animals, and some even honey. See, now you learned something, so today is a good day for you.
It seems now several times you refuse to discuss what I am actually saying and you come back with things that have no meaning at all. Could it be you are arguing with some mythical nephilimfree and not even reading my posts at all?
A strict vegetarian that is lacto-vegetarian. A lesser strict vegeterian is a lacto-ovo-vegetarian. See how easy it is. Exactly what issue has I dodged? I keep giving you answers which you are to stupid to grasp.
Keep in mind that I have purposely let you go on your idiotic remarks on how eating meat is not a moral question for all non-vegans. I don't think you are capable of understanding that kind of reasoning.
Search for Nephilifree on youtube and you'll find yourself.
@OwlwoodProduction Nope. contrast in terms. milk and eggs are by definition not vegetable matter. In fact that's why they call it lacto-ovo-vegetarian.....it is a vegetarian with the qualifiers to show they are not strictly vegetarian.
Seems you bought the Vegan propaganda. Did you buy the rest of it too? You believe that it is immoral to eat meat? You believe mankind originally was biologically a herbivore? Do you use words like "non-human animals" or "sentient beings" talking about animals?
I thought you were a Bible Christian? Did you NOT read in Genesis One the food God gave us to eat? O that's right you do not believe in Genesis One???!!!
God calls us ALL to be vegans! It is God's food! Meat is dangerous to our bodies and meat WILL NOT be eaten in Heaven.
Where did you come up with all the false ideas and claims! I cannot believe you are a 'self imposed authority' on the Bible. As I told you before ask the Holy Spirit to help you with Genesis One.
@rosepetal108: If you want to use definitions that is used only by you then fine. But congratulations, you will find yourself stuck in many conversations because if your lack of understanding in basic semantics.
Yes, my opinion is that it is morally wrong to eat meat because of the unnecessary suffering inflicted on other beings. You'll find my opinion on the validity of different argument in my initial comment to this video.
@OwlwoodProduction "Yes, my opinion is that it is morally wrong to eat meat because of the unnecessary suffering inflicted on other beings."
Then your opinion mirrors exactly the religious doctrine "ahimsa" which was my point to begin with. I have no problem with your religious beliefs. I strongly believe in religious freedom. Just be honest about it to yourself and others.
@rosepetal108; You sir are an idiot. I don't waste my time debating people this are cognitive disabled, which you clearly are. Don't forget to put on your foil hat before you go to sleep.
@OwlwoodProduction LOL The obvious tactic of a failed debate is always personal attacks. You started this whole debate with a claim that " The only thing that is relevant is the question and position to suffering. If you want to minimize it or not." Which is a religious doctrine of Ahimsa. That means your point is correct, but only if your morality is based on those religions. If you are NOT Vegan (or Jain Hindu Buddhist etc...) then there is no moral imperative to not eat meat.
@rosepetal108: Normally yes but when a person like you repeatably try to add 2 plus 2 and get the answer 5 and are so intellectually retarded that you are unable to distinguish correlation with consequentiality and on top of that don't understand basic semantics and still sit on high horses, then there is only one possibility; you must either be a kid with no clue or an adult idiot. I suggest the latter.
@OwlwoodProduction ===> " But for the sake of argument lest use your misunderstanding of correlation/consequentiality."
There is your test for correlation.3 posts of facts proving the religious basis for Veganism. Instead of calling anyone who disagrees with you a "NAZI", "idiot.", "retarded","cognitive disabled", or anything else, you should instead educate yourself or use this wisdom:
Sometimes it is better to be silent and thought a fool, that to speak and leave no doubt.
Bottom line is I showed with sources that the founders of Veganism purposely added religious doctrine to what was previously vegetarianism and made Veganism. They did this to add an ethical and moral (religious) component to what by itself is just a diet. By using Jain as their religious model for Veganism they made it religious and still can indoctrinate atheists. I used actual facts and sources which you can't refute,
But never mind that. You know what? I don't refute that at all, I can grant you the whole idea about term veganism was inspired by janism. Even if I go that far it still doesn't make being a vegan any more religions then eating meat makes you a nazi. It is a difference between correlation and consequence, if you don't understand that you don't understand anything... which you obviously don't.
@rosepetal108: I kind of feel bad for you that you are unable to understand the English language. It is my second and your first and still you get lost in terminology and logic. You are more then welcome to live in your egocentric bubble were you decide the rules no matter what the surrounding world. Run off little boy...I have spent more then enough time on you.
If you eat meat and nazis do there must that must be the moral consequence in the same way that following ahimsa is for being a vegan, isn't that so? NO I am neither NAZI nor do I believe in any of the various forms of the religious doctrine "Ahimsa".
You do understand what "for the sake of the argument" means? Yes but that doesn't make your "argument" valid.
3:29 Really? Hrm. The people of Okinawa japan are some of the longest living people in the world. They've passed down the same basic diet for a looong time. They're certainly not the wealthiest people in the world,Never have been. Their diets include very little meat or none at all. Soy is more common.Grains too. Now look at modern japan. USA Culture has invaded. MCdonalds. People are aren't living as long.
@Skeletonwitharaygun You're drawing a correlation/causation fallacy from diet to longevity. It has to do with their genetics for the most part how long they live.
most people in general don't want to give up meat...I wasn't fat and my diet consisted primarily of meat and eggs, so I wasn't thrilled about giving up animal products; all my old favorite foods come from animals. I mean if we're talking about health, a little lean meat or fish in your diet probably isn't that bad, but yea, this guy doesn't know what he is talking about. If wants to remain credible, he should acknowledge when he doesn't know the subject well.
These rednecks argue against the religious people who live in the past believing in stupid cults (except muslims of course!), but they themselves rather continue being primitive savages and continue eating meat and supporting the industry that murders billions of animals each year, when we could really live without wasting innocent lives for their dead flesh and live even healthier. All of their arguments are so stupid! But I guess for a redneck state like Texas, atheism is a big step...
@ZoldierrZzz meat is vital part(PART!! not whole diet..) of human diet, many people cant even get proper replacements for meat, so if they give up meat, they will have health problems or in some countries even die. Just because you have a money and resources to get yourself proper replacements and have lived vegan few years doesnt make you an expert, maybe you dont even know you are developing some health issues that will surface later. If you live long enough first, then maybe try write a book.
fuck, this guy is not proving to be very intelligent... evolution proves meat is healthy? All evolution requires is that we survive long enough to reproduce. Not eating meat is healthier in the sense it allows you to live a longer life.
i loved your reasoning in part one and part two on defending the right of omnivores. I am always amazed at people that practice without philosophic reasoning without any practice making distinctions. I am not an atheist but then I am fine that you all are. I love how you guys are respectful. SO are there any you tube videos where both of you describe your progression to an Atheist position. I have a background in science and philosophy.
The problem with Tracy's point (never thought I'd say/type that) is the shark doesn't have the ability to sympathize with the animal that died. We can and to feel sorry for an animal getting killed (or suffering before hand) and then ordering a plate of it, is hypocritical. I do prefer and respect the fact that she atleast wants the animal she's eating, to have atleast lived a life without abuse. I think most people feel that way though most eat way too much meat and fuel mass production.
I sympathize with the suffering of one life form savaging another life form from another species just to maintain its life force, but (you may think this is a cop out) I don't think ethics has anything to do with it. We're predators, I don't think there's a way around that.
Now if you're talking about environmental pollution, consumption and mass factory farming that's another issue - that's just irresponsible hyper capitalism.
@Rahab111222 What makes you think that humans are predators? Our technology allows us to fly...are we birds? Our noses make a perfect rest for glasses, did we evolve to this feature for the sake of eyewear? Just because we CAN do something, doesn't mean that that particular behavior is best suited to us.
We are predators 'because' we hunt and eat meat. We're not herbivores, sorry.
If you don't want to eat meat, that's cool. If you want to eat less meat for health reasons, or for just having a more balanced meal - that's perfectly ideal. (This is the part where I get spammed with negative replies) Just don't throw around bad science, and bullshit non-applicable analogies attempting to convince people in your pretentious new age faggy lifestyle like some cult member.
@Rahab111222 I don't hunt and eat meat...I'm a herbivore. Most people that I know don't hunt their own food...are they still predators? Is a person still labeled as a predator if they buy prepackaged beef wrapped in cellophane? What about all the house cats on vegan diets? They aren't hunting or eating meat...are they predators?
@Rahab111222 What about all the Hindus and Buddhists that don't hunt or eat meat...do they carry the label of predator too just because just because a few dickless turds get off on shooting deer a few months out of the year?
@Rahab111222 "...don't throw around bad science..." What "bad science"? Do I sound like a "cult member"? I would argue that the hordes of people who insist on eating the scorched flesh of dead birds, despite the negative impact to their health - AND the science to back it up, sounds more cultish to me than eating locally grown fresh fruits and vegetables. You still didn't address my question. Based on our anatomy & physiology, What reason is there to think that we are anything but herbivores?
