Yeah, but it's barely metabolized by our organism, it's almost not bioavailable.

Copy-paste from another comment I made:

The problem is that's an elitist and exclusionary take.

Vegan and vegetarian replacements are way too expensive for almost the 99% of the population, and while you can theoretically replace some of these with medication and supplementation, it will never be the same as the synthetic replacements will never have the exact nutritional matrix that the natural animal source has, and as such it will not interact the same with our metabolism and our organs, thus causing a higher probability on related diseases and health issues.

I disagree, things eat each other. It's just an exchange of resources. What matters is intent, process, and waste. I an fine with eating animals that were raised in non-cruel conditions(which is also a food safety issue), killed humanely, and all parts are utilized.

Also like, if some animal gets the drop on me and returns the favor, them so be it, good on them,

Based

lol yeah that was fun to read when I first read that. Tyson is such a shit company, I've been boycotting them so long

You're still building your body out of mushrooms and plants dead bodies, and also stealing other animals food! /s

Anyways, the poing on eating meat is that plants don't give you as much energy as plants, so you'll need to be as a panda, a koala or a cow to be able to survive (like, pass the vast majority of every day in your life just eating).

Or well, at least that's in a purely natural/primitive/pre-industrial enviroment.

Plants vs Zombies: The Movie

Finally!

Huh. I haven't heard of anything that explicitly requires meat protein for you to live, what do you have? And if you prefer not to say, obviously that is fine, I'm just curious. And not a vegan.

You must be like the only person in 100,000 to have a good reason to fear a vegan restaurant opening up nearby.

No dhal tadka? Damn, sorry to hear that mate. I'd be morose for ages. Also my favourite type of veggie burger.

fuck that server though. what if instead of a voluntary dietary restriction you were allergic to meat?

You are aware systems are more than the sums of their parts...?

A book is more than the sum of its words.

A painting is more than the sum of its pigments

Music is more than the sum of its sine waves.

This is called emergence and is a very basic principle of - well anything, really. The same building blocks arranged in different ways will result in entirely different new objects.

If you're interested in philosophy, feel free to read a few Wikipedia articles. You're not the first one to ask about the nature of feelings and I am not qualified to have deeper discussions about this topic.

Yeah it's weird, I thought what's the difference it's like beans when I tried a vegan diet. Nope, I've never had anything that made my body want to vomit unless it was spoiled.

This is actually a fundamental part of dark magic. To eat the blood, heart, or liver of a pure person to gain their power.

Shit. Did I just make myself a vegan?

That's only for certain plants. I could get fat off a pre modern vegan diet. Mostly it'd be by overconsuming nuts, grains, and legumes. Probably mushrooms fried in olive oil as well. Like it'd take some doing because fiber sends satiation signals. But of course, I could bypass the fiber easily with beer, and it'd make having too many nuts sound perfect.

This is kind of an industry wide thing that's more than just Tyson, I should note

Why does one combination of quarks produce a shiny, malleable solid that's conductive and stable, and yet another produces a highly reactive liquid at room temperature

That's not true. It's a little less bioavaliable, but hardly "almost not" and the bioavaliable improves with more Vitamin C (which you also get from plants)

What if -- stick with me now -- you wanted what you ordered and it was the server's job to bring that to you? Fucking chaos, man.

They left out the part where everybody clapped.

As they scale up, the costs will be lower. It's a supply chain thing, not a fundamental limitation. The input costs are lower. In the broader sense, plant-based diets from whole-foods are actually already cheaper

It found that in high-income countries:

• Vegan diets were the most affordable and reduced food costs by up to one third.

• Vegetarian diets were a close second.

• Flexitarian diets with low amounts of meat and dairy reduced costs by 14%.

• By contrast, pescatarian diets increased costs by up to 2%.

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-11-11-sustainable-eating-cheaper-and-healthier-oxford-study

This is also true in real spending data

Based on primary data (n = 1040) collected through an online survey, representative of the Portuguese population, through logistic regressions, it was possible to conclude that plant-based consumers, particularly vegan, are associated with lower food expenditures compared to omnivorous consumers. In fact, plant-based consumers are shown to spend less than all other consumers assessed

https://agrifoodecon.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40100-022-00224-9

Compared to meat eaters, results show that “true” vegetarians do indeed report lower food expenditures

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800915301488?via=ihub
(looking at the US)

EDIT: I should also note that in an increasing list of countries, non-whole plant-based things like this are already cheaper too. With meat prices rising further, that's only likely to increase more

"You don't smoke crack?! If I couldn't smoke crack, I'd kill myself." ~ them, probably.

Yeah, I understad that.

But most countries are underdeveloped, or in ways of development, and there it's not really viable now.

Also, take into account this. The scalability IS a fundamental issue because the quantity, quality and speed of production needed to feed the global population are not compatible with the limited space, resources and the physics, chemistry and biology of soils. You will cause massive soil losses due to the mere fact that such soils will be above their limits.

There's also enviromental and echological issues, such as the point that you'll be displacing many native species (both from plants and animals) to be able to grow others that are edible to us, massively altering ecosystems. If with the scale of plant production that we now have that's a serious problem, imagine with such a drastic increase. We wouldn't give enough.

