6 ms·

Part time is great. I'm part time vegan (probably 90% of my meals), but I still rarely have meat, dairy, everything. I dislike the idea that if you aren't alway

Part time is great. I'm part time vegan (probably 90% of my meals), but I still rarely have meat, dairy, everything. I dislike the idea that if you aren't always vegan/vegetarian you've "failed". Like it's some religion that if you ever strayed you have some mark against you. It's so much easier to go 90% than 100, and I bet many more people would be willing to go 90% than 100%. We'll make major strids to improving the environment, improving our populations health, and improving the well being of animals if a majority of people have a goal of 90% rather than full removal.

godelski 6y ago
Even just getting people to go mostly chicken over beef has a big impact. This also creates a way to ease into a more plant based diet. Personally I've found the 90% aspect easier. I don't have to worry if my vegetarian meals have something like chicken stock in them. It is about eating healthier and a lower carbon diet than being 100% perfect. Just needs to be good enough.
- galangalalgol 6y ago
  What about pescatarian (sp?)? I like the idea of ditching dependence on land based animals. Is sane tilapia farming sustainable? I have a fairly strong intolerance for beans and pulses and getting enough protein to deadlift from other sources is hard. The best my blood work has ever been was me eating about 1.3lbs of grassfed beef a day plus greens and 4 sweet potatoes. Thats great, but not sustainable for our whole population.
  - SEJeff 6y ago
    I'm an omnivoire, but can't you get a lot of vegan protein from chickpeas and soy? Soy does have the obvious huge downside of containing a much higher amount of estrogen and causes havoc in some people, but Chickpeas aren't hard to make delicious. Ditto for lentils as well
    - vram22 6y ago
      > Chickpeas aren't hard to make delicious. Ditto for lentils as well Yes. Check out my other comment about beans in this thread. All the dishes I mentioned there are pretty tasty. And so are lentils, if by that you meant masoor or masoor dal, or even if you meant tuar dal). And all those are high in protein as you say.
      - galangalalgol 6y ago
        I love Indian curries, but one serving obbeans or pulses will haunt me for a couple days. I don't know if it is sibo related, but I do have that. Cauliflower, blackberries, and mushrooms destroy me too.
        vram22 6y ago
        Tough luck. Maybe some people are more prone to such issues. >sibo A typo? An acronym?
        galangalalgol 6y ago
        Small intestine bacterial overgrowth. Often due to overuse of antibiotics in childhood. I'm not complaining, probably would have died without them.
        vram22 6y ago
        Had not heard of SIBO. Good to know. Wonder if yogurt and other fermented foods that increase good gut bacteria can help.
    - seanwilson 6y ago
      > Soy does have the obvious huge downside of containing a much higher amount of estrogen and causes havoc in some people Do you have a study that confirms this? As far as I know this is a myth. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phytoestrogen#Effects_on_humans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phytoestrogen#Effects_on_human...
  - srg0 6y ago
    Commercial fishing at modern scale is not sustainable. Fish farming, especially for valuable species, still has a huge carbon footprint, requires a non trivial amount of agricultural land, and often uses wild-caught fish to feed the farm. So we're back to square one. Not saying that the issues can't be solved, but pisciculture is not a free lunch from the sustainability point of view.
    - galangalalgol 6y ago
      My favorites are baitfish like herring and sardines does that change the sustainability? If not, should I just go back to beef, or is it at least better?
    - galangalalgol 6y ago
      Tilapa are herbivores, and some setups grow all the fishes food in the tank. Whether that is scalable is another matter.
    - curryst 6y ago