@Rahab111222 We can digest meat (albeit very inefficiently), but that doesn't mean that our physiology is based around that food item. To say that we are predators because we hunt and eat meat makes no more sense that to say that we are Twinkie-vores because we manufacture and eat Hostess snack-cakes. There is nothing in our biology that would indicate we are anything but herbivores. If we are fortunate enough to fossilize, what reason would there be for our discoverer to conclude we ate meat?
@Rahab111222 There actually is a way around it. My way was realising I couldn't justify loving my pets and thinking about how they'd taste but claiming to love animals in general and also thinking how they'd taste. Most eat meat for taste and claim superiority over the animal they eat but are probably against cannibalism regardless of how a certain human might taste. Bottomline, we aren't slaves to nature which gives us all we need in grown form.
@clipsryan I find it ironic that anyone would claim that they continue to eat meat because they like the taste - seeing how it's the plants they flavor the meat with that give it the TASTE they argue about.
I don't understand your thinking... people love the taste of meat... the taste, the texture, the fullness and satisfaction you feel from eating it... I'm a vegan and I miss all of that.
POST 1: In regards to consuming meat, it is true...many people love and enjoy "...the taste, the texture, the fullness and satisfaction (they feel) from eating it". I would argue however, that many people enjoy rather the flavour that plants give to meat. I don't believe that many people would eat straight cooked chicken or hamburger without the oils to cook and fry them in or the condiments added to disguise the bland taste.
POST 2: Also, take what you just said about the sentiments people (including yourself) have towards meat, and now replace the word 'meat' with 'rape'. Just because a person elicits joy or happiness from some act doesn't mean that there doesn't exist an obligation to limit such activities.
i agree, that's why I am a vegan. As for flavor, you're still off. I find it harder to make good tasting vegan meals than meals with meat. Sure, I wasn't eating the meat bland, but that's not the point. Meat mixes well with spices and sauces. Again, I'm a vegan, I know the difference between diets with and without meat. I know exactly what meat contributed to meals.
@mellamosean OK, so you find it harder to make a good tasting vegan meal than one which has meat. Too bad, and sucks to be you. It's not the fault of the diet that you don't know how to cook/bake properly. I don't have that problem with any of the food I make. Your point that meat mixes well with spices is rather lame. Again, replace "meat" with "tofu" or "seiten" or "tempeh". I also know the difference between diets with and without meat. My diet without tastes far better.
Then that is simply a matter of personal taste. I know plenty of people who don't really like meat. I also know people who love meat and eat it with nothing else. I don't know you feel the need to criticize me, when I was just trying to explain to you that people do enjoy the taste and texture of meat. And btw, by harder, I mostly meant it requires more work. i used throw eggs and ground beef in a pan, toss it in a tortilla, throw some salsa on it, and I was good.
I bet there is good "meat" sauce out there somewhere, you just need a good vegetarian chef. I have never tried a vegetarian "meat" sauce myself; since I've been a vegan I haven't really eaten much of the meat replacements..
And ps: "Vitamin B12 is needed for cell division and blood formation. Plant foods do not contain vitamin B12 except when they are contaminated by microorganisms. Thus, vegans need to look to other sources to get vitamin B12 in their diet. Although the minimum requirement for vitamin B12 is quite small, 1/1000 of a milligram (1 microgram) a day for adults, a vitamin B12 deficiency is a very serious problem leading ultimately to irreversible nerve damage."
@psychotica81 Just out of curiosity...how many vegans/vegetarians have you consulted who have had a B12 deficiency - due to insufficient dietary intake? I have never met anyone who suffered from B12 deficiency because of their diet...it's almost always due to intestinal disease of some sort, and, it's almost always in my elderly patients. What university did you graduate from and what year? What exactly is your diploma in. The information you are putting out simply isn't true.
@monkeyfist529 Thank you. I finally got an opinion from an actual doctor. This denial that we can't get what we need from mother earth, is rediculous. The "we are omnivores" defense is just as dumb as the "we are killers because we can kill and we should because we can get away with it" argument.
@clipsryan You should check out the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. It's an online community of vegan/vegetarian physicians that provide much of the research and background info that goes into the overwhelming health benefits of a plant-based diet and provides a preponderance of evidence concerning the consumption of non-human animal products.
@psychotica81 - and of course omnivores can suffer from B12 deficiency as well, especially in old age. For vegans at least 2000 micrograms a week is enough, since it is stored in the liver.
@monkeyfist529, a lot thank you, I have a diploma in it, and a ton of experience. There is b12 in Soy and products a like but our body can not digest the b12 in there. We need the b12 out of animalproducts like butter, milk, cheese, etc. I have plenty of evidence. You can ask your doctor, I don't stop consulting, unlike you I got a diploma, did my exams, had real life experience, and did not base it on googlesearches.
@psychotica81 I don't need to ask my doctor, I am a doctor. I'm also vegan. Google search...you're funny. I'll stick to PubMed if that's alright with you. From what you're telling me, I shouldn't be alive if I'm eating an exclusively plant-based diet - after all, where am I getting my B12 from? I challenge you to give me one evidence-based reference from a reputable peer-reviewed journal that corroborates what you typed: "We need the b12 out of animalproducts like butter, milk, cheese, etc".
Being vegan, or eating too much meat are equally unhealthy and not recommendable. Being vegetarian, or eating healthy doses meat, which is very little, is the best choice. We need vitamins, and some vitamines are only produced in animal products, for example b12. I, myself, am vegetarian and a food-consultant. Basing your decision on what is healthy and what is healthy for the environment is the best way to go and not one way or the other.
@psychotica81 You are a consultant? A consultant to whom or what I wonder. What kind of degree or experience do you have with nutrition science? I ask because you mention that B12 is only produced by animals. You don't have any references that will confirm that, so why would you ever make such a statement. B12 is too easy to obtain from nutritional yeast. Additionally, you don't have evidence that a vegetarian diet is healthier than an entirely plant-based diet either. Stop consulting.
Killing an animal for pleasure (eat meat) is not an issue of opinion, is not a moral relativism. When you eat meat, you endorse animal suffering. Sam Harris says that you don't need to be ethical with a rock. You have to be moral with living beings able to suffer. And definitely pigs (wich are one of the smartest animals) suffer when they are mutilated, castraded without anesthesia, decapitaded to become you bacon.
The major cause of the Amazon deforestation is for cattle raise that feeds meat eaters worldwide. This is more than a reason why you shouldn't eat meat knowing all the negative enviromental impacts it causes.
You can't compare your actions to a shark's action. A shark is not able to have ethical thoughts. You can judge what is ethical. You don't act like a shark in 99,99% of your life, so why you make a exception at this point (eating meat)? Monkeys rape, why don't you rape too?
Veganism isn't about being healthy. People have the right to be unhealthy. If you feel like beating your head on the wall, go ahead. But you can't force other people to not beat their head on the wall. You have the right to hurt yourself for pleasure, but you can´t hurt others, including animals, for pleasure. When you cause suffering and kill lifes which don't wanna feel pain or die just for your own pleasure (eating meat, dairy, fur...), then you don't have the right, because is not ethical.
The two hosts are idiots. Basically they spent ~15 minutes talking about how they don't want to stop eating animals, so they aren't going to. It's ridiculous how the violent option is always looked at as the default position when it comes to this. Why not go vegan until you can prove animals like being raped, tortured, and killed for your pleasure?
Ask the Masai in Africa if meat is healthy: they eat almost exclusively beef, and drink the milk and blood of their cattle. Ask the Inuit, who eat a diet composed almost entirely of seal BLUBBER how dangerous animal fats are. Meat, and the fat that accompanies it, only becomes a health risk when combined with a steady intake of high carbohydrate foods. Meat,yes. Potatoes, yes. Meat AND potatoes, probably not.
it disturbs and saddens you to see a seal getting eaten by a shark, yet you use this argument to defend killing animals to eat them when you don't have to?
and yes to star trek: in-vitro meat has the potential to completely end the trivial suffering of 10 billion animals (US alone) per year.
it's a fallacy to argue that acknowledging a non-human animal's interest in not suffering or being killed to eat her means one necessarily think humans and non-humans are equal; this is basic decency.
@itchynights It's obvious she was lying about that. Really, she wanted to "show" how she was more compassionate than a vegan. She changes the channel during a wildlife documentary because she doesn't want to "watch killing for pleasure," but she has no problem eating chickens for pleasure.
These kind of people are almost as hard to talk to about veganism as vegetarians.
Humans evolved to digest meat? If we ate it raw, we'd get sick. We can't even chew it raw. But EVERY OTHER meat eater on this planet doesn't have to cook their meat??? Every other meat eater is born with teeth and claws for hunting. And how is taking an action (eating meat) until someone demonstrates why you shouldn't, default? NOT TAKING AN ACTION is default. That's like believing in a god until someone demonstrates why you shouldn't. derp Matt
jsamari 1 week ago
You have opinions where facts should be, so I can't agree to disagree with you.
IndieAnthias 1 week ago
so "might makes right" implies a duty, and hunting for population control nullifies the environmental issue of commercial meat production. kthanxbai.
