As long as billionaires are allowed to run around and do what ever the fuck they want I will continue eating meat and not giving a fuck about recycling.
As long as billionaires have zero consequences then I will have zero sacrifices.
Fuck you all as long as you let billionaires destroy the earth while the poors take the hit.
Nah fuck all that shit.
If you want me to stop eating meat then fucking make me.
As long as Israel is allowed to bomb children with impunity I will continue to beat my children.
They kill dozens of children in a day and I beat mine maybe once, twice a week. They’re the real problem, and I’m not making any sacrifices until they’re held accountable.
That’s absolving yourself of your personal responsibility to your health, the environment and the animals.
Just because someone is stepping on puppies doesn’t make it okay for you to do it too. No one should base their morality on the reprehensible things rich people do.
Besides the plant-based alternatives are great, you wont be missing meat for long.
I obviously don’t know anything about you other than that you’re a lemmy user and I get your sentiment. Remember that there are likely those worse off than you as well as those with more, and those worse off will be more affected by the ongoing climate crisis.
I’m not gonna make you do anything, but by not doing anything, you’re throwing those even worse off than yourself under the bus, in the same way billionaires are throwing everone worse off than them under the bus.
We don’t all have to screw people over who have less power than us, even if that’s what billionaires do.
Hey how about you cut down on private jets and I keep eating my burgers
Yeah right, eating less meat smells awful lot like “calculate your carbon footprint”
Two things can both be done. Saying one thing is worse is only an excuse to do nothing. Those rich fucks on their jets will probably point to companies polluting more. Do what’s best and advocate the same for others. Everyone just pointing to something else is how we end up in the situation we’re in. “I got mine. Go attack them!” Changing ourselves allows us to see all issues and work on them all.
How many cars off the road does a dead executive take?
What about Taylor swift…
I am all about eating less meat for various reasons but this some idiotic thesis.
Why not both?
Are you implying that we should only do good things if they are the most good things in existence? Like, I shouldn’t have an electric car because planes exist? Please enlighten me.
This is BBC which speaks for big oil…
Eat less meat but don’t be confused what BBC is doing here…
yUoR CaRBON FoOTPriNt
great. but why don’t we go double and also take 8m cars off the road?
The price of electric cars will do that on its own, once we phase out petrol.
I didn’t eat meat today so apparently I took 8m cars off the road.
I refuse to drive, I walk and transit, 1 car off road for decades.
How long have you been doing that, and I’m guessing you live in a city?
Yes, I live in a city. When young living with my parents (2 cars as they both worked and couldn’t car pool) I lived in what we called the “land of 3 numbered busses” aka the suburbs. I decided before 16 I didn’t want to drive, so never did. Started then to make my footprint as small as possible. Easiest way to make my footprint small was to live downtown where almost everything I need is 20 mins away by foot, sadly if I move now I will not be able to afford anywhere near where I am. I’m 50 next year.
Good for you. Personally, I can’t stand living in the city nowadays. I certainly can’t justify that rent.
Right now, due to how long I have been there, I am paying less for a 3 bedroom apt than one would for a 1 bed or bachelor
Dang. Lucky. Is that rent control or do you own?
Let’s aim for at least a nice billion.
There are an estimated 1.475 billion cars/trucks/vans in the world, as of 2023. 8 million is 0.005% of 1.475 billion.
Now, if they’re going by the number of vehicles in the UK, then that number is obviously different. 41.2 million estimated vehicles in the UK. 8 million is a significantly larger percentage in that equation (19.4%). They also don’t mention whether they’re talking about ICE or electric cars, but I think it’s safe to assume ICE. In 2023 there were 851,000 licensed zero emissions vehicles in the UK, up 57% from the prior year.
I’m a strong proponent for cutting your beef, lamb, cheese, coffee, and chocolate consumption , as they’re among the worst, emissions-wise (bearing in mind this chart is by kilogram, not by calorie) by a long-shot, but we should be realistic about the things that are likely to do the most good.
