Movies: Vegan 2019 - The Film

[Neutrinos]

It's moral because humans need to eat and that's where eating meat stems from. It is a primal thing, like a lion devouring a zebra, we're just intelligent enough as a species to move forward with technology so alternatives are available now, but that doesn't mean that those alternatives will always exist. Claiming that meat eaters will be looked down upon like we do on slavery is absurd, eating is a necessity for humans to survive, having slaves is not.

When looking at the mass agriculture needed to supply the planet with enough plants and nutrients to survive without eating meat, I just don't see how it's possible. The amount of fertile land required, the amount of chemicals used, the amount of farm equipment, variation in animal populations, etc. makes me think it can't really be done without harming certain animals and potentially the planet. Getting rid of factory farming and unfair treatment of animals is not the same thing as getting rid of meat in our diets.

During times of necessity, our ancestors would've done whatever they needed to in order to survive, but as the world is today, we're no longer faced with those challenges

A lion has no moral compass. No concept of right and wrong. I don't think we should be looking to them as examples of how we should conduct ourselves

It's also a "primal thing" to rape and kill, but the majority of people in today's society live their lives without indulging in such behaviors



Perhaps I should've been more clear, but my suggestion was that factory farming will be viewed by future generations the way the Atlantic slave trade is viewed today

Because they believed they were superior, and because they had the means and the might to do it, white people benefited from enslaving, abusing, torturing, and killing millions of people

That same mindset is being used to justify factory farming, only instead race being used as justification, these living beings are being subjugated because they're a different species



It's estimated that approx. 70 billion animals are raised each year to feed humans

Instead of using fertile land to grow crops to feed to those animals, we could be using that land to grow crops for humans


From a 1997 article in the Cornell Chronicle:

"If all the grain currently fed to livestock in the United States were consumed directly by people, the number of people who could be fed would be nearly 800 million," David Pimentel, professor of ecology in Cornell University's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences

The 7 billion livestock animals in the United States consume five times as much grain as is consumed directly by the entire American population.

Each year an estimated 41 million tons of plant protein is fed to U.S. livestock to produce an estimated 7 million tons of animal protein for human consumption. About 26 million tons of the livestock feed comes from grains and 15 million tons from forage crops. For every kilogram of high-quality animal protein produced, livestock are fed nearly 6 kg of plant protein.

More than 302 million hectares of land are devoted to producing feed for the U.S. livestock population -- about 272 million hectares in pasture and about 30 million hectares for cultivated feed grains.

U.S. could feed 800 million people with grain that livestock eat, Cornell ecologist advises animal scientists | Cornell Chronicle

 

[Neutrinos]

Correct. I know hunting hasn't been brought up much here, but it usually does in these discussions. Something it doesn't get credit for is how hunting has helped rebuild ecosystems. Many of the animals today were on the edge of extinction before refrigeration became a thing. Humans would have to hunt quite a bit and there would be a lot of wasted meat because it could be kept or sent to people in mass. Now with taxes and regulation, the hunting industry has helped many species recover and flourish. Over-fishing is a risk though right now.

Yeah, that is something really not considered very often either. To be able to feed everyone through plants, the impact would be massive, not even sure we are there yet. Lab grown meat is not where it needs to be either. If lab grown meat can be healthy and tasty, that would be the game-changer.

How does hunting help many species recover and flourish?

 

[Kiwi]

How does hunting help many species recover and flourish?

As somebody that's shot and trapped pests in New Zealand like possums, deer and goats that kill and eat native bush and attack native birds and eat their eggs (possums) I can absolutely state hunting certain species can help other species of plants and animals to flourish

Not eating meat as an argument is about as interesting to me as what sort of blinds I've got in my house but if people want to go Vegan you be you and I wish you the best with it but I'm not going to be "shamed" because I eat meat and hunt

 

[PK Cronin]

During times of necessity, our ancestors would've done whatever they needed to in order to survive, but as the world is today, we're no longer faced with those challenges

Depends where you live.

A lion has no moral compass. No concept of right and wrong. I don't think we should be looking to them as examples of how we should conduct ourselves

It's also a "primal thing" to rape and kill, but the majority of people in today's society live their lives without indulging in such behaviors

It wasn't a comparison about moral compass, but instinct and necessity for humans.

Perhaps I should've been more clear, but my suggestion was that factory farming will be viewed by future generations the way the Atlantic slave trade is viewed today

Because they believed they were superior, and because they had the means and the might to do it, white people benefited from enslaving, abusing, torturing, and killing millions of people

That same mindset is being used to justify factory farming, only instead race being used as justification, these living beings are being subjugated because they're a different species

Okay.

It's estimated that approx. 70 billion animals are raised each year to feed humans

Instead of using fertile land to grow crops to feed to those animals, we could be using that land to grow crops for humans


From a 1997 article in the Cornell Chronicle:

"If all the grain currently fed to livestock in the United States were consumed directly by people, the number of people who could be fed would be nearly 800 million," David Pimentel, professor of ecology in Cornell University's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences

The 7 billion livestock animals in the United States consume five times as much grain as is consumed directly by the entire American population.

Each year an estimated 41 million tons of plant protein is fed to U.S. livestock to produce an estimated 7 million tons of animal protein for human consumption. About 26 million tons of the livestock feed comes from grains and 15 million tons from forage crops. For every kilogram of high-quality animal protein produced, livestock are fed nearly 6 kg of plant protein.

More than 302 million hectares of land are devoted to producing feed for the U.S. livestock population -- about 272 million hectares in pasture and about 30 million hectares for cultivated feed grains.

U.S. could feed 800 million people with grain that livestock eat, Cornell ecologist advises animal scientists | Cornell Chronicle

That just takes a raw total weight and doesn't factor in nutrition at all. Is the 41 million tons of plant protein healthier for humans than consuming the meat produced? Probably not. Crops require very specific conditions to grow, so I don't know that the land can simply be used for another crop that would be more beneficial and nutritious for humans than meat. Can that crop be easily transported and preserved to locations that need them?

How does hunting help many species recover and flourish?

Often times animal populations for different species become unbalanced, especially when impacted by the presence of humans. Hunting allows for population control to keep things in balance so one predator or prey doesn't become eradicated from an area. It wasn't hunting, but I believe Yellowstone had an issue where there weren't enough predators in a specific area anymore and the ecosystem was suffering because the deer were overpopulating the area and consuming everything. They reintroduced wolves into the area and the ecosystem became more balanced. The same thing can be controlled with hunting, because after all, humans are a predator. There are also other issues like on Staten Island where there are too many deer but hunting isn't allowed. The deer cause problems for the local community because they are left unchecked and there are no predators, so they wander into areas that create danger for themselves and humans, like crossing a highway.

Here's a quick video on the Yellowstone thing:


I'd never suggest that some of the issues aren't issues created by humans, but they are issues that are currently present and cannot magically be undone.

 

[Mach85]

Correct. I know hunting hasn't been brought up much here, but it usually does in these discussions. Something it doesn't get credit for is how hunting has helped rebuild ecosystems. Many of the animals today were on the edge of extinction before refrigeration became a thing. Humans would have to hunt quite a bit and there would be a lot of wasted meat because it could be kept or sent to people in mass. Now with taxes and regulation, the hunting industry has helped many species recover and flourish. Over-fishing is a risk though right now.

Yeah, that is something really not considered very often either. To be able to feed everyone through plants, the impact would be massive, not even sure we are there yet. Lab grown meat is not where it needs to be either. If lab grown meat can be healthy and tasty, that would be the game-changer.

Not to mention that harvesting crops means killing a lot of rodents, birds, etc. And doing that on a scale as to feed all humans would result in even more carnage. So animal cruelty arguments for vegetarian/vegan doesn't account for the fact that you're still responsible for the brutal deaths of a lot of wildlife.

 

[Neutrinos]

Depends where you live.



It wasn't a comparison about moral compass, but instinct and necessity for humans.




Okay.




That just takes a raw total weight and doesn't factor in nutrition at all. Is the 41 million tons of plant protein healthier for humans than consuming the meat produced? Probably not. Crops require very specific conditions to grow, so I don't know that the land can simply be used for another crop that would be more beneficial and nutritious for humans than meat. Can that crop be easily transported and preserved to locations that need them?



Often times animal populations for different species become unbalanced, especially when impacted by the presence of humans. Hunting allows for population control to keep things in balance so one predator or prey doesn't become eradicated from an area. It wasn't hunting, but I believe Yellowstone had an issue where there weren't enough predators in a specific area anymore and the ecosystem was suffering because the deer were overpopulating the area and consuming everything. They reintroduced wolves into the area and the ecosystem became more balanced. The same thing can be controlled with hunting, because after all, humans are a predator. There are also other issues like on Staten Island where there are too many deer but hunting isn't allowed. The deer cause problems for the local community because they are left unchecked and there are no predators, so they wander into areas that create danger for themselves and humans, like crossing a highway.

Here's a quick video on the Yellowstone thing:


I'd never suggest that some of the issues aren't issues created by humans, but they are issues that are currently present and cannot magically be undone.

I acknowledged in a previous message that there are some communities where humans remain dependent on animal meat in order to survive, but it should go without saying that I'm referring to the majority of the population that reside in the developed world



And as I said, rape and murder may be instinctual for humans, but the majority of us don't act upon those instincts because unlike a lion, we have a moral compass which influences our actions



I can't speak to the nutritional worth of plant-based protein vs meat protein, but I would challenge you to provide something in the way of evidence to support your claim that the plant-based protein would be inferior



I've seen that video before

One theory as to why ecosystems have become unbalanced is that many of the large predators (such as wolves) were killed off by farmers trying to protect their livestock

 

[PK Cronin]

Not to mention that harvesting crops means killing a lot of rodents, birds, etc. And doing that on a scale as to feed all humans would result in even more carnage. So animal cruelty arguments for vegetarian/vegan doesn't account for the fact that you're still responsible for the brutal deaths of a lot of wildlife.

You strip them of their natural habitats, introduce more machinery, potentially emit more pollution, use more pesticides, kill the moles, rabbits, etc. that are around, increased use of water, plus a whole host of other issues we're probably not thinking about.

 

[Neutrinos]

You strip them of their natural habitats, introduce more machinery, potentially emit more pollution, use more pesticides, kill the moles, rabbits, etc. that are around, increased use of water, plus a whole host of other issues we're probably not thinking about.

From the article I linked above:

On average, animal protein production in the U.S. requires 28 kilocalories (kcal) for every kcal of protein produced for human consumption. Grain production, on average, requires 3.3 kcal of fossil fuel for every kcal of protein produced.

Every kilogram of beef produced takes 100,000 liters of water. Some 900 liters of water go into producing a kilogram of wheat. Potatoes are even less "thirsty," at 500 liters per kilogram.

 

[PK Cronin]

I acknowledged in a previous message that there are some communities where humans remain dependent on animal meat in order to survive, but it should go without saying that I'm referring to the majority of the population that reside in the developed world

So it is moral for one group and not for another group because of where they live?

And as I said, rape and murder may be instinctual for humans, but the majority of us don't act upon those instincts because unlike a lion, we have a moral compass which influences our actions

Well, we still murder animals (and I don't think murdering other humans is instinctual necessarily). Rape is different and isn't necessary for survival, eating is and our bodies are designed to consume meat. The fact that vegans need to be more diligent about what they consume in order to insure that they're getting a healthy diet suggests this.

I can't speak to the nutritional worth of plant-based protein vs meat protein, but I would challenge you to provide something in the way of evidence to support your claim that the plant-based protein would be inferior

You misunderstood my point I think. I'm not saying that plant based protein is different than meat protein, I'm suggesting that the type of crop given to our livestock is inferior and less nutritious than the type of crop we'd need to feed humans. Cows eat grass, humans don't. Including crops that humans cannot consume in that breakdown is an attempt to exaggerate the numbers.

As for what you did ask, I don't think one is superior to the other but they provide different types of proteins (complete vs incomplete). Depending on the person and what they're trying to accomplish either could be beneficial. A mixed diet is probably healthiest and easiest to maintain for most people.

I've seen that video before

One theory as to why ecosystems have become unbalanced is that many of the large predators (such as wolves) were killed off by farmers trying to protect their livestock

I'm sure there's a host of reasons why those ecosystems became unbalanced, not just farmers protecting their livestock. Humans are likely responsible for most of it, but again, that's the situation we're currently in regardless of how we got here.

 

[PK Cronin]

From the article I linked above:

On average, animal protein production in the U.S. requires 28 kilocalories (kcal) for every kcal of protein produced for human consumption. Grain production, on average, requires 3.3 kcal of fossil fuel for every kcal of protein produced.

Every kilogram of beef produced takes 100,000 liters of water. Some 900 liters of water go into producing a kilogram of wheat. Potatoes are even less "thirsty," at 500 liters per kilogram.

It's interesting to me that we're looking at specific types of food, which cannot be grown all over the planet where other crops or animals may be farmed at the moment. Are humans only going to eat potatoes because they require the least amount of resources?

When applied to an entire global population, the vegan diet wastes available land that could otherwise feed more people. That’s because we use different kinds of land to produce different types of food, and not all diets exploit these land types equally...The five diets that contained the most meat used all available crop and animal grazing land. The five diets using the least amount of meat—or none at all—varied in land use. But the vegan diet stood out because it was the only diet that used no perennial cropland at all, and, as a result, would waste the chance to produce a lot of food.

If modern agriculture in the U.S. were adjusted to the vegan diet, according to the study in Elementa , we’d be able to feed 735 million people—and that’s from a purely land-use perspective. Compare that to the dairy-friendly vegetarian diet, which could feed 807 million people. Even partially omnivorous diets rank above veganism in terms of sustainability; incorporating about 20 to 40% meat in your diet is actually better for the long-term course of humanity than being completely meat-free.

Going Vegan Isn't the Most Sustainable Option for Humanity

 

[Neutrinos]

So it is moral for one group and not for another group because of where they live?



Well, we still murder animals (and I don't think murdering other humans is instinctual necessarily). Rape is different and isn't necessary for survival, eating is and our bodies are designed to consume meat. The fact that vegans need to be more diligent about what they consume in order to insure that they're getting a healthy diet suggests this.



You misunderstood my point I think. I'm not saying that plant based protein is different than meat protein, I'm suggesting that the type of crop given to our livestock is inferior and less nutritious than the type of crop we'd need to feed humans. Cows eat grass, humans don't. Including crops that humans cannot consume in that breakdown is an attempt to exaggerate the numbers.

As for what you did ask, I don't think one is superior to the other but they provide different types of proteins (complete vs incomplete). Depending on the person and what they're trying to accomplish either could be beneficial. A mixed diet is probably healthiest and easiest to maintain for most people.



I'm sure there's a host of reasons why those ecosystems became unbalanced, not just farmers protecting their livestock. Humans are likely responsible for most of it, but again, that's the situation we're currently in regardless of how we got here.

If it's a necessity for self preservation, I wouldn't call it immoral

There are, of course, some grey areas with this line of thinking. For example, if you and a friend were stranded somewhere with nothing to eat, would it be moral to kill and eat them?

Thankfully we live in a world where the majority of us don't have to rely on the death of a living being in order to survive and thrive


Are we really designed to eat meat though?

First of all, humans don't possess any of the physical traits required to catch most prey. A lion, for example, has the speed and agility required to chase down prey, the claws required to grasp it, and the teeth required to provide a fatal bite. Humans couldn't catch small or large prey without the use of tools

Secondly, if humans are designed to eat meat, and it's a part of our nature, why do the vast majority of meat-eating humans insist on cooking their meat? All other omnivorous and carnivorous predators on the planet consume their prey raw, but most meat-eating humans would be disgusted at the thought of it

And lastly, and I don't know if this is true, but I've heard that unlike carnivores, humans have very long intestines (3x longer than that of a lion's was the example given). So while we can digest meat - much like cow's milk, we can drink it, but the majority of humans are lactose intolerant - perhaps, given how long it stays in our intestines, it's not optimal for our digestive system to have to deal with the decaying flesh of other animals. As someone once said, do you want your stomach to be a graveyard full of dead bodies, or a garden filled with plants?


Yes, it seems I misunderstood your point, so thanks for clarifying

 

[Mach85]

There are, of course, some grey areas in this line of thinking. For example, if you and a friend were stranded somewhere with nothing to eat, would it be moral to kill and eat them?

Thankfully we live in a world where the majority of us don't have to rely on the death of a living being in order to survive and thrive

There would be groundhogs, moles, rabbits, mice, rats, birds, etc. that would be killed en masse if everyone went vegan and mass amounts of crops therefore needed to be produced efficiently. Still lots of killing, just different animals.

 

[RandV]

@RandV, this should clear it up.

Oh well there you go

I'd imagine that we're talking about future generations here as we move forward and it moves further and further from living memory the need to compare everything to what the Nazi's did will start begin to decrease. Like you're not going to see anyone compare this to Genghis Khan, who wiped a significant portion of the global human race.

And speaking of which, I should add that we need to keep the perspective that while humans have always eaten meat the mass consumption "a chicken in every pot" society we have now only came about in the post WW2 prosperity era.

 

[RandV]

I've seen that video before

One theory as to why ecosystems have become unbalanced is that many of the large predators (such as wolves) were killed off by farmers trying to protect their livestock

David Suzuki's The Nature of Things did an episode on this recently, and I believe the correct scientific term is "keystone species". The first experiment conducted on this concept in the 50's or 60's was done somewhere along the West Coast with tide pools. Providing a bunch of diverse isolated ecoystems, the naturalist over the course of a few months would spend time removing one specific species from each tide pool to see what happened. In almost all of them nothing happened, same diverse system but just minus one specific species, but in the pool where he tossed out the star fish, the top predator of the area, it quickly became overrun with muscles and eventually that's all that lived there.

So this is where animals like Wolves and Sea Otters, if an environment needs humans to perform some kind of population control it's probably because we removed a keystone species. And it's not always a predator, in Africa there was a situation in a national park where some decades ago the Buffalo (or another large grazer) population had been decimated by disease from local cattle, and once that was removed scientists were alarmed that the spiking population would devastate the local ecosystem by eating all the grass. But they had the exact opposite effect, restoring the herd to the original natural size had an effect on fires which has a restoration effect. Like the wolves changing the shape of the rivers, instead of destroying the environment it rejuvenated it with pockets of trees becoming abundant.

Not entirely relevant to the discussion but I just like this stuff.

 

[Neutrinos]

Is it in our nature to kill animals for food, or have we simply been conditioned from an early age to accept it as normal?


If you were to see a pig stumble into your backyard with a badly injured leg, would your first thought be "that's supper", or would you feel empathetic, and want to help it?

A predator would look at an injured animal as nothing more than an easy meal


What if I were to take that same injured pig, and I began cutting off its leg while it screamed in agony, would you be okay with that or would you find it horrifying and try to stop me?

A predator wouldn't be affected by the sight and sound of its prey being ripped apart while it's still alive


And what if I were to give you that newly amputated pig's leg, would the sight and smell of it make you hungry, or would you be sickened by it?

A predator would salivate at the sight of a fresh piece of meat


Many meat-eaters openly admit they wouldn't be able to slaughter an animal themselves, why is that if it's part of human nature?

And if killing animals is instinctual to humans, why is cruelty to animals during childhood the first warning sign of violent and criminal behavior as an adult?

So, on the one hand, killing and eating animals is supposed to be natural for our species. But on the other hand, many meat-eaters wouldn't be willing to kill an animal themselves, and cruelty to animals during childhood is often a precursor to violent tendencies as an adult

 

[bleedblue1223]

How does hunting help many species recover and flourish?

Take deer population. Prior to refrigeration, humans would hunt deer to survive, but they wouldn't be able to make full use of the animal because the meat would go bad. Even if you were able to sell some of it, for humans to survive they had to constantly hunt, which lead to over-hunting. White-tailed Deer were near extinction at that time.

With refrigeration, a single animal can provide food for a hunter for a lot longer, meaning we don't have to hunt as much to provide food for everyone. On top of that, a % of all sales of hunting gear goes towards conservation of the habitats to ensure species aren't over-hunted. The white-tailed deer population has recovered and flourished.

Similar to how the big-game hunts pay for the protection against poachers. I know big-game hunters have a negative stereotype in many areas, but without that industry, poachers would be running wild in Africa.

 

[Mach85]

Is it in our nature to kill animals for food, or have we simply been conditioned from an early age to accept it as normal?


If you were to see a pig stumble into your backyard with a badly injured leg, would your first thought be "that's supper", or would you feel empathetic, and want to help it?

A predator would look at an injured animal as nothing more than an easy meal


What if I were to take that same injured pig, and I began cutting off its leg while it screamed in agony, would you be okay with that or would you find it horrifying and try to stop me?

A predator wouldn't be affected by the sight and sound of its prey being ripped apart while it's still alive


And what if I were to give you that newly amputated pig's leg, would the sight and smell of it make you hungry, or would you be sickened by it?

A predator would salivate at the sight of a fresh piece of meat


Many meat-eaters openly admit they wouldn't be able to slaughter an animal themselves, why is that if it's part of human nature?

And if killing animals is instinctual to humans, why is cruelty to animals during childhood the first warning sign of violent and criminal behavior as an adult? In fact, according to an article on Psychology Today, nearly all violent perpetrators have a history of animal cruelty

So, on the one hand, killing and eating animals is supposed to be natural for our species. But on the other hand, many meat-eaters wouldn't be willing to kill an animal themselves, and cruelty to animals during childhood is often a precursor to violent tendencies as an adult

There would be groundhogs, moles, rabbits, mice, rats, birds, etc. that would be killed en masse if everyone went vegan and mass amounts of crops therefore needed to be produced efficiently. Still lots of killing, just different animals.

What do you suggest we do when the alternative also kills many, many animals but just different ones?

 

[chicagoskycam]

There is another recent anti-meat doc called The Gamechangers. Joe Rogan has a couple of podcasts out in the last two months with the creator and an opposing expert. The doc makes a ton of false claims against Dairy and Meat to support a Vegie diet.

In my opinion, the main problem is feeding in the ever-increasing population from dwindling resources, farmland is dying. I have no issue with any adults choosing to go veggie or vegan but when it's forced on their kids who in many cases are deficient in protein, you run into problems.

 

[PK Cronin]

Is it in our nature to kill animals for food, or have we simply been conditioned from an early age to accept it as normal?


If you were to see a pig stumble into your backyard with a badly injured leg, would your first thought be "that's supper", or would you feel empathetic, and want to help it?

A predator would look at an injured animal as nothing more than an easy meal


What if I were to take that same injured pig, and I began cutting off its leg while it screamed in agony, would you be okay with that or would you find it horrifying and try to stop me?

A predator wouldn't be affected by the sight and sound of its prey being ripped apart while it's still alive


And what if I were to give you that newly amputated pig's leg, would the sight and smell of it make you hungry, or would you be sickened by it?

A predator would salivate at the sight of a fresh piece of meat


Many meat-eaters openly admit they wouldn't be able to slaughter an animal themselves, why is that if it's part of human nature?

And if killing animals is instinctual to humans, why is cruelty to animals during childhood the first warning sign of violent and criminal behavior as an adult? In fact, according to an article on Psychology Today, nearly all violent perpetrators have a history of animal cruelty

So, on the one hand, killing and eating animals is supposed to be natural for our species. But on the other hand, many meat-eaters wouldn't be willing to kill an animal themselves, and cruelty to animals during childhood is often a precursor to violent tendencies as an adult

You're lumping a lot of things together here.

You've been talking about humans being conditioned to eat meat but are neglecting that the opposite can (and likely is) true. People have been removed from the hunting and butchering of animals that it isn't a common sight for them anymore, so they've been conditioned to be turned off by the gore of it. Ask a hunter if they saw those things and most would probably be fine with killing and eating it. If you were to take the same people who are disgusted by the killing and butchering of animals and put them in a scenario where super markets didn't exist anymore, I'd pretty much guarantee they'd go after whatever game they could find. That's why it's instinctual.

Being cruel to an animal isn't the same thing as as wanting to eat it or kill it. Hunters, at least the ones I know and have seen, want to make the kill painless for the animal. Other predators, as far as I know, don't just maul an animal and then laugh at it. They typically go for the kill as quickly as possible because that's the most efficient way to do things. Torturing something isn't instinctual.

Can I ask if you're a vegan or vegetarian? (sorry if I missed it already in here)

 

[PK Cronin]

If it's a necessity for self preservation, I wouldn't call it immoral

There are, of course, some grey areas with this line of thinking. For example, if you and a friend were stranded somewhere with nothing to eat, would it be moral to kill and eat them?

Thankfully we live in a world where the majority of us don't have to rely on the death of a living being in order to survive and thrive

Eh, we could go on and on about various scenarios like this.

Are we really designed to eat meat though?

First of all, humans don't possess any of the physical traits required to catch most prey. A lion, for example, has the speed and agility required to chase down prey, the claws required to grasp it, and the teeth required to provide a fatal bite. Humans couldn't catch small or large prey without the use of tools

Secondly, if humans are designed to eat meat, and it's a part of our nature, why do the vast majority of meat-eating humans insist on cooking their meat? All other omnivorous and carnivorous predators on the planet consume their prey raw, but most meat-eating humans would be disgusted at the thought of it

And lastly, and I don't know if this is true, but I've heard that unlike carnivores, humans have very long intestines (3x longer than that of a lion's was the example given). So while we can digest meat - much like cow's milk, we can drink it, but the majority of humans are lactose intolerant - perhaps, given how long it stays in our intestines, it's not optimal for our digestive system to have to deal with the decaying flesh of other animals. As someone once said, do you want your stomach to be a graveyard full of dead bodies, or a garden filled with plants?

