Veggie or Meat Eater?

[haddonite]

Meat, definitely!

I used to live out of a frying pan, but due to the health implications I have compromised to a griddle.....

Neil

[Mollie]

Strict vegetarian bordering on vegan.

Why?

Ok I accept that there is a food chain and human beings were designed to eat some meat - although they were not designed to eat it in the sort of quantities that we do these days. Perhaps once or twice a week is more natural. Hence the rise in digestive cancers, heart disease etc. Too much meat simply is not good for you. Particularly with all the hormones, antibiotics etc the animals are fed these days. It's also wildly inefficient. We grow grains etc to feed animals to kill them to feed us!? It costs more money, costs the environment more and makes no sense at all.

But natures intentions aside we have developed to the extent where we do not need meat to survive. All of the nutrients provided by meat can be sourced elsewhere and no animal needs to die for it. I simply cannot come to terms with the idea that an animal should die for my enjoyment.

I don't have too much of a problem with people eating animals that they killed themselves, through hunting for example as this is what nature intended and the animal at least had a good life first. But current farming practices mean that animals are subjected to miserable, short lives followed by a great deal of suffering.

In my mind there is a natural progression from vegetarian to vegan. Egg laying hens have horrendous lives whether "free range" or battery. In order to supply milk, cows must be pregnant which means calves are born. Male calves are of no use to the dairy industry so these end up as meat. The cows are kept constantly pregnant and pumped full of hormones to make them produce more milk. The calcium is all directed to their milk leaving them with brittle bones. The life of a dairy cow is short and painful and ends up at the slaughter house again. Each calf she bears is snatched away within 24 hours and she will call for it for days.

While so much suffering is involved in providing something which is not necessary then what nature intended simply is not a good enough argument for eating meat. Nature never intended animals to be kept in tiny cages and slaughtered at just a few months old.

[Imaginos]

Originally Posted by Mollie

But natures intentions aside we have developed to the extent where we do not need meat to survive. All of the nutrients provided by meat can be sourced elsewhere and no animal needs to die for it. I simply cannot come to terms with the idea that an animal should die for my enjoyment.

Originally Posted by henrya

No, I hadn't considered milk production. I was thinking of all the animals that die in cultivation of the ground, protection of crops, storage of produce, and yes, roadkill in all the transport involved.

I accept that you may reduce the number of deaths by being a vegetarian, but it annoys me when I hear people say, when eating a salad sandwich, "No animals died for this food." as it's clearly not true.

henrya

Pesticide use has doubled every 10 years since the 1950's, even though DDT with its direct effect on bird populations (see Silent Spring by Rachel Carson) has been phased out there are still major concerns. It is now widely accepted that the decline in many of our farmland birds is related to the decline in their insect food and there are thoughts that the same decline is related to our woodland bird declines over recent years. Insects are therefore killed directly in arable fields, and birds indirectly.

The corncrake is a bird hanging on in our country & suffering badly now in its strongholds eastern Europe. One of the main causes of corncrake mortality has been identified as death under the blades of harvesters. This form of death is also found in other arable species such as the field mouse and the hare.

Of course these problems are unavoidable unless we return to pre-industrial farming methods. A very unlikely scenario seeing as world food needs are set to increase 2-3 fold by 2050.

There is no way around the fact that animals will die whatever we do, I remember being told once that the average 5 mile car journey in the summer will kill around 2,000 insects splattered on the front of the vehicle or flattened under the wheels (whether this figure is still true in our modern insect depleted countryside I don't know).

Once again I will also point out that arable fields are much, much less biodiverse than pastoral fields. If everyone turned vegetarian or vegan what happens to these pastures & their attendant insect bird and mammal species?

[matt_xyz]

(a) The fact that arable farming is bad for the environment is an argument for vegetarianism since there would be far fewer arable fields if everyone were veggie. Most arable crops are grown for animal feed.

(b) the fact that animals die whatever we do does not make it irrational to try to minimise these animal deaths

(c) what would happen to current pastoral land? That is a legitimate question that no-one has an answer to. However, there is no reason why its new land use would have to be environmentally inferior to pastoral land.

Matt

[Fritillary]

...and just to add what Mollie said.
The production of milk is huge because we are the only animals that are drinking milk all life and it shouldnt.

Publicity is our first enemy today.
It is said that we should drink milk get calcium to our bones, and avoid ostheoporosis, but that is not true, the problem is with the own metabolisme when getting older.

An ageing person cannot digest and assimilate milk in the same way that a baby because it is not natural. We just cannot incorporate the calcium to our bones. We need to accept that become old imply a fragilisation of the body. I agree with taking care and trying to have a good health but we cannot stop the time passing. It is life.


Fritillary

[nightshade]

Changing the farming balance will finish off the bats that live off the insects that cattle etc.supply food for in their dung there are no natural herds
to crop the grass short for Rabbits the supply of veg for a sudden increase in consumption will lead to vast profits for GM seed suppliers
it is a catch 22 situation it would not be organic food for everyone we would end up eating yeasts and moulds

[matt_xyz]

Originally Posted by nightshade

Changing the farming balance will finish off the bats that live off the insects that cattle etc.supply food for in their dung

In reality, there would be a million and one environmental implications associated with a major shift in agricultural practices. Many positive, many negative. There is no reason why the negatives should outweigh the positives and a compelling case could certainly be made for the opposite.