Moreover, think on the issues of transport: not all plants are able to grow in every country, and as such you'll have to move a massive amount of these around the globe, boosting the carbon footprints of global transport.

And then we have all the hydric issues, and all the issues with fertilizers and insecticides.

And it could go on, but it would never end.

I have to look better at these studies, tho, I'll do it later because nevertheless it looks like there are interesting advances I haven't heard of before, and that makes me a bit excited because anything that can help both humanity and animals is good.

Perhaps counterintuitively, it's the other way around. Meat, dairy, etc. production is what does not scale well. Low income countries don't have nearly as much of it because high income countries have to subsidize the hell out of animal farming to make it as common as it is. It actually takes significantly less plant farming to eat plants directly

we show that plant-based replacements for each of the major animal categories in the United States (beef, pork, dairy, poultry, and eggs) can produce twofold to 20-fold more nutritionally similar food per unit cropland. Replacing all animal-based items with plant-based replacement diets can add enough food to feed 350 million additional people, more than the expected benefits of eliminating all supply chain food loss.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.1713820115

Pesticide and fertilizer use is significantly lower

To produce 1 kg of protein from kidney beans required approximately eighteen times less land, ten times less water, nine times less fuel, twelve times less fertilizer and ten times less pesticide in comparison to producing 1 kg of protein from beef

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25374332/

Even if we maximally used manure, it's still lower

Thus, shifting from animal to plant sources of protein can substantially reduce fertilizer requirements, even with maximal use of animal manure

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921344922006528

For transport, it's actually not the driver of food emissions. The production itself is more important, especially when it comes to animal products

Transport is a small contributor to emissions. For most food products, it accounts for less than 10%, and it’s much smaller for the largest GHG emitters. In beef from beef herds, it’s 0.5%.
Not just transport, but all processes in the supply chain after the food left the farm – processing, transport, retail and packaging – mostly account for a small share of emissions.
This data shows that this is the case when we look at individual food products. But studies also shows that this holds true for actual diets; here we show the results of a study which looked at the footprint of diets across the EU. Food transport was responsible for only 6% of emissions, whilst dairy, meat and eggs accounted for 83%.

https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local

hmmmm I should load up Rimworld again

Remind yourself that a lot of people fall into the trap of boosting themselves at the expense of others around them because it's a low-hanging-fruit way to make themselves feel better. Their comments aren't really about you. Someone's always going to judge, no matter what we do. At least you try, that *is *worth something.

Ironically I did yesterday. Got a good spawn area as well.

People that only eat plants exist and they are doing totally fine.

Because they're taking a lot of meds and a lot of supplements. Not everybody can't do that.

They stopped being "their" gains when they ceased to live, and became "your" gains when you ate them.

The same statement is true for plants, too.

(Saying this as someone who eats very little meat for animal rights reasons, and merely wishes to be padantic right now for some reason)

That seems just like a strange interpenetration to me, like the point is that is should be theirs?

For the plants part, it's worth mentioning that it takes more plants for animal products than it does to eat them directly

1 kg of meat requires 2.8 kg of human-edible feed for ruminants and 3.2 for monogastrics

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2211912416300013

What? You don't need replacement meats. I eat veggies and cheap plant protein crumbles or tofu, both cheaper than meat equivalents, and I have regular blood work done and all levels are normal. I don't take any supplementary vitamins either. Going vegetarian is definitely not more expensive, and going vegan isn't either if you're willing to change your diet. Obviously, one to one replacements for egg, cheese, and meats are gonna be pricey, but you don't need those.

My main point is that meat is really bad for the environment. It takes way more water, land, and lets off more emissions by far for the same amount of food, since you need to feed the livestock.

This take is also especially crazy to me because I'm dirt poor, like one missed check from homelessness poor. I'm living entirely off of savings while I try to earn a certification and also work full time to survive. Kinda insulting to call it elitist when I'm barely surviving.

That is when you also mention you need to speak to a manager. l know it is now considered a "Karen" thing, but sometimes it really is the right course of action.

You're probably right but my social anxiety would never let me lol

Bro, I'm fucking Venezuelan, here the fucking income for a decent work is less than $4/month, I can't even study because of that, I'm unemployed because both AI and the horrible administration in my country are crushing any work possibilities out there, my mom's need an special diet and I have to take 6 fucking chronical meds that are expensive as hell, I eat the same shit everyday because I can't afford anything else, I only have a house because it's the same one from my mom-side grandfather and it's falling into pieces, I fucking know what I'm talking about.

Some people are just clueless. I was asking the hostess at a restaurant we were considering if they had anything vegan. And she said "we have shrimp?" Like, what rock are you living under?

I'm not suggesting everyone must go vegan, but I guarantee there are Buddhists in your community in similar economic positions that are vegan or vegetarian. It sounds like it's more a mental bandwidth thing than a requirement. It's objectively cheaper to eat vegan if you subsist on rice and lentils, like much of the most impoverished do. Again, I'm not suggesting you need to do anything, but the idea that going vegetarian or vegan is an elitist or privileged thing is objectively false, economically. You could absolutely go vegan for cheaper than you are eating now, if you were willing to restrict your diet. It's not the right decision for everyone, but don't make it about money or privilege.

