5 ms·

Why? I cut out almost all meat by simply not eating it. I eat some seafood on the rare occasion but really all it took was just choosing not to. I don't even t

Why? I cut out almost all meat by simply not eating it. I eat some seafood on the rare occasion but really all it took was just choosing not to. I don't even think of myself as vegetarian, just a normal human who opts for meatless options most of the time.

seba_dos1 5y ago
Same here. I do eat meat at times, especially when eating out; I just opt for meatless option whenever it's good enough to me, which turns out to be very often. I wonder if there's some meat addiction at play there, because that's how all these "it's not that easy" comments start to sound like to me. That said, I'm fully aware that it's easier to avoid meat in some places than in others. Living in the middle of a capital city, good meatless options were everywhere around, but after moving to suburbs of the same city there's not that much meatless stuff that I can order with delivery, for instance. It can also cost more, making it much less available for some social groups (although I hope it's just a matter of time and economy of scale, because in the end there's no reason why would it stay more expensive). Nevertheless, cutting meat intake by around half still doesn't seem that hard, it doesn't even take much effort once you already got to know the alternatives.
lolsal 5y ago
The British could give up tea, the Japanese could give up rice, and Indians could give up cumin. It's entirely possible to do all of those things by "simply not eating it". Do you think the above are equivalent to what you're asking regarding meat? Why or why not?
- seba_dos1 5y ago
  I don't think it would be a huge challenge for the British to drink less tea, the Japanese to eat less rice and Indians to use less cumin if continuing to eat, drink and use them would pose a huge risk for the future of all humanity. All of that (and also eating less meat) can be done without damaging the culture around it. What's much more challenging is to make people care about danger enough to be willing to change their personal behavior even in slightest ways. > Do you think the above are equivalent to what you're asking regarding meat? Why or why not? Of course it's not equivalent, because this thread is explicitly not about giving up meat consumption.
  - sam0x17 5y ago
    Except if they just start feeding the cows seaweed, there is no risk to humanity. Conversely, if everyone went vegetarian, that would pose a severe risk to humanity in the form of well documented negative health effects.

seba_dos1 5y ago

Same here. I do eat meat at times, especially when eating out; I just opt for meatless option whenever it's good enough to me, which turns out to be very often. I wonder if there's some meat addiction at play there, because that's how all these "it's not that easy" comments start to sound like to me. That said, I'm fully aware that it's easier to avoid meat in some places than in others. Living in the middle of a capital city, good meatless options were everywhere around, but after moving to suburbs of the same city there's not that much meatless stuff that I can order with delivery, for instance. It can also cost more, making it much less available for some social groups (although I hope it's just a matter of time and economy of scale, because in the end there's no reason why would it stay more expensive). Nevertheless, cutting meat intake by around half still doesn't seem that hard, it doesn't even take much effort once you already got to know the alternatives.

lolsal 5y ago

The British could give up tea, the Japanese could give up rice, and Indians could give up cumin. It's entirely possible to do all of those things by "simply not eating it". Do you think the above are equivalent to what you're asking regarding meat? Why or why not?

seba_dos1 5y ago
I don't think it would be a huge challenge for the British to drink less tea, the Japanese to eat less rice and Indians to use less cumin if continuing to eat, drink and use them would pose a huge risk for the future of all humanity. All of that (and also eating less meat) can be done without damaging the culture around it. What's much more challenging is to make people care about danger enough to be willing to change their personal behavior even in slightest ways. > Do you think the above are equivalent to what you're asking regarding meat? Why or why not? Of course it's not equivalent, because this thread is explicitly not about giving up meat consumption.
- sam0x17 5y ago
  Except if they just start feeding the cows seaweed, there is no risk to humanity. Conversely, if everyone went vegetarian, that would pose a severe risk to humanity in the form of well documented negative health effects.