Amino acids are vital, sure. Protein as it is found in animal flesh is not, and contrary to common belief does not directly build muscle. The protein from meat has to be broken down into simpler amino acids(same ones already found in plants) to be used to build muscle. You cant even refute this here becasue this is a proven FACT. There are vegan body builders who have not had meat in over 20 years and are ripped and do not take protein supplements and some eat little to no nuts or seeds. This is the protein myth that people spew out all over the place when they dont really understand how muscle tissue is built.

I personally know a woman who has been vegan for at least 15 years and mostly raw part of that time with long periods of 100% raw fruitarian and she is like 40 years old , is muscular and looks like she is maybe 28 and runs freaking marthons and outruns 20 year old kids. There is no way anyone would need to worry abotu protein deficiency with a vegan diet.

Can anyone even verify a case of protein deficiency in the scientific literature that is dietary related, and is not associated with literal starvation or some weird form of blood coagulation? I have never been able to even verify it's documented existance in vegans with even the worst diets..as far as I know there is no such thing as protein deficiency related to diet unless a person is basically starving and not eating enough food in general..there are amino acids in all plants and even in junk food. If someone out there can find a case of a vegan who is not starving themselves who has been scientifically documented to have protein deficiency.

It seems that to have a diet related case of protein deficiency they will also be calory due to starvation..like an anorexic person. Either that or they have some disease that causes it.

The whole missing link thing is something that I have seen other people here who get paid to study this sort of stuff explain in other threads. I dont think it has to be as mysterious as people make it out to be. Unless you want to claim we came from aliens in outer space I really dont see where that discussion is going to go. Bonobos differ from us by such a slight variation, they are bipedal hominids just like us..it is not hard tro figure out why sooo many researchers think that is our closest relative and that we evolved from apes.

http://www.gate.net/~rwms/hum_ape_chrom.html

^that can explain alot about why we only have 23 chromosome pairs and why other apes have 24. It really does not require weird theories about humans not being related to apes.

i do eat meat but im very picky with it

no pork... disgusting
beef cuts if it perfectly lean then usually very little almost never (because it never seems to be lean enough)
beef ground about once a month usualy only in taco's or chili
chicken fried about once a month
fish a couple times a year
wild game couple times a year

yep but not very often

I just want to say that regardless of each of your personal diets and reasons for following them, it's really refreshing to see that most of you have put a lot of thought into it. Hopefully we all bring that same awareness and consideration into every aspect of our lives. The nexus team is a winning team.

I am simply astonished by the amount of replies this thread is getting

I asked the question in the first place because I just don't feel like eating bulk meat anymore (the cheap supermarket stuff) but it doesn't matter how often I ask my dad to stop buying it, he just ignores it. And when it is already at home I feel as it is even worse to just throw it away. Argh.

But what I mean, if I want to continue eating meat I want to make sure it comes from a place were animals are treated the right way and not tortured. Even if the price of the meat is higher this way, it will just become something special.

I don't eat as much meat as I used to. My wife became a vegetarian about a year ago - she occasionally eats seafood. So I generally try eat what she feels like. It has helped me lose a few kg's and I do feel healthier.

That been said I really enjoy a nice steak every now and then.

At least you can be assured that even the most inhumane factory farming practices have nothing on what a cat does to its prey when hunting for itself



I've been on many forums in my life and the carni/veggie debate has a way of rearing its head every so often... This is the most civilised thread on the subject that I've ever seen. Well done Nexians for being so mature (or mods working very hard!)

At the end of the day there isn't really a right or wrong. Taste, opinion and morals are all relative and subjective.

Fizzy

I've been vegetarian for 12 years now and its the best decision that i have ever made... Though i must admit that before becoming a vegetarian i didn't eat much meat i only pretty much ate chicken and fish. Though i feel strongly about being vegetarian i have no issue with other people eating meat as it truly is a personal choice and I don't think its positive or productive to push how i feel on other people.

When i used to eat chicken and fish my body would feel extremely sluggish and my mind was always tiered, one day i came across a hare krishna festival after going for a surf. It was incredibly informative and the food tasted absolutely incredible so i thought since i have a deep love for animals and meat isn't really doing much for me ill give being a vegetarian a try.

