Veganism is not ecological - Sorry vegans, you're not doing it to save the planet

[Gender: Xenomorph]

Yea, I guess if they ate nothing but potato and rice, that argument would be valid.

But the average vegan diet contains a lot of almonds/avocadoes/really expensive shit that are anything but sustainable.

Sure, 35% of all crops go to livestock, but they use very little water, can grow on unfertile soil and get reduced to fertilizer.

 

[From The Uncanny Valley]

They're doing it to hurt other people. 'Cause they're sociopaths.

 

[Angry Shoes]

Okay.

 

[The Cunting Death]

They're doing it to hurt other people. 'Cause they're sociopaths.

Its done for virtue signaling

 

[Fünter]

save the cows , save the piggies , save the
world peace.

 

[SiccDicc]

Its done for virtue signaling

Yeah, like he said: sociopaths.

 

[Letora]

I don't like veganism because it promotes the lives of lesser beings over allowing the human body to thrive, and promotes grocery stores filling up with "vegan alternative" products that are hard to digest (high-FODMAP), low protein, filled with disgusting plant oils and soy product, and high in inflammatory omega-6s. It's shit that shouldn't exist, packaged in plastic that ends up in our landfills.

A few days ago I saw hummus being promoted as a high protein snack by some vegans. 2g of protein for 80 calories is fucking NOT high protein, wtf?

I really want lab-grown meat so vegans shut the fuck up, and I can have nicely shaped, environmentally friendly, easy to slice, tasty meat cylinders with no gristle.

Almost all vegans quit anyway. Look at the mass exodus of hardcore and casual vegans on Youtube, and IRL celebrities over the years. Every celeb that goes vegan gives up, because they feel like shit. I saw that h3h3 recently tried going vegan, again, and I'm just like: that ain't gonna last. I won't give him a year.

 

[DerKryptid]

I don't think vegans ever gave a shit aboit ecology, theu cared more about applying principles of hedonism to animals who can't even feel pleasure

 

[XANA]

Doesn't 60% of the human race have to die in order to make a sustainable vegan lifestyle?

Many superfoods have to be flown from other countries because they either can't grow in the climate, the other country has more arable land perfect for growing it, or the vegetables are out of season. Veganism isn't really an ecological alternative to an omnivorous diet unless they decide to homestead and only eat local produce - which might become a problem later down the line if they're missing supplements.

 

[Just Another Apocalypse]

More likely and sustainable than world wide veganism.

 

[melty]

Maybe if the vegans eat only shitty chocolate, but people have already done the math on this and meat is way worse, there's not some gotcha argument.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-46459714

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

We really need the late rating back.

Maybe if the vegans eat only shitty chocolate, but people have already done the math on this and meat is way worse, there's not some gotcha argument.
Ver archivo adjunto 2487356
Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-46459714

Looking at the original article there seems to be some fuckery going with how they calculated it. Specifically that land use is considered as carbon footprint and how they ignore that a small amount of beef will be more nutritious than equivelent amount of peas.

 

[melty]

We really need the late rating back.

Looking at the original article there seems to be some fuckery going with how they calculated it. Specifically that land use is considered as carbon footprint and how they ignore that a small amount of beef will be more nutritious than equivelent amount of peas.

Regardless, if meat was even remotely more sustainable, don't you think every meat manufacturer would be going on about it?
I have never seen anyone seriously suggest eating more meat is more sustainable and lots of evidence to the contrary so I really doubt kiwi farms napkin math is on to something here.
Here's another source that addresses transportation: https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

Regardless, if meat was even remotely more sustainable, don't you think every meat manufacturer would be going on about it?
I have never seen anyone seriously suggest eating more meat is more sustainable and lots of evidence to the contrary so I really doubt kiwi farms napkin math is on to something here.

There is no use for that claim because any researchers who will promote it will be blacklisted by the academia, and their findings will be considered tainted due to being paid by the meat industry. Especially that the whole cult of global warming is based entirely on the belief that a 20 year old model that keeps overshooting is correct, and that we should extinct white people to save the world.

 

[Ser Prize]

We really need the late rating back.