Not going vegan or vegetarian because you have more important things to worry about than a diet change is a totally valid reason. Don't make excuses or punch left because your feelings are hurt. You can choose to not go vegan or vegetarian for your own reasons without shaming those that make the difficult choice to do so.

It IS true.

There are not many nutrients only available on meat, but they do exist nevertheless, just as there are some nutrients on vegetables not present at all in meat, and the same for mushroom with these two.

But even if we don't count that, the amounts and forms matter. For example, both have iron, yeah, but almost only animals have hemo iron, while there's barely vegetables with hemo iron, although in mushrooms is more common, but even then in those two hemo iron is found in really low concentrations, and the non-hemo iron is barely metabolized by human body because it needs structures that we humans lost. Like, cows have a crazy big stomach with four compartments to be able to process non-hemo iron. And even if so, they still have to be most of their day eating to be able to survive, because vegetal nutrients are simply not as dense as their counterparts in meat.

That's only one example.

Those nutrients solely available in meat are easily replaceable by your body. I do not eat any meat, and most weeks I eat only vegetables. I am not deficient in any nutrients. Much of Southeast Asia and India eat only vegan or vegetarian, and aren't nutrient deficient. The nutrient excuse has been endlessly debunked, scientifically and practically. Again, you can choose to eat meat for your own reasons without shaming or excuses.

Yeah, I understand that, and actually, I'm sorry for the really harsh response, I was a bit stressed although that's not justification, I felt bad afterwards.

And I'm not trying to shame those who want to be vegan. I have vegan family, and I respect and love them. But I'm tired of being shamed and attacked for being omnivore (I'm not even carnist, and I hate industrialized meat production).

But it's not objectively false my claim.

Maybe I was too broad, it can be more nuanced, but at least where I live, is cheaper not to be totally vegan, and I know because I have to read the price of everything everytime I go to buy stuff with my mother (I'm the one that knows how to use the calculator, she doesn't). Meat consumption should be reduced, nevertheless, but never totally removed.

I know you're not forcing anyone to be vegan too, but there's a really noisy group of vegans and vegetarians that want to ban it, and will demonize and shame and attack non-vegan and non-vegetarian people in the process.

There are about a dozen common ones that limit bioavailability of things like vitamin A or iron from plant sources. I don't keep the list in my pocket, and the enshittification of search has risen to the point where trying to find it again just gets me lectured by an AI about how I should go vegan.

Also:

some people believe the "you can't get nutritionally complete diet from veganism" thing, which isn't true. All vitamins, proteins, and nutrients we need are available while vegan.

While that's technically true, it's not actually easy to get things like Omega-3 from plant sources, and most of the nuts and seeds that have it are expensive and/or difficult to source.

You also have to basically spend a lot more of your free time figuring out a meal plan that will allow you to actually get all the vitamins, minerals, and nutrients you need on a plant based diet, and you'll still likely wind up eating the same meals every week bcs there's only so many vegan sources of things your body really needs.

At the end of the day, veganism is a consumerist solution to structural problems. Much like snake oil to "reduce your carbon footprint", it pushes responsibility for a societal problem back on the individual.

Is eating less meat, and having that meat be mostly fish and poultry a good thing for both your health and the environment? Absolutely. Is it nearly as impactful on either as getting rid of your car? I'd say probably not.

It's something understandable. I push for a more sustainable, ethical and with less suffering farming and livestock as much as my situation lets me to do so.

Banning would be absolutely impractical until affordable replacements for staples exist. Obviously regional availability differs, but I suspect if you were to go shopping with a vegan or vegetarian in your community they could show you how to eat vegan affordably. You can buy bulk legumes and rice, supplement that with seasonally affordable other vegetables for fiber and nutrients, and season for flavor. You won't be eating a diverse diet, but you certainly can eat cheaper vegetarian or vegan, just by the law of thermodynamics. It way more expensive to feed plants to livestock to then be eaten by you, compared to just feeding you directly. Keep an eye out for seasonal maize family vegetables, squash family vegetables, onions, and cabbage. Its all about when and how much you buy. The only meat that comes close to vegetable pricing per calorie is chicken.

I agree, but every little bit matters. You're preaching to the choir here, I'm a leftist that would very much like massive structural changes.

That's why I mostly eat the muscles of plants

Actually most of my diet is just chicken and cow meat, and cow meat here is really cheap because we live relatively near to where it's locally produced.

I actually asked my vegan family to teach us to affordably eat vegan (like, still consuming eggs, cheeses and the like, because for me these dense proteins are something I can't leave, I have an accelerated metabolism and I feel hungry really fast, and fiber-rich foods are expensive here because most of them are imported and we have international commerce problems), but they told us that was impossible here because of our country's situation, even when they could like us to eat less meat.

I'd actually like vegan food to become more universally accesible but that's unfortunately something hard with the current worldwide events.

That's fair. I usually keep quiet and don't eat, ordering a drink or maybe fries. I can understand and I'm glad you speak up for yourself though.