Guest guest Posted October 29, 2007 Report Share Posted October 29, 2007 Eating meat is an inappropriate activity and is also very very inefficient. You can eat an animal only once, but they can be watched endlessly. -- the kneeling fool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 29, 2007 Report Share Posted October 29, 2007 > Eating meat is an inappropriate activity and is also very > very inefficient. You can eat an animal only once, but they > can be watched endlessly. > > -- > the kneeling fool Thank you. I would encourage meat-eaters to check out the following documentaries: Eating - www.ravediet.com and Earthlings - www.isawearthlings.com (available on google video or youtube for free) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 In a groundbreaking 2006 report, the United Nations (U.N.) said that raising animals for food generates more greenhouse gases than all the cars and trucks in the world combined. Senior U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization official Henning Steinfeld reported that the meat industry is “one of the most significant contributors to today’s most serious environmental problems.”2 http://www.goveg.com/environment-globalwarming.asp On Oct 29, 2007, at 3:18 PM, the kneeling fool wrote: > Eating meat is an inappropriate activity and is also very > very inefficient. You can eat an animal only once, but they > can be watched endlessly. > > -- > the kneeling fool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 New studies show a flaw in that thinking: http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/Oct07/diets.ag.footprint.sl.html A new study done in New York that shows that if New Yorkers eat small amounts of meat and dairy they are better managing their land and are able to feed more people then if they only used land for vegetarian crops. This study shows that in this instance…a vegetarian diet is not better for the planet. Nothing is that black and white. Tiffany ý Please consider the environment before printing this email. rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of Vegan Monday, October 29, 2007 8:25 PM rawfood Re: [Raw Food] Eating Meat In a groundbreaking 2006 report, the United Nations (U.N.) said that raising animals for food generates more greenhouse gases than all the cars and trucks in the world combined. Senior U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization official Henning Steinfeld reported that the meat industry is “one of the most significant contributors to today’s most serious environmental problems.”2 http://www.goveg.com/environment-globalwarming.asp On Oct 29, 2007, at 3:18 PM, the kneeling fool wrote: > Eating meat is an inappropriate activity and is also very > very inefficient. You can eat an animal only once, but they > can be watched endlessly. > > -- > the kneeling fool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 > http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/Oct07/diets.ag.footprint.sl.html > > A new study done in New York that shows that if New Yorkers eat small > amounts of meat and dairy they are better managing their land and are able > to feed more people then if they only used land for vegetarian crops. This > study shows that in this instance…a vegetarian diet is not better for the > planet. > > Nothing is that black and white. Oh, the effect of 20 billion animals's waste and resource usage is pretty black and white. It's nice to see the USDA is still putting out " studies " , but that makes no sense that it would be poor for the rest of the world, philosophically, but suddenly good for NY-ers. And even if it was, eating animals is cruel. How much slaughter footage have you watched? If you wouldn't run around cutting up cats and dogs, you probably should not do it to other animals. ERica Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 31, 2007 Report Share Posted October 31, 2007 Uhm. " the effect of 20 billion animals's waste and resource usage is pretty black and white " means what exactly? Are you suggesting they be killed to remove the burden? Sorry if the study isnt' what you want to hear. LOL. And I have watched MANY slaughters and even did my college thesis on meat consumption and the meat packing industry. T * Please consider the environment before printing this email. _____ rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of Erica Tuesday, October 30, 2007 11:02 AM rawfood Re: [Raw Food] Eating Meat > http://www.news. <http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/Oct07/diets.ag.footprint.sl.html> cornell.edu/stories/Oct07/diets.ag.footprint.sl.html > Oh, the effect of 20 billion animals's waste and resource usage is pretty black and white. It's nice to see the USDA is still putting out " studies " , but that makes no sense that it would be poor for the rest of the world, philosophically, but suddenly good for NY-ers. And even if it was, eating animals is cruel. How much slaughter footage have you watched? If you wouldn't run