IndieAnthias 1 week ago
Sharks do not have any notion of right or wrong. We do. There's the difference.
alexholmes1541993 2 weeks ago
Just because something is natural, or comes naturally, does not mean it is correct.
alexholmes1541993 2 weeks ago
I am a vegan, for the not wanting to cause pain to animals thing. If there was a humane and more eco friendly way to kill animals then i might go back to eating meat. However from what i know it is more sustainable to be on a plant based diet. On that note with the internet i am not sure which facts that support veganism are facts and which are propaganda spread by groups like PETA.
naturalistmind 3 weeks ago
And the environmental thing the guy meant , is that all the transportation of the animals (wich is also cruel) from such long distances, generates contamination that wouldn't generate if the food was local, all of the farming industry, generates a lot, so people chosing a product that is not local such a farmed animal meat, is contributing to it, If people chose to eat local products, it would be a different story, not that many people can chose, but still.That's a fact
parodita 1 month ago
I would have answered him because animal cruelty, I used to say, well yeah animals are killed, that's the process that has to happen to get what I eat. Animals just don't get killed, they are breeded for it, they suffer in the process of the growth, where they are fed with substances to make them unnaturally bigger, and the conditions they live in are just inhumane , it's not a way to live, and certainly they way most of them die, the only relief they have is, horrendous as well.
parodita 1 month ago
The argument on weather animals hunting animals is moral or not is interesting. Morality pends on the assumption on having a choice: we have the choice to cheat or not to cheat on a school exam, we have the choice to discriminate gay people or not to discriminate, we have the choice to be cruel to animals or not to be. Morality is an attribute to the choice that we make.
vappole 2 months ago
If we have no choice, there is not much to be discussed about morality: if I'm forced to eat meat it is irrelevant weather I'm moral or not about it. Sharks and tigers have no choice but to eat meat, they simply know no other way to survive. So it is irrelevant weather what they do is moral or not.
vappole 2 months ago
Here is a good reason not to eat meat: because it creates suffering of sentient beings.
The evolution argument is not consistent: we have not evolved to use computers, nor to live in houses, nor to take medicines or to live till we are 80, yet we do so.
vappole 2 months ago 3
Take note kids. Never ever listen to the dietary advise of an obese man.
pompousprick 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pompousprick "Take note kids. Never ever listen to the dietary advise of an obese man."
Wow. You certainly live up to your name. Is that why you have to hide like a coward behind the old 'channel not available'?
moopism 2 months ago
Damnit, why do dumbasses have to represent veganism? Please people, don't think veganism is stupid because this guy is stupid.
Evan2718281828 4 months ago
@Evan2718281828 Rest assured, I don't think anyone is going to judge vegans based on this guy alone, unless they already have something against vegans to begin with. I'm not a vegan myself, but I respect the choice of people who are.
weelittledragon 1 month ago
I agree with Matt that it's not so much the eating of meat that's unethical, it's the means by which you obtain it. However, I'd like to challenge Matt on how he obtains his meat. Do you wander the highways with a spatula looking for a roadkill dinner Matt? I suspect you buy some meat from the supermarket.
devourerofbabies 4 months ago 3
@devourerofbabies Good point and I am on Matt's side on this one, but I think he answered this question already in part one. He stated that he doesn't extend ethical laws to members of another species. Most of us don't either. The more intelligent animals are the less likely we are to eat them. We are biased towards intelligence. On second thought, we *do* eat pig...Oh well, if you taste good you are shit out of luck.
thelordmemnoch 3 months ago
@thelordmemnoch But we do extend ethical laws to other species, we have laws against animal cruelty etc. It's a matter of how far you extend those rights. Matt and I (and you) do have ethical guidelines regarding species, we just differ on how far to take it.
devourerofbabies 3 months ago
@devourerofbabies Right and other than the pig, we don't make a habit out of eating intelligent animals which is why we can kill thousands of tuna, but if one dolphin gets caught, we are all outraged. I will admit that it gets tricky determining where the cutoff line is at.
thelordmemnoch 3 months ago
@thelordmemnoch I don't think it has much to do with intelligence but with how much we like the animal in question. There are some countries where they eat cats and dogs but we find that repulsive. We eat a lot of beef, but in India they don't because they're afraid they'll eat Brahma by accident or something. Insects are stupid and lots of cultures eat them and they're more nutritious than mammals but we don't eat them because we think they're icky. There's not rhyme or reason to it.
devourerofbabies 3 months ago
sources:
Hussein, N., et al. Long-chain conversion of [13C]linoleic acid and a-linolenic acid in response to marked changes in their dietary intake in men. J. Lipid. Res. 46: 269-280, 2005.
Lamptey, M.S., and Walker, B. L. A possible essential role for dietary linolenic acid in the development of the young rat. J. Nutr. 106(1): 86-93, 1976.
Pawlosky, R. J., et al . Physiological compartmental analysis of alpha-linolenic acid metabolism in adult humans. J. Lipid Res. 42(8):1257-1265, 2001.
rosepetal108 4 months ago
@rosepetal108 It's hilarious how DHA, B12, and protein intake get thrown around by people on a standard american diet. Assuming you have read every reference you provided...is there a single one that indicates adverse health effects of lower DHA intake? Because if there is, I would be very curious to know how you would explain the remarkable health of so many vegans who go without obtaining DHA from animal sources.
monkeyfist529 4 months ago
@monkeyfist529 The conversion of ALA to DHA/EPA varies widely in individuals. But in all humans it is very low. This is because naturally by design it never had to completely replace ALL animal sources. It only had to be enough to get through periods of game scarcity. We evolved as hunter gatherers. Sometimes hunting was scarce. In some humans the conversion rate is 0% because they were from genetic stock that never had to contend with long periods without animal sources.
rosepetal108 4 months ago
@rosepetal108 True, ALA conversion is low in humans. It doesn't matter however. Humans on veg*an diets still thrive. How?
monkeyfist529 4 months ago
@monkeyfist529 ===> "Humans on veg*an diets still thrive. How?"
Some do and some don't. Some actually die, or get forced off the diet by physicians, or must supplement. The reason is what I stated to you already several times. Conversion rates vary widely in individuals. 0% - 9 %. Now if your body converts at 0% and you maintain a 100% Vegan diet without supplements, you WILL die. If you have a typical <5% conversion you will have medical problems. Only a few can go their whole lives Vegan 100%
rosepetal108 4 months ago
@rosepetal108 That's fucking bullshit, roflmao.
vOddy75 4 months ago
@monkeyfist529 ===> ".is there a single one that indicates adverse health effects of lower DHA intake?"
Yes, many of them do. Instead of reading the studies though (They are quite academic), I think it would be better to read many of the articles that use these and others as sources. There are many articles, Including published by Vegetarian/Vegan organisations that have written extensively on the dangers of not supplementing.
rosepetal108 4 months ago
Sources:
Francois, C.A., et al . Supplementing lactating women with flaxseed oil does not increase docosahexaenoic acid in their milk. AJCN. 77: 226-233, 2003.
Gerster, H. Can adults adequately convert a-linolenic acid (18:3n-3) to eicosapentaenoic acid (20:5n-3) and docosahexaenoic acid (22:6n-3)? Int. J. Vit. Nutr. Res. 68: 159-173, 1998.
rosepetal108 4 months ago
Source:
Food and Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine. Dietary Reference Intakes for Energy, Carbohydrate, Fiber, Fat, Fatty Acids, Cholesterol, Protein, and Amino Acids (Macronutrients). A report of the Panel on Macronutrients, Subcommittess on Upper Reference Levels of Nutrients and Interpretation and Uses of Dietary Reference Intakes, and the Standing Committee on the Scientific Evaluation of Dietary Reference Intakes. National Academy Press, Washington , DC , 2002.
rosepetal108 4 months ago
More sources:
Burdge, G.C., et al. Eicosapentaenoic and docosahexaenoic acids are the principle products of alpha-linolenic acid metabolism inyoung men. Brit. J. Nutr. 88: 355-363, 2002.
Chan. J.K., et al. Effects of dietary alpha-linolenic acid and its ratio to linoleic acid on platelet and plasma fatty acids and thrombogenesis. Lipids. 28: 811-817, 1993.
rosepetal108 4 months ago
Sources: Burdge, G.C., and Calder, P.C. Conversion of a-linolenic acid to longer-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids in human adults. Reprod. Nutr. Dev. 45: 581-597, 2005.
Burdge, G.C., and Wootton , S.A. Conversion of a-linolenic acid to eicosapentaenoic, docosapentaenoic and docosahexaenoic acids in young women. Brit. J. Nutr. 88: 411-420, 2002.
rosepetal108 4 months ago
The ecological footprint of manyfactured meat is a fact, but the health side is a bit more confusing, as a large study recently indicated a lower risk of ischemic heart disease in occasional meat-eaters than vegans (which themselves had lower said risk than regular meat eaters). The risk was still lower in lacto-ovo vegetarians and the lowest in pescetarians.
The real ecological problem is the size of human population. I think we should at least temporarily lower our fertility rates.
