4 ms·

Yes, but one has to wonder whether linear output requiring nearly constant animal input, vs. linear output requiring linear animal input, will cause some people

Yes, but one has to wonder whether linear output requiring nearly constant animal input, vs. linear output requiring linear animal input, will cause some people to rethink this (thus resulting in a split in veganism). Every burger may ultimately come from exploitation of a cow, but if the burger in front of you does not come from any additional exploitation of a cow, many people may not have a problem with it. Unless there are already existing products that have this property, in which case I guess we have our answer. Or if it's not so non-linear as it sounds, in which case there's no question.

latch 15y ago
Well, there's still the issue of "living on the products of the plant kingdom." The only thing I can think of that's similar would maybe be recycled leather. I still think ethical vegans would have a problem with it, and I don't see this changing the opinion of anyone doing it for health reasons. I think environmental vegans are the most likely to buy into this..if it even becomes an efficient way to produce nutrition/calories. I could certainly see some more pragmatic organizations throwing their weight behind it.."if you must eat beef, at least eat this kind of beef (but consider X, Y and Z as even better alternatives)."
- ido 15y ago
  I still think ethical vegans would have a problem with it, and I don't see this changing the opinion of anyone doing it for health reasons. I think very few will have an ethical problem with it, most non-meat-eaters are vegetarians and not vegans, and I suspect even among vegans most are not as strict as you think.
lloeki 15y ago
> "thus resulting in a split in veganism" Theere's already a split: vegetarianism vs (strict) veganism. In French we actually have two distinct words: "végétarisme" vs "végétalisme" (which are both cases of "véganisme"). The former is concerned with cruelty and eating living animals, and is assumed to have no problem consuming milk and eggs. The latter is assumed to reject all forms of animal proteins, living exclusively on vegetal products.

latch 15y ago

Well, there's still the issue of "living on the products of the plant kingdom." The only thing I can think of that's similar would maybe be recycled leather. I still think ethical vegans would have a problem with it, and I don't see this changing the opinion of anyone doing it for health reasons. I think environmental vegans are the most likely to buy into this..if it even becomes an efficient way to produce nutrition/calories. I could certainly see some more pragmatic organizations throwing their weight behind it.."if you must eat beef, at least eat this kind of beef (but consider X, Y and Z as even better alternatives)."

ido 15y ago
I still think ethical vegans would have a problem with it, and I don't see this changing the opinion of anyone doing it for health reasons. I think very few will have an ethical problem with it, most non-meat-eaters are vegetarians and not vegans, and I suspect even among vegans most are not as strict as you think.

lloeki 15y ago

> "thus resulting in a split in veganism" Theere's already a split: vegetarianism vs (strict) veganism. In French we actually have two distinct words: "végétarisme" vs "végétalisme" (which are both cases of "véganisme"). The former is concerned with cruelty and eating living animals, and is assumed to have no problem consuming milk and eggs. The latter is assumed to reject all forms of animal proteins, living exclusively on vegetal products.