Funny thing is i havent ever liked the taste of meat so being vegetarian in more ways than one suits me down to the ground. I have felt no harmful effects from being vegetarian, i feel strong and healthy in my body and mind and i couldn't feel happier. Most people who meet me can't believe that i am almost 30 though i don't smoke or drink either. Being vegetarian also has made me more aware of what i eat and where it comes from, its definitely made me extremely conscious.

Indeed becoming more aware of where your meat is coming from really does go a long way in making sure the animals are healthier and happier...

intern making you healthier and happier.


Much Peace and Happiness

I raise a small herd of cows and a flock of chickens and ducks to supply my family with food. I decided that if I could not kill my own meat I would stop eating it, because if I could not face the deaths required for my food myself, I shouldn't allow it to be hidden from me by a supermarket.

I've had a tendency to not be as ruthless with my animals as I "should" be. Meaning instead of selling an old cow past her prime I would allow her to stay with the herd. Instead of butchering all the roosters as they grew up I would let most of them run with the flock. I thought I was being kind to them. What I saw was that we live in a dualistic world where life needs to be balanced with death. And if I didn't balance it, it would be balanced for me.

The old cows, instead of dying in an instant by a bolt gun and providing 500 lbs of meat, collapse in the winter or have their hips go out while crossing a muddy creek and die slowly from exposure. Even if they're found and I try to save them, they've become too old and weak to survive. Their meat then rots unused.

The hens, living in a flock of 50% roosters, lose all the feathers on their head and back by being repeatedly raped over and over. Sometimes the roosters in their aggression tear the skin from the back of the hens heads as they hold them down. I have guard dogs to keep predators away and close the chickens in their barns at night, but being completely free range they will sometimes stray outside of the dogs protection or a fox will get hungry enough to sneak while the dogs aren't looking. Rather than dying instantly the chickens are torn to pieces by predators. I haven't seen it happen, but I've found pieces of them strung out for half a mile. Predation has become so bad now I either need to eliminate the chickens all together or keep them in a small securely fenced area, which is not how I want them to have to live.

What is clear is that because of the world we live in death will come. If it doesn't come by my hand it will come from disease, age and predation. If I were out of the picture totally you could add a good deal of starvation. I've realized that it's my responsibility to balance life and death in the most humane way I can. I've seen the way that I balance life and death is more human and results in a healthier and more vibrant population than the way nature balances life and death.

I love my animals and I don't rejoice in their death, even though it feeds me. But until I exist in a not dualistic world the only way I can eliminate destruction is to eliminate creation and I judge existence better than non-existence.

Thanks for that post applebaum, I think it's a very interesting perspective/experience you bring to the thread

Save livestock...eat the rich!

or, for those less-inclined towards conflict...

Give peas a chance?

Any moral appeal or any moral discussion is wasted on those who wouldn´t want to diminish useless suffering or who don´t care about their own possible contribution to the suffering of others.

This is not an arrogant statement but merely an objective fact.

The choice not to care is simply the choice not to lead an ethically good life. That´s just an objective statement: you cannot appeal to morality (of others) in any way, if you choose to abandon morality when it suits yourself. You can not say to make moral choices in life when it are only the choices you like and are comfortable with.

When it comes to moral choices we can also be objective, without letting sentiments affect our judgements.

Some choices will create more suffering and other choices will create less suffering. Those are simply objective facts.

The choice to eat meat is therefore objectively speaking, just a morally inferiour choice. This is just an objective fact and not a statement i make to gratify my own ego as a vegetarian.

As endlessness says, we all have to make choices everyday that will either contribute to suffering or that will diminish suffering. This suffering is simply an indisputable result of our actions.

Therefore everybody with an objective, distanced look at the facts will necessarily have to come to the conclusion that eating meat is a morally inferiour choice. Just like stealing is.

It is worth mentioning that no-one leads a 100% ethical life. But at the same time, being an ethical being requires us to take every decission we make seriously, everytime.

Polytrip imho you are far too absolute with your stance. A great argument has just been made for a situation where instant death by bolt at the hand of their owner is far preferable to the animal than letting nature do what it does. An animal raised in these kind of conditions (a virtual utopia where it is fed and protected) lives a much less stressful life than its wild counterpart and a bolt through the brain causes no suffering. I see nothing immoral in applebaum's method of obtaining meat. I think it is quite admirable.

