3 ms·

So you mean to say the mass production of corn and soy as animal feed is not an example of crop monoculture? Also, how do vegans "kill wild animals" - and are y

by noondip 11y ago

So you mean to say the mass production of corn and soy as animal feed is not an example of crop monoculture? Also, how do vegans "kill wild animals" - and are you so sure they do so in numbers of over 150 billion per year, as does modern animal agriculture? I think you are confused. Wildlife suffers mostly from the collateral damage of meat production - deforestation, drought, pollution, climate change, etc. Definitely check out documentaries such as Cowspiracy if you are not convinced, or just search around. Here's something I found about Amazon deforestation: > A 2009 Greenpeace report found that the cattle sector in the Brazilian Amazon, supported by the international beef and leather trades, was responsible for about 80% of all deforestation in the region,[3] or about 14% of the world’s total annual deforestation, making it the largest single driver of deforestation in the world.[4] According to a 2006 report by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 70% of formerly forested land in the Amazon, and 91% of land deforested since 1970, is used for livestock pasture.[5][19] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation_of_the_Amazon_rainforest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation_of_the_Amazon_ra...

qrendel 11y ago
Exactly this. Animal agriculture necessarily kills far more animals than crops since you have to grow significantly more crops to feed livestock in the first place. Meat does not just magically appear without having been fed. Not only that, but in addition to the unpaid negative externalities of meat production (e.g. climate change, deforestation, health problems), the price of meat is kept artificially low through subsidies for corn and soybean produced as animal feed.
- nikolay 11y ago
  My animals don't eat crops - they eat grass. Climate change? Get educated! It's not caused by sustainable animal farming! And what health problems? Vegans have worse health than people who eat sustainable animal products. Don't compare Mickey Dee's to quality meats! It's like saying all cars are Mickey Mouse cars because you only look at a Yugo!
  - qrendel 11y ago
    > Climate change? Get educated! It's not caused by sustainable animal farming! Grass-fed and free range cattle are an even larger contributor to deforestation and climate change than intensive animal agriculture is, since it requires vastly more land area to graze them, or to grow grass to transport to them, than it does to intensively grow corn or soybeans. The only way it can even be supported now is because only a small proportion of meat consumers buy meat produced in this way. Carnivorous animals are at a higher trophic level than herbivores. A meat heavy diet necessarily requires more resources than a plant-based one. As the GGP comment suggested, I'd really recommend Cowspiracy for a more detailed overview on the issue of "sustainable" animal agriculture. > Vegans have worse health than people who eat sustainable animal products. This is at worst a lie and at best a controversial statement with little evidence to back it up. The biggest known downsides to a vegan diet that I'm aware of are a risk of some vitamin deficiencies, which can be easily corrected with cheap supplements: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veganism#Health_effects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veganism#Health_effects > The animal products I eat come only from Certified Humane pastured livestock! Certified Humane has been widely criticized as not actually particularly humane, though it's probably a mild improvement over the worst possible practices. You don't have to do much research to see stuff like: "Certified Humane. This label, offered by Humane Farm Animal Care (HFAC), holds equal appeal to industrial producers, largely due to its tacit allowance of farrowing crates— cruel confinements that prevent sows from moving enough to even roll over— and for its lax pasturage standards (CH beef can be fattened in feedlots). CH does not require outdoor access. Its meat is processed in industrial slaughterhouses and, as a result, the label allows the unlimited transportation of farm animals. CH audits its slaughterhouses, but only to ensure that they meet American Meat Institute standards, which were designed with industry oversight in 1990 by none other than Temple Grandin." [1][2] That's aside from other ethical issues such as continuing to kill the male offspring of hens and diary cows, confining chickens in large pens with only an average 1.5 sq. ft. per bird, on top of the basic ethical concerns associated with any use of livestock. To the best of my knowledge, all of the "humane" labels have the same problems to some degree or another. So please do some research yourself before you go around telling others to "get educated" and referring to their arguments as "propaganda." [1] http://freefromharm.org/farm-animal-welfare/animal-welfare-labeling-what-theyre-not-telling-you/ http://freefromharm.org/farm-animal-welfare/animal-welfare-l... [2] http://www.businessinsider.com/the-truth-about-humanely-raised-chicken-2014-12 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-truth-about-humanely-rais...
PerfectElement 11y ago
Didn't you know that these 150 billion animals come from the magic farm where there's no environmental impact and no cruelty? You don't have to worry; the animal industry is looking after your health and the health of the planet. Also, it's a well known fact that farm animals, opposed to pets and wild animals, don't feel any pain, and lack basic interests. They're basically cucumbers, so it's totally fine to treat them as property.
- nikolay 11y ago
  If you don't eat animal products (not necessarily just meat), billions of animals will be without a purpose and this would have never existed to start this. Is this better?
  - noondip 11y ago
    If you want to be hyperbolic, then yes - if the whole world went vegan today, hundreds of billions of animals would be without "purpose". However, the reality is, we breed these animals into captivity, and as less demand for these products exists, fewer animals would need to be born to a life of misery.

