commie

@commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com

i am more than willing to engage on any positive claim you want to make (i probably agree with a lot of them). what i’m not willing to do is tolerate personal attacks and dogpiling.

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

commie,

that’s without accounting for the feed

it’s not, and the methodology is flawed.

openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/…/content

commie,

I didn’t even touch on all the deforestation

the paper does, and it’s deeply flawed. no one should trust these over simplifications of our vastly complex agricultural systems.

commie,

it is no longer the position of the academy of nutrition and dietetics that vegetarian, including vegan, diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. it hasn’t been for years. you should stop spreading misinformation.

commie, (edited )

since the paper you linked expired

edit:

all current positions of the academy

double edit:

i see you are not the one who linked the expired paper. whoops.

commie,

animals aren’t killed for taste. it’s usually for profit.

commie,

it’s not their current position, and linking it, and saying it is their position, is dishonest.

commie,

it’s entirely true. they don’t care how it tastes, they care if they get paid

commie,

they have published a version of this position continually since the early '90s at least. if you look at the position paper that’s linked, you can see the specifics. this position has expired and not been renewed for years. that is good reason to believe that it will not be renewed and will no longer be the position of the academy.

commie,

this is a leap of logic. there is not direct correlation, and your accusation of bad faith is, itself, bad faith.

commie,

then there is no need to lie about the position the academy

commie,

do you think .world admins care?

commie,

the movement is growing

google trends says otherwise

commie,

99% of male calves are killed immediately after being born

that’s not true.

commie,

You cannot slaughter a healthy animal in a humane way. “Slaughter” excludes “humane”.

this is just a semantic game. there are human slaughter laws in most of the developed world. maybe all of it. and some in the developing world, too.

commie,

Every time we eat meat we caused absolutely unnecessary suffering for a quick moment of pleasure.

you might mean “all of humanity” or “all meat eaters” caused suffering, but, in fact only the individuals who cause suffering have done so, and eating meat does not, in and of itself, cause any suffering at all. if there is any suffering involved, it happens before the meat-eating, and thus cannot be caused by the meat-eating, since an event in the future cannot cause an event in the past.

commie,

Data for the production of alfalfa( Reference Mathews, Canevari and Frate 51 , Reference Vargas, Mueller and Frate 52 ) and maize( Reference Vargas, Frate and Mathews 53 , Reference Brittan, Muiner and Klonsky 54 ) used for animal feed were obtained from CRS and were added to the direct water used by the animals using a net feed consumption rate of 5·62 kg maize/kg beef and 2·66 kg alfalfa/kg beef. A feed conversion efficiency of 7·0 was assumed( Reference Horrigan, Lawrence and Walker 10 ). Soya in the feed formulations for beef and poultry was excluded.

since most beef cattle graze for the first year, where they put on the majority of their weight, then why would you attribute all the meat production to feedlots? shouldn’t it be halved at least?

commie,

You are ending the life of a sentient being that feels pain and has feelings/emotions, that has family of one kind or another, for no benefit other than your own pleasure.

there are reasons to eat meat besides"pleasure". like nutrients or convenience or cost, and it’s unlikely that most meat eaters are killing anything.

commie,

no, it’s not. bullets fired from guns kill people, but there is no similar causal system at play that can traverse time and kill animals in the past

commie,

i never suggested you couldn’t get nutrients other places. but meat is one option for nutrients.

commie,

Not sure how cooking pea protein sausage is less convenient than cooking a pork sausage.

if you’re cooking it’s probably roughly the same. but if you’re out and about, whether at a drive through or a neighborhood cookout, the meat might just be more convenient.

commie,

b) most people aren’t in a position where you have such financial pressure (food stamps etc) where you have to weigh calories per cent

i am barely middle class, but i still shop on calories per penny.

commie,

you can’t deny that a demand for meat influences the scale of meat production. Everyone in the production and consumption chain has blood on their hands.