We recommend four widely applicable high-impact (i.e. low emissions) actions with the potential to contribute to systemic change and substantially reduce annual personal emissions: having one fewer child (an average for developed countries of 58.6 tonnes CO2-equivalent (tCO2e) emission reductions per year), living car-free (2.4 tCO2e saved per year), avoiding airplane travel (1.6 tCO2e saved per roundtrip transatlantic flight) and eating a plant-based diet (0.8 tCO2e saved per year). These actions have much greater potential to reduce emissions than commonly promoted strategies like comprehensive recycling (four times less effective than a plant-based diet) or changing household lightbulbs (eight times less).
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541/pdf
A bit underwhelming when put into the context of the estimated number of cars being closer to 1.5B, but worthwhile to pursue regardless.
This would be 8 million cars in the UK alone, which has a population of 68 million.
Serves me right for not reading the article. I’ll keep my shame up for display in public
No need, most articles are bad and much longer than needed. Luckily chatgpt&friends are good at summarizing.
Thank you for your service 🫡
I am a fan of context. There were about 29.1 million vehicles on the road in the USA in 2023.
8 million is a lot, and part of the overall solution.
Source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/859950/vehicles-in-operation-by-quarter-united-states/
The article is just about the u.k. The number would be larger for the u.s. due to both population size, and that the u.s. eats more meat, around 50% more. Although we do drive more per car here as well, so that may effect it as well.
Fear porn. Keep eating meat. It’s far more nutrient rich than any of the overly processed vegan garbage. And I know because I was vegan for more than 8yrs.
overly processed vegan garbage.
Am not vegan, but your issue here is eating all these “plant-based” ultra-processed food and thinking that’s the only way. Just eat more veggie and mushroom and bean.
Yeah but the slop being market to gen pop is literally same quality as a hotdog
It’s far more nutrient rich than any of the overly processed vegan garbage
Nothing more nutritious than slop. Keep stuffing your face with hamburger
I eat grass fed wagyu from a local farmer
Lies again, the vast majority of meat is factory farmed.
The exceptional rare “local farms” do not stop the exploitation and slaughter.
You do realize that plants are quite sentient, right? They communicate with one another, they feel pain, and even help one another. Trees will use mycelium to talk to one another if one tree needs help they will. So great work trading one sentient suffering for another. Pat yourself on the back for partaking in groupthink and keep feeding the ego that you’re doing any good for the environment.
Meat requires more plants than directly eating them. So if you really cared about the plants you would go vegan.
You’re filling out my Carnist bingo sheet proving once again that you were never vegan.
Meat requires more plants than directly eating them.
this isn’t true. most of what is fed to livestock is crop seconds and industrial waste. I don’t eat corncobs or corn stalks, or soy cake. but if I eat a pig that has been fed those, no more plants have been harmed.
It’s just so hard for your brain to comprehend maybe someone escaped the fear mongering and ego tickling of veganism. Yes, of course I had the lentils, tofu, seitan everything (because wheat gluten use is endless) and everything else. Had to eat throughout the whole day just to feel sustenance. But as said before, most of the foods targeted to vegans are overly processed. And way to ignore the fact that plants are probably crying as they’re ripped from their roots and start releasing toxins as defense mechanism.
And way to ignore the fact that plants are probably crying as they’re ripped from their roots and start releasing toxins as defense mechanism.
Ignores the fact meat requires more plants and that plants do not have a central nervous system to process pain.
Great an astroturfer…
You’re lying about ever being vegan as if you were you would’ve known that processed vegan food products are not the only alternatives to eating meat as there are pulses, peas, beans, lentils, nuts, seeds and whole grains you can have instead.
Plant-based meat is actually healthier than processed meat and red meat.
you would’ve known that processed vegan food products are not the only alternatives
I think you should give them the benefit of the doubt in this instance – they could be dumb as a rock.
They’re clearly trolling, I have never heard of this instance.
Nope, I definitely was vegan. And plant based meat is not healthier. What a cope if you believe that nonsense. I would even make my own vegan “chicken” nuggets using seitan. But nothing compares to the number of vitamins attained through a juicy steak. I’m glad I made the change back from being a vegan. A lot more energy throughout the entire day. Eggs are another great source of nourishment.
Someone is trolling.
Nah you’re just too stuck in dogma and propaganda. All good. Carry on.
Says the person obviously lying about having lower levels of energy despite the fact studies show that vegans are actually healthier.