The formula is absolute, not the outcome. You have to keep asking yourself the moral questions. And never fear what the answers might be. There may be cases where killing an animal is morally preferable above not killing the animal.
The only thing is that you have to keep asking, just like endlessness stated that you cannot sink back into a state of great contentment with yourself, just because you´re a vegetarian. You have to keep asking and never fear what the answer might be. In most cases (most people don´t have their own farm) those answers will lead you to vegetarianism.

Thank you for this perspective.

I'm not sure it's as clear cut as you think. How are we supposed to judge what's the highest morality? What if reducing the suffering of sentient creatures results in a reduction of biodiversity? How do we weigh a life lived in security with ample food and mates against a quick, but premature death? Is it fair or accurate to place our species value of freedom over security onto another species who may value tangible security over abstract ideals?

That's not me supporting chickens raised in battery cages or hogs raised in confinement, but those aren't the only options we have. If no one ate meat my farm would have no cattle on it. The pastures would be torn up to grow corn and soybeans for the production of industrial starch, protein and oil. Erosion would increase, the water would become polluted because the streams and rivers would lack the buffer the pastures currently provide them.

Right now if I find out about a certain herb that grows wild I'd be interested in finding I go to look in the pastures. And 9 out of 10 times I can find it. The cattle remove the grass that otherwise out compete everything else. If you care about biodiversity the best thing you can do is to support grass fed beef. Grass fed beef doesn't support any monocrops and greatly reduces the intensity of pesticide usage.

I have watched as increasing grain prices have caused pastures to be plowed over one after the other. Land that is not fit to be torn up is being torn up because of public demand for corn syrup and bio fuels. I sympathize with the sufferings of animals, but from where I sit the thirst for Coca cola is causing more damage to the environment than a hunger for naturally raised meat ever could.

There is no such thing as morality .

"If you care about biodiversity the best thing you can do is to support grass fed beef"

Uhh..do you have a source for that? Sounds to me to a bit of a personal opinion and a gross overstatement. There are far more things that can be done that would support biodiversity more than supporting grass fed beef. It is called permaculture.

Applebaum you bring up some very good points. BTW I find what you are doing FAR FAR FAR preferable to factory farming. Also I do find it compassionate to help an animal at end of life. I held my dog when I had the vet put the needle in her. It pained me, but I knew that it was the only moral thing to do....at least by my standards. So I totally understand your take on electrocution of the cows...especially if you are waiting until they are getting very old.

however, if I may can I tease apart some of what you wrote for better clarification.



Humans have been the single greatest negative impact on the planets biodiversity. If we didn't farm animals I don't think the diversity would decrease. Surely the number of cows, chickens, hogs, etc would take a dramatic nose dive, but biodiversity would probably actually increase.



This seems to be a logical fallacy. Just because the land doesn't have cows on it does not mean it has to have crops on. But even more importantly is this fact.

Most beef is fed via other farm crops...thus more farm land.
But even if you assume the cows are grass feed it's still a fact that the same land used to grow plant food will feed more people.

Pretty much any way I 'skin the cat' I arrive at the fact that If people didn't eat meat there would be less land actually used for farming food for humans. Less land used equals greater biodiversity.



This is kind of a separate argument IMHO. Yes people comsuming to much coca cola which results in more farm land being used is a bad thing. But it is a completely seperate bad thing from people consuming so much meat that 25,000 sq kilometers of rain forest (6 million acres) of Amazon rainforest are cut down every year for grazing cattle and to grow soybeans to feed them! 6 million acres a year. Gone.

from this article: http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/feed/ (ref's at bottom of page)



BTW I'm not trying to ruffle your feathers at all. What you do is far better, and perhaps not even morally wrong in your book, but I don't really think it stands up when you start thinking about the cost to the environment. Not saying what you are doing is bad, but I am saying that if you grew only plant food on the same land you cost to the environment would be less. Especially if you did it organically.

Just food for thought. BTW It's nice to know you love your animals....I think this is something that is shared by most small farmers.

Peace.