“influences” is so weak that i am going to say that you meant “causes”. is this a strawman? maybe. but if you’re argument relies on the ambiguity of “influence” as opposed to the much stronger “cause” then you’re not really saying anything of substance anyway.

so does the decision to eat meat cause meat production in the future? no. a thousand times no. first, and this should be all that needs to be said, farmers and abottoir workers are agents with free will, so their decisions cannot in any meaningful sense be said to be caused by anything except their own will. that should be the beginning and end of it, but consider this additional hypothetical:

if there are three blue pigs in the world, and i kill all three and send them to the butcher shop, when someone buys that pork or bacon or ham, how do we kill more blue pigs? it’s impossible. so we can see that even if people lack free will and there is some economic theory that actually showed some causal link where consumption causes production (which is impossible), then we can see that consumption still can’t actually cause later production in even this one case, but probably many others.

commie,

this sounds like a good experiment. please let me know the results!

commie,

so to be clear, sometimes meat is a better choice based on convenience.

commie,

it’s not an analogy. it’s a hypothetical. and in my hypothetical you can see that your proposed causation falls apart. even in your amended version, when do i lose free will?

commie,

At this point I really am unsure whether you are just trolling since this is not rocket science.

this is an appeal to ridicule. youre right that it’s not rocket science though: that is provable.

commie,

at no point have i proposed that the production is desirable, only the consumption.

commie,

so long as i can still choose my own actions, i can’t say that other people’s reactions caused me to act in any way.

commie,

I don’t feel that I ever ask you to respond at all. I feel I’ve been right this whole time and you just don’t understand the topic well enough to discuss it. enjoy your vacation.

commie,

that image is based on poore-nemecek 2018 which has terrible methodology.

commie,

the sources on that paper are labyrinthine, but i recall pulling up the water use for cattle out of it, and they attributed all of the water used in the production of all the food given to cattle to the production of the cattle, which might make sense if you don’t think about it for even a few seconds more. we know that there are things that we grow that we use, and then discard other parts. maybe crop “seconds”; that is things that we grew thinking we would eat it but we pulled it to early or too late or mashed it up pretty bad during harvest or whatever. we are actually conserving water use by feeding these things to cattle, but it isn’t credited to cattle, it’s counted against their total water use.

that was just the water use for california dairy cattle. if even 10% of the study is done this sloppily, how much do you trust that study?

commie,

that is not the position of the academy and hasn’t been for years

commie,

they don’t even have a position on vegetarian diets any more

commie,

that is no longer the position of the academy

commie,

one of them is a lifter. one of them plays pro football. everyone else is endurance, speed, or technical athlete. so while being vegan seems like a reasonable option for people who don’t need mass and strength, it appears that vegans who have those attributes are outliers.

commie,

the venus williams bit mentions that being vegan helps with the symptoms of some autoimmune disease. it doesn’t say it prevents them (at least not from my reading)

commie,

they aren’t constantly pregnant, and the vast majority of even male calves are brought to full weight before slaughter.

commie,

It’s realy fucked up to eat and kill another sentient beeing to feed yourself

i don’t think so. can you support that claim?

commie,

everything eats living things. what is fucked up about that?

commie,

curiosity, then suddenly, boredom.

Former officials speak out against Biden’s unconditional support for Israel (www.independent.co.uk)

“There’s no incentive to investigate if the president and the White House themselves have announced that aid is unconditional,” said Brian Finucane, who worked for a decade in the Office of the Legal Adviser at the State Department advising on arms transfers and the laws of war....

commie,

viability is a myth. they told us hilary was viable and john kerry.

commie,

you’ve been suggesting, which is to vote third-party

lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/9217095

where?

commie,

It’s a fact that 3rd-party lose universally all of their elections while often spoiling elections for the primary party that most-closely shares their interests.

no it’s not. only a single counterexample is necessary to disprove this. but that’s not even what’s at issue here. what’s at issue is what the greater evil would have been. we cannot know what the losers of elections would have done had they won.

commie,

its the subject of serious debate in scholarly sources.

commie,

leftists are communists and anarchists. communism is a stateless classless moneyless society. what you’re calling leftists is actually fascist.

commie,

reflective of the non-sequitur you’re engaging in

i have done no such thing.

commie,

it’s unrelated to the crux of the argument. it’s a distraction.

commie,

nethier the civil rights act nor the legalization of same sex marriage is as concrete as a constitutional amendment, which is itself part of the constitution, and determines whether other laws are constitutional.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • fightinggames
  • All magazines
    •