      > Fish farming, especially for valuable species, still has a huge carbon footprint, requires a non trivial amount of agricultural land, and often uses wild-caught fish to feed the farm. So we're back to square one. Isn't most of that only true for carnivorous or omnivorous fish? I knew there were problems with finding small fish to feed the bigger fish, but I was under the impression that herbivores and filter feeders could be raised sustainably. I.e. farming tuna would be extremely difficult and costly to the environment, but you can farm things like tilapia and catfish fairly sustainably. They aren't fish that a lot of people are excited to eat, unfortunately.
- yboris 6y ago
  Depends on the reason behind being vegan / vegetarian. If it's to reduce animal suffering, eating chicken is almost certainly causing a greater amount of animal suffering than if you eat cows. https://reducing-suffering.org/how-much-direct-suffering-is-caused-by-various-animal-foods/#Results_table https://reducing-suffering.org/how-much-direct-suffering-is-...
  - srg0 6y ago
    I find the approach of the cited web page very strange. Basically, it says, the longer the animal lives, the more it suffers. Throws in some arbitrary multipliers, divides by mass, and voilà. I would not call healthy animal life as suffering. Details matter. We all have seen peaceful cows and healthy fish. What counts, IMO, is fear, stress, pain, and the way animals are dying. That's not accounted in the article. One may argue that the number of lives taken counts too. And then eating beef or whale meat will kill fewer animals than eating chicken or insects (of we don't count what whales eat). But in my opinion eating insects would cause less suffering. Overall I think that eating smaller animals more frequently is more natural and oppotunistic. And eating cheaper meat will reduce overall carbon and water footprint.
    - yboris 6y ago
      From the welfare perspective, if the cows are just out in a large pasture, they will likely have net-positive experiences across their lives. But there are animals that have overwhelmingly negative experience throughout their lives (pigs confined to a cage where they can't turn around). As for chickens, >99% of which grow up in cramped conditions, with no access to the outside, with selective breeding causing them to grow so fast they often can't move, it is better to never have been (their lives are a net negative experience). It's unfortunate, with respect to emissions, cows are worse than chickens, but with respect to suffering on sentient creatures, chickens are worse than cows. Great news! There's a solution: eating fewer of both.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
xur17 6y ago
This is a fantastic way to look at it. It feels like a perfect application of the 80 / 20 rule -> with 20% of the effort, you can get 80% of the benefits of being vegetarian / vegan.
- Zancarius 6y ago
  Definitely. Not the OP you were replying to, but I love meat of all types. I also love vegetables. I also really like some vegetarian foods. Actually, I just like food, but I can't each much of it at one sitting. I think the other proposition is that, for whatever reason, there's this push to market vegetarian foods as substitutes to lure in traditional meat eaters rather than putting effort toward convincing them that they're alternatives that taste just as good. Like bean burgers. I absolutely love bean burgers because regular burgers just don't sit right with me half the time. But I don't treat them as a substitute--I treat them as an alternative that is delicious and unique in its own right AND to be enjoyed as such. I mean, let's be honest: There's so many different varieties of beans, and so many things you can do with them, that even speaking as a meat eater, it's almost impossible to get bored with how many different dishes you can make (with no meat)! One example that comes to mind that's semi-vegetarian is a black bean enchilada recipe I make from time to time. Just beans. Only non-vegetarian item is the cheese (and sometimes the corn tortillas because of lard, if you get them fresh). Doesn't feel heavy, tastes amazing, and it's super filling. Have a side of refried beans (I like beans)[1], Spanish rice, a salad, and it's like a restaurant-style meal. Err. Didn't mean to make this reply so long. Sorry. I guess I just love cooking, too. And yes, it's not that much effort to at least cut out red meat from your diet. Way healthier too. [1] The people around you probably won't like the side effects.
