4 ms·

That's because like OP says "Substitution works best with meats that are typically a highly processed mess filled with salt & spices". See how Burger King and M

That's because like OP says "Substitution works best with meats that are typically a highly processed mess filled with salt & spices". See how Burger King and McDonalds are so eager to sell you plant burgers and plant nuggets? That's because they don't give a shit what you eat, as long as it gets you in through the door. But those are the same people, the same industry, the same organisations, that are responsible for the over-production and over-consumption of meat, and they are very directly responsible for deforestation and land use change for industrial farming. Not eating meat may or may not do anything for the environment, but continuing to support the food industry does exactly the opposite: it supports the people who destroy the environment. And the ones who torture animals to boot. Here's a simple solution: don't eat industrial shit. If you're going to eat meat, eat meat from a small, local farmer (not for the miles, but for the size). If you're going to not eat meat, then don't eat fake meat, but real food made of plants and that looks like plants. And if you can't stand not eating meat, then sit down and think why not. Moralising about pleasure is dumb. People enjoy eating meat for the same reason we enjoy eating plants: because it's nourishing. You want to save the environment? Eat real food and support the people who make real food. Not burgers.

uxcolumbo 4y ago
Yes - you have these substitutes that are high in fats and salt. But there are also substitutes that are healthier. Or like you said, just don't go for fake meat products - that's also an option. But to allow people to transition to a more plant-based diet and try out different dishes - these fake meat burgers help. > Not eating meat may or may not do anything for the environment Not eating meat will reduce our carbon footprint and deforestation. The conclusion of this Oxford University study [0] is that the single best thing an individual can do to reduce their environmental footprint is to avoid or reduce as much as possible meat & dairy consumption. The lead researcher gave up meat & dairy because of this study. > Moralising about pleasure is dumb. People enjoy eating meat for the same reason we enjoy eating plants: because it's nourishing. Why is it dumb? As far as I know we are the only animal with morale agency. Then why don't we use it? Do you think it's justified to kill a sentient being, like a cow, just so we can enjoy its flesh? Like you said, plants are equally nourishing, so why not avoid killing other sentient beings when it's not necessary anymore for our survival? > Eat real food and support the people who make real food. I'm all for that. But we'd need a different agricultural system - maybe vertical farms etc - to make this scalable and more affordable. One thing that must end is subsidizing the meat & dairy industry and subsidize foods with a lower environmental footprint. [0] https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2018-06-01-new-estimates-environmental-cost-food https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2018-06-01-new-estimates-environme...
- cheese_goddess 4y ago
  I never said anything about plants being "equally nourishing". I certainly believe that it is "justified" to kill another animal of a different species to eat its flesh. You can't eat an animal's flesh without enjoying it, so I don't care about your sneaky attempt to turn the simple issue of what nourishes our bodies to a morality play about pleasure. I do not feel any guilt about my bodily functions. If I thought killing an animal to eat its flesh is not justified, then why would I think that killing a plant to eat its flesh is justified? A life is a life and to feed you have to take a life (or many). You're an animal and a cow is an animal, and so you (seem to?) think that a cow's life is more important or valuable than that of a potato, but that is an inconsistent and self-centered belief. I don't really care about your distinction between "sentient" and, presumably non-sentient, either. That's an arbitrary distinction you have conjured up just to support your misguided ideology. In a vast universe that is almost entirely composed of dead matter, we must value life above all else, in all its forms. To value one being's life over another is an abominable injustice and it is only with extreme contortions of reason that vegans and vegetarians arrive at it. Or rather, historically, it is because of religious beliefs (like in Buddhists etc) that they do.
  - uxcolumbo 4y ago
    There is a difference between animals and plants. That's a scientific fact. The question isn't which is more valuable - it's: can they suffer? The answer is yes - other animals suffer - just like us human animals. Plants don't suffer as they don't have pain receptor cells or a central nervous system. Take your example of a potato and a cow. If you cut a potato in half - it lives on and you will have more potatoes if you let those pieces grow. I think you know what happens to a cow when it's cut in half. Have you ever killed an animal? If so, how did it react? What did you feel while it was screaming for its life? What happens when you pick an apple or harvest nuts, legumes etc? Another thought experiment. How do you think children would react to the following scenarios: A) Cutting the throat of a baby sheep or pig, the blood gushing out and the animal screaming of pain - and the mother if she's nearby screaming as well because its baby is being slaughtered. B) Cutting a carrot, apple, mango or other fruit / vegetable or crushing nuts. There are various videos online showing how children react when they find out where meat comes from. They are shocked and cry - without even having to show them these graphic images. It's a sign that humans are not carnivores. Our mouths don't salivate when we see or smell blood, when we see intestines etc. quite the opposite - most people are disgusted by seeing all this stuff. That's why all this is hidden from us. We only see nice pieces of meat in the shops. As per Carl Sagan's words - 'They (animals) are too much like us'. The fact is - humans who are not hunter gatherers anymore or don't live in harsh environments, don't need meat to survive. Several government health organizations have already stated that humans can get adequate nutrition from plant-based foods alone. Since you are here on HN, I'm assuming you are interested in tech. I'm assuming you appreciate a logical way of thinking. What is more logical when it comes to feeding the world. A) Consume foods that require FEWER resources and create less damage to our biosphere. B) Consume foods that require MORE resources and slowly destroy our biosphere. I'm not attacking your way of life. But we humans have given up previous practices that didn't make sense anymore, e.g. burning women alive because they were deemed 'witches'. Enslaving other humans, because they were deemed a lesser human. There are reports of farmers talking about how they've given up farming animals, as they realized 'there is somebody in there' - and transitioned to non animal farming. Just because something is a tradition, doesn't mean it's right. We humans evolve and so does our moral system. Einstein talked about this 70 years ago - if we as a civilization want to survive, we can achieve this by 'widening our circles of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.' Future humans will equate what we are currently doing to animals the same way we find it morally reprehensible to enslave other humans. Even Star Trek envisioned this kind of future, where animals are not exploited anymore. Like I said before, it would be great if the world could at least adopt the lifestyle you outlined, i.e. have a diet that's mostly plant-based. But as you already noted - the factory farm industry is trying to enter your world. And that's the problem - we need to eradicate this destructive industry. A parting question: If you can avoid cruelty, suffering and exploitation - why don't you? Ignore all of the above, if you would die without eating meat.

uxcolumbo 4y ago

Yes - you have these substitutes that are high in fats and salt. But there are also substitutes that are healthier. Or like you said, just don't go for fake meat products - that's also an option. But to allow people to transition to a more plant-based diet and try out different dishes - these fake meat burgers help. > Not eating meat may or may not do anything for the environment Not eating meat will reduce our carbon footprint and deforestation. The conclusion of this Oxford University study [0] is that the single best thing an individual can do to reduce their environmental footprint is to avoid or reduce as much as possible meat & dairy consumption. The lead researcher gave up meat & dairy because of this study. > Moralising about pleasure is dumb. People enjoy eating meat for the same reason we enjoy eating plants: because it's nourishing. Why is it dumb? As far as I know we are the only animal with morale agency. Then why don't we use it? Do you think it's justified to kill a sentient being, like a cow, just so we can enjoy its flesh? Like you said, plants are equally nourishing, so why not avoid killing other sentient beings when it's not necessary anymore for our survival? > Eat real food and support the people who make real food. I'm all for that. But we'd need a different agricultural system - maybe vertical farms etc - to make this scalable and more affordable. One thing that must end is subsidizing the meat & dairy industry and subsidize foods with a lower environmental footprint. [0] https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2018-06-01-new-estimates-environmental-cost-food https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2018-06-01-new-estimates-environme...

cheese_goddess 4y ago
I never said anything about plants being "equally nourishing". I certainly believe that it is "justified" to kill another animal of a different species to eat its flesh. You can't eat an animal's flesh without enjoying it, so I don't care about your sneaky attempt to turn the simple issue of what nourishes our bodies to a morality play about pleasure. I do not feel any guilt about my bodily functions. If I thought killing an animal to eat its flesh is not justified, then why would I think that killing a plant to eat its flesh is justified? A life is a life and to feed you have to take a life (or many). You're an animal and a cow is an animal, and so you (seem to?) think that a cow's life is more important or valuable than that of a potato, but that is an inconsistent and self-centered belief. I don't really care about your distinction between "sentient" and, presumably non-sentient, either. That's an arbitrary distinction you have conjured up just to support your misguided ideology. In a vast universe that is almost entirely composed of dead matter, we must value life above all else, in all its forms. To value one being's life over another is an abominable injustice and it is only with extreme contortions of reason that vegans and vegetarians arrive at it. Or rather, historically, it is because of religious beliefs (like in Buddhists etc) that they do.
- uxcolumbo 4y ago
  There is a difference between animals and plants. That's a scientific fact. The question isn't which is more valuable - it's: can they suffer? The answer is yes - other animals suffer - just like us human animals. Plants don't suffer as they don't have pain receptor cells or a central nervous system. Take your example of a potato and a cow. If you cut a potato in half - it lives on and you will have more potatoes if you let those pieces grow. I think you know what happens to a cow when it's cut in half. Have you ever killed an animal? If so, how did it react? What did you feel while it was screaming for its life? What happens when you pick an apple or harvest nuts, legumes etc? Another thought experiment. How do you think children would react to the following scenarios: A) Cutting the throat of a baby sheep or pig, the blood gushing out and the animal screaming of pain - and the mother if she's nearby screaming as well because its baby is being slaughtered. B) Cutting a carrot, apple, mango or other fruit / vegetable or crushing nuts. There are various videos online showing how children react when they find out where meat comes from. They are shocked and cry - without even having to show them these graphic images. It's a sign that humans are not carnivores. Our mouths don't salivate when we see or smell blood, when we see intestines etc. quite the opposite - most people are disgusted by seeing all this stuff. That's why all this is hidden from us. We only see nice pieces of meat in the shops. As per Carl Sagan's words - 'They (animals) are too much like us'. The fact is - humans who are not hunter gatherers anymore or don't live in harsh environments, don't need meat to survive. Several government health organizations have already stated that humans can get adequate nutrition from plant-based foods alone. Since you are here on HN, I'm assuming you are interested in tech. I'm assuming you appreciate a logical way of thinking. What is more logical when it comes to feeding the world. A) Consume foods that require FEWER resources and create less damage to our biosphere. B) Consume foods that require MORE resources and slowly destroy our biosphere. I'm not attacking your way of life. But we humans have given up previous practices that didn't make sense anymore, e.g. burning women alive because they were deemed 'witches'. Enslaving other humans, because they were deemed a lesser human. There are reports of farmers talking about how they've given up farming animals, as they realized 'there is somebody in there' - and transitioned to non animal farming. Just because something is a tradition, doesn't mean it's right. We humans evolve and so does our moral system. Einstein talked about this 70 years ago - if we as a civilization want to survive, we can achieve this by 'widening our circles of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.' Future humans will equate what we are currently doing to animals the same way we find it morally reprehensible to enslave other humans. Even Star Trek envisioned this kind of future, where animals are not exploited anymore. Like I said before, it would be great if the world could at least adopt the lifestyle you outlined, i.e. have a diet that's mostly plant-based. But as you already noted - the factory farm industry is trying to enter your world. And that's the problem - we need to eradicate this destructive industry. A parting question: If you can avoid cruelty, suffering and exploitation - why don't you? Ignore all of the above, if you would die without eating meat.