Originally Posted by nightshade

the supply of veg for a sudden increase in consumption will lead to vast profits for GM seed suppliers

I'm not sure that follows. Why would it be a sudden increase? Any widespread shift to vegetarianism would be slow and gradual (as its growth has been over recent decades). Plus, we would actually require less of some crops.

Matt

[RobF]

Originally Posted by haddonite

Meat, definitely!

I used to live out of a frying pan, but due to the health implications I have compromised to a griddle.....

Neil

I use a George Formby grill - turned out nice again

[Imaginos]

Originally Posted by matt_xyz

In reality, there would be a million and one environmental implications associated with a major shift in agricultural practices. Many positive, many negative. There is no reason why the negatives should outweigh the positives and a compelling case could certainly be made for the opposite.
Matt

There are about 350 species of insect in the UK that directly depend on the dung of hoofed mammals, the vast majority of these are dependant on livestock pasture to maintain their populations and many of these are obligated to feed on cattle or sheep dung. Added to this there are several fungi that grow exclusively on dung and certain species of insect that feed on that fungus. Then there are those species such as the bot fly that live on the livestock themselves. Finally many plants are dependant on the nutritional input of dung in the soil. It is not just the pastoral habitat that provides the biodiversity, but the livestock also.

One final point on this from me-once pastoral farms become unprofitable then, although it would be nice to envisage a return to semi-wilderness, the more likely result would be the selling off of the land for housing/industrial purposes-nice.

[nightshade]

Imaginos,I do agree instead of grazing cattle there would be cheap housing for the increasing numbers in our country and nowhere to grow cereals or vegetables,I do seem to remember that eating meat takes up less resources per acre than growing crops for consumption this led to the increase in leisure
that we all enjoy now

[matt_xyz]

Originally Posted by nightshade

I do seem to remember that eating meat takes up less resources per acre than growing crops for consumption this led to the increase in leisure that we all enjoy now

That is most definitely NOT true. One of the arguments for vegetarianism is that it is far more efficient (in terms of calories per acre).

This debate can run and run and I think I'm about done to be honest. I'm not claiming that vegetarianism would not be without costs and who knows whether these would outweigh the benefits for definite. However, my objection to the debate so far is that all costs and benefits have to be considered. It's no good raising an individual (possible) cost as an argument against vegetarianism and it is disingenuous to imply there would be no potential benefits (just as it would be disingenuous of me to imply there would be no potential costs). We can't pretend that today's agricultural practices are not without significant cost (re. livestock, the current density of livestock is extremely unnatural) and so shouldn't assume that a carefully managed change would have to be detrimental to the environment.

Matt

[Paul mabbott]

But these animals and fungi were there - feeding on deer, boar &c - before humans provided them with alternative sources ....

[nightshade]

It is like many things,that was then this is now so the apparent losses would apply

[Beryl]

I have to agree with Nightshade
we are desined to eat meat.
We are Preditors , our eyes are at the front.
Seed eaters and most vegi eaters are prey have there eyes at the side as they have to see where they are going and what is behind , I think this is why Rabbits run in a zig-zag fashion. Even a Shark has it's eyes at the front and crnivorous fish.
I may be wrong but that is the way life seams to me.
Yes I eat meat
Pleas excuse any bad spelling. I don't very often write novels

[Paul mabbott]

I agree, the question is too simplistic and lots of the replies show that it's easy to get way off the central point. I have no primary objection to eating meat and do so every week or two. I prefer sustainably cultivated and harvested meat: the very worst thing for both individual health and the environment is intensively farmed cow meat. It is more efficient (economically and ecologically) to grow crops for humans directly than to feed cattle and then eat the animals. One thing that no one has mentioned is that cows ans sheep produce vast amounts of methane which is a greenhouse gas and are thus major contributors to climate change. They are also treated with antibiotics and hormones which are having a distorting effect on natural systems, not to mention the humans who ingest them. Most grazing land is heavily 'improved' - fertilised by chemicals which use lots of energy (again contributing to global warming).
So, I think, we don't need to be vegetarians but we do need to be careful how much meat we eat and how it is produced.

Originally Posted by wildone

I went off meat some years ago. No specific reason, just didn't like eating it any more. However as I do eat fish I can hardly be a vegetarian more a piscatarian. So am unable to vote in your poll.

[nightshade]

Do the calories per acre include the whole plant or just the derived grain?
Merely curious
There are pros and cons for all mass produced foods, so I for one am happy to eat whatever is nearest nature, meat or veg (and fish if there are any left!)

[Helen]

Originally Posted by Paul mabbott

I agree, the question is too simplistic and lots of the replies show that it's easy to get way off the central point. .

The question was simplistic, because it's meant as a bit of fun, and was posted as a result of mere idle curiosity. Please note where this thread is - in The Treehouse, so people are free to wander off topic as they wish.

