Veganism - to save the world? Watch

marcusfox
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#41
Report 11 years ago
#41
(Original post by nolongerhearthemusic)
What? Bacteria are bacterial cells.
Yes, I realised my error and deleted the post.

Marcus
0
reply
shootbangfire
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#42
Report 11 years ago
#42
When I said this was a good idea, I didn't mean black or white all veganism or no veganism - just a cut down in meat eaten - we eat far more than our ancestors did, even in the 1950s.
0
reply
xaxa
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#43
Report 11 years ago
#43
(Original post by rich2606)
doesn't the common agricultural policy mean too much food is produced in europe anyway with no where for it to go? surely something can be done there...
When you hear things like "Europe donats X million kg of wheat to country Y" it's probably come from that. The government stockpiles were very big in the 1980-1990s, but because of the weather and some bad harvests in the last few years they're much smaller now. "Too much food" is useful, in case there isn't enough food next year!


Back on topic, simply eating less meat would be a great step for most people to take. Healthier, cheaper and good for the environment. There's no risk of vitamin deficiencies if you're still eating some meat. (There is a risk with a poorly-planned vegan diet, but there's also risks with other poor diets.)

A lot of people say they don't like veg(etari)an food, but they don't realise they already eat it. Beans on toast, for instance, includes lots of nutrients and is vegan.
0
reply
nolongerhearthemusic
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#44
Report 11 years ago
#44
(Original post by shootbangfire)
When I said this was a good idea, I didn't mean black or white all veganism or no veganism - just a cut down in meat eaten - we eat far more than our ancestors did, even in the 1950s.
Definitely. We shouldn't be eating as much meat as we do now, it's not necessary (well meat in general is not necessary but since some people insist on eating it).
0
reply
Veni_vidi
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#45
Report 11 years ago
#45
(Original post by nolongerhearthemusic)
No, infants need milk. Vegan infants drink breast milk. Older children don't need it.

No other adult animal still drinks milk, so I would be very surprised if there was something vital in it.
not all mothers can produce enough milk to keep the baby satisfied for the day so
you are wrong, children need milk to help them grow properly, infant is before the person can walk, i case i showed you is a perfect example that the 12 year girl needed something to help her bones grow normal.
0
reply
nolongerhearthemusic
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#46
Report 11 years ago
#46
(Original post by Veni_vidi)
not all mothers can produce enough milk to keep the baby satisfied for the day so
you are wrong, children need milk to help them grow properly, infant is before the person can walk, i case i showed you is a perfect example that the 12 year girl needed something to help her bones grow normal.
Most mothers can breast feed without a problem. And breast feeding does not have to stop just because the child can walk.

Milk isn't some magical vitamin which would have made her healthy. She could have got all the nutrients in milk from other sources. Her diet was obviously very badly planned by her parents - that is the problem, not her veganism.
0
reply
Gancor
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#47
Report 11 years ago
#47
lol @ people think eating meat is unhealthy.

Lean beef is healthy as it can be, it contains every single amino acid your body needs in one serving, high protein which your body needs to rebuild tissue, essential minerals and isn't hugely calorific.

I drink 2.5 litres of whole milk a day and eat meat with every single meal, along with a source of carbs and vegetables with every meal. I am the healthiest I have ever been in my life. I used to weigh 117lb before I started eating properly.

(I also take multivitamins everyday, I have the most complete diet you can imagine. Screw veganism).
0
reply
jgupta
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#48
Report 11 years ago
#48
(Original post by Sarahl89)
hum right okay and where exactly are the nutrients required within the introvenus drip going to be obtained from? and who is going to provide them? I suspect that feeding 9 billion people by introvenus drip may cause something to be lost from the environment somewhere along the line.

the main factors other than what the OP mentioned are that of human greed - in more developed countries, we like eating meat, have comfortable lifestyles, and as of yet, in many people's opinions have no reason to give it up personally, as it will not be beneficial to us here. (regardless of it possibly being beneficial long term for the world as a whole).
'Lost to the environment' was perhaps a bad choice of phrase on my part. I was not actually referring to energy being lost to the environment, as you quite reasonably assumed, but was making a point on the logical level that, whilst my 'analogy' seems far-fetched, it *is* the logical thing to do if we accept the OP's factors as the sole ones - 'nothing lost to the environment' simply means that it is not a 'slippery slope' argument because you do not need to assume anything else or take anything away from the original argument.

In short: it is not a sufficient criteria
0
reply
nolongerhearthemusic
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#49
Report 11 years ago
#49
(Original post by Gancor)
lol @ people think eating meat is unhealthy.
Except that red meat is linked to, y'know, cancer.