  - vram22 6y ago
    If by your [1] you mean flatulence, Indians (and some other Asians) eat many kinds of legumes (including many kinds of beans, like rajma, lobia, French beans, etc.), on a regular basis, and I, at least, have not heard of flatulence as a common thing among them due to that. Only if you indulge a bit too much in say chana (chickpeas, as in chana masala or puri chole or bhature chole), do you sometimes get gas. Possibly the Indian masala's spices used in those dishes help with digesting the beans, in fact they probably do, since they are the common ones used in Indian cooking, some of which have known digestive benefits, such as cumin, ginger, coriander, asafoetida, etc. (BTW, tip: just a pinch of asafoetida a.k.a. hing, really improves a dish; the zing of hing :) Also, I saw a video about nutrition by some scientist, who said that peoples (i.e. nations) who eat beans regularly, develop, over time, the ability (maybe via better gut flora) to digest them more easily, without gas being generated.
Gibbon1 6y ago
I have a friend that is mostly a vegetarian because he thinks a) the meat industry is often cruel. b) very destructive environmentally. I'm okay with that. I don't eat veal or fish for the same reasons[1]. Veal is cruel. And fishing is horribly destructive. Where someone draws a line isn't as important as they do. [1] Don't get me started though with Hippie Brahmans that won't eat chicken or beef but eat fish for 'heath reasons'
seanwilson 6y ago
> I dislike the idea that if you aren't always vegan/vegetarian you've "failed". In the case you're vegan because you think it's unethical to kill for food, why should you get a break here? I can't think of other ethical issues where you wouldn't be looked down for going against your firmly held beliefs. "Mostly plant-based diet" sounds like a better term if you're less concerned about the animal suffering aspect. Vegan would also include not wearing leather for example so it might be a case of you not using the right word.
- tashoecraft 6y ago
  And I disagree with the leather part because leather production isn’t causing animals to be killed. It’s a by product of the, mostly beef industry. It would take a massive decline in beef production to cause cows to be killed purely for their leather. Leather goods also last decades. I believe more in a overall balance. You can’t get everyone to be vegan, the earth simply can’t support that.
  - seanwilson 6y ago
    > It’s a by product of the, mostly beef industry. You're supporting and putting more money into the beef industry by buying leather though. You don't kill cows directly by buying milk either, but the milked cow will eventually be slaughtered for meat too and its male offspring used as veal. > I believe more in a overall balance. You can’t get everyone to be vegan, the earth simply can’t support that. Fair enough, but "vegan" isn't the term to use to describe your beliefs then.
  - luckman212 6y ago
    You can’t get everyone to be vegan, the earth simply can’t support that. Genuinely curious, why can't Earth support everyone eating vegan? I thought it took more land, water, soil, and resources in general to produce meat? Is it about transportation, or Arctic climates where fresh fruit and veg is not available?
    - seanwilson 6y ago
goda90 6y ago
And honestly, animals will play an important role in sustainable agriculture, so animal products will still be part of our lives. I was watching a presentation about soil health by a farmer. They don't use fertilizers, pesticides, irrigation, etc because of a system of cover crops, free range animals, and mob grazing(a dense herd moved through the field quickly to trample and poop all over) to build healthy soil. The problems we have are from factory farms, monocultures, and destroying old growth ecosystems so more people can consume in excess, instead of moderation.