Hirvassalo 5 months ago
Matt is wrong here. I think he's fallen on his own sword here. He hasn't given any evidence for why he thinks the environmental side of vegetarianism is bunk.
Moppy1988 5 months ago
seeing another animal kill another animal for food, I understand it, but im with tracie, it makes me cry..... I'm also with her on the food, I only on occasion eat beef. It's kinda screwed up how our world creates an amazing thing like life, but then it's destroyed so easy, but without it everything would die...It's either kill and reduce population or let live and everything dies from over population...It's kinda fucked up!!! I want everything to live but then everything dies!!!!
MetalSiicken 5 months ago
Wow, the male host's position is so full of logical fallacies and moved goalposts, it's hard to know where to begin. Not to mention his constant interruption of the caller and refusal to let the guy finish a line of reasoning. And his faith-based reasoning about meat's healthiness. Whew.
HumaneHominid 5 months ago
@HumaneHominid - how so?? I personally agree with almost if not all that he says. If someone wants to be a vegan, great good for them, I am not stopping them, but it is this whole badge of honor, superman, I am gonna save the animals and the world mentality that is flawed, and full of logical fallacies. I know ppl who eat nothing but plants who lack in health and ppl who eat mostly meat who are perfectly healthy. Every person is different and one cant say meat is unhealthy.
paulcorda 5 months ago
@paulcorda Your caller was not displaying that mentality at all, and you kept interrupting him to project that mentality onto him. That's the core of my objection. You wouldn't let him finish a thought, and kept moving the goalposts away from his original chain of reasoning. Based on that, I seriously doubt you've actually examined any secular arguments for veganism at all.
HumaneHominid 5 months ago
@paulcorda Actually, one can say that meat is unhealthy, and their is a preponderance of evidence throughout the literature that objectively demonstrates that eating meat and animal products is ill-advised. Concerning research and studies and your comments on why you "...do not find much use in them...", I would say that you have absolutely no understanding on the nature of how these studies work.
monkeyfist529 5 months ago
@monkeyfist529 - yes, to some meat can be unhealthy, and to others it may not make any difference. ALL of us are different and react differently to food. When I say I do not find much use in studies, what I mean is, if I were to take the side that meat is fine, then I am sure there are plenty of studies to prove that point as well. Basically if you believe something is bad, well then it is bad for you. but not for me.
paulcorda 5 months ago
@paulcorda "...there are plenty of studies to prove [meat is fine]..." Really. Show me one. "Basically if you believe something is bad, well then it is bad for you. but not for me." So if I believe that depriving you of oxygen for 24 hours will end your life, then for me it will end your life, but for you it won't end your life? There is no reason to eat meat. There is absolutely nothing beneficial in meat that can't be provided for by plants.
monkeyfist529 5 months ago
@monkeyfist529 - dumb analogy idiot, I'm talking about things that can be bad for you, not things that will kill you. Again, if I am the only person who eats meat their entire life, and when I die it is shown that I was healthy and only died of old age, then that is all one would need to refute all the "meat is unhealthy studies" In that case you could not assert with 100% accuracy the claim. Your badge of honor, superman stance is amusing though.
paulcorda 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@paulcorda What is a "...badge of honor, superman stance"?
"Again, if I am the only person who eats meat their entire life, and when I die it is shown that I was healthy and only died of old age, then that is all one would need to refute all the "meat is unhealthy studies" In that case you could not assert with 100% accuracy the claim." You're not a scientist are you? And, how are you defining "health".
monkeyfist529 5 months ago
@monkeyfist529 - I will give you 1 great reason to eat meat though ---- IT TASTES GREAT AND I REALLY ENJOY EATING IT. As for animal welfare, I am definitely Pro - 1) the animals being treated very well and healthy (the better their health the better it will be for anyone eating them) 2) the animals being killed as quickly and painlessly as possible. As for the ecological well being of our planet, do you not think 6.5 billion humans have an affect on that? apart from the eating meat issue
paulcorda 5 months ago
@paulcorda You gave an excuse for eating meat, not a reason. So, if you knew that animals weren't being treated well or healthfully, would that prevent you from consuming them? The human population certainly has an effect on our planet - which is all the more reason to choose our food and our lifestyles responsibly. At our current rate, we won't be able to sustain our eating habits. Choosing not to eat animal products has more of an impact on our environment that anything else.
monkeyfist529 5 months ago
@monkeyfist529 - I would still say it is a reason not an excuse. I would still eat animals, like I said I would want to eat them under the pro conditions I stated before. I would also search to find those conditions if I knew that the opposite was what was happening. It seems like you think the whole world should be vegan. I cant stop u from having your beliefs, but all I will say is good luck with that. Maybe you could just be happy knowing you are doing you part to contribute.
paulcorda 5 months ago
@paulcorda You can say that eating meat because it tastes good is a "reason", but your actions are purely emotion driven which is what makes it an excuse. The fact is, there are no good reasons for eating meat. And by "reason", I simply mean, there is no rational reason to eat meat or any animal products. Everything that makes up a health and balanced diet can easily be obtained with a plant-based diet. All human beings should be vegan, after all, everything about our biology indicates this.
monkeyfist529 5 months ago
@monkeyfist529 - Look dude, I am not going to argue semantics with you. To your argument that it is an excuse, No sale, and never will be, so stop trying. If you want to be a vegan, like I stated before, Great, all the best to you and anyone else who wants that. Again, be happy doing your part and thinking that you are correct, that is your right. But guess what? it is also my right to completely disagree with you and think I am correct. So lets agree to disagree. cool?
paulcorda 5 months ago
@monkeyfist529 That's just a lie. Don't know who told you that but it simply isn't true. Even "taste" is a biological function to help us determine what is good for us to eat. Try eating oak leaves or grass and see how that tastes? Guess what? We cant digest them for nutrition either. Try feeding a cucumber to a cat. Guess what he cant digest that and it tastes bad to him. There are more important biological issues too, Like bioactivity of lipids and nutrients, all showing Man is an omnivore.
rosepetal108 5 months ago
@rosepetal108 So you are saying that when I eat sugar and fat laden cookies, the delicious taste is letting me know this food item is good for me to eat versus the underwhelming taste I perceive from eating raw broccoli? Why does my brain prefer the taste of the food item that causes disease? I can't comment on whether or not humans can derive any nutritional value from oak leaves, but we certainly derive tons of nutritional value from eating other plants. I'm not sure what your point is?
monkeyfist529 5 months ago
@rosepetal108 "...bioactivity of lipids...", uhg, too easy. Well, eat polar bear liver. Due to it's lipid solubility across the blood brain barrier, hypervitaminosis A and central nervous system toxicity will likely occur, so it can be argued that Man isn't an omnivore. So cucumbers don't taste great to cats. Who cares? Cucumbers don't taste good to me either, what difference does that make. Cats go ape shit over catnip, and further, there are plenty of cats thriving on vegan diets.
monkeyfist529 5 months ago
@monkeyfist529 ===>"there are plenty of cats thriving on vegan diets"
Wrong. You can kill a cat on a vegan diet, and more than one crazy Vegan has been charged with animal cruelty trying to put their cats on a Vegan diet too. There are even Humans that have had their children die of malnutrition because they were radical cultist Vegans.
As far as taste goes. It is a general indicator, nothing more, in todays modern world we have bypassed that evolutionary function.
rosepetal108 4 months ago
@rosepetal108 Uhh..."Wrong."? I know of several cats that have thrived on a vegan diet for over a dozen years. Animal cruelty...really? Can you give me that reference, I want to read the article. Sure, there have been people whose kids died, and yes, they had some ridiculous diet that happened to be vegan...so what? There are even Humans that take their children to KFC and allow their children to drink sugar laden carbonated beverages because they are fucking idiots.
monkeyfist529 4 months ago
Comment removed
rosepetal108 4 months ago
@monkeyfist529 "hypervitaminosis A and central nervous system toxicity will likely occur, so it can be argued that Man isn't an omnivore."
That is another of your logic fallacies. Vegans you try to claim that since over eating something is bad so therefore you shouldn't eat any at all. Absolutely false. Eating all meat is as bad or worse than all Veggies. Neither is balanced. The proper balance is mostly veggies and meat / fish etc about 1-3 times a week. (varies dramatically by ethnicity)
rosepetal108 4 months ago
@rosepetal108 "...another of my logical fallacies." What were the other ones? Eating polar bear liver is toxic. That isn't up for debate...it's academic. That's not a logical fallacy, it's one of those annoying facts you seem to want to avoid. Why isn't eating ONLY plants balanced. What is imbalanced about it? Please tell me...why MUST I eat meat to be balanced. YOU CANNOT NAME ONE THING A BALANCED DIET REQUIRES THAT CAN ONLY BE OBTAINED FROM MEAT, FISH, POULTRY OR DAIRY. I win. Thanks.
monkeyfist529 4 months ago
@monkeyfist529 "What were the other ones (logic fallacies)? Eating polar bear liver is toxic. That isn't up for debate...it's academic"
For every meat that is poison (very rare), there are 1000's of poisonous plants (very common). It is a logic fallacy to conclude, as you did, that Humans are not omnivores because polar bear livers are poison. That is just an ignorant statement.
rosepetal108 4 months ago
@rosepetal108 That statement was used to point out how ridiculous your statement was, that since humans can't digest oak leaves, we must be omnivores. Why is your statement valid, and my statement ignorant?
monkeyfist529 4 months ago
@monkeyfist529 ==> "since humans can't digest oak leaves, we must be omnivores. Why is your statement valid, and my statement ignorant?"
