HOME | DD
poderiu — I am not loving it I
Published: 2010-07-03 17:45:14 +0000 UTC; Views: 4499; Favourites: 85; Downloads: 57
Redirect to original
Description
...Related content
Comments: 214
I know, eating animals is cruel and unecessary
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
my opinion. would never do that
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
great for them, great for envirnorment, great for sustainability and, for course, good for you
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Awwww how sad ):
I'm just wondering, how long have you been vegetarian for? :0 I have been a vegetarian for about 7 years. 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
vegetarian for 12, vegan for 7
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Many need this for the message to go through - in both senses
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Stupid McDonalds. The children who eat there have no idea
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
You do know that a cow is usually sedated prior to being killed correct? What usually happens is it is led to a room sedated, tjan it is killed 1 of two ways, 1. It is sot at point blank range with a 10 guage shotgun or a high powered hunting rifle, or 2. Has a 6 inch spike drivin into its head and death both ways is insant, on top of that, it is sedated. This device is used, well, I'm nt really sure what it is used for, but I know this, if a cow is killed via this method in Canada, the farm is shut down, the animals sold and the farmer imprisoned.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
You can't nicely kill something that doesn't want to die.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
uau... so the world is pink, and a cow, or a chicken, or a pig, in Paradise Canada don´t have a suffering living since the first day they are born till the day they are assassinated. Keep living in "Meat Dream Land"...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I love Canada and will live here till the day I die. And I know living conditions for arm animals is not great, but the propaganda put out by vegans villianizes all the meat eating people in the world. And assasinated means they make it look like an accisent, if you are going to apply a more grusome term, use murderd, I use it when I disscuss the atrocity of whaling.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You love Canada and you love living in your Dream Meat World. Of course thouse vegans make propaganda: those images, documentaries, films in youtube are just special effects that come from the Vegan Cinema Industry. Comparing whales with cows or pigs? No way! You are correct: whales are murdered, cows just kill them selfs or even they purpose in live is to be killed and serve your stomach. Of course whales are sentient just like dogs, cats, or humans. Cows aren´t, they are just like plants - they have no central nervous system like the "vegan propagana" says.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
From Google definitions: Propaganda: Information of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view. I do love Canada yes, I love the Queen, poutine, hockey, maple syrup, I am pretty polite. Love this nation, and our flag. Those images that are from violent famrs that are shut down as a result, making it seem like it is that way on ALL farms, is propaganda, same with the videos. Now, I have no problem with veganism, just the people who decide eating meat, which by the way is called the circle of life, is wrong. Cows, pigs whales, people, all the same value, difference is, we can farm pigs and cows, can't farm whales. Can't make cows go extinct because of over-hunting because we breed them at a controlled rate, can hunt whales to extinction, something we almost did. Yes, they are born, raised and killed for food. Does a lion not kill the gazzel in the serengetti? Does the shark not kil the fiwsh for food? Does the cat not eat the mouse?It is called the circle of life, the difference is, with cows and pigs, we have alterd the circle into an oval, we cut out risking extinction and having to hunt. They are rigth there, now, I loves cows, they are cute, the little ones anyway, nice, and mello, they ar ealso food. Cows are sentiant yes, that is why they are sedated prior to being killed, so they do not feel the pian. If you wanna go twelve rounds with me on this, I will gladly, just know this, I am un-relenting, whether it be against whaling, or culinary discrimination, I will not quit.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So vegan propaganda is biased and misleading? Can you give me and example?
Listen I will not loose my time to explain you with decent sources (not biasad or misleading) what happens in lifestock industries (also in Canada) and what appens to animals inside. And I will not also explain to you that you can´t compare hunting animals with producing animals. The farm animals you eat are produced, not hunted. You don´t hunt, you pay for someone to produce and assassinate lifes. The human "circle of life" you mention about raizing and eating so much animals is just ruining the envirornment worldwide. You can be glad you are co-responsable for the one of the principle causes of ruining envirornment - The Meat Industry (Says the United Nations).
And who told you the "suffering" of farm animals comes only when they arrive to slaugtherhouses? Suffering comes from since the first day of their birth. Go see some videos ar some articles on how the animals you eat are raised since the first day that are born. No the videos are not "biased", are REAL imagens where REAL animals do suffer. The videos were made by decent people that risk their lifes to make the videos, they where not given by the factory farms. And this people don´t do activism for money, they do it for princeples.
"Cows are food" according to our speciesist culture that you reproduce without questioning: So for you is natural to eat a cow and to love a dog, and you don´t even realize that the animals you call pets are eaten in many coutries, or the cow you don´t hesitate to call "food" is not eaten in India (example).
So you love cows and you eat their dead bodies? You pay someone to murder them? Uau... Some people from Denmark that kill whales just say the same stuff "I love whales, they are so beautiful, admirable" and then they go to the restaraunt to eat them.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Example: From fridge to farm. What farm, what fridge?
Exactly, less harm to the populations of animals in the wild. You keep proving my points. I could never kill an animal, I can eat one, not kill one. Like I siad, go tell the lion to stop eating the gazzell, go tell the shark to stop eating the fish, go tell the orca to stop eating the seal, and go tell the bear to stop eating the deer. Humans eat meat. I am a very large man (hieght and girth) I stop eating meat, I loose a tremendous amount of wieght in an unhealthy time frame. I can stop the oil companies, because there is a viable alternative, ethonal, there is however no subvsitute for meat. Yeah, I will admit, one bike riding meat eating human is worse for the enviroment than a hummer driving vegan, but, I was raised with meat, and my kids will be raised with meat.
