5 ms·

As an avid meat-eater (because nature almost by definition is living things eating other living things and humans evolved to be omnivorous for various nutrition

As an avid meat-eater (because nature almost by definition is living things eating other living things and humans evolved to be omnivorous for various nutritional reasons), my answer to the animal cruelty argument is just to buy the top-shelf, pasture-raised meats. It's better for my health and much better for the animals. Obviously I have no control over where restaurants source their food from, but I try to preference those who claim ethical/sustainable practices. As for sustainability, the answer to that is to develop systems that price in environmental externalities. The issue isn't going to be solved through a meat boycott. Farm raised fish is also quite sustainable. I'm personally looking forward to economically viable lab-grown meat. Once perfected it'll likely be the most sustainable option with none of the nutritional deficits and none of the ethical concerns. Plus we'll be able to engineer meat with tastes that don't exist in nature, endless variety!

f430 6y ago
> my answer to the animal cruelty argument is just to buy the top-shelf, pasture-raised meats. So the solution is to pay more. Got it.
ookdatnog 6y ago
> because nature almost by definition is living things eating other living things and humans evolved to be omnivorous for various nutritional reasons This is such a non-argument, and I'm saying this as a(n occasional) meat-eater. > nature almost by definition is living things eating other living things The default state for most living beings is scarcity. I think we all intuitively judge the morality of people's actions depending on scarcity. If two people were on an uninhabited island with no chance to escape, and the island only produces enough food to sustain one person, then I don't think it's immoral for them to fight to the death over the scarce resources, neither of them has the duty to sacrifice their life for the other. But if the island produces enough for two people, then killing the other so you can have more food is clearly murder. Humans evolved the ability to eat meat because it increased their chances of survival in a hostile environment with scarce resources. In this dog eat dog world, I don't think eating meat was immoral. But the scarcity that justified it has disappeared for many (but sadly not nearly all) of us. > humans evolved to be omnivorous for various nutritional reasons There is no evidence that vegetarian diets are less healthy than those that incorporate meat. Again, eating meat no doubt increased the chances of survival for ancient hunter-gatherers living in harsh conditions, but that's no longer our environment, so it is irrelevant. To be clear, I'm not offended by the fact that you eat meat; I am irritated by the weak justification though, which is worse than no justification at all. Just have the honesty to admit that you are merely putting your comfort above the well-being of the animals you eat. Comfort is the only reason why healthy people eat meat.
- BlargMcLarg 6y ago
  >I am irritated by the weak justification though Pot, kettle. >Humans evolved the ability to eat meat because it increased their chances of survival in a hostile environment with scarce resources. It doesn't stop there. Humans have subsequently evolved to thrive on fatty foods. Our understanding of nutritional evolution is incredibly weak. Despite agriculture predominantly giving us access to carbohydrates, human brains are mostly fat-adapted. Many of today's health epidemics are linked to a lack of fat and an excess of carbohydrates. Try finding fatty fruits and veggies: they were incredibly scarce for most the human population until the last 100 years. Several people have noticed significant improvements going predominantly meat. There's more going on here than just the scarcity argument, the scarcity argument is a gross simplification. >Comfort is the only reason why healthy people eat meat No. Plenty of people are eating meat to be healthy. People are, in fact, getting frustrated by listening to the advice of the average western diet, listening to dietitians when they get fat, and unable to get in shape despite putting in an insane amount of effort listening to their dietitians putting their hormones out of whack, making them hungry and agitated 24/7, while they keep saying "just keep going". We don't process meat-based products the same way we do plant-based products. This is not to moralize meat. Rather, this is to indicate people jump on the "meat is bad / lazy / immoral" bandwagon way too quickly, being spoonfed the common narrative without doing an ounce of research and frequently without experience. Just like the average person doesn't eat meat for any other reason than their own comfort, so does the average person stop eating meat because everyone and their mother claims eating plants will save the world. It's becoming a story of "my propaganda is better than yours".
  - swixi 6y ago
    >Many of today's health epidemics are linked to a lack of fat and an excess of carbohydrates. I'm genuinely curious as to what you're getting at. When you say "excess of carbohydrates", are you referring specifically to processed foods or refined sugars? >Try finding fatty fruits and veggies: they were incredibly scarce for most the human population until the last 100 years. Maybe fatty fruits and veggies were scarce for most humans 100+ years ago, but I highly doubt nuts and seeds were. But that doesn't really matter if we're talking about what we can do today. Things like avocados, olives, coconuts, and the above-mentioned large categories of nuts and seeds, are readily available for most people making these sorts of arguments. Plus, if you're vegetarian and not vegan, then you have access to cheese, yogurt, milk, and eggs. It's easy to eat high fat and low carb while avoiding meat, so the argument for eating meat to be healthy on these grounds seems quite weak to me.
novok 6y ago
After doing some more research, I've found meat isn't as cruel as most think it is, and even vegetable farming isn't as animal injury / cruelty free as people would think. Often many, many small animals get basically wood chipped by agricultural machinery or poisoned by pest traps and pesticides. If you go by pure numbers of "non-insect brains" made to feel pain or die in horrible ways from human agricultural activity, vegetable farming would actually far outpace meat farming. Also a lot of meat ranching can use land that is plain unusable for vegetables, but cows, chickens, sheep and pigs can use just fine. That will not go away. Also meat such as cows especially are not subject to the 'cows living in shit up to their knees' type of reality everyone thinks most cheap cow meat lives in, which is actually a small minority of badly run farms. All cow meat lives in a pasture for at least %70 of their lives. That last %30 is the difference between 'grass fed' and conventional beef. All food has blood on its hands, and in the end, that is the way of life in human and non-human reality. I think a big part of the push to be vegetarian or vegan comes from a disconnect on how food is made. Societies used to be +%90 agricultural workers and processed their food in far more raw forms than the typical "abstract shapes of meat" that we typically deal with today, so a lot of the rhetoric did not connect, because it conflicted with their lived experience.
atweiden 6y ago
> my answer to the animal cruelty argument is just to buy the top-shelf, pasture-raised meats. It's better for my health and much better for the animals. No it isn't. [1] It really isn't. [2] [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtnlwqEii2I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtnlwqEii2I [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQRAfJyEsko https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQRAfJyEsko

f430 6y ago

> my answer to the animal cruelty argument is just to buy the top-shelf, pasture-raised meats. So the solution is to pay more. Got it.

ookdatnog 6y ago

> because nature almost by definition is living things eating other living things and humans evolved to be omnivorous for various nutritional reasons This is such a non-argument, and I'm saying this as a(n occasional) meat-eater. > nature almost by definition is living things eating other living things The default state for most living beings is scarcity. I think we all intuitively judge the morality of people's actions depending on scarcity. If two people were on an uninhabited island with no chance to escape, and the island only produces enough food to sustain one person, then I don't think it's immoral for them to fight to the death over the scarce resources, neither of them has the duty to sacrifice their life for the other. But if the island produces enough for two people, then killing the other so you can have more food is clearly murder. Humans evolved the ability to eat meat because it increased their chances of survival in a hostile environment with scarce resources. In this dog eat dog world, I don't think eating meat was immoral. But the scarcity that justified it has disappeared for many (but sadly not nearly all) of us. > humans evolved to be omnivorous for various nutritional reasons There is no evidence that vegetarian diets are less healthy than those that incorporate meat. Again, eating meat no doubt increased the chances of survival for ancient hunter-gatherers living in harsh conditions, but that's no longer our environment, so it is irrelevant. To be clear, I'm not offended by the fact that you eat meat; I am irritated by the weak justification though, which is worse than no justification at all. Just have the honesty to admit that you are merely putting your comfort above the well-being of the animals you eat. Comfort is the only reason why healthy people eat meat.