around cutting up cats and dogs, you probably should not do it to other animals. ERica Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 31, 2007 Report Share Posted October 31, 2007 rawfood , " Tiffany " <diapermama wrote: > > Uhm. " the effect of 20 billion animals's waste and resource usage is > pretty black and white " means what exactly? Are you suggesting they be > killed to remove the burden? Hey, no, I'm suggesting they not be bred. ;-) And it's interesting to me that Britain, the University of Chicago and many more reputable, objective institutes have studied climate change and the environment independent of the USDA or the Dairy Association and have ALL concluded that yes, all the resources and energy that go into one lb of meat (which would be 20x what it costs at the store, at least, without subsidies - i.e. the govt making sure you eat it and get sick, etc) are totally unsustainable. That New York would somehow be any different than the rest of the world is kind of ridiculous. I'm pretty sure some *new* " studies " DID emergy once the conclusions were shared. It's called DAMAGE CONTROL. Peace, Erica Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 31, 2007 Report Share Posted October 31, 2007 Hello Tiffany, I doubt that many vegans would suggest that, to solve the proliferation of " livestock " on the planet, a mass killing of these animals would be the best solution. On the contrary, the vegans I know would more likely agree that: 1) Humans are responsible for the proliferation of " livestock " in the first place. We could probably figure out a more sensible, compassionate approach to diminishing these populations, if we put our minds to it. 2) The proliferation of livestock has enormous environmental consequences: climate change, deforestation, loss of biodiversity, desertification & topsoil loss / destruction, shrinking water tables, polluted & death-inducing waterways & oceans, etc. I recall reading that behind almost every major environmental problem lies animal agriculture. This connection is so strong that it seems hypocritical for anyone to label him / herself an " environmentalist " or " animal lover " if he/she consumes animal products. 3) This livestock proliferation (i.e., the SAD animal food habit) is also a main driver of myriad other (inter-related) problems at every level of social organization. These include poverty, hunger, conflict, the U.S. deficit / debt / financial outlook, infectuous diseases, health care crisis, animal cruelty, etc. If you do not see the connection between an animal-based diet and any one of the above problems, let me know and I'll be glad to elaborate. I recognize that what I wrote above constitutes mere headlines. Better, read (or Google) the work of John Robbins (Food Revolution, or Diet for a New America) and Earthsave. And/or read my post 34866. I have not even mentioned the strong health arguments against consuming even small amounts of animal food. Reference T. Colin Campbell's " The China Study " for significant detail. This book also explains quite well the unholy alliance formed by big food interests, big medicine & pharmacy, academia, and government regulators. This alliance uses the techniques practiced by such dubious companies as Phillip Morris and Exxon in producing mass media $tories and academic publication$ to support the status quo. Perhaps such forces are behind the article you cite. On another note, I am curious if you'd be willing to share your experience watching many slaughters and studying the meat industry. I have witnessed slaughters - not in US factor farms, but in rural, developing country contexts where the animals tend to lead happier lives. Even in these more ideallic conditions, these animals suffer mightily in their final moments of life. To this day, I am bothered by the obvious, overwhelming fear, and the gut-wrenching pain, that these sentient beings endured. First-hand observation of such senseless murders of defenseless animals motivated me to become a voice for those who are voiceless and violated. Was your reaction similar? Thanks for engaging in this dialogue - it may be the most important topic of all for the future of our planet and its inhabitants. Peace, Marc rawfood , " Tiffany " <diapermama wrote: > > Uhm. " the effect of 20 billion animals's waste and resource usage is > pretty black and white " means what exactly? Are you suggesting they be > killed to remove the burden? > > > > Sorry if the study isnt' what you want to hear. LOL. And I have watched MANY > slaughters and even did my college thesis on meat consumption and the meat > packing industry. > > T Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 2, 2007 Report Share Posted November 2, 2007 Hi Marc, Thanks for your well written and thoughtful post. I joined this group to learn more about the raw lifestyle as I just started eating raw a little more than a month ago. I am not a vegan...I really don't have a desire to be and since I have studied this matter