It would of course, be a different matter if the thread was in one of the main topic fora.

Cheers

[Paul mabbott]

Wasn't a complaint - just a comment on the difficulty of answering an apparently simple question! That's why lawyers are so well paid ....

[Paul mabbott]

Complex question! Grazing animals "waste" 90% of the calorific value of their food - they use it moving around, keeping warm and replacing the body parts they already have. And the animals that eat the grazers then "waste" another 90%. This is a rough percentage and depends upon a lot of factors but clearly, if you cut out the middle animal, you will get a better "return" of nutrients. Therefore closest to the ground is for we humans to eat beans and cereals rather than to process them into animal meat.
The agribusiness gets around this in several ways (although if you compare the price of a tin of beans or a loaf of bread to the price of a piece of steak you may not be too impressed). They can grow their fodder in third world countries - land is cheap, they just have to mow down a bit of virgin forest and plant some genetically modified maize or soya. Flight (plane fuel is untaxed) to USA or elsewhere is cheap. Then they can stop their animals moving and wasting calories - why factory farming with penned animals is preferred to open grazing.
The reply to your comment on 'nearest nature' then would make you either chose plant food or free range meat grown and fed locally.
And it's worth eating!
Paul M
PS: I didn't answer your question fully - the non-seed part of plants, in a biologically sensitive farm would be recycled (soil, compost or animal feed) and therefore not come in to the equation whereas in an industrialised farm it would be burned or otherwise deployed and thus be a further contributor to pollution.

Originally Posted by nightshade

Do the calories per acre include the whole plant or just the derived grain?
There are pros and cons for all mass produced foods, so I for one am happy to eat whatever is nearest nature, meat or veg (and fish if there are any left!)

[Paul mabbott]

That's why I don't get invited to dinner parties? I can only talk about insects, plants and the troubles of the world (i.e. politics and religion) oh, and I do tend to comment on the source of the food being presented ....
I do think, Matt, that you're wrong to not "try to convert others". Veggies do no harm to anyone whereas gross meat eaters are doing a lot of harm to the world - *your* world!

Originally Posted by matt_xyz

..although a very large proportion of arable crops are grown for livestock feed. Maybe we'd be overun by Quorn factories instead
Veggie here. Personal choice, of course, and I never try to convert others. Why am I a veggie? Well, for animal welfare reasons. But beyond that, other things being equal, I would always prefer to eat a meal that didn't require an animal to be killed.
It's a sensitive topic, a bit like discussing politics at a dinner party!
Matt

[Paul mabbott]

I think if we're going into anatomy I'd look at the teeth!
I think that most animals are intrinsically omnivorous - they'll eat whatever plant, fungus, dead or live animal they can catch and digest. This certainly applies to primates - some of these are fruit and leaf eaters, some are carnivores - did you see the Attenborough film of leaf-eating baboons?
When we talk about 'us' you may be thinking about social habits rather than evolutionary ones. The original hominids, in Africa, were omnivores - plenty of fruit, seed, insects &c to eat. But those humans/pre-humans living on the edge of the ice-belt would have had to eat meat from lack of an alternative! This has probably stuck in our traditions (not our needs) so that "we" assume that meat is essential.
It isn't. So the answer is to get your main nutrition from organically and locally grown plants but, if you feel the need for meat, eat this occasionally as a special treat and make sure it's organic and locally grown.
PS: no need to apologise for your note. Very clear - even if I disagree!

Originally Posted by Beryl

I have to agree with Nightshade
we are desined to eat meat.
We are Preditors , our eyes are at the front.
Seed eaters and most vegi eaters are prey have there eyes at the side as they have to see where they are going and what is behind , I think this is why Rabbits run in a zig-zag fashion. Even a Shark has it's eyes at the front and crnivorous fish.
I may be wrong but that is the way life seams to me.
Yes I eat meat
Pleas excuse any bad spelling. I don't very often write novels

[Paul mabbott]

We're then talking about quantity versus quality.
Intensive arable systems result in large numbers of *very few* species. These species are not threatened by extensive farming whereas *many* species of grassland, woodland &c disappear, often forever.
The judgement shouldn't be on number of insects but on the numbers of species.

Originally Posted by nightshade

It is like many things,that was then this is now so the apparent losses would apply

[Beryl]

Meat is a part of our essential diet as from that we gat Vitamin B12. I don't make red blood cells and have to have regular injections of Vitamin B12. Some thing Vegans have to watch for.

[Paul mabbott]

Sorry to hear about that Beryl.
You can actually get Vit B12 from Marmite and other fungal products *but* pernicious anaemia is not necessarily due to lack of B12 in the diet. There are problems with absorption and the body's production of related compounds. The old treatment for B12/folic acid deficiency was raw liver and raw tripe .... makes the injections look good? It's quite a complex matter but most vegetarians can easily overcome it as long, as you say, they watch out .
Paul M

Originally Posted by Beryl

Meat is a part of our essential diet as from that we gat Vitamin B12. I don't make red blood cells and have to have regular injections of Vitamin B12. Some thing Vegans have to watch for.