BlargMcLarg 6y ago
>I am irritated by the weak justification though Pot, kettle. >Humans evolved the ability to eat meat because it increased their chances of survival in a hostile environment with scarce resources. It doesn't stop there. Humans have subsequently evolved to thrive on fatty foods. Our understanding of nutritional evolution is incredibly weak. Despite agriculture predominantly giving us access to carbohydrates, human brains are mostly fat-adapted. Many of today's health epidemics are linked to a lack of fat and an excess of carbohydrates. Try finding fatty fruits and veggies: they were incredibly scarce for most the human population until the last 100 years. Several people have noticed significant improvements going predominantly meat. There's more going on here than just the scarcity argument, the scarcity argument is a gross simplification. >Comfort is the only reason why healthy people eat meat No. Plenty of people are eating meat to be healthy. People are, in fact, getting frustrated by listening to the advice of the average western diet, listening to dietitians when they get fat, and unable to get in shape despite putting in an insane amount of effort listening to their dietitians putting their hormones out of whack, making them hungry and agitated 24/7, while they keep saying "just keep going". We don't process meat-based products the same way we do plant-based products. This is not to moralize meat. Rather, this is to indicate people jump on the "meat is bad / lazy / immoral" bandwagon way too quickly, being spoonfed the common narrative without doing an ounce of research and frequently without experience. Just like the average person doesn't eat meat for any other reason than their own comfort, so does the average person stop eating meat because everyone and their mother claims eating plants will save the world. It's becoming a story of "my propaganda is better than yours".
- swixi 6y ago
  >Many of today's health epidemics are linked to a lack of fat and an excess of carbohydrates. I'm genuinely curious as to what you're getting at. When you say "excess of carbohydrates", are you referring specifically to processed foods or refined sugars? >Try finding fatty fruits and veggies: they were incredibly scarce for most the human population until the last 100 years. Maybe fatty fruits and veggies were scarce for most humans 100+ years ago, but I highly doubt nuts and seeds were. But that doesn't really matter if we're talking about what we can do today. Things like avocados, olives, coconuts, and the above-mentioned large categories of nuts and seeds, are readily available for most people making these sorts of arguments. Plus, if you're vegetarian and not vegan, then you have access to cheese, yogurt, milk, and eggs. It's easy to eat high fat and low carb while avoiding meat, so the argument for eating meat to be healthy on these grounds seems quite weak to me.

novok 6y ago

After doing some more research, I've found meat isn't as cruel as most think it is, and even vegetable farming isn't as animal injury / cruelty free as people would think. Often many, many small animals get basically wood chipped by agricultural machinery or poisoned by pest traps and pesticides. If you go by pure numbers of "non-insect brains" made to feel pain or die in horrible ways from human agricultural activity, vegetable farming would actually far outpace meat farming. Also a lot of meat ranching can use land that is plain unusable for vegetables, but cows, chickens, sheep and pigs can use just fine. That will not go away. Also meat such as cows especially are not subject to the 'cows living in shit up to their knees' type of reality everyone thinks most cheap cow meat lives in, which is actually a small minority of badly run farms. All cow meat lives in a pasture for at least %70 of their lives. That last %30 is the difference between 'grass fed' and conventional beef. All food has blood on its hands, and in the end, that is the way of life in human and non-human reality. I think a big part of the push to be vegetarian or vegan comes from a disconnect on how food is made. Societies used to be +%90 agricultural workers and processed their food in far more raw forms than the typical "abstract shapes of meat" that we typically deal with today, so a lot of the rhetoric did not connect, because it conflicted with their lived experience.

atweiden 6y ago

> my answer to the animal cruelty argument is just to buy the top-shelf, pasture-raised meats. It's better for my health and much better for the animals. No it isn't. [1] It really isn't. [2] [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtnlwqEii2I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtnlwqEii2I [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQRAfJyEsko https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQRAfJyEsko