10 ms·

As a vegetarian with lots of vegetarian friends, I'll add a purely anecdotal observation: People who choose to not eat meat generally do so for a reason, and f

by magpi3 4y ago

As a vegetarian with lots of vegetarian friends, I'll add a purely anecdotal observation: People who choose to not eat meat generally do so for a reason, and for many of my friends that reason is cruelty to animals. If a person is aware of cruelty to animals, and actually cares enough to actually change their lifestyle, then that person extends their empathy beyond their own life, beyond their own immediate sphere. For me, it is this quality that can lead to depression. If a person allows themselves to take on the suffering they see see around them, if they allow themselves to really feel it, the world seems colder and crueler and the individual feels more powerless. IOW, I do think people with very strong powers of denial about the wrongs they see around them are generally happier.

iinnPP 4y ago
Aka ignorance is bliss.
- ryukoposting 4y ago
  Is it really ignorance? I've seen the pictures of Chickens in cages. I'm aware of the industrialized meat business. I'm aware of the shitty conditions a lot of animals are put in. It just doesn't make me feel bad about eating meat.
  - timeon 4y ago
    Seems like it is.
  - iinnPP 4y ago
    I would be happier not knowing how the animals are treated.
  - kcplate 4y ago
    I am aware of all that as well and it doesn’t bother me either, because they are food and food is something I need to survive. Whether it’s higher order life or lower order life…for you to live, something else has to die.
    - 9dev 4y ago
      This is the thing I don’t get. Yes, those animals are exploited for food, but it’s not like you need to eat animals to live. You could very well thrive on plants exclusively, but you choose not to. Why, and I ask this not out of spite but honest curiosity, do sentient beings have to die for your diet?
      - kcplate 4y ago
        The brutally honest answer is… they taste good and I don’t want to eat plants exclusively because I don’t have to as an omnivore. As for sentience, it does not factor into my equation, in the same way a lion isn’t concerned about the impala’s feelings. If plants are shown to have sentience one day, would you allow yourself to starve to death out of concern?
        9dev 4y ago
        No. If I’m starving, I’m going to take a puppy, rip it’s heart out, and eat it raw. But… I’m not starving. None of us is. So to me, this all comes down to having a conscience, and being considerate. You answered the question quite well — you simply care more about yourself than anyone else. If that’s okay for you, carry on.
        kcplate 4y ago
        Yes, I certainly care for myself more than chickens, deers, cows, pigs, ducks, fish, and many other animals that have found their way to my plate over the years. I don’t humanize them, because they are not humans, their food. You referred to them as “anyone”, which indicates you blur that line. One difference between us…I would never pass judgement on someone who chooses to eat a plant based diet. However, being well experienced with vegans I have come to expect that moralistic evangelical aspect of folks that choose that lifestyle.
        9dev 4y ago
        It’s not about humanising, it’s about recognising other sentient beings as having a subjective existence, thus, being someone. I don’t pass judgement on you, by the way. Choosing not to eat me is, for most, a different mindset, not just a dietary change. I guess this is something everyone has to learn for themselves, and this discussion won’t really lead anywhere, so let’s cut it at this point.
  - panarky 4y ago
    Someone should study whether there's a causal relationship between empathy and depression/anxiety.
electromech 4y ago
Thanks for this. I began switching to a vegan diet a few months AFTER my depression started. The suffering in the world weighs heavily on me, and it's marginally helpful to do something about it.
aerojoe23 4y ago
I had a similar thought. Also I think a vegetarian is more likely to understand humanity's impact on the world, and just how helpless we seem to be to stop a negative impact that takes coordinated effort. Though the ozone is getting better.
verisimi 4y ago
I think this is a great observation, obvious once you think about it. No one would accept killing their dog or cat, but sheep, cows, etc - who cares? - even though they have the similar levels of sentience, and no creature wants to die or be killed. Its odd that our perception of suffering in another can be switched on or off, at least for most. We can allow ourselves to feel detached from the daily carnage, or not. Perhaps choosing to accept truth does make you more depressed. Perhaps too, it has its consolations - not that these will necessarily assist you in the ladder to success.
- aksss 4y ago
  It’s a difference between thinking of dogs as a species and dogs as individuals. I wouldn’t want “my” dog on the barbie, but generally don’t have a problem with the idea of “dogs” on the barbie if we didn’t have better choices (I/we do). There’s also a hierarchy of value: I love you and I love my dog. I you were starving, I’d feed you my dog. If my dog were starving, it’s curtains for the dog. It also improves understanding to differentiate between the act of killing “an” animal for food, and the specialization in a society to do that at scale. Criticizing the excesses of esp. modern industrialization need not mandate rejection of using animals for food in principle. Those are two separate issues to my way of thinking. Raising and killing an animal for food is not in itself cruel unless the methods to do so are such - in other words it need not be done cruelly. The opinion that raising and killing animals at an industrial scale crosses the line seems then a question of degree (what would it take to make industrial scale less cruel?). This is of course balanced with what our tribe needs to thrive efficiently. We allow a lot of cruelty for our convenience - just look at how your iPhone or Nikes are made (and food has to be a whole lot more affordable than iPhones). Doing anything at industrial scale exploits resources (human or otherwise). Fighting for better conditions in industry doesn’t require abstention from eating meat unless perhaps that’s your only way to get meat. I say perhaps because there’s also this idea of fixing the truck while we’re driving it - complete abolition of an industry is not a necessary step (or arguably a wise one) to improve it. If you just broadly reject the idea of eating meat because it represents the death of another life form to sustain your own existence, that’s a tough corner to be in with any consistency.
jasonhansel 4y ago
There's actually some evidence that having left-wing political beliefs in general is associated with mental health consequences, because people with such beliefs are more aware of societal injustices, and because unhappy people are more likely to want change. I suspect that this is a similar effect, probably enhanced by the fact that vegetarians are usually on the left. Did the study control for political views? I'd be interested in seeing if this replicates in India, where many vegetarians are actually strong (religious) conservatives.
- wyager 4y ago
  > There's actually some evidence that having left-wing political beliefs is associated with mental health consequences This is certainly true, at least based on polling, cf https://news.gallup.com/poll/102943/republicans-report-much-better-mental-health-than-others.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/102943/republicans-report-much-... > because people with such beliefs are more aware of societal injustices in general There is no evidence I'm aware of that this is the underlying causal relationship.
- goodpoint 4y ago
  > because people with such beliefs are more aware of societal injustices, and because unhappy people are more likely to want change That's well proven. Yet, for the record, mental health is known to be much worse in the far-right and far-right libertarians (conspiracy theories, projection etc.)
  - denton-scratch 4y ago
    >> unhappy people are more likely to want change > That's well proven. Is that something that needs proving? Doesn't being unhappy logically imply that you want change?
  - wyager 4y ago
    > for the record, mental health is known to be much worse in the far-right and far-right libertarians Every paper I've seen on the subject has pretty much monotonic improvement in reported mental health outcomes almost all the way to the right, and if there's any non-monotonicity, it's insufficient to come even close to the reported negative mental health outcomes on the far left. This is not a formal scientific paper, but the SSC survey has the benefit of tighter granularity and more heterodoxy than most sources. https://mobile.twitter.com/phl43/status/1227338353101672450 https://mobile.twitter.com/phl43/status/1227338353101672450 Low granularity research from gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/102943/republicans-report-much-better-mental-health-than-others.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/102943/republicans-report-much-...
lytefm 4y ago
I'd add that many people go vegan/ vegetarian due to awareness of impact of meat consumption on global warming and hunger. Worrying too much about the future and the state of the world in general can definitely lead to depression. Ignorance is bliss. Also, I've found esoteric or conspiracy theorist views to be quite common among some vegans and vegetarian: If you're convinced that this this the only healthy and ethical way of eating, some evil force must be working against it!
- denton-scratch 4y ago
  > Worrying too much about the future and the state of the world in general can definitely lead to depression. Doing "too much" of anything leads to adverse consequences, almost by definition. Arguably "worrying too much" is a symptom of depression, rather than a cause. And what is "depression"? Are you just saying that worrying about the state of the world makes you fed-up? Maybe being fed-up about the state of the world makes you fed-up. I try to avoid the vernacular use of the word "depression", because it can mean either being fed-up or being clinically depressed, and I'm not a clinician. FTR, I was once diagnosed with depression, and prescribed antidepressants. They had a really odd effect on me, and I discontinued their use after 6 months. I'm much happier now, because I'm not ill; I just have lots of reasons to be fed-up.
  - lytefm 4y ago
    > Arguably "worrying too much" is a symptom of depression, rather than a cause. Well, it's not like you're suddenly getting a depression out of the blue and then start having obsessive negative thoughts. Repetitive intrusive thoughts can in fact lead into depression. > Are you just saying that worrying about the state of the world makes you fed-up? Most people will probably just feel fed up and not bother much. But for some, it can contribute to anxiety, depressive episodes or a full depression. I agree, the term "depression" is probably used inflationary when it's "only" a depressive episode or feeling depressed.
    - denton-scratch 4y ago
      > But for some, it can contribute to anxiety Being anxious isn't the same as being ill. It's rational (and healthy) to be anxious in the face of serious threats.
veganthrowaway 4y ago
A thing that makes me sad at times is that, otherwise caring and open-minded, important people that I love in my life contributes to something as cruel and horrific as animal agriculture. And also that you can't catch a break, you can't trust food and you must be prepared to defend your lifestyle during lunch or when going out.
goodpoint 4y ago
A lot of vegetarians/vegans do that for environmental reasons. And if you are aware of climate change & co you have reasons to feel hopeless. Nothing new in this research. The difficult part is to stay hopeful.
- pier25 4y ago
  It's difficult to hear someone say they chose to become vegan/vegetarian for environmental reasons when agriculture is one of the biggest environmental disasters of all time and (by far) the largest source of emissions globally is the generation of electricity.
- aksss 4y ago
  This trend in the comments of so many to say “awareness causes depression/hopelessness” is an annoying leap and probably just a salve (“I’m so sad cuz I’m so wise”). The depression is a result of how an individual may respond to an awareness (from the small to the massive), and depression/hopelessness is certainly not a foregone conclusion for others. The lack of depression should not imply a lack of awareness. Those telling themselves that their depression is a result of their super big brains or high empathy may want to explore other possibilities to resolve the issue in a healthy manner. You may be highly empathetic with the chickens at Foster Farms, but the issue is an inability to incorporate that knowledge/feeling/sensation into a worldview where it doesn’t have outsized influence. I know the justifications, reasoning, excuses, and remedies are a deep discussion not to be had here, but empathy/knowledge is not the enemy.
  - goodpoint 4y ago
    > The depression is a result of how an individual may respond to an awareness It's more complex than that and there are many confounding variables. > The lack of depression should not imply a lack of awareness. I never implied that. > Those telling themselves that their depression is a result of their super big brains This sound like a strawman... > a deep discussion not to be had here Correct. This is HN.
    - 4y ago
wyager 4y ago
This model falls flat for at least one important reason: Anti-abortion people believe that there is presently widespread systematic mass murder of babies. Regardless of whether or not you agree with them, you must concede that this is a very terrible thing to believe. Certainly worse than the effects of agriculture on animals, unless you are deeply misanthropic. Anti-abortion people are not nearly as depressed as people who don't eat meat.
- totoglazer 4y ago
  First, curious to see that cited. Second, Anti-abortion people are ok with causing significant harm to women and see their lives as less valuable and not worth protecting.
  - verisimi 4y ago
    Are latent baby lives not worth protecting?
    - kennywinker 4y ago
      Why would you prioritize a “latent” life over an actual life? Anti-choice people only seem to care about others up until birth, at which point your poverty is your own problem and you shouldn’t have had so many kids.
      - wyager 4y ago
        Do you think anti-abortion activists would be OK with state-sanctioned intentional murder of babies who have been born? That would be the prediction of your model if it was applied consistently. Being against (what you believe to be) murder should be very easily distinguishable from being in favor of whatever flavor of welfare program you're thinking about.
        kennywinker 4y ago
        That's how anti-choice people want to frame the argument, but that's not the only "applied consistently" frame available, and frankly it's not one that I'm interested in. The decision is to carry a child to term, or to not carry a child to term - the "murder" (as some see it) is a consequence of the decision, not the decision itself. Nobody is choosing to have an abortion in order to kill. So, applying that consistently, if you believe that fetuses are people, the question would be - are you ok with people being able to make legal ("state-sanctioned") choices that result in the death of other people? And of course we all are ok with that to some degree - driving is legal (40k/year dead in the USA), as is gun ownership (30k/year), as is deregulating the EPA (unknowable but large numbers of cancer deaths), and climate inaction (unknowable and growing numbers of climate related deaths).
brightball 4y ago
IMO this is a naive perspective. “Everyone else is heartless and only I can see the truth.” If you were to sit down and have a very open honest conversation with somebody who doesn’t share your perspective, you’ll find that you’re intentionally (or unintentionally) ignoring a lot of information to form your point of view. Every public influence in our world today knows how to influence people in this way too. You fit in a bucket and you’re going to see information that reinforces you. There’s nothing wrong with being vegetarian or vegan. There’s nothing wrong with eating meat. There’s a lot wrong with believing you know what’s best for everybody.
- sgu999 4y ago
  > There’s nothing wrong with eating meat. Putting the suffering of sentient beings aside, there are still many things wrong with eating meat as practiced in most developed countries... Ressources consumptions and heart diseases are only two of the very well documented issues.
- magpi3 4y ago
  Do you think there is something wrong with how animals are treated in factory farms?
- nathanaldensr 4y ago
  It doesn't stop at "knowing what's best for everybody." I'm fine with people thinking they know things; what I'm not fine is the power of the state being turned against everyone to enforce what are nearly always fringe or minority beliefs. Sorry, vegetarians and vegans, but most of the world is just fine with eating meat[1]. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1280098/global-non-meat-eaters-by-select-country/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1280098/global-non-meat-...
rogerkirkness 4y ago
Causality is reversed in the studies in practice: neuroticism is likely to lead to lifestyle solutions like vegetarian diets.
- vannevar 4y ago
  Yes, associative studies like this, with no testable theory of causation, are pretty worthless. Given the thousands of such fishing expeditions conducted annually, some are bound to have statistical significance and get promoted. They give academic researchers something to do, but don't really add much to the body of knowledge.
vlunkr 4y ago
This was a study in Brazil, so we know if vegan/vegetarian culture even has the same motives there?
asdf98 4y ago
Is not eating meat for this reason any better than just only buying from farms that are free range and cruelty free - so you support humane farms. The problem with vegetables is they have a lot of compounds that stop nutrient absorption. You do not absorb iron easily from vegetables. But a roaming animal that eats grass and vegetables digests them and makes their nutrients readily absorbable when you eat their muscle. I think we are more evolved to eat meat than plants honestly. Do you think the plant wants to get ripped out of the ground, sliced up and eaten by you? Probably not. You're not any more noble than a meat eater.
pier25 4y ago
The industrial civilization is cruel with the environment at large no matter your diet. Agriculture needs to destroy entire ecosystems for it to exist.
hrbf 4y ago
Thanks for this. I had originally written quite a bunch but realized it’s rather pointless to do. Ultimately, no matter the stance or argument, it all boils down to the old Tolstoy quote for me: “As long as there are slaughterhouses there will always be battlefields.” If you are unable or unwilling to muster the empathy to care for living beings you can easily dominate, how will you ever be able to emphasize with your enemies?
snapplebobapple 4y ago
I am not sure about this because I have many friends who feel the exact same way you do about animal cruelty but chose to solve the problem by eating less meat but choosing higher quality meat from regenerative agriculture farms that they have personally inspected and none of those people suffer depressive episodes (they also enjoy knowing their cows had 2ish excellent years of life, up to 10-11 for their dairy consumption, while sequestering a crapload of carbon, providing a seriously underappreciated carbon sink while creating higher quality soil for growing crops)

by magpi3 4y ago

iinnPP 4y ago

Aka ignorance is bliss.

ryukoposting 4y ago
Is it really ignorance? I've seen the pictures of Chickens in cages. I'm aware of the industrialized meat business. I'm aware of the shitty conditions a lot of animals are put in. It just doesn't make me feel bad about eating meat.
- timeon 4y ago
  Seems like it is.
- iinnPP 4y ago
  I would be happier not knowing how the animals are treated.
- kcplate 4y ago
  I am aware of all that as well and it doesn’t bother me either, because they are food and food is something I need to survive. Whether it’s higher order life or lower order life…for you to live, something else has to die.
  - 9dev 4y ago
    This is the thing I don’t get. Yes, those animals are exploited for food, but it’s not like you need to eat animals to live. You could very well thrive on plants exclusively, but you choose not to. Why, and I ask this not out of spite but honest curiosity, do sentient beings have to die for your diet?
    - kcplate 4y ago
      The brutally honest answer is… they taste good and I don’t want to eat plants exclusively because I don’t have to as an omnivore. As for sentience, it does not factor into my equation, in the same way a lion isn’t concerned about the impala’s feelings. If plants are shown to have sentience one day, would you allow yourself to starve to death out of concern?
      - 9dev 4y ago
        No. If I’m starving, I’m going to take a puppy, rip it’s heart out, and eat it raw. But… I’m not starving. None of us is. So to me, this all comes down to having a conscience, and being considerate. You answered the question quite well — you simply care more about yourself than anyone else. If that’s okay for you, carry on.
        kcplate 4y ago
        Yes, I certainly care for myself more than chickens, deers, cows, pigs, ducks, fish, and many other animals that have found their way to my plate over the years. I don’t humanize them, because they are not humans, their food. You referred to them as “anyone”, which indicates you blur that line. One difference between us…I would never pass judgement on someone who chooses to eat a plant based diet. However, being well experienced with vegans I have come to expect that moralistic evangelical aspect of folks that choose that lifestyle.
        9dev 4y ago
        It’s not about humanising, it’s about recognising other sentient beings as having a subjective existence, thus, being someone. I don’t pass judgement on you, by the way. Choosing not to eat me is, for most, a different mindset, not just a dietary change. I guess this is something everyone has to learn for themselves, and this discussion won’t really lead anywhere, so let’s cut it at this point.
- panarky 4y ago
  Someone should study whether there's a causal relationship between empathy and depression/anxiety.

electromech 4y ago

Thanks for this. I began switching to a vegan diet a few months AFTER my depression started. The suffering in the world weighs heavily on me, and it's marginally helpful to do something about it.

aerojoe23 4y ago

I had a similar thought. Also I think a vegetarian is more likely to understand humanity's impact on the world, and just how helpless we seem to be to stop a negative impact that takes coordinated effort. Though the ozone is getting better.

verisimi 4y ago

I think this is a great observation, obvious once you think about it. No one would accept killing their dog or cat, but sheep, cows, etc - who cares? - even though they have the similar levels of sentience, and no creature wants to die or be killed. Its odd that our perception of suffering in another can be switched on or off, at least for most. We can allow ourselves to feel detached from the daily carnage, or not. Perhaps choosing to accept truth does make you more depressed. Perhaps too, it has its consolations - not that these will necessarily assist you in the ladder to success.

aksss 4y ago
It’s a difference between thinking of dogs as a species and dogs as individuals. I wouldn’t want “my” dog on the barbie, but generally don’t have a problem with the idea of “dogs” on the barbie if we didn’t have better choices (I/we do). There’s also a hierarchy of value: I love you and I love my dog. I you were starving, I’d feed you my dog. If my dog were starving, it’s curtains for the dog. It also improves understanding to differentiate between the act of killing “an” animal for food, and the specialization in a society to do that at scale. Criticizing the excesses of esp. modern industrialization need not mandate rejection of using animals for food in principle. Those are two separate issues to my way of thinking. Raising and killing an animal for food is not in itself cruel unless the methods to do so are such - in other words it need not be done cruelly. The opinion that raising and killing animals at an industrial scale crosses the line seems then a question of degree (what would it take to make industrial scale less cruel?). This is of course balanced with what our tribe needs to thrive efficiently. We allow a lot of cruelty for our convenience - just look at how your iPhone or Nikes are made (and food has to be a whole lot more affordable than iPhones). Doing anything at industrial scale exploits resources (human or otherwise). Fighting for better conditions in industry doesn’t require abstention from eating meat unless perhaps that’s your only way to get meat. I say perhaps because there’s also this idea of fixing the truck while we’re driving it - complete abolition of an industry is not a necessary step (or arguably a wise one) to improve it. If you just broadly reject the idea of eating meat because it represents the death of another life form to sustain your own existence, that’s a tough corner to be in with any consistency.

jasonhansel 4y ago

There's actually some evidence that having left-wing political beliefs in general is associated with mental health consequences, because people with such beliefs are more aware of societal injustices, and because unhappy people are more likely to want change. I suspect that this is a similar effect, probably enhanced by the fact that vegetarians are usually on the left. Did the study control for political views? I'd be interested in seeing if this replicates in India, where many vegetarians are actually strong (religious) conservatives.

wyager 4y ago
> There's actually some evidence that having left-wing political beliefs is associated with mental health consequences This is certainly true, at least based on polling, cf https://news.gallup.com/poll/102943/republicans-report-much-better-mental-health-than-others.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/102943/republicans-report-much-... > because people with such beliefs are more aware of societal injustices in general There is no evidence I'm aware of that this is the underlying causal relationship.
goodpoint 4y ago
> because people with such beliefs are more aware of societal injustices, and because unhappy people are more likely to want change That's well proven. Yet, for the record, mental health is known to be much worse in the far-right and far-right libertarians (conspiracy theories, projection etc.)
- denton-scratch 4y ago
  >> unhappy people are more likely to want change > That's well proven. Is that something that needs proving? Doesn't being unhappy logically imply that you want change?
- wyager 4y ago
  > for the record, mental health is known to be much worse in the far-right and far-right libertarians Every paper I've seen on the subject has pretty much monotonic improvement in reported mental health outcomes almost all the way to the right, and if there's any non-monotonicity, it's insufficient to come even close to the reported negative mental health outcomes on the far left. This is not a formal scientific paper, but the SSC survey has the benefit of tighter granularity and more heterodoxy than most sources. https://mobile.twitter.com/phl43/status/1227338353101672450 https://mobile.twitter.com/phl43/status/1227338353101672450 Low granularity research from gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/102943/republicans-report-much-better-mental-health-than-others.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/102943/republicans-report-much-...

lytefm 4y ago

I'd add that many people go vegan/ vegetarian due to awareness of impact of meat consumption on global warming and hunger. Worrying too much about the future and the state of the world in general can definitely lead to depression. Ignorance is bliss. Also, I've found esoteric or conspiracy theorist views to be quite common among some vegans and vegetarian: If you're convinced that this this the only healthy and ethical way of eating, some evil force must be working against it!

denton-scratch 4y ago
> Worrying too much about the future and the state of the world in general can definitely lead to depression. Doing "too much" of anything leads to adverse consequences, almost by definition. Arguably "worrying too much" is a symptom of depression, rather than a cause. And what is "depression"? Are you just saying that worrying about the state of the world makes you fed-up? Maybe being fed-up about the state of the world makes you fed-up. I try to avoid the vernacular use of the word "depression", because it can mean either being fed-up or being clinically depressed, and I'm not a clinician. FTR, I was once diagnosed with depression, and prescribed antidepressants. They had a really odd effect on me, and I discontinued their use after 6 months. I'm much happier now, because I'm not ill; I just have lots of reasons to be fed-up.
- lytefm 4y ago
  > Arguably "worrying too much" is a symptom of depression, rather than a cause. Well, it's not like you're suddenly getting a depression out of the blue and then start having obsessive negative thoughts. Repetitive intrusive thoughts can in fact lead into depression. > Are you just saying that worrying about the state of the world makes you fed-up? Most people will probably just feel fed up and not bother much. But for some, it can contribute to anxiety, depressive episodes or a full depression. I agree, the term "depression" is probably used inflationary when it's "only" a depressive episode or feeling depressed.
  - denton-scratch 4y ago
    > But for some, it can contribute to anxiety Being anxious isn't the same as being ill. It's rational (and healthy) to be anxious in the face of serious threats.

veganthrowaway 4y ago

A thing that makes me sad at times is that, otherwise caring and open-minded, important people that I love in my life contributes to something as cruel and horrific as animal agriculture. And also that you can't catch a break, you can't trust food and you must be prepared to defend your lifestyle during lunch or when going out.

goodpoint 4y ago

A lot of vegetarians/vegans do that for environmental reasons. And if you are aware of climate change & co you have reasons to feel hopeless. Nothing new in this research. The difficult part is to stay hopeful.

pier25 4y ago
It's difficult to hear someone say they chose to become vegan/vegetarian for environmental reasons when agriculture is one of the biggest environmental disasters of all time and (by far) the largest source of emissions globally is the generation of electricity.
aksss 4y ago
This trend in the comments of so many to say “awareness causes depression/hopelessness” is an annoying leap and probably just a salve (“I’m so sad cuz I’m so wise”). The depression is a result of how an individual may respond to an awareness (from the small to the massive), and depression/hopelessness is certainly not a foregone conclusion for others. The lack of depression should not imply a lack of awareness. Those telling themselves that their depression is a result of their super big brains or high empathy may want to explore other possibilities to resolve the issue in a healthy manner. You may be highly empathetic with the chickens at Foster Farms, but the issue is an inability to incorporate that knowledge/feeling/sensation into a worldview where it doesn’t have outsized influence. I know the justifications, reasoning, excuses, and remedies are a deep discussion not to be had here, but empathy/knowledge is not the enemy.
- goodpoint 4y ago
  > The depression is a result of how an individual may respond to an awareness It's more complex than that and there are many confounding variables. > The lack of depression should not imply a lack of awareness. I never implied that. > Those telling themselves that their depression is a result of their super big brains This sound like a strawman... > a deep discussion not to be had here Correct. This is HN.
  - 4y ago

wyager 4y ago

This model falls flat for at least one important reason: Anti-abortion people believe that there is presently widespread systematic mass murder of babies. Regardless of whether or not you agree with them, you must concede that this is a very terrible thing to believe. Certainly worse than the effects of agriculture on animals, unless you are deeply misanthropic. Anti-abortion people are not nearly as depressed as people who don't eat meat.

totoglazer 4y ago
First, curious to see that cited. Second, Anti-abortion people are ok with causing significant harm to women and see their lives as less valuable and not worth protecting.
- verisimi 4y ago
  Are latent baby lives not worth protecting?
  - kennywinker 4y ago
    Why would you prioritize a “latent” life over an actual life? Anti-choice people only seem to care about others up until birth, at which point your poverty is your own problem and you shouldn’t have had so many kids.
    - wyager 4y ago
      Do you think anti-abortion activists would be OK with state-sanctioned intentional murder of babies who have been born? That would be the prediction of your model if it was applied consistently. Being against (what you believe to be) murder should be very easily distinguishable from being in favor of whatever flavor of welfare program you're thinking about.
      - kennywinker 4y ago
        That's how anti-choice people want to frame the argument, but that's not the only "applied consistently" frame available, and frankly it's not one that I'm interested in. The decision is to carry a child to term, or to not carry a child to term - the "murder" (as some see it) is a consequence of the decision, not the decision itself. Nobody is choosing to have an abortion in order to kill. So, applying that consistently, if you believe that fetuses are people, the question would be - are you ok with people being able to make legal ("state-sanctioned") choices that result in the death of other people? And of course we all are ok with that to some degree - driving is legal (40k/year dead in the USA), as is gun ownership (30k/year), as is deregulating the EPA (unknowable but large numbers of cancer deaths), and climate inaction (unknowable and growing numbers of climate related deaths).