Simple. That is a strawman argument. Another logic fallacy. I never claimed "since humans can't digest oak leaves, we must be omnivores" So claiming that I said that and then arguing against that is a logic fallacy. Quite rude too, if done purposely. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and let you claim ignorance instead of being rude.
rosepetal108 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rosepetal108 "Try eating oak leaves or grass and see how that tastes? Guess what? We cant digest them for nutrition either. There are more important biological issues too, Like bioactivity of lipids and nutrients, all showing Man is an omnivore." This is your statement. You started with oak leaf digestion, and ended with "...Man is an omnivore.". What did I miss, and why would that be a straw man argument?...I merely quoted you.
monkeyfist529 4 months ago
@monkeyfist529 No plant makes the Omega 3 DHA which is required for you brain. Yet Humans are only capable of producing DHA and EPA long chain Omega 3's from 0% - 9 % efficiency. The vast majority of Humans average less than 5%. No plant produces B 12 either. Humans do not have "vat" stomachs like herbivores where bacteria produce B 12. These and other examples of the biochemistry of humans that prove 100% we are not carnivores or Herbivores either one. We are omnivores.
rosepetal108 4 months ago
@rosepetal108 Are you actually going on record and definitely stating that "No plant makes the Omega 3 DHA which is required for (our) brain".? If you are actually...SERIOUSLY going to make that statement, then there is absolutely no point debating with you until you have checked your facts. I would love to read the peer reviewed lit you got that information from. It's comical, because you make that statement as though we live in a world where flaxseeds and walnuts don't exist. Explain.
monkeyfist529 4 months ago
@monkeyfist529 Flax and walnuts do have Omega 3's. They have the plant based short chain omega 3 α-linolenic acid (ALA). Many fruits and vegetables have ALA. They do not have the long chain Omega 3's EPA & DHA.
Herbivores have the ability to convert ALA into EPA & DHA , Humans however are VERY VERY limited in the ability to do this (many humans cant convert it at all). Yet we need DHA and EPA more than any other animal due to our larger brains. Restrictions of EPA & DHA will cause brain damage
rosepetal108 4 months ago
You mentioned B12...I'm waiting for you to tell me that it must be obtained from animals. C'mon, tell me it has to be obtained from animals. There is not a single essential nutrient that humans need that can't be obtained from a vegan diet. We can and DO thrive on plants and bacteria alone. Humans typically can't thrive on meat alone (vitamin C comes to mind). Humans are vegan by design.
monkeyfist529 4 months ago
@monkeyfist529 "You mentioned B12 ... We can and DO thrive on plants and bacteria alone. Humans typically can't thrive on meat alone (vitamin C comes to mind). Humans are vegan by design."
Incorrect assumption. You said "by design" and the reason a pure Vegan diet is even possible, is due to cultured products replacing the naturally designed "fermenting vat stomachs" of Herbivores, This is NOT an evolutionary "design" but instead a man made cultural/scientific adaptation.
rosepetal108 4 months ago
@rosepetal108 Plants are typically what make meat palatable. Take A1 steak sauce for examlel...it's completely vegan. It has orange juice, raisins, tomatoes, onions, garlic, and other spices and herbs. Humans don't salivate at the sight of other animals because we aren't hardwired to recognize them as food items. Even when they are dead, we don't associate road kill with dinner. We do however instantly recognize fruits and vegetables in their natural state as a source of nutrition.
monkeyfist529 5 months ago
@HumaneHominid - all our bodies react differently and we all have different tolerances to foods. As for "studies" I personally do not find much use in them because you usually find what you are basing the study about. Seek and you will find. Again if you are a vegan and have you reasons, great!. Tell them to someone else who cares, no one else wants to hear it. And if u need to have to world agree with you before you are happy and the animals are safe, well... ha ha ha good luck!!!
paulcorda 5 months ago
@paulcorda As for "studies," the case for plant-dominated diets being healthiest is a lot like the case for evolution: one study, one data point, neither confirms nor refutes it. It's built on a preponderance of the evidence, and to dismiss it as blithely as you did is pure faith-based reasoning. I don't care if you're vegan or not. It's just your knee-jerk refusal to let the caller make his point that I object to. It's terribly rude, and not really skeptical at all.
HumaneHominid 5 months ago
@paulcorda - Just to clarify, I am an observer here and not on the show. I am somewhat confused in your wording? It seems like you think it was me interrupting the caller etc... So again just to be fair and clarify, I am only watching this clip and it is only my point of view. I agree with not cutting ppl off and interrupting or just not being rude etc.. that being said, It is their show and this person is calling them, so in essence they have the control.
paulcorda 5 months ago
@paulcorda - but I would assume for many reasons they need to control the show. I would think for time, other callers, not letting callers ramble on and on for too long, amongst other reasons. Again if you want to be vegan great. I have no objections. I just mean I do not take great heed into studies. I am a meat eater and veggies etc.... If I go to the doctor and he says I am perfectly healthy ( which I am ) then that is all I would need to refute the original study.
paulcorda 5 months ago
@paulcorda OK, so your doctor says that you're perfectly healthy...so are physicians ever wrong? I'm a doctor, I don't always get it right. My daughter's PCP told me that she is failing to thrive. When I asked him why he thought that was the case, he said because we are vegan and that my daughter wasn't getting enough protein. He then proceeded to tell me about complimentary proteins. No one has seriously discussed combining proteins since the early 80's. Doctors aren't nutritionists.
monkeyfist529 5 months ago
@monkeyfist529 - sure physicians can be wrong, so that means they can be wrong about meat eating as well. Hope your daughter gets the nutrition that she needs. Again just what I said from before, she is a vegan and lacking in some health or nutrition. We are all different. If doctors are not nutritionists, then they probably should not be giving nutritional advice. Is the problem here the eating of meat, or animal welfare?
paulcorda 5 months ago
@paulcorda Wait, are you saying that vegans lack in health and nutrition. If that IS what you are saying, I challenge you to explain how that could be possible for every vegan. The problem here is 1) eating meat is unhealthy. That is academic, it's not up for debate; 2) non-human animal welfare is of course a major issue, and 3) consuming animal products puts you in direct opposition to the ecological well-being of our planet.
monkeyfist529 5 months ago
@monkeyfist529 - No I am not saying Vegans lack in health and nutrition, I am saying not all people who eat meat will be unhealthy. So even if there a a certain percentage of ppl who eat meat and are perfectly healthy, then you cant say eating meat is unhealthy and not up for debate. Again, I do not know how many times I have to make this point, EVERYONE REACTS DIFFERENTLY TO FOOD!!
paulcorda 5 months ago
@paulcorda Comments like these is why our planet is rapidly become an ecologically raped-to death "I don't give a fuck about other sentient creatures" pile of shit landfill, full of overweight-type II diabetics (e.g., Matt Dilahunty) who can't stop pissing & shitting in their fucking diapers for 2 seconds to take some accountability for their actions and the effects they have on us all.
monkeyfist529 5 months ago
@monkeyfist529 - wow, pretty bold statement to make. Accountability for what actions? eating meat??. I guess your insults can be directed to any meat eater out there. Again, if it is a health issue, then I speak for myself and probably many others when I say " Screw off and mind your own business". I'll worry about my own health thank you. If I want to eat meat, well then I am going to. I don't care about your health, that is your business. Do what you may.
paulcorda 5 months ago
@paulcorda "Accountability for what actions?" Are you serious? Every time you make a conscious decision to support the meat and dairy industry, you are directly supporting the wholesale destruction of our environment. Every time you purchase meat, you are funding the stripping of our land to make way for more cattle and of course further deterioration of our atmosphere from all of the methane output. Others health IS my business because part of my paycheck pays for their healthcare services.
monkeyfist529 5 months ago
@monkeyfist529 - Really, guess what genius, if everyone became a vegan, then the same land would need to be used to grow the tons and tons of new veggies and plants etc.. to feed everyone. As for your superman save the world badge of honor you are wearing. well, unless you live in a cave and eat berries, you as well, are doing all the same things to the environment you are accusing me of. Example, your car, home, other packaged products u buy, all your electronics etc...,
paulcorda 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@paulcorda Replace "vegan" & "animals" in this paragraph with "anti-slavery" & "non-caucasian humans" respectively and it becomes obvious why your comments sound like someone who places no value on the world around them.
monkeyfist529 5 months ago
Jain core belief: " There is no supreme divine creator, owner, preserver, or destroyer."
rosepetal108 6 months ago
"The term "vegan" was coined in England in 1944 by Donald Watson, co-founder of the British Vegan Society, to describe a vegetarian who doesn't consume dairy or eggs on ethical grounds. It extended its definition in 1951 to mean "the doctrine that man should live without exploiting animals," and in 1960 H. Jay Dinshah started the American Vegan Society, linking the movement to the Jainist concept of ahimsa, the avoidance of violence against living things."
rosepetal108 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Ahimsa means kindness and non-violence towards all living things including non-human animals, It is an important tenet of the Indian religions Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism."