up and down for years and feel content in that decision. I read the books and studies for both sides of the argument and as a mid western farm girl by birth I have more up close exposure to it than most. I also did eat vegan for 2 years as a college experiment. It did not turn out so well for me in the health dept. I appreciate vegans that are respectful of another's decision NOT to eat the way they do. I am pretty laid back so the intolerance I have met with thus far in the raw foods arena is almost enough to make me run for the hills. I was warned by a raw foodie friend of mine who studied with the Braggs that I would likely find raw foodies to be fanatical and militant.so far I am seeing her point. I did not eat the SAD diet before I started this journey. I ate organic fruits and veggies and meat products sourced from local organic farms and not very much meat either. I DO consider myself an environmentalist and if you have doubts about that I suggest you read An Ominore's Dilemma. Meat CAN be eaten with minimal impact to the earth.we just have to get it from ethical farmers and eat it waaaay less. Environmentalist does not equal perfect or zero impact. What I find interesting is the fact that many raw vegans are quick to jump on the environmental impact of meat consumption but yet they are eating fresh salad greens and tropical fruits in the dead of winter. These items are not usually available locally during this season and require mass transportation. This is every bit as much a contributor to environmental pollution and crisis. No one likes to comment on that though. Anyone eating coconuts from Thailand is contributing to global warming pollution. Everyone eating citrus fruits grown in Cali and Florida while living in other states or eating figs that had to be shipped is contributing as well. To truly be conscious of your environmental impact we " should " be eating only what can be had locally .within 100 miles of your door ALL YEAR LONG. If we are NOT doing that than I am not sure what right anyone has to declare meat to be harmful to the environment...kind of like the pot calling the kettle black. I am not 100% raw right now because I find it hard to eat winter staples raw and do without goods that have been canned in the summer. The study I mentioned from Cornell made a lot of sense. If land can't be used to grow crops to eat then using it for animals to graze upon and then eat is efficient. I am sure it is in no way isolated to New York either. This does not address the cruelty issue that you mentioned though and I can fully understand why some people cannot get past that. I stand against all factory farm operations myself. But I so support meat and dairy from small scale ethical farmers who treat their animals well and slaughter in the most humane fashion. I have seen slaughters that were downright peaceful when done by a farmer that has a relationship with the animal. I don't like slaughters but I can get past it. At some point on my raw journey I may find that I do not eat meat anymore. But I will never have an issue with those that do. Tiffany * Please consider the environment before printing this email. _____ rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of marcospcv Wednesday, October 31, 2007 4:16 PM rawfood Re: [Raw Food] Eating Meat Hello Tiffany, I doubt that many vegans would suggest that, to solve the proliferation of " livestock " on the planet, a mass killing of these animals would be the best solution. On the contrary, the vegans I know would more likely agree that: 1) Humans are responsible for the proliferation of " livestock " in the first place. We could probably figure out a more sensible, compassionate approach to diminishing these populations, if we put our minds to it. 2) The proliferation of livestock has enormous environmental consequences: climate change, deforestation, loss of biodiversity, desertification & topsoil loss / destruction, shrinking water tables, polluted & death-inducing waterways & oceans, etc. I recall reading that behind almost every major environmental problem lies animal agriculture. This connection is so strong that it seems hypocritical for anyone to label him / herself an " environmentalist " or " animal lover " if he/she consumes animal products. 