4 ms·

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 tak

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
  It's always going to be more efficient to feed grain, soy etc. directly to humans than it is to feed those crops to cows then feed cow meat and milk to humans (you lose about 90% of the crop calories creating beef: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feed_conversion_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feed_conversion_ratio). People arguing the opposite are usually under the false impression that cows are only fed grass (there's no enough room for this for the amount of cows we need) or arguing corner cases.
danaris 6y ago
And the alternatives to leather are mostly various plastic products, which have a much lower lifespan and much higher pollution footprint in general.

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
It's always going to be more efficient to feed grain, soy etc. directly to humans than it is to feed those crops to cows then feed cow meat and milk to humans (you lose about 90% of the crop calories creating beef: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feed_conversion_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feed_conversion_ratio). People arguing the opposite are usually under the false impression that cows are only fed grass (there's no enough room for this for the amount of cows we need) or arguing corner cases.

danaris 6y ago

And the alternatives to leather are mostly various plastic products, which have a much lower lifespan and much higher pollution footprint in general.