"Additionally, there is a belief that meat consumption is generally detrimental to physical health.Nonviolence is a common value in all the vegetarian traditions of Hinduism"
"Jain doctrine teaches that Jainism has always existed and will always exist" (ie.. vegetarianism)
rosepetal108 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I rest my case!
rosepetal108 6 months ago
How something taste, whether or not something is "natural" (what ever that is suppose to mean) or more healthy is all non-moral arguments and are totally irrelevant to the question. The only thing that is relevant is the question and position to suffering. If you want to minimize it or not.
And Matt; eating meat is not a default position, you are smarter then claiming that. Eating meat IS a positve claim that eating meat is right, so it is your responsability to moraly justify it.
OwlwoodProduction 6 months ago
@OwlwoodProduction There is no moral issue unless you are Vegan. Veganism is a religion. Make no mistake about it. Part of Veganism is the religious doctrine "ahimsa". This religious belief "ahimsa" is what makes the moral and ethical judgement that eating meat is wrong. So if you are Vegan, yes eating meat is morally wrong. But if you are not a follower of the religious doctrine ahimsa then eating meat is a natural part of life without moral judgement either way.
rosepetal108 6 months ago
@rosepetal108:
Definition of religious belief: "a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny"
Veganism is a chose of diet which can be a chose of multiple and different reason. You are probably the only person in the world that are unable to identify eating meat as a moral question, regardless if you think it is right or wrong. Calling veganism a religion shows that you obviously no nothing about this matter. I was an atheist vegan for 10 years so I DO know.
OwlwoodProduction 6 months ago
@OwlwoodProduction Then you should know that the main difference between a strict vegetarian and a Vegan is the religious doctrine "ahimsa".
It is no secret that the American Vegan Society was founded by a Jainist and that the official publication was even called "Ahimsa Magazine". In fact that is why Vegan is a religion. Because it has adopted the religious doctrine ahimsa and applied it to vegetarianism for a moral basis.
Your post is correct if you say vegetarian instead of Vegan.
rosepetal108 6 months ago
@rosepetal108; Science Christ you're stupid!
For the last time; Veganism is a DIET which can be a choise of MANY reasons such as; health, enviromental, political, animal rights, human rights and yes even religious.
The simple fact that me and loads of my friends and every single vegan I have ever met has not been Janist or Hindu shows that you are wrong. Go back and watch American idol, you are definitely are in over your head in this discussion.
OwlwoodProduction 6 months ago
@OwlwoodProduction Why does it upset you so much to accept that the difference between vegetarian and Vegan is religion?
And why did you purposely pick such a narrow interpretation of religion that even Jainism and Buddhism are not religions by that definition?
This definition is more accurate.
"Religion is a collection of cultural systems, belief systems, and worldviews that relate to humanities moral values."
rosepetal108 6 months ago
@rosepetal108
:)
Not only are you an idiot, you are also ignorant. I wrote "Hindu" as in Hinduism not Buddhist.
Even if I should buy your definition, veganism is still a DIET (as in what you eat and digest) not a belief. Wrong again... It must be tough being wrong so much so I must ask the obvious question; nephilimfree is that you?
There can't be two people equally stupid on youtube.
OwlwoodProduction 6 months ago
@OwlwoodProduction Who is ignorant? Hinduism has Gods and Buddhism doesn't, neither does Jainism.
All three plus Veganism use the basic doctrine of Ahimsa, but Vegans Jainists and Buddhists either say there is no God at all, or simply make no comment and allow each individual to decide.
So obviously it is you who are ignorant. I chose very carefully what I said for a reason.
rosepetal108 6 months ago
@rosepetal108
I got you nephilimfree, thought you could fool me?
If you can't distinguished a diet from a religion you must have some sort of mental block.
No vegan I know is basing their chose of diet on the concept of Ahimsa. Check mate, you lost.
Enough time spent on airheads like you tonight, off to something important.
OwlwoodProduction 6 months ago
@OwlwoodProduction What is nephilimfree?
Taking a guess that perhaps he was some guy who also pointed out that Veganism is a religion? Just a guess. Could be a made up word just as easily.
Personally I am a big supporter of freedom of religion. So I generally have no problems with Vegans. Unless like you they are in complete denial.
Why not try this. You tell me what you think is the difference between a strict vegetarian and a Vegan?
rosepetal108 6 months ago
@rosepetal108:
Again, since I turned vegetarian after being vegan for 10 years I actually KNOW the answer compared to you.
Vegetarian; Comes in different styles but to make it easy. You exclude eating the flesh of all animals. You can be lacto-vegetarian which means that you do drink dairy products or lacto-ovo-vegetarion in which you also eat egg.
A vegan exclude all products that comes from animals, and some even honey. See, now you learned something, so today is a good day for you.
OwlwoodProduction 6 months ago
@OwlwoodProduction Cant read? I very clearly said "strict vegetarian".
It seems now several times you refuse to discuss what I am actually saying and you come back with things that have no meaning at all. Could it be you are arguing with some mythical nephilimfree and not even reading my posts at all?
rosepetal108 6 months ago
@rosepetal108
A strict vegetarian that is lacto-vegetarian. A lesser strict vegeterian is a lacto-ovo-vegetarian. See how easy it is. Exactly what issue has I dodged? I keep giving you answers which you are to stupid to grasp.
Keep in mind that I have purposely let you go on your idiotic remarks on how eating meat is not a moral question for all non-vegans. I don't think you are capable of understanding that kind of reasoning.
Search for Nephilifree on youtube and you'll find yourself.
OwlwoodProduction 6 months ago
@OwlwoodProduction Nope. contrast in terms. milk and eggs are by definition not vegetable matter. In fact that's why they call it lacto-ovo-vegetarian.....it is a vegetarian with the qualifiers to show they are not strictly vegetarian.
Seems you bought the Vegan propaganda. Did you buy the rest of it too? You believe that it is immoral to eat meat? You believe mankind originally was biologically a herbivore? Do you use words like "non-human animals" or "sentient beings" talking about animals?
rosepetal108 6 months ago
@rosepetal108
I thought you were a Bible Christian? Did you NOT read in Genesis One the food God gave us to eat? O that's right you do not believe in Genesis One???!!!
God calls us ALL to be vegans! It is God's food! Meat is dangerous to our bodies and meat WILL NOT be eaten in Heaven.
Where did you come up with all the false ideas and claims! I cannot believe you are a 'self imposed authority' on the Bible. As I told you before ask the Holy Spirit to help you with Genesis One.
howsimpleisit56 6 months ago
@rosepetal108: If you want to use definitions that is used only by you then fine. But congratulations, you will find yourself stuck in many conversations because if your lack of understanding in basic semantics.
Yes, my opinion is that it is morally wrong to eat meat because of the unnecessary suffering inflicted on other beings. You'll find my opinion on the validity of different argument in my initial comment to this video.
OwlwoodProduction 6 months ago
@OwlwoodProduction "Yes, my opinion is that it is morally wrong to eat meat because of the unnecessary suffering inflicted on other beings."
Then your opinion mirrors exactly the religious doctrine "ahimsa" which was my point to begin with. I have no problem with your religious beliefs. I strongly believe in religious freedom. Just be honest about it to yourself and others.
rosepetal108 6 months ago
@rosepetal108; You sir are an idiot. I don't waste my time debating people this are cognitive disabled, which you clearly are. Don't forget to put on your foil hat before you go to sleep.
OwlwoodProduction 6 months ago
@OwlwoodProduction LOL The obvious tactic of a failed debate is always personal attacks. You started this whole debate with a claim that " The only thing that is relevant is the question and position to suffering. If you want to minimize it or not." Which is a religious doctrine of Ahimsa. That means your point is correct, but only if your morality is based on those religions. If you are NOT Vegan (or Jain Hindu Buddhist etc...) then there is no moral imperative to not eat meat.
rosepetal108 6 months ago
@rosepetal108: Normally yes but when a person like you repeatably try to add 2 plus 2 and get the answer 5 and are so intellectually retarded that you are unable to distinguish correlation with consequentiality and on top of that don't understand basic semantics and still sit on high horses, then there is only one possibility; you must either be a kid with no clue or an adult idiot. I suggest the latter.
OwlwoodProduction 6 months ago
@rosepetal108; But for the sake of argument lest use your misunderstanding of correlation/consequentiality.
Nazis eat meat, so do you, hence you must be a national socialist.
OwlwoodProduction 6 months ago
@OwlwoodProduction LMAO
rosepetal108 6 months ago
@OwlwoodProduction ===> " But for the sake of argument lest use your misunderstanding of correlation/consequentiality."