A study published last week in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that dietary protein derived from plant sources built muscle just as well as protein from meat sources. However meat also comes with additional components that are harmful to our health, including antibiotic residue, hormones, saturated fat, trans-fats, endotoxins, cholesterol, Neu5Gc, heterocyclic amines and contaminants such as high levels of metals including copper and arsenic. These undesirable elements increase inflammation and promote various diseases thus making meat a less desirable option when building muscle and long term health are considered.
A plant-based diet consists of exclusively plant foods, including fruit, vegetables, grains, and legumes, and avoids meat, dairy, and eggs. Plant-based foods are full of fiber, rich in vitamins and minerals, free of cholesterol, and low in calories and saturated fat. Eating a variety of these foods provides all the protein, calcium, and other essential nutrients your body needs. It’s important to include a reliable source of vitamin B12 in your diet. You can easily meet your vitamin B12 needs with a daily supplement or fortified foods, such as vitamin B12-fortified breakfast cereals, plant milks, and nutritional yeast. Those who eat a plant-based diet lower their risk for heart disease, type 2 diabetes, obesity, and other health conditions. Research also shows that a plant-based diet can be less expensive that an omnivorous diet.
Enjoy your inflammatory seed oils and glyphosate laced vegetables, unless eating local and organic.
We could delete every car from existence ever, and it wouldn’t be a drop in the bucket. Cargo ships burn the worst fuel and excrete a years worth of car emissions per day. The Nash Equilibrium to all this - the math says it’s still the best way to do it. Banning single use plastics, regulating petroleum products, and nuking China will all help alleviate climate change.
You got some sources for that claim, cause transportation accounts for 28% of u.s. ghg emissions and 57% of that is light duty vehicles, only 3% is ships and boats. So if we delete every car emissions, at least in the u.s. , would go down by 15%, not enormous but also not a drop in the bucket.
I’m all for the other solutions you mentioned, besides nuking China, but we can’t pretend like meat consumption and car use aren’t large factors in climate change that we’ll have to address.
According to this compelling article, a significant portion of cargo ships could be electrified.
While I support not eating meat, I am also realistic and reducing is good enough.
But the problem is that not every meat is created the same. There is one footprint for meat feom animals that are grazing and are used in regenerative agriculture and much bigger from industrial farming of cows fed with irrigated alfalfa in desert.
It should certainly be the first step. I’ve started like this, continuously less meat, your gut-biome slowly adjusts. I’m still not vegan/vegetarian but basically eat no meat anymore (mostly leftovers of others). A good part of it is that I just don’t really like meat anymore (tastes kind of rotten?).
I recommend going this route, as I think it’s easier to get into a vegan diet.
That said I think we (as a global society) should strive towards eating only vegan long-term. We got the food science and it just feels wrong (moral, inefficiency, health) and isn’t sustainable.
While I support not eating meat, I am also realistic and reducing is good enough.
No, we gotta completely uproot the animal agriculture industry if we want to save the planet and no “regenerative farming cattle” still uses too much land/water and has bovines abused and slaughtered for nothing.
Well okay then.
If my only options are, “Continue eating all the meat you want and the planet is fucked.”
…or, “Stop eating all meat and go completely vegan…and the planet is still fucked unless everyone else does it too.”
Well…
… fire up that grill, man, I’ve got some steaks and burgers in the freezer.
God, seeing the comments from some people that I’m even nominally on the “same side of the aisle” makes me see how the other side finds it so easy to not only ridicule, but automatically unite in opposition against it.
Like, nothing brings me closer to being understanding and sympathetic to the people I’d normally be ideologically set totally against…like visiting Lemmy and seeing the shit flowing from the people I broadly tend to align with.
Okay, then I might as well just keep eating as much meat as I do now though? If we have to be perfect and most people aren’t going to be perfect, there’s no point in even trying.
Or maybe get off your high horse, accept that humanity isn’t perfect, and try to get people to eat less meat first, then worry about getting them to eat no meat at all. 50% of people doing 70% of what they should is more useful than 10% doing 100%.
There are no baby steps to stoping animal abuse. It’s not hard to follow a 31 day challenge.
Do that first then comeback critic my “big ask”.
Your effect on people opting NOT to eat less meat because you’re trying to moralize them is going to outdo your personal contribution at least 10 to 1, maybe 100 to 1 if you interact with enough people.
Each child born produces as much CO2 as 71 people going vegan for life. That ignores all the other ways humans pollute. Given that 130M babies are born each year, even if the entire planet went vegan right now (forever), it would only offset the next 324 days. If you care about the environment at all, you would focus all of your ire on the the real danger: countries with high birth rates.
However I suspect this has nothing to do with the environment for you. There is a duplicitous tactic employed by vegans which seeks to hijack the environmental movement for moral aims. People such as yourself have a moral problem with eating meat, and you know that many others care about the environment, so you attempt to wed the two. I am of course happy to be proven wrong.
Which in effect tells me that we need to be even more radical in policies to bring this to net-negative. It just doesn’t help when there are a lot less people in the future as we need to get net-negative. Fewer people means also potentially less leverage here.
But I agree that we need to split between moral and environmental factors (though it doesn’t help when these are often correlated).
That’s a straw-man fallacy. Just because you’re trying doesn’t mean you have to be perfect right away.
I also believe that we have all reason to go completely vegan long-term. Thanks to food-science, it’s not a radical shift anymore, just a slow adjustment and a little bit of discipline until you’ve adapted that new habit. I was a very much into meat and slowly adapted to a vegan diet, it get’s easier over time until a point (for me at least) that you even prefer the vegan/vegetarian option.
I agree, but the other commenter specifically was saying that it’s a case of do or do not, there is no try.
If eating no meat at all is too hard, from a climate perspective eating no beef will have the biggest impact. Eating no ruminants to be specific, but hardly anyone is eating bison/sheep/goat on the regular.
Lamb is popular in the UK. Beef is actually behind chicken and pork already.
Is lamb a regular dish or more of a Christmas and special occasion dish? I’m not in the UK so I genuinely don’t know. Not sure that you can get lamb at a fast food joint like you can with beef burgers.
A joint of lamb is a special occasion dish, but I think the statistics are skewed by the massive number of drunkenly-consumed kebabs
I’m in the US and can get lamb at fast food joints. Go to any Mediterranean shop for a gyro. Afaik it’s even more available in the UK since it’s primarily sold as people food, not dog food like the US market.
I’m in Canada and there aren’t a lot of shops with gyros. Tons of shawarma though, but that’s all beef or chicken.
Shepherd’s pie is a fairly regular Sunday meal.
And kebab meat is normally lamb. You can get that at pretty much any takeaway chippy in the country, and is traditionally eaten with about six pints of cheap lager.
I went like 90% vegetarian and switched to the meat substitutes. If I can do it, anyone can. I’ve always had a meat-a-saurus diet until 2-3 years ago.
I’ve only met one person who couldn’t go veg, because they had allergies to everything: soy, legumes, nuts.
There’s been a lot of obsession with protein in popular culture when in reality unless you’re a bodybuilder you don’t need a ton and a veg diet will suffice. And there are tons of vegan athletes.
The point I was making is that there is one step even the laziest can take to have an impact: just stop eating beef. Going full veg is better of course.
I eat bison instead of beef, that way I’m a big part of a smaller problem rather than the other way around.
“I want to help save the earth!”
“Great! Eat less meat.”
" . . . . No."
Relatable
I ain’t gonna stop eating meat to save 100g of CO2 a year while Taylor Swift takes her jet when she needs to tinkle.
I ain’t gonna stop beating my children while Israel drops bombs on schools to take out a hamas laptop.
Eat your bugs, you need to offset the damage caused by a billionaire’s third yacht.
What is with you guys and bugs? Do you really think vegetarians eat bugs or want you to eat bugs?
We eat and want you to eat beans, but I guess that’s not disgusting enough for you to get mad over.
Bugs, beans, whatever. That’s not the point.
Feel free to feel good about saving all that planet.
Oops some billionaire’s megayacht just dumped more CO2 in the atmosphere in a day than you banked by eating beans for the past decade.
But yeah, more beans please.
Also, 'people like men talk about bugs because that’s what the elite is working hard trying to manufacture that delicious bug eating consent
I will, and i will also feel good about not assaulting children even though there are people out there slaughtering droves of them.