Everything I've ever read suggest that we are, yes. I don't know enough about biology and whatnot to say for certain though (and I think that's a point of contention among the two camps, right?). The stomach thing is certainly interesting. I don't think the use of tools suggests that we couldn't get prey otherwise, there are plenty of slow moving prey out there.

 

[Neutrinos]

There is another recent anti-meat doc called The Gamechangers. Joe Rogan has a couple of podcasts out in the last two months with the creator and an opposing expert. The doc makes a ton of false claims against Dairy and Meat to support a Vegie diet.

In my opinion, the main problem is feeding in the ever-increasing population from dwindling resources, farmland is dying. I have no issue with any adults choosing to go veggie or vegan but when it's forced on their kids who in many cases are deficient in protein, you run into problems.

Do you have any evidence to support your claim that many of the kids being "forced" to adhere to a vegan diet are protein deficient?

What about all the parents who force their obese kids to eat meat and dairy on a daily basis? Do you take issue with that as well?

 

[chicagoskycam]

Do you have any evidence to support your claim that many of the kids being "forced" to adhere to a vegan diet are protein deficient?

What about all the parents who force their obese kids to eat meat and dairy on a daily basis? Do you take issue with that as well?

There are definitely parents that are Vegan and force those values on their children. There are also parents that feed their kids crap for monetary reasons, education or that's what they eat. We mainly eat what our parents feed us as kids. There are all kinds of info and details on-line for kids/vegan and protein/b12 and overall vitamin deficiencies if you search it. It's possible to supplement but for growing kids, you really need to be strict about it. I'm not about posting various links from both sides to start a large debate on here. I have a few friends that are Vegan doing great and a couple that look like they are on death's door.

As far as obese kids getting meat and dairy, this is where the issue is! You're equating meat and dairy with obese or unhealthy. It's not those products that are the main cause of obesity, it's sugar and processed foods. You can still be obese as a vegetarian or vegan although I think it's rare because typically those people are more concerned with health. They watch what they eat, get exercise, ect. There is a difference in the type of meat you eat, grass-fed vs. grains.

My thought overall is a vegetarian or vegan diet is probably healthier long term if you can supplement correctly. Vegan is really tough when you're travelling or going out to eat. SoCal is probably one of the easiest places I've been in to adhere to that diet.

 

[Neutrinos]

There are definitely parents that are Vegan and force those values on their children. There are also parents that feed their kids crap for monetary reasons, education or that's what they eat. We mainly eat what our parents feed us as kids. There are all kinds of info and details on-line for kids/vegan and protein/b12 and overall vitamin deficiencies if you search it. It's possible to supplement but for growing kids, you really need to be strict about it. I'm not about posting various links from both sides to start a large debate on here. I have a few friends that are Vegan doing great and a couple that look like they are on death's door.

As far as obese kids getting meat and dairy, this is where the issue is! You're equating meat and dairy with obese or unhealthy. It's not those products that are the main cause of obesity, it's sugar and processed foods. You can still be obese as a vegetarian or vegan although I think it's rare because typically those people are more concerned with health. They watch what they eat, get exercise, ect. There is a difference in the type of meat you eat, grass-fed vs. grains.

My thought overall is a vegetarian or vegan diet is probably healthier long term if you can supplement correctly. Vegan is really tough when you're travelling or going out to eat. SoCal is probably one of the easiest places I've been in to adhere to that diet.

And you were equating a vegan diet with protein deficiency


This is what a vegan diet looks like when it's done properly:

 

[LarKing]

A vegan diet is healthier for the majority of the population. It’s hard to stick to for sure but has crazy health and environmental benefits.

 

[Osprey]

I wouldn't say that we're "designed" to eat meat. Practically all other primates, including those biologically closest to us, are plant eaters. Eating meat is just the most efficient means of sustenance and early Man was smart enough to figure that out. Human intelligence compels us to do things that are against our nature in an effort to be more efficient. For example, it's not natural for us to fly, but we figured out a way because it's the most efficient way to travel long distances. Not being natural isn't an argument to stop flying, though, just as it's not an argument to stop eating meat (not that I've seen anyone here make that argument).

As someone once said, do you want your stomach to be a graveyard full of dead bodies, or a garden filled with plants?

That someone was a good spin doctor. It might not change the answer, but it'd be fairer and more accurate to ask "do you want your stomach to be a graveyard or a compost heap?"