by noondip 11y ago

qrendel 11y ago

Exactly this. Animal agriculture necessarily kills far more animals than crops since you have to grow significantly more crops to feed livestock in the first place. Meat does not just magically appear without having been fed. Not only that, but in addition to the unpaid negative externalities of meat production (e.g. climate change, deforestation, health problems), the price of meat is kept artificially low through subsidies for corn and soybean produced as animal feed.

nikolay 11y ago
My animals don't eat crops - they eat grass. Climate change? Get educated! It's not caused by sustainable animal farming! And what health problems? Vegans have worse health than people who eat sustainable animal products. Don't compare Mickey Dee's to quality meats! It's like saying all cars are Mickey Mouse cars because you only look at a Yugo!
- qrendel 11y ago
  > Climate change? Get educated! It's not caused by sustainable animal farming! Grass-fed and free range cattle are an even larger contributor to deforestation and climate change than intensive animal agriculture is, since it requires vastly more land area to graze them, or to grow grass to transport to them, than it does to intensively grow corn or soybeans. The only way it can even be supported now is because only a small proportion of meat consumers buy meat produced in this way. Carnivorous animals are at a higher trophic level than herbivores. A meat heavy diet necessarily requires more resources than a plant-based one. As the GGP comment suggested, I'd really recommend Cowspiracy for a more detailed overview on the issue of "sustainable" animal agriculture. > Vegans have worse health than people who eat sustainable animal products. This is at worst a lie and at best a controversial statement with little evidence to back it up. The biggest known downsides to a vegan diet that I'm aware of are a risk of some vitamin deficiencies, which can be easily corrected with cheap supplements: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veganism#Health_effects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veganism#Health_effects > The animal products I eat come only from Certified Humane pastured livestock! Certified Humane has been widely criticized as not actually particularly humane, though it's probably a mild improvement over the worst possible practices. You don't have to do much research to see stuff like: "Certified Humane. This label, offered by Humane Farm Animal Care (HFAC), holds equal appeal to industrial producers, largely due to its tacit allowance of farrowing crates— cruel confinements that prevent sows from moving enough to even roll over— and for its lax pasturage standards (CH beef can be fattened in feedlots). CH does not require outdoor access. Its meat is processed in industrial slaughterhouses and, as a result, the label allows the unlimited transportation of farm animals. CH audits its slaughterhouses, but only to ensure that they meet American Meat Institute standards, which were designed with industry oversight in 1990 by none other than Temple Grandin." [1][2] That's aside from other ethical issues such as continuing to kill the male offspring of hens and diary cows, confining chickens in large pens with only an average 1.5 sq. ft. per bird, on top of the basic ethical concerns associated with any use of livestock. To the best of my knowledge, all of the "humane" labels have the same problems to some degree or another. So please do some research yourself before you go around telling others to "get educated" and referring to their arguments as "propaganda." [1] http://freefromharm.org/farm-animal-welfare/animal-welfare-labeling-what-theyre-not-telling-you/ http://freefromharm.org/farm-animal-welfare/animal-welfare-l... [2] http://www.businessinsider.com/the-truth-about-humanely-raised-chicken-2014-12 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-truth-about-humanely-rais...

PerfectElement 11y ago

Didn't you know that these 150 billion animals come from the magic farm where there's no environmental impact and no cruelty? You don't have to worry; the animal industry is looking after your health and the health of the planet. Also, it's a well known fact that farm animals, opposed to pets and wild animals, don't feel any pain, and lack basic interests. They're basically cucumbers, so it's totally fine to treat them as property.

nikolay 11y ago
If you don't eat animal products (not necessarily just meat), billions of animals will be without a purpose and this would have never existed to start this. Is this better?
- noondip 11y ago
  If you want to be hyperbolic, then yes - if the whole world went vegan today, hundreds of billions of animals would be without "purpose". However, the reality is, we breed these animals into captivity, and as less demand for these products exists, fewer animals would need to be born to a life of misery.