So your evidence for this grand elite conspiracy is one article from the new York post. Tell me what’s the advertising budget for crickets, or if you’ve ever even seen an ad for crickets? Cause the advertising budget for Tyson foods alone is over $200 million . That’s just the industry itself, that doesn’t include restaurants like McDonald’s etc. That are also pushing you to buy meat. Tyson foods alone also lobbies the government to the tune of $2.8 million. The big money is not trying to get you to eat crickets, it’s trying to get you to eat meat.
Man you’re still missing the whole point of my argument just because I said bugs, huh?
Your brain that starved for real protein? Try meat.
Why is your moral compass calibrated according to the worst people? Is not being the worst possible human being good enough?
Also, as long the general public doesnt change whats acceptable and what not through their actions, why would the rich change anything? Theyre not the ones who will suffer from climate change and they dont care.
It’s about efficiency.
What’s better? Forcing 1000000 people to eat bugs and beans, or summarily executing one Elon Musk?
You dont need to force anyone. People make their own decisions.
By the same reasoning, would you abolish elections because letting a single person decide is more efficient?
In theory, I agree with you, it is way more efficient to just ban cars, ban billionaires, distribute their money and end world hunger. But thats not realistic. There is absolutely no indication that any politician will even consider any of that, as long as the population still keeps driving around in massive SUVs, eating mass produced meat and buying everything from Amazon.
Man you guys sure love to jump to absurd conclusions using apples to oranges comparisons… First the guy comparing eating beans to child abuse, now you… It’s almost as if trying to force your lame lifestyle on billions of people requires leaps of logic only a protein deprived brain can achieve.
First off, you can’t measure the efficiency of one person deciding vs multiple.
You can, however, determine how much co2 one person emits.
There’s also no indication that politicians will ever consider banning meat and yet here you are trying to make people eat beans on toast every meal.
Look, all I’m saying, if you truly care about the planet, instead of trying to force lifestyle changes on 99% of the population, there’s 1% of them that emits 15% of CO2 without really contributing anything useful to society.
There’s a quick ROI. Be the change you want to see in the world.
Or you could eat beans I guess.
You are strawmanning and coping so hard I dont have enough time to address all of that, so ill just pick a few.
-
Im not trying to force lifestyle changes on anyone and I dont know why youre claiming that. I am simply arguing which life choices can make a difference and which cant.
-
What exactly do you suggest the average person does to ensure the 1% stop emitting 15%? Vote green? That has worked wonderfully over the past 30 years right?
-
Is ‘be the change you want to see in the world’ supposed to be a summary of my arguments? Coz it sure as hell doesnt fit you attitude of ‘dont change anything as long as rich people dont change’.
-
Yes, yes you are. The only reason you are arguing right now is because you’re mad that I refuse to stop eating meat while some rich fuck’s personal jet flies around the world just so he can have a shit in a different toilet every day. If you didn’t care about changing my way, you’d be doing something else.
-
You really want to get politicians involved, huh. You haven’t figured out yet that they’re part of the problem?
-
Be the change you want to see in the world is meant as an encouraging statement to go and take things into your own hands instead of relying on third parties to fix your problems.
-
That has worked wonderfully over the past 30 years right?
veganism has been around since the '40s and the meat industry grows every year.
-
I mean, I’m 90% veg for environmental reasons mostly. But every time we share this narrative that the effort needs to be on us while the true culprits are literally upping their consumption is fucking sick. Don’t guilt people for not doing 1% of what is needed while the people/corpos doing the other 99% are pushing this “personal responsibility” narrative and literally created the language to deflect blame. We should be way more upset and spend 20000x the effort shaming and shutting down those organizations.
It doesn’t matter if you put 2000x your effort into something if it has no effect. If you spend all your day shaming these corporations on lemmy that won’t do anything. So the question should be what actions can make an effect?
Protests don’t really do much. Electoral politics, at least here in the u.s. , are completely captured by these corporations and will never truly challenge them. I doubt what just happened in NYC is a valid tactic either. A revolution or even just a general strike is pretty much out of the picture right now.