Looking at the original article there seems to be some fuckery going with how they calculated it. Specifically that land use is considered as carbon footprint and how they ignore that a small amount of beef will be more nutritious than equivelent amount of peas.

They also ignore soil nutrition loss.

 

[cummytummies]

Doesn't 60% of the human race have to die in order to make a sustainable vegan lifestyle?

No? What the fuck? Do you people get your information from some boomer facebook pages?

OP is right in that a lot of the vegans, especially those vocal on social media who live upper class lives and place great value on appearances etc. tend to eat a very unsustainable diet. Importing soybeans and avocado from across the ocean and whatnot. But if people actually picked their diet according to ecological concerns a vegan diet would be much easier to make work, because meat farming inherently eats up a ton of resources. There is no "ecologically sustainable" way to feed 8 billion people on meat, there is a way to do it with veggies. Doesn't mean that a veggie diet is automatically more ecological than a diet that includes meat, though.

For what it's worth I'm not vegan nor do I have any plans on becoming one.

Specifically that land use is considered as carbon footprint and how they ignore that a small amount of beef will be more nutritious than equivelent amount of peas.

Per weight of the finished product. But you can farm a lot, lot more peas in the same amount of space, and even more peas if you calculate it in energy spent per energy in the finished product. Even if you just focus on protein.

 

[ToroidalBoat]

vegetarian diet > vegan diet

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

Per weight of the finished product. But you can farm a lot, lot more peas in the same amount of space, and even more peas if you calculate it in energy spent per energy in the finished product. Even if you just focus on protein.

Only if you treat land used by cattle as farmable land (not always the case) and ignore that the cows are used for multiple other industries that aren't just meat.

Really the best kind of diet to the environment is just eating parts of the animal that aren't considered edible by the majority dumb population but are perfectly edible and nutritious, ditto for "ugly" vegetables and fruit.

Also nuke africa.

 

[cummytummies]

Only if you treat land used by cattle as farmable land (not always the case) and ignore that the cows are used for multiple other industries that aren't just meat.

But with modern farming technology you can grow veggies literally underground or in giant silos that have a hundred layers of peas growing on top of another via NFT (hydroponics). You can even recycle the water so it takes very little resources and most importantly doesn't hurt the quality of the end product unlike how factory-farming meat does.

Really the best kind of diet to the environment is just eating parts of the animal that aren't considered edible by the majority dumb population

That might help, but it's far from the "best". I'm not saying these numbers are 100% accurate but they're just ones I found, I've seen many studies that give similiar results:

Chicken meat production consumes energy in a 4:1 ratio to protein output; beef cattle production requires an energy input to protein output ratio of 54:1. (Lamb meat production is nearly as inefficient at 50:1, according to the ecologist's analysis of U.S. Department of Agriculture statistics. Other ratios range from 13:1 for turkey meat and 14:1 for milk protein to 17:1 for pork and 26:1 for eggs.)

This statistic even adjusts for plant protein being less nutritious than animal-based protein. You need 50 times the amount of energy to get the same amount of protein from a cow you'd get with plant-based alternatives. Similiarly:

Grain-fed beef production takes 100,000 liters of water for every kilogram of food. Raising broiler chickens takes 3,500 liters of water to make a kilogram of meat. In comparison, soybean production uses 2,000 liters for kilogram of food produced; rice, 1,912; wheat, 900; and potatoes, 500 liters.

The numbers for red meat production are simply astronomical compared to vegetables, no matter what statistic you look at. A steak being more nutritious than a potato doesn't come close to offsetting the difference of 100,000 to 500.

I mean I get it. I love the taste of beef and I believe it's healthy. I just don't see any point in trying to conjure up some sort of global conspiracy to justify my red meat eating habits.

 

[The Wicked Mitch]

Veganism is an intentional starvation diet for the slave class, designed to weaken their mind, body and soul. The same powers that be who are telling you muh veganism is good for you are the same people telling you Kevin Gibes is a True and Honest woman, that being surrounded by various shades of niggers is beneficial for you, that procreation bad but importation of aforementioned niggers good, that BLM riots were fiery but mostly peaceful, that muh coof is ebola 9.0 etc etc