godelski 6y ago

Even just getting people to go mostly chicken over beef has a big impact. This also creates a way to ease into a more plant based diet. Personally I've found the 90% aspect easier. I don't have to worry if my vegetarian meals have something like chicken stock in them. It is about eating healthier and a lower carbon diet than being 100% perfect. Just needs to be good enough.

galangalalgol 6y ago
What about pescatarian (sp?)? I like the idea of ditching dependence on land based animals. Is sane tilapia farming sustainable? I have a fairly strong intolerance for beans and pulses and getting enough protein to deadlift from other sources is hard. The best my blood work has ever been was me eating about 1.3lbs of grassfed beef a day plus greens and 4 sweet potatoes. Thats great, but not sustainable for our whole population.
- SEJeff 6y ago
  I'm an omnivoire, but can't you get a lot of vegan protein from chickpeas and soy? Soy does have the obvious huge downside of containing a much higher amount of estrogen and causes havoc in some people, but Chickpeas aren't hard to make delicious. Ditto for lentils as well
  - vram22 6y ago
    > Chickpeas aren't hard to make delicious. Ditto for lentils as well Yes. Check out my other comment about beans in this thread. All the dishes I mentioned there are pretty tasty. And so are lentils, if by that you meant masoor or masoor dal, or even if you meant tuar dal). And all those are high in protein as you say.
    - galangalalgol 6y ago
      I love Indian curries, but one serving obbeans or pulses will haunt me for a couple days. I don't know if it is sibo related, but I do have that. Cauliflower, blackberries, and mushrooms destroy me too.
      - vram22 6y ago
        Tough luck. Maybe some people are more prone to such issues. >sibo A typo? An acronym?
        galangalalgol 6y ago
        Small intestine bacterial overgrowth. Often due to overuse of antibiotics in childhood. I'm not complaining, probably would have died without them.
        vram22 6y ago
        Had not heard of SIBO. Good to know. Wonder if yogurt and other fermented foods that increase good gut bacteria can help.
  - seanwilson 6y ago
    > Soy does have the obvious huge downside of containing a much higher amount of estrogen and causes havoc in some people Do you have a study that confirms this? As far as I know this is a myth. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phytoestrogen#Effects_on_humans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phytoestrogen#Effects_on_human...
- srg0 6y ago
  Commercial fishing at modern scale is not sustainable. Fish farming, especially for valuable species, still has a huge carbon footprint, requires a non trivial amount of agricultural land, and often uses wild-caught fish to feed the farm. So we're back to square one. Not saying that the issues can't be solved, but pisciculture is not a free lunch from the sustainability point of view.
  - galangalalgol 6y ago
    My favorites are baitfish like herring and sardines does that change the sustainability? If not, should I just go back to beef, or is it at least better?
  - galangalalgol 6y ago
    Tilapa are herbivores, and some setups grow all the fishes food in the tank. Whether that is scalable is another matter.
  - curryst 6y ago
    > Fish farming, especially for valuable species, still has a huge carbon footprint, requires a non trivial amount of agricultural land, and often uses wild-caught fish to feed the farm. So we're back to square one. Isn't most of that only true for carnivorous or omnivorous fish? I knew there were problems with finding small fish to feed the bigger fish, but I was under the impression that herbivores and filter feeders could be raised sustainably. I.e. farming tuna would be extremely difficult and costly to the environment, but you can farm things like tilapia and catfish fairly sustainably. They aren't fish that a lot of people are excited to eat, unfortunately.
yboris 6y ago
Depends on the reason behind being vegan / vegetarian. If it's to reduce animal suffering, eating chicken is almost certainly causing a greater amount of animal suffering than if you eat cows. https://reducing-suffering.org/how-much-direct-suffering-is-caused-by-various-animal-foods/#Results_table https://reducing-suffering.org/how-much-direct-suffering-is-...
- srg0 6y ago
  I find the approach of the cited web page very strange. Basically, it says, the longer the animal lives, the more it suffers. Throws in some arbitrary multipliers, divides by mass, and voilà. I would not call healthy animal life as suffering. Details matter. We all have seen peaceful cows and healthy fish. What counts, IMO, is fear, stress, pain, and the way animals are dying. That's not accounted in the article. One may argue that the number of lives taken counts too. And then eating beef or whale meat will kill fewer animals than eating chicken or insects (of we don't count what whales eat). But in my opinion eating insects would cause less suffering. Overall I think that eating smaller animals more frequently is more natural and oppotunistic. And eating cheaper meat will reduce overall carbon and water footprint.
  - yboris 6y ago
    From the welfare perspective, if the cows are just out in a large pasture, they will likely have net-positive experiences across their lives. But there are animals that have overwhelmingly negative experience throughout their lives (pigs confined to a cage where they can't turn around). As for chickens, >99% of which grow up in cramped conditions, with no access to the outside, with selective breeding causing them to grow so fast they often can't move, it is better to never have been (their lives are a net negative experience). It's unfortunate, with respect to emissions, cows are worse than chickens, but with respect to suffering on sentient creatures, chickens are worse than cows. Great news! There's a solution: eating fewer of both.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

xur17 6y ago

This is a fantastic way to look at it. It feels like a perfect application of the 80 / 20 rule -> with 20% of the effort, you can get 80% of the benefits of being vegetarian / vegan.