The best and only way to get at the mega corporations causing all the climate change is to boycott them. The meat industry is burning the Amazon and emitting tons of methane, boycott them and eat less / no meat. The fossil fuel industry is lobbying congress to deny climate change while increasing production and emitting more every year, boycott them and buy less gas by driving less or taking public transit.
In this capitalist hellscape the only real choice we have is of consumption, and choosing what to consume and more importantly what not to consume is the only real way we can effect the system.
The best and only way to get at the mega corporations causing all the climate change is to boycott them.
Sorry to say this, but these boycotts rarely do anything. If enough people would boycott some company, or business practice to matter only a little bit, then there also would be enough people to effect politics to try to get better regulation in place, via electoralism, direct action of just getting actively involved in politics.
I absolutely agree with you. Meat is something that has a big impact on the climate and this is something that we as the consumers actively can control. If society decides to buy less and instead higher quality meat the demand will go down and therefore the CO2 footprint. However, this is nothing that is possible without the government supporting this change.
society decides to buy less and instead higher quality meat the demand will go down and therefore the CO2 footprint
this isn’t causal
I may have articulated myself badly. What I mean is the following: If I decide to instead eat e. G. 1kg of low quality meat every week I am responsible (by eating meat) for an amount x of CO2 emissions. If I now switch to only 500g of higher quality meat the amount of CO2 emissions goes down to about 1/2x(I know this isn’t exactly true, due to the lost efficiency, but for bigger reductions its absolutely true, that the amount if CO2 you emitted goes down).
If I decide to instead eat e. G. 1kg of low quality meat every week I am responsible (by eating meat) for an amount x of CO2 emissions.
I don’t think that’s true. those emissions happen regardless of whether you eat it. they happen regardless of whether you buy it.
Source please.
Your analysis undermines genuine science by disregarding the reduction in demand which reduces the supply and forming a data set with a sample of 1.
it’s obvious that the emissions happen before you decide whether to purchase a product. that’s how linear time works.
reduction in demand which reduces the supply
this isn’t causal
and this is something that we as the consumers actively can control.
didn’t you try that?
I wouldn’t worry much about the “I’m doing X more to offset you doing Y!” crowd. Probably a few act like that but firstly they’ll say it to everyone they don’t like (and one meat eater eating 2x meat can’t feasibly offset more than one vegan, so their impact is limited) and secondly most of them are just ragebaiting.
The same people post shit like “omg getting a Starbucks!!!” under videos calling for boycotts due to Gaza.
I’m definitely not worried about the people saying they’ll spite-eat more meat. I’m talking about us putting so much effort into shaming people for not going veg—so I’m talking about the opposite.
The blame isn’t at our feet. It’s not on us. That’s the companies literally pitting us against each other, baiting us into shaming other .00002% contributors to climate change while they, the true 99.99998% culprits, increase their output and greenwash their literal mass murder crimes.
Your numbers are way off here. (https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/research-report-carbon-inequality-era.pdf ) in 2025, the top 1% only accounted for 15% of global emissions. The rest are still generated by the general public. Sure, per person, the richest 1% have a disproportionally higher impact, but on a large scale, they dont matter that much.
Pushing this narrative takes the incentive of reducing your own impact away.
That study doesn’t account for what their money and influence does. These people use their money to, sure, fly private jets and heat massive houses and drive big luxury cars and eat exotic foods. But they also use it to prop up massive businesses, push for outsourcing, drill, mine. We don’t. That’s what I’m talking about.
That is what needs to change. And that isn’t quantified. It can’t be. But that is insurmountable.
But then you look at things like this and we can start to understand how massive the imbalance is.
They dont drill and mine for fun. They do it because people consume their products. Sure, they do a lot of manipulating and lobbying to ensure that doesnt change, but the decision stilllies with the consumer.
‘I wont change my behaviour because the rich manipulate us not to change our behaviour so the system has to change’ will never bring any change.
Politics does not know what inside the populations heads. They wouldnt know if 90% of the population wants automobile companies banned when everyone is still using cars. Sure, there are questionnaires and statistics but thats not what drives politics. Its where the moneys at.
You transition out of meat to save the environment.
I transitioned out of meat because of meat recalls and all the chemicals they sneak in a cow, and was ripping the hardest farts that would clear out a room.
We are not the same.