There is your test for correlation.3 posts of facts proving the religious basis for Veganism. Instead of calling anyone who disagrees with you a "NAZI", "idiot.", "retarded","cognitive disabled", or anything else, you should instead educate yourself or use this wisdom:
Sometimes it is better to be silent and thought a fool, that to speak and leave no doubt.
rosepetal108 6 months ago
@rosepetal108
You do understand what "for the sake of the argument" means?
Since I don't agree with your confusion about correlation/consequentiality I DIDN'T call you an nazi but according to YOUR own logic you must be.
If you eat meat and nazis do there must that must be the moral consequence in the same way that following ahimsa is for being a vegan, isn't that so?
I am sorry but I can't make your idiotic circular argument more clear then that...
OwlwoodProduction 6 months ago
@OwlwoodProduction LOL More personal attacks? Very funny.
Bottom line is I showed with sources that the founders of Veganism purposely added religious doctrine to what was previously vegetarianism and made Veganism. They did this to add an ethical and moral (religious) component to what by itself is just a diet. By using Jain as their religious model for Veganism they made it religious and still can indoctrinate atheists. I used actual facts and sources which you can't refute,
rosepetal108 6 months ago
@rosepetal108: "LOL" - You ARE a kid aren't you?
But never mind that. You know what? I don't refute that at all, I can grant you the whole idea about term veganism was inspired by janism. Even if I go that far it still doesn't make being a vegan any more religions then eating meat makes you a nazi. It is a difference between correlation and consequence, if you don't understand that you don't understand anything... which you obviously don't.
OwlwoodProduction 6 months ago
@OwlwoodProduction Atheism, Animal Rights And Ethical Veganism is the title and subject of this vid.
I showed how all three relate and the correlation between them and religion.
Further I showed factual information that this wasn't a coincidence. The founders of Veganism did this on purpose.
All you can claim is some lame logic that if Veganism is a religion then anyone who eats meat is a NAZI? Give me a break.
rosepetal108 6 months ago
@rosepetal108: I kind of feel bad for you that you are unable to understand the English language. It is my second and your first and still you get lost in terminology and logic. You are more then welcome to live in your egocentric bubble were you decide the rules no matter what the surrounding world. Run off little boy...I have spent more then enough time on you.
OwlwoodProduction 6 months ago
@OwlwoodProduction LMAO Again nothing but lame personal attacks. Not one word backing your claim that Veganism isn't a religion.
ROTFLMAOAY
rosepetal108 6 months ago
@OwlwoodProduction As for your lame argument.
If you eat meat and nazis do there must that must be the moral consequence in the same way that following ahimsa is for being a vegan, isn't that so? NO I am neither NAZI nor do I believe in any of the various forms of the religious doctrine "Ahimsa".
You do understand what "for the sake of the argument" means? Yes but that doesn't make your "argument" valid.
rosepetal108 6 months ago
Comment removed
rosepetal108 6 months ago
Skeletonwitharaygun 6 months ago
@Skeletonwitharaygun You're drawing a correlation/causation fallacy from diet to longevity. It has to do with their genetics for the most part how long they live.
Aviii 6 months ago
@Aviii
Um....Agree to disagree?
Skeletonwitharaygun 6 months ago
@Skeletonwitharaygun Sure :P.
Aviii 6 months ago
Meat is good
rockaholick37 6 months ago
@imtheuser12345
most people in general don't want to give up meat...I wasn't fat and my diet consisted primarily of meat and eggs, so I wasn't thrilled about giving up animal products; all my old favorite foods come from animals. I mean if we're talking about health, a little lean meat or fish in your diet probably isn't that bad, but yea, this guy doesn't know what he is talking about. If wants to remain credible, he should acknowledge when he doesn't know the subject well.
mellamosean 7 months ago
These rednecks argue against the religious people who live in the past believing in stupid cults (except muslims of course!), but they themselves rather continue being primitive savages and continue eating meat and supporting the industry that murders billions of animals each year, when we could really live without wasting innocent lives for their dead flesh and live even healthier. All of their arguments are so stupid! But I guess for a redneck state like Texas, atheism is a big step...
ZoldierrZzz 7 months ago 2
@ZoldierrZzz meat is vital part(PART!! not whole diet..) of human diet, many people cant even get proper replacements for meat, so if they give up meat, they will have health problems or in some countries even die. Just because you have a money and resources to get yourself proper replacements and have lived vegan few years doesnt make you an expert, maybe you dont even know you are developing some health issues that will surface later. If you live long enough first, then maybe try write a book.
LMstrike 7 months ago
@LMstrike
What an ignorant and uneducated statement to make. You are 100% wrong. Do you want to know why? Read this:
britishmeat . com/49.htm
Do some research before you make stupid statements.. Or you could stay ignorant and blind just like the religious people you look down on.
ZoldierrZzz 7 months ago
Chicken is good. End of. :D
ArghCake 8 months ago
fuck, this guy is not proving to be very intelligent... evolution proves meat is healthy? All evolution requires is that we survive long enough to reproduce. Not eating meat is healthier in the sense it allows you to live a longer life.
mellamosean 9 months ago
i loved your reasoning in part one and part two on defending the right of omnivores. I am always amazed at people that practice without philosophic reasoning without any practice making distinctions. I am not an atheist but then I am fine that you all are. I love how you guys are respectful. SO are there any you tube videos where both of you describe your progression to an Atheist position. I have a background in science and philosophy.
YourMadTourGuide 10 months ago
The problem with Tracy's point (never thought I'd say/type that) is the shark doesn't have the ability to sympathize with the animal that died. We can and to feel sorry for an animal getting killed (or suffering before hand) and then ordering a plate of it, is hypocritical. I do prefer and respect the fact that she atleast wants the animal she's eating, to have atleast lived a life without abuse. I think most people feel that way though most eat way too much meat and fuel mass production.
clipsryan 10 months ago
@clipsryan
I sympathize with the suffering of one life form savaging another life form from another species just to maintain its life force, but (you may think this is a cop out) I don't think ethics has anything to do with it. We're predators, I don't think there's a way around that.
Now if you're talking about environmental pollution, consumption and mass factory farming that's another issue - that's just irresponsible hyper capitalism.
Rahab111222 9 months ago
@Rahab111222 What makes you think that humans are predators? Our technology allows us to fly...are we birds? Our noses make a perfect rest for glasses, did we evolve to this feature for the sake of eyewear? Just because we CAN do something, doesn't mean that that particular behavior is best suited to us.
monkeyfist529 9 months ago
@monkeyfist529
We are predators 'because' we hunt and eat meat. We're not herbivores, sorry.
If you don't want to eat meat, that's cool. If you want to eat less meat for health reasons, or for just having a more balanced meal - that's perfectly ideal. (This is the part where I get spammed with negative replies) Just don't throw around bad science, and bullshit non-applicable analogies attempting to convince people in your pretentious new age faggy lifestyle like some cult member.
Rahab111222 9 months ago
@Rahab111222 I don't hunt and eat meat...I'm a herbivore. Most people that I know don't hunt their own food...are they still predators? Is a person still labeled as a predator if they buy prepackaged beef wrapped in cellophane? What about all the house cats on vegan diets? They aren't hunting or eating meat...are they predators?
monkeyfist529 9 months ago
@Rahab111222 What about all the Hindus and Buddhists that don't hunt or eat meat...do they carry the label of predator too just because just because a few dickless turds get off on shooting deer a few months out of the year?
monkeyfist529 9 months ago
@Rahab111222 "...don't throw around bad science..." What "bad science"? Do I sound like a "cult member"? I would argue that the hordes of people who insist on eating the scorched flesh of dead birds, despite the negative impact to their health - AND the science to back it up, sounds more cultish to me than eating locally grown fresh fruits and vegetables. You still didn't address my question. Based on our anatomy & physiology, What reason is there to think that we are anything but herbivores?
monkeyfist529 9 months ago
@Rahab111222 We can digest meat (albeit very inefficiently), but that doesn't mean that our physiology is based around that food item. To say that we are predators because we hunt and eat meat makes no more sense that to say that we are Twinkie-vores because we manufacture and eat Hostess snack-cakes. There is nothing in our biology that would indicate we are anything but herbivores. If we are fortunate enough to fossilize, what reason would there be for our discoverer to conclude we ate meat?
monkeyfist529 9 months ago
@Rahab111222 There actually is a way around it. My way was realising I couldn't justify loving my pets and thinking about how they'd taste but claiming to love animals in general and also thinking how they'd taste. Most eat meat for taste and claim superiority over the animal they eat but are probably against cannibalism regardless of how a certain human might taste. Bottomline, we aren't slaves to nature which gives us all we need in grown form.