Zancarius 6y ago
Definitely. Not the OP you were replying to, but I love meat of all types. I also love vegetables. I also really like some vegetarian foods. Actually, I just like food, but I can't each much of it at one sitting. I think the other proposition is that, for whatever reason, there's this push to market vegetarian foods as substitutes to lure in traditional meat eaters rather than putting effort toward convincing them that they're alternatives that taste just as good. Like bean burgers. I absolutely love bean burgers because regular burgers just don't sit right with me half the time. But I don't treat them as a substitute--I treat them as an alternative that is delicious and unique in its own right AND to be enjoyed as such. I mean, let's be honest: There's so many different varieties of beans, and so many things you can do with them, that even speaking as a meat eater, it's almost impossible to get bored with how many different dishes you can make (with no meat)! One example that comes to mind that's semi-vegetarian is a black bean enchilada recipe I make from time to time. Just beans. Only non-vegetarian item is the cheese (and sometimes the corn tortillas because of lard, if you get them fresh). Doesn't feel heavy, tastes amazing, and it's super filling. Have a side of refried beans (I like beans)[1], Spanish rice, a salad, and it's like a restaurant-style meal. Err. Didn't mean to make this reply so long. Sorry. I guess I just love cooking, too. And yes, it's not that much effort to at least cut out red meat from your diet. Way healthier too. [1] The people around you probably won't like the side effects.
- vram22 6y ago
  If by your [1] you mean flatulence, Indians (and some other Asians) eat many kinds of legumes (including many kinds of beans, like rajma, lobia, French beans, etc.), on a regular basis, and I, at least, have not heard of flatulence as a common thing among them due to that. Only if you indulge a bit too much in say chana (chickpeas, as in chana masala or puri chole or bhature chole), do you sometimes get gas. Possibly the Indian masala's spices used in those dishes help with digesting the beans, in fact they probably do, since they are the common ones used in Indian cooking, some of which have known digestive benefits, such as cumin, ginger, coriander, asafoetida, etc. (BTW, tip: just a pinch of asafoetida a.k.a. hing, really improves a dish; the zing of hing :) Also, I saw a video about nutrition by some scientist, who said that peoples (i.e. nations) who eat beans regularly, develop, over time, the ability (maybe via better gut flora) to digest them more easily, without gas being generated.

Gibbon1 6y ago

I have a friend that is mostly a vegetarian because he thinks a) the meat industry is often cruel. b) very destructive environmentally. I'm okay with that. I don't eat veal or fish for the same reasons[1]. Veal is cruel. And fishing is horribly destructive. Where someone draws a line isn't as important as they do. [1] Don't get me started though with Hippie Brahmans that won't eat chicken or beef but eat fish for 'heath reasons'

seanwilson 6y ago

> I dislike the idea that if you aren't always vegan/vegetarian you've "failed". In the case you're vegan because you think it's unethical to kill for food, why should you get a break here? I can't think of other ethical issues where you wouldn't be looked down for going against your firmly held beliefs. "Mostly plant-based diet" sounds like a better term if you're less concerned about the animal suffering aspect. Vegan would also include not wearing leather for example so it might be a case of you not using the right word.

tashoecraft 6y ago
And I disagree with the leather part because leather production isn’t causing animals to be killed. It’s a by product of the, mostly beef industry. It would take a massive decline in beef production to cause cows to be killed purely for their leather. Leather goods also last decades. I believe more in a overall balance. You can’t get everyone to be vegan, the earth simply can’t support that.
- seanwilson 6y ago
  > It’s a by product of the, mostly beef industry. You're supporting and putting more money into the beef industry by buying leather though. You don't kill cows directly by buying milk either, but the milked cow will eventually be slaughtered for meat too and its male offspring used as veal. > I believe more in a overall balance. You can’t get everyone to be vegan, the earth simply can’t support that. Fair enough, but "vegan" isn't the term to use to describe your beliefs then.
- luckman212 6y ago
  You can’t get everyone to be vegan, the earth simply can’t support that. Genuinely curious, why can't Earth support everyone eating vegan? I thought it took more land, water, soil, and resources in general to produce meat? Is it about transportation, or Arctic climates where fresh fruit and veg is not available?
  - seanwilson 6y ago

goda90 6y ago

And honestly, animals will play an important role in sustainable agriculture, so animal products will still be part of our lives. I was watching a presentation about soil health by a farmer. They don't use fertilizers, pesticides, irrigation, etc because of a system of cover crops, free range animals, and mob grazing(a dense herd moved through the field quickly to trample and poop all over) to build healthy soil. The problems we have are from factory farms, monocultures, and destroying old growth ecosystems so more people can consume in excess, instead of moderation.