Dat odorless, anxiety-free, harmles fun of vegan farts!
Not kidding. Had a vegan apologize when she ripped a loud fart because steamed carrots made her gassy.
Not a single person smelled anything.
I wish cloned meat was a viable thing. No animal suffering, far less pollution, sticking it to the vegan.
• save the planet• save the animals• stick it to the people who thought of all that first
Very mature of you.
But they hurt my fee fees with their mean words!
Why would this be sticking it to a vegan if you are eating a cloned organism with no experience of life? Its not a zero sum game, you can both have some (vegan) pie.
There are great alternatives today like impossible, beyond and tofurky. There’s no need to wait for lab grown meat. That’s like saying sticking it to the abolitionists and feminists. It’s silly to want to stick it to the most moral people in the world.
abolitionists and feminists fight for human dignity. comparing them to animals undermines human dignity
get abolishionists and feminists name out of ur mouth if ur just gonna use it to piss on vegans
talk about undermining dignity
I don’t care what anyone says, take some dry aged ribeye cooked to perfection, or some smoked ribs falling off the bone and compare that to some frozen tofurky log and tell me with a straight face that that’s an alternative. Forget about ballpark, gardein and beyond aren’t even playing the same sport when it comes to something like a smoked turkey leg.
Veganism is admirable. Animal welfare, carbon emissions, nutrition, these are all good reasons to stop eating meat altogether. But let’s not delude ourselves here, meat can be just about the most delicious food in existence. I have tried tons of fake meat products and they all taste like sodium cardboard nuggets.
No idea what that is about, maybe because I do want to eat meat, without the moral implications.
Anyway, I doubt I can get away with it in this conservative shithole country. If I didn’t live with my parents, I would have cut meat quite a lot. I actually prefer salads and such.
Except it’s not because the industry is not going to reduce its production and instead of being used it will just be thrown away at the store. They would require a significant chunk of the population to get on board with this to such a degree that it forced them to reduce production which will literally never happen there’s other more realistic things we can be doing
Raising animals costs a huge amount of money. Who can afford to raise animals that aren’t selling?
The entire point of my message was that they won’t stop selling, my point was that it’s not realistic to expect a large enough portion of the population to do this for it to matter. It’s just not going to happen no matter what we do
Oh you’re so god now saying “this will happen or this will never happen” bunch of arrogant rubbish.
You’re lying because you don’t want it to change you want to keep eating meat while the planet gets destroyed for your selfish desires. As they’re cutting down the Amazon for beef farms.
Research has shown that meat consumption is going down and the vegan population is rapidly growing so your stance is wrong.
meat consumption is going down and the vegan population is rapidly growing
can you cite this?
Good point, but the market is very inefficient system for determining supply.
And big companies have other methods for dealing with low demand like
- Lobby the government (and the government will give in)
- Just targeting rich people. It is known that they contribute to climate change much more than working class people. As long as the rich are free to do whatever they like the planet will continue to rot.
It would still be way less profitable in the end and would raise questions by the public as to why so much money being wasted on a cruel inefficient system.
That is what I am saying it will become less profitable after years, we need climate change solutions now.
And most people are very good at ignoring cruelty.
The People who want baby steps don’t give a damn about the environment. It’s just business as usual for them.
No, it will increase the production costs and reduce the profitability of meat products.
Going vegan is the best thing you can do for the environment as an individual. As animal agriculture causes at least 14.5% of emissions, uses up 75% more land and wastes ungodly amounts of water.
A whole foods plant-based will reduce your risk from chronic diseases and lengthen your life expectancy.
Do the 30 day vegan challenge and do better for yourself and the environment:
I feel like you missed the part of my message where I said it wasn’t realistic. You are correct that if we could convince a large portion of the population to switch it would reduce profits and ultimately cause the industry to scale down. The entire point of my message was that that’s not going to happen no matter how much you talk about how good it is no matter how many facts you give you are simply not going to get a majority of the population to give up or even meaningfully reduce their meat consumption.
So instead of wasting your time spending your wheels on something that will never happen you could be doing something more productive that actually has a chance of succeeding.
A bunch of rubbish veganism is growing all around the world and yet you’re here arrogantly saying that things won’t change because you think you somehow know everything.