(Original post by Gancor)
Lean beef is healthy as it can be, it contains every single amino acid your body needs in one serving, high protein which your body needs to rebuild tissue, essential minerals and isn't hugely calorific.
Rearing cows also produces methane, which causes global warming and is an inefficient way of producing food. Yay!
0
reply
Joanna May
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#50
Report 11 years ago
#50
(Original post by nolongerhearthemusic)
Most mothers can breast feed without a problem. And breast feeding does not have to stop just because the child can walk.
And what about those mothers who cannot breast feed? Sure, the majority might be able to, but that still leaves some women who can't and we need dairy production so those children don't starve.

(Original post by shootbangfire)
When I said this was a good idea, I didn't mean black or white all veganism or no veganism - just a cut down in meat eaten - we eat far more than our ancestors did, even in the 1950s.
You can hardly have "in between" veganism. If you just meant for us to eat less meat, why bring veganism into it? Most people would agree that we probably eat excessive amounts of meat.
0
reply
Joanna May
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#51
Report 11 years ago
#51
(Original post by nolongerhearthemusic)
Except that red meat is linked to, y'know, cancer.
Everything is linked to cancer. Chips, deodorant, contraceptive injections and pills, makeup, milk, certain plastics, bath products, mobile phones...even soy is linked to cancer. Should we just give up on modern life entirely, just because things are linked to, y'know, cancer?
0
reply
Nicolish
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#52
Report 11 years ago
#52
I know someone who was a vegetarian but was told by their doctor that they had to eat meat as their weight was too low...
0
reply
Queen Alice
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#53
Report 11 years ago
#53
If they forced everyone to do it, there would be a lot of effort into making nice tasting substitutes.
Since hardly anyone is vegan, vagan food tastes pretty bad

I think it is a nice idea, but would not happen.
If no one grew up eating meat and dairy, they wouldn't know what they were missing lol
0
reply
Gancor
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#54
Report 11 years ago
#54
(Original post by nolongerhearthemusic)
Except that red meat is linked to, y'know, cancer.
Maybe if all you eat is red meat. I eat plenty of roughage to keep my bowels clear. My main sources of meat are lean minced beef, chicken, steak and tuna (although that's not really meat). I also drink craploads of water.

I need this amount of food for bulking, I don't want to be a scrawny dweeb.

Also, everything and anything is linked to cancer.
0
reply
marcusfox
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#55
Report 11 years ago
#55
The people who go on and on about trying to justify veganism as being a natural diet are only lying to themselves. How can any diet be natural if you have to take artificially created supplements? Not only B vitamins, but you need to be careful you're getting vitamin D, calcium, iodine, essential fatty acids.

Deficiencies wouldn't be a problem if you had a diet that included meat.

Marcus
0
reply
Sarahl89
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#56
Report 11 years ago
#56
(Original post by jgupta)
'Lost to the environment' was perhaps a bad choice of phrase on my part. I was not actually referring to energy being lost to the environment, as you quite reasonably assumed, but was making a point on the logical level that, whilst my 'analogy' seems far-fetched, it *is* the logical thing to do if we accept the OP's factors as the sole ones - 'nothing lost to the environment' simply means that it is not a 'slippery slope' argument because you do not need to assume anything else or take anything away from the original argument.

In short: it is not a sufficient criteria
well yeah fair enough, but the OPs idea is different to this as it could actually be beneficial to us - ie, potentially healthier lifesytle, better food supplies, saving money - so not compromising our current affluent lifestyles. i know there are alot more issues involved aswell as food supply & they would obviously be taken into account, & i think could overall work with the OPs idea..
0
reply
nolongerhearthemusic
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#57
Report 11 years ago
#57
(Original post by Joanna May)
And what about those mothers who cannot breast feed? Sure, the majority might be able to, but that still leaves some women who can't and we need dairy production so those children don't starve.
If the parents are choosing to be vegan, they can feed soya formula. If they are willing to compromise their veganism, normal formula.

My point was a vegan diet for a child is not unhealthy, I'm not arguing that everyone should be vegan.
0
reply
nolongerhearthemusic
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#58
Report 11 years ago
#58
(Original post by Joanna May)
Everything is linked to cancer. Chips, deodorant, contraceptive injections and pills, makeup, milk, certain plastics, bath products, mobile phones...even soy is linked to cancer. Should we just give up on modern life entirely, just because things are linked to, y'know, cancer?
I know, I'm just pointing out that while meat isn't 100% unhealthy, it's also not 100% healthy.
0
reply
Gancor
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#59
Report 11 years ago
#59
Soya, yay lets give our children high amounts of food containing phytoestrogens and screw their hormones, giving our son gynecomastia.
0
reply
marcusfox
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#60
Report 11 years ago
#60
(Original post by nolongerhearthemusic)
If the parents are choosing to be vegan, they can feed soya formula. If they are willing to compromise their veganism, normal formula.

My point was a vegan diet for a child is not unhealthy, I'm not arguing that everyone should be vegan.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/21/op...3bd4bc&ei=5090

Marcus
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Would you turn to a teacher if you were being bullied?

Yes (10)
22.22%
No (35)
77.78%

Watched Threads

View All