Well, that stuff too.
clipsryan 9 months ago
@clipsryan I find it ironic that anyone would claim that they continue to eat meat because they like the taste - seeing how it's the plants they flavor the meat with that give it the TASTE they argue about.
monkeyfist529 9 months ago
@monkeyfist529 That is pretty damn ironic.
clipsryan 9 months ago
@monkeyfist529
I don't understand your thinking... people love the taste of meat... the taste, the texture, the fullness and satisfaction you feel from eating it... I'm a vegan and I miss all of that.
mellamosean 9 months ago
POST 1: In regards to consuming meat, it is true...many people love and enjoy "...the taste, the texture, the fullness and satisfaction (they feel) from eating it". I would argue however, that many people enjoy rather the flavour that plants give to meat. I don't believe that many people would eat straight cooked chicken or hamburger without the oils to cook and fry them in or the condiments added to disguise the bland taste.
monkeyfist529 9 months ago
@mellamosean
POST 2: Also, take what you just said about the sentiments people (including yourself) have towards meat, and now replace the word 'meat' with 'rape'. Just because a person elicits joy or happiness from some act doesn't mean that there doesn't exist an obligation to limit such activities.
monkeyfist529 9 months ago
@monkeyfist529
i agree, that's why I am a vegan. As for flavor, you're still off. I find it harder to make good tasting vegan meals than meals with meat. Sure, I wasn't eating the meat bland, but that's not the point. Meat mixes well with spices and sauces. Again, I'm a vegan, I know the difference between diets with and without meat. I know exactly what meat contributed to meals.
mellamosean 9 months ago
@mellamosean OK, so you find it harder to make a good tasting vegan meal than one which has meat. Too bad, and sucks to be you. It's not the fault of the diet that you don't know how to cook/bake properly. I don't have that problem with any of the food I make. Your point that meat mixes well with spices is rather lame. Again, replace "meat" with "tofu" or "seiten" or "tempeh". I also know the difference between diets with and without meat. My diet without tastes far better.
monkeyfist529 9 months ago
@monkeyfist529
Then that is simply a matter of personal taste. I know plenty of people who don't really like meat. I also know people who love meat and eat it with nothing else. I don't know you feel the need to criticize me, when I was just trying to explain to you that people do enjoy the taste and texture of meat. And btw, by harder, I mostly meant it requires more work. i used throw eggs and ground beef in a pan, toss it in a tortilla, throw some salsa on it, and I was good.
mellamosean 9 months ago
@mellamosean I tried vegetarian spaghetti with 'meat' sauce. Wow. I won't make THAT mistake again.
Deke101 8 months ago
@Deke101
I bet there is good "meat" sauce out there somewhere, you just need a good vegetarian chef. I have never tried a vegetarian "meat" sauce myself; since I've been a vegan I haven't really eaten much of the meat replacements..
mellamosean 8 months ago
And ps: "Vitamin B12 is needed for cell division and blood formation. Plant foods do not contain vitamin B12 except when they are contaminated by microorganisms. Thus, vegans need to look to other sources to get vitamin B12 in their diet. Although the minimum requirement for vitamin B12 is quite small, 1/1000 of a milligram (1 microgram) a day for adults, a vitamin B12 deficiency is a very serious problem leading ultimately to irreversible nerve damage."
psychotica81 10 months ago
@psychotica81 Just out of curiosity...how many vegans/vegetarians have you consulted who have had a B12 deficiency - due to insufficient dietary intake? I have never met anyone who suffered from B12 deficiency because of their diet...it's almost always due to intestinal disease of some sort, and, it's almost always in my elderly patients. What university did you graduate from and what year? What exactly is your diploma in. The information you are putting out simply isn't true.
monkeyfist529 10 months ago
@monkeyfist529 Thank you. I finally got an opinion from an actual doctor. This denial that we can't get what we need from mother earth, is rediculous. The "we are omnivores" defense is just as dumb as the "we are killers because we can kill and we should because we can get away with it" argument.
clipsryan 10 months ago
@clipsryan You should check out the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. It's an online community of vegan/vegetarian physicians that provide much of the research and background info that goes into the overwhelming health benefits of a plant-based diet and provides a preponderance of evidence concerning the consumption of non-human animal products.
monkeyfist529 9 months ago
@clipsryan ps. I can't type in the website, but just Google: Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine.
monkeyfist529 9 months ago
@psychotica81 - and of course omnivores can suffer from B12 deficiency as well, especially in old age. For vegans at least 2000 micrograms a week is enough, since it is stored in the liver.
pandaya 10 months ago
@monkeyfist529, a lot thank you, I have a diploma in it, and a ton of experience. There is b12 in Soy and products a like but our body can not digest the b12 in there. We need the b12 out of animalproducts like butter, milk, cheese, etc. I have plenty of evidence. You can ask your doctor, I don't stop consulting, unlike you I got a diploma, did my exams, had real life experience, and did not base it on googlesearches.
psychotica81 10 months ago
@psychotica81 I don't need to ask my doctor, I am a doctor. I'm also vegan. Google search...you're funny. I'll stick to PubMed if that's alright with you. From what you're telling me, I shouldn't be alive if I'm eating an exclusively plant-based diet - after all, where am I getting my B12 from? I challenge you to give me one evidence-based reference from a reputable peer-reviewed journal that corroborates what you typed: "We need the b12 out of animalproducts like butter, milk, cheese, etc".
monkeyfist529 10 months ago
Being vegan, or eating too much meat are equally unhealthy and not recommendable. Being vegetarian, or eating healthy doses meat, which is very little, is the best choice. We need vitamins, and some vitamines are only produced in animal products, for example b12. I, myself, am vegetarian and a food-consultant. Basing your decision on what is healthy and what is healthy for the environment is the best way to go and not one way or the other.
psychotica81 10 months ago
@psychotica81 You are a consultant? A consultant to whom or what I wonder. What kind of degree or experience do you have with nutrition science? I ask because you mention that B12 is only produced by animals. You don't have any references that will confirm that, so why would you ever make such a statement. B12 is too easy to obtain from nutritional yeast. Additionally, you don't have evidence that a vegetarian diet is healthier than an entirely plant-based diet either. Stop consulting.
monkeyfist529 10 months ago
Killing an animal for pleasure (eat meat) is not an issue of opinion, is not a moral relativism. When you eat meat, you endorse animal suffering. Sam Harris says that you don't need to be ethical with a rock. You have to be moral with living beings able to suffer. And definitely pigs (wich are one of the smartest animals) suffer when they are mutilated, castraded without anesthesia, decapitaded to become you bacon.
lili152436 10 months ago
The major cause of the Amazon deforestation is for cattle raise that feeds meat eaters worldwide. This is more than a reason why you shouldn't eat meat knowing all the negative enviromental impacts it causes.
You can't compare your actions to a shark's action. A shark is not able to have ethical thoughts. You can judge what is ethical. You don't act like a shark in 99,99% of your life, so why you make a exception at this point (eating meat)? Monkeys rape, why don't you rape too?
lili152436 10 months ago
Veganism isn't about being healthy. People have the right to be unhealthy. If you feel like beating your head on the wall, go ahead. But you can't force other people to not beat their head on the wall. You have the right to hurt yourself for pleasure, but you can´t hurt others, including animals, for pleasure. When you cause suffering and kill lifes which don't wanna feel pain or die just for your own pleasure (eating meat, dairy, fur...), then you don't have the right, because is not ethical.
lili152436 10 months ago
The two hosts are idiots. Basically they spent ~15 minutes talking about how they don't want to stop eating animals, so they aren't going to. It's ridiculous how the violent option is always looked at as the default position when it comes to this. Why not go vegan until you can prove animals like being raped, tortured, and killed for your pleasure?
spillproofbox 11 months ago
Ask the Masai in Africa if meat is healthy: they eat almost exclusively beef, and drink the milk and blood of their cattle. Ask the Inuit, who eat a diet composed almost entirely of seal BLUBBER how dangerous animal fats are. Meat, and the fat that accompanies it, only becomes a health risk when combined with a steady intake of high carbohydrate foods. Meat,yes. Potatoes, yes. Meat AND potatoes, probably not.
SirLordBeavisEsquire 11 months ago
it disturbs and saddens you to see a seal getting eaten by a shark, yet you use this argument to defend killing animals to eat them when you don't have to?
and yes to star trek: in-vitro meat has the potential to completely end the trivial suffering of 10 billion animals (US alone) per year.
it's a fallacy to argue that acknowledging a non-human animal's interest in not suffering or being killed to eat her means one necessarily think humans and non-humans are equal; this is basic decency.
itchynights 11 months ago
@itchynights It's obvious she was lying about that. Really, she wanted to "show" how she was more compassionate than a vegan. She changes the channel during a wildlife documentary because she doesn't want to "watch killing for pleasure," but she has no problem eating chickens for pleasure.
These kind of people are almost as hard to talk to about veganism as vegetarians.
spillproofbox 11 months ago
there are so many fallacies on veganism these two are espousing that it makes me never want to watch this channel again.
1) I believe in reducing unnecessary suffering
2) Animals can suffer
3) Almost all meat from developed countries (~95-99%) comes from factory farms
4) Factory farms cause animals to suffer unnecessarily
5) Animals who lead good lives suffer by dying (deprivation of pleasure)
6) Therefore I don't support the intentional killing of animals
itchynights 11 months ago
Matt the environmental consequences go far beyond the death of the animal, do some research as you sound like an ignoramus.
pompousprick 1 year ago