3) This livestock proliferation (i.e., the SAD animal food habit) is also a main driver of myriad other (inter-related) problems at every level of social organization. These include poverty, hunger, conflict, the U.S. deficit / debt / financial outlook, infectuous diseases, health care crisis, animal cruelty, etc. If you do not see the connection between an animal-based diet and any one of the above problems, let me know and I'll be glad to elaborate. I recognize that what I wrote above constitutes mere headlines. Better, read (or Google) the work of John Robbins (Food Revolution, or Diet for a New America) and Earthsave. And/or read my post 34866. I have not even mentioned the strong health arguments against consuming even small amounts of animal food. Reference T. Colin Campbell's " The China Study " for significant detail. This book also explains quite well the unholy alliance formed by big food interests, big medicine & pharmacy, academia, and government regulators. This alliance uses the techniques practiced by such dubious companies as Phillip Morris and Exxon in producing mass media $tories and academic publication$ to support the status quo. Perhaps such forces are behind the article you cite. On another note, I am curious if you'd be willing to share your experience watching many slaughters and studying the meat industry. I have witnessed slaughters - not in US factor farms, but in rural, developing country contexts where the animals tend to lead happier lives. Even in these more ideallic conditions, these animals suffer mightily in their final moments of life. To this day, I am bothered by the obvious, overwhelming fear, and the gut-wrenching pain, that these sentient beings endured. First-hand observation of such senseless murders of defenseless animals motivated me to become a voice for those who are voiceless and violated. Was your reaction similar? Thanks for engaging in this dialogue - it may be the most important topic of all for the future of our planet and its inhabitants. Peace, Marc rawfood@ <rawfood%40> .com, " Tiffany " <diapermama wrote: > > Uhm. " the effect of 20 billion animals's waste and resource usage is > pretty black and white " means what exactly? Are you suggesting they be > killed to remove the burden? > > > > Sorry if the study isnt' what you want to hear. LOL. And I have watched MANY > slaughters and even did my college thesis on meat consumption and the meat > packing industry. > > T Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 2, 2007 Report Share Posted November 2, 2007 > On another note, I am curious if you'd be willing to share your > experience watching many slaughters and studying the meat industry. > > I have witnessed slaughters - not in US factor farms, but in rural, > developing country contexts where the animals tend to lead happier > lives. Even in these more ideallic conditions, these animals suffer > mightily in their final moments of life. To this day, I am bothered > by the obvious, overwhelming fear, and the gut-wrenching pain, that > these sentient beings endured. First-hand observation of such > senseless murders of defenseless animals motivated me to become a > voice for those who are voiceless and violated. > > Was your reaction similar? This post was awesome, Marc!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 3, 2007 Report Share Posted November 3, 2007 Hi Tiffany, You wrote: I was warned by a raw foodie friend of mine who studied with the Braggs that I > would likely find raw foodies to be fanatical and militant.so far I am > seeing her point. One only sees what they set out wanting to see. Perhaps raw foodists are more *passionate* than militant. They are discovering the truth about what our bodies really require and find it so important for others to discover the truth. Perhaps there are some who attempt to force what they consider the truth up on you but these may be the ones who are still a little uncertain, on their path and need reassurance from others that what they say is right. If you read or listen with an open heart you may find that certain things either resonate with you or don't. Whatever path you are taking right now is the right path for you. There is no right or wrong as a lesson underlies every action you take. Always do what feels right for you. If you feel passionate that eating meat is the right path for you, does it feel any less right if others do not support you in that? I wondered, because you also said: I don't like > slaughters but I can get past it. Is there any discomfort around your meat eating? I'm not asking for an answer but maybe you could ask yourself that, internally. We sometimes find that if we are defending our decisions, it is because we're not altogether comfortable with our decisions. The healthiest thing we can do for our bodies is to drop judgement and beliefs about others and live our own lives in acceptance of what IS, in our own reality. Peace, Katya. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 5, 2007 Report Share Posted November 5, 2007 I appreciate you explaining yourself more, Tiffany. It's interesting you tried veganism in college - most don't have the means or space (or desire) to get well-balanced nutrition in college. I think my " omnivore " brother lived on mac and cheeze... To object eating animals....I don't think it's militance or fanatacism, except in a world where nobody bats an eye at murder and cruelty, as we do, and most are pretty sedated, period. I wish everyone practiced zero tolerance to cruelty. It's the only way. One can never be too peaceful and loving to life. And there is no such thing as ethical slaughter. Erica Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.