7 ms·

I'm not vegan, but I do advocate a more reasonable approach to meat. By eating less meat, you can afford to eat better quality meat. I've heard a few good sug

I'm not vegan, but I do advocate a more reasonable approach to meat. By eating less meat, you can afford to eat better quality meat. I've heard a few good suggestions that balance ethics, pragmatism, and nutrition, either following the rule "vegan before 6", so you save up meat and dairy products only for dinner, or "meat x3", where you eat high quality meat only three meals a week, with the rest vegetarian, which I've been trying to do, and it seems to work great, even in the midst of a workout routine. I've also tried to convince people that shrimp and oysters are vegan, but I've had less luck with that.

frossie 16y ago
Thank you for making that point. False dichotomies annoy the heck out of me. I encourage people who are not to try and eat vegetarian (never mind vegan - and BTW I am neither) for one week as an intellectual exercise. The issue is not whether one eats meat, but how totally unthinking our meat consumption has become - bacon for breakfast, ham sandwich for lunch, burger for dinner. The question isn't whether to be vegan or omnivore, but whether it is necessary to eat meat at every meal, as is now common in many Western countries. A lot of the ecological, social and humanitarian concerns of meat production can be significantly improved by just reducing red meat consumption. A lot of our food choices are habitual choices that can be changed with minor effort. Have hummus instead of ham in that sandwich. Have shrimp instead of beef in your Thai curry. Don't eat a mammal every meal out of reflex - eat it mindfully, and pay a fair price for humanely reared meat. The planet (and probably your body) will thank you for it.
- abeppu 16y ago
  For bonus points, keep track of hidden meat, like gelatin in 'yogurt' and marshmallows, isinglass in your wine, or bonechar in your sugar, or lard, oyster sauce, fish sauce or chicken broth snuck into otherwise vegetarian dishes.
  - makmanalp 16y ago
    I appreciate the sentiment that you should know what you eat, but don't understand this mentality that I observe many vegetarian / vegans have. Oh no, gelatin snuck in your food, you're not a proper vegan / vegetarian anymore! Beat yourself up about it! It oddly reminds me of those tiny silly inconsequential rules that you're supposed to pay attention in some religions. Like no alcohol. What does that have anything to do with the main idea of the religion? Oops, you ingested some chicken broth. Feel bad about it. Maybe we'll forgive you later.
    - pyre 16y ago
      It's not about 'rules' or 'regulations.' For some it's about morality. If I find it immoral to eat a dead animal, then why would it be 'ok' because it's 'only chicken broth?' I've still supported (with my money) the death of an animal. [ Please don't break down into some 'but animals die all the time in the wild,' argument. It's slightly different when we created the animal just for the purpose of killing it for meat. We take issue with the idea of growing full-sized human clones just to harvest for organs in the event that the original needs a transplant (i.e. The Island), so why is it that different for animals? They are still living beings, but our society has been raised to treat them like a commodity. No different than some mineral that was mined out of hole in the ground. Unless they are one of the 'chosen' types of animal (e.g. dog, cat, etc) then it's totally immoral to treat them poorly or (god forbid) eat them. ]
      - scythe 16y ago
        >Please don't break down into some 'but animals die all the time in the wild,' argument. Yeah, let's not bring up a totally valid objection!
        pyre 16y ago
        Please expand on how it's valid. [edit] I'm being open to debate here, but instead of debate, I get down votes? Is that really what HN is about? [/edit]
        16y ago
die_sekte 16y ago
Why shrimp? I understand the part about oysters, but I've read that shrimp feel pain.
- michaelchisari 16y ago
  It really depends on how you define "pain", given how simple they are, I'd say it's more of a simple stimulus response. But you're right that it is a little more debatable with shrimp than with oysters.

frossie 16y ago

Thank you for making that point. False dichotomies annoy the heck out of me. I encourage people who are not to try and eat vegetarian (never mind vegan - and BTW I am neither) for one week as an intellectual exercise. The issue is not whether one eats meat, but how totally unthinking our meat consumption has become - bacon for breakfast, ham sandwich for lunch, burger for dinner. The question isn't whether to be vegan or omnivore, but whether it is necessary to eat meat at every meal, as is now common in many Western countries. A lot of the ecological, social and humanitarian concerns of meat production can be significantly improved by just reducing red meat consumption. A lot of our food choices are habitual choices that can be changed with minor effort. Have hummus instead of ham in that sandwich. Have shrimp instead of beef in your Thai curry. Don't eat a mammal every meal out of reflex - eat it mindfully, and pay a fair price for humanely reared meat. The planet (and probably your body) will thank you for it.

abeppu 16y ago
For bonus points, keep track of hidden meat, like gelatin in 'yogurt' and marshmallows, isinglass in your wine, or bonechar in your sugar, or lard, oyster sauce, fish sauce or chicken broth snuck into otherwise vegetarian dishes.
- makmanalp 16y ago
  I appreciate the sentiment that you should know what you eat, but don't understand this mentality that I observe many vegetarian / vegans have. Oh no, gelatin snuck in your food, you're not a proper vegan / vegetarian anymore! Beat yourself up about it! It oddly reminds me of those tiny silly inconsequential rules that you're supposed to pay attention in some religions. Like no alcohol. What does that have anything to do with the main idea of the religion? Oops, you ingested some chicken broth. Feel bad about it. Maybe we'll forgive you later.
  - pyre 16y ago
    It's not about 'rules' or 'regulations.' For some it's about morality. If I find it immoral to eat a dead animal, then why would it be 'ok' because it's 'only chicken broth?' I've still supported (with my money) the death of an animal. [ Please don't break down into some 'but animals die all the time in the wild,' argument. It's slightly different when we created the animal just for the purpose of killing it for meat. We take issue with the idea of growing full-sized human clones just to harvest for organs in the event that the original needs a transplant (i.e. The Island), so why is it that different for animals? They are still living beings, but our society has been raised to treat them like a commodity. No different than some mineral that was mined out of hole in the ground. Unless they are one of the 'chosen' types of animal (e.g. dog, cat, etc) then it's totally immoral to treat them poorly or (god forbid) eat them. ]
    - scythe 16y ago
      >Please don't break down into some 'but animals die all the time in the wild,' argument. Yeah, let's not bring up a totally valid objection!
      - pyre 16y ago
        Please expand on how it's valid. [edit] I'm being open to debate here, but instead of debate, I get down votes? Is that really what HN is about? [/edit]
        16y ago

die_sekte 16y ago

Why shrimp? I understand the part about oysters, but I've read that shrimp feel pain.

michaelchisari 16y ago
It really depends on how you define "pain", given how simple they are, I'd say it's more of a simple stimulus response. But you're right that it is a little more debatable with shrimp than with oysters.