brightball 4y ago

IMO this is a naive perspective. “Everyone else is heartless and only I can see the truth.” If you were to sit down and have a very open honest conversation with somebody who doesn’t share your perspective, you’ll find that you’re intentionally (or unintentionally) ignoring a lot of information to form your point of view. Every public influence in our world today knows how to influence people in this way too. You fit in a bucket and you’re going to see information that reinforces you. There’s nothing wrong with being vegetarian or vegan. There’s nothing wrong with eating meat. There’s a lot wrong with believing you know what’s best for everybody.

sgu999 4y ago
> There’s nothing wrong with eating meat. Putting the suffering of sentient beings aside, there are still many things wrong with eating meat as practiced in most developed countries... Ressources consumptions and heart diseases are only two of the very well documented issues.
magpi3 4y ago
Do you think there is something wrong with how animals are treated in factory farms?
nathanaldensr 4y ago
It doesn't stop at "knowing what's best for everybody." I'm fine with people thinking they know things; what I'm not fine is the power of the state being turned against everyone to enforce what are nearly always fringe or minority beliefs. Sorry, vegetarians and vegans, but most of the world is just fine with eating meat[1]. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1280098/global-non-meat-eaters-by-select-country/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1280098/global-non-meat-...

rogerkirkness 4y ago

Causality is reversed in the studies in practice: neuroticism is likely to lead to lifestyle solutions like vegetarian diets.

vannevar 4y ago
Yes, associative studies like this, with no testable theory of causation, are pretty worthless. Given the thousands of such fishing expeditions conducted annually, some are bound to have statistical significance and get promoted. They give academic researchers something to do, but don't really add much to the body of knowledge.

vlunkr 4y ago

This was a study in Brazil, so we know if vegan/vegetarian culture even has the same motives there?

asdf98 4y ago

Is not eating meat for this reason any better than just only buying from farms that are free range and cruelty free - so you support humane farms. The problem with vegetables is they have a lot of compounds that stop nutrient absorption. You do not absorb iron easily from vegetables. But a roaming animal that eats grass and vegetables digests them and makes their nutrients readily absorbable when you eat their muscle. I think we are more evolved to eat meat than plants honestly. Do you think the plant wants to get ripped out of the ground, sliced up and eaten by you? Probably not. You're not any more noble than a meat eater.

pier25 4y ago

The industrial civilization is cruel with the environment at large no matter your diet. Agriculture needs to destroy entire ecosystems for it to exist.

hrbf 4y ago

Thanks for this. I had originally written quite a bunch but realized it’s rather pointless to do. Ultimately, no matter the stance or argument, it all boils down to the old Tolstoy quote for me: “As long as there are slaughterhouses there will always be battlefields.” If you are unable or unwilling to muster the empathy to care for living beings you can easily dominate, how will you ever be able to emphasize with your enemies?

snapplebobapple 4y ago

I am not sure about this because I have many friends who feel the exact same way you do about animal cruelty but chose to solve the problem by eating less meat but choosing higher quality meat from regenerative agriculture farms that they have personally inspected and none of those people suffer depressive episodes (they also enjoy knowing their cows had 2ish excellent years of life, up to 10-11 for their dairy consumption, while sequestering a crapload of carbon, providing a seriously underappreciated carbon sink while creating higher quality soil for growing crops)