Most farms now have large, open pens with no barries anymore. I can take you to my Grandma's old farm and show you if you like. The cows hgad acres of land, and the pig pens and chicken coops were huge, I mean, bigger than the damn house! Go look at real video of people doing REAL documentaries, not trying to shut down the few barbaric farms that are left. You will see, farm animals now live better than the farmes. No predatation, untill d-day, very few diseases, and, all you can eat food. Yeah, sonds like hell to me.
Cows are food for 1 reason, humans are animals, and animals eat meat. The lion does, the shark does, the dolphin does, and so does the human. Yeah I do know that dogs are killed for food in Korea, did you know they also eat half alive cephalapods too? Crazy ass culture over there, but it is not my place to dis-respect or to discriminate them. Yeah, and pigs are not eaten by Jews, you're point? What you are saying is this, and correct me if I am wrong; we should stop eating meat because the animal suffers correct? Well, then the lion should stop eating meat because the gazell suffers, the orca should stop eating seals because they suffer, and the shark should stop eating the fish because they suffer by you're logic. I am ofg the beliefs that animal and humans are equal. You and I have the same value as my cat, and the cat has the same vaklue as his 1 flea, and that flea is the same value of a whale, and so on, and, animals eat animals.
I don't pay them, the supermarkets do, I pay the super markets for my meat. Killing whales, worse than murder in my opinion, also, people in Denmark don't kill whales anymore, whale meat is imported, but not killed there, they get their meat from the Icelandics. And I like cows, I love myself, I love my mom, I love my cat, I love whales, I like cows.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I was expecting for you to be more specific about the example. You gave me a title of a documentary "Farm To Fridge - The Truth Behind Meat Production Video" - What is the propaganda or the parts they lie, can you point any?
You don´t kill animals but you are co-responsabale for their suffering and killing. When you pay for the corpses you eat you are sponsoring a industry that provoques suffering to the animals.
You still compare human organisms and cultural practices to other animals, particularly carnivores. I can see you are very confuse.
Fact 1: You should compare human organisms with animals that share biological characteristics, not with lyons or sharcs, or cats, etc. Gorilas share with humans 96% of our genes and they are VEGAN, superstrong, they even have bigger canines than humans, but their teeth is very similar to ours and other hervibores. Also our intestins are long, just like other hervibores. Lyons, sharks, and other carnivores have shorter intestins and their teeth is very different from ours.
Fact 2: You don´t need meat to gain muscles or to be strong. I will not speek about me, sure I am very healthy, run for 2 hours non stop. Vegan athletes (bodybuilders, triathletes, UFC fighters, martial artists, tenis players, etc.) are champions, they gain contests, gold medals. They are strong, resistant and prove that our organism is suitable for being vegan.
Fact 3: Intensive meat production happens in the majority of farms of the most developed coutries. And that means that animals do have intensive different kind of pains since the day they born to the day they are assassinated. Your grandmother farm is real, of course, but this kind of farms are small, they don´t produce in a large scale.
Fact 4: Meat and dairy consumption is associated with human desieses: intenstine, cancer, prostate cancer, lung cancer, heart desieses, strockes, obesity, and others.
Fact 5. MEat and dairy consumption and also fishing are responsable for several environmental serious damages, is even worst then transportation industries.
Fact 6. Meat and dairy industry are insustainable. The meat and dairy industry monopolise the usage of water, 72% of food produced worldwide (soybean, wheat, corn, and others), soil, energy. MEat industry is coresponsable for world hunger.
Fact 7: Cows, whales, dogs, humans, sheeps, monkeys, birds, pigs, etc., are all animals and we all have a central nervous system that makes us all sentient. We all have interest in living, avoiding pain, in loving and taking care of others.
*** If you disagree about this 7 facts can prove them very easily with non vegan sources. 
Being vegan requires to understand what are the nutrients we need to stay strong and healthy. That is why I am healthy and my vegan sun is also super healthy (even stronger then other kids with his age.) Me and other millions of vegans we are growing each and every day in number. Is good people aknowledge REALITY and not MYTHS in order for the world be a better place.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
In the documentary, it shows a farm that was shut down.
No, I, or rather my mom, pays the supermarket, the supermarket pays the farms. I don't advocate or support the killing of animals, I like meat though.
Human ate meat prior to vegatables. Wht did the first humans eat during ice age, mammoth, aka, meat. What did cave people eat, meat. Humans are onivores, as are bears, and we have simalar teeth os a dog, exept our K9's are shorter.
Chimanzee's eat lizards and sometines eachother, and we share 99% of DNA comatability are them. Gorillas also eat termites, or do insects not count?
I am fat, not muscled, well, I do have some definition. Also, humans need protiens, if we do not get enough, we can go into shock, espiecally since I have eaten meat for over a decade.
The pens in farms have lots of space, room to lay, room to sit, lots of water, lots of food, and no predators, untill "that day"
Oh what, you don't drink milk either? You are hardcore vegan. Those are sicknesses that can be counterd with vitamins and exersice, not smoking ar drinking helps too.
I don't eat fish next.
Meat production contributes to world hunger eh? Do you mind to tell me when you'r next flying pigs leave WFT airport? If meat production stops, many people in the world ie, because meat and dairy make up almost 75% of my diet. And that water is used for the expanding vegan community to produce more vegatables, means less wtaer.
Yes we all do, but an animal has to eat. And humans eat meat.
Good for you, and I can disprove them with studies from other people, so go right on ahead.
What myths? The only myth is that the animal suffers when it is killed. More vegan propaganda. I will admit, I like vegans, there a decent people, it is the propaganda that is spouted by them that annoys me, if this picture did not imply that this is how cows are killed, I would have continued on my merry little way.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The documentary shows a farm that shut down so that means it didn´t happen or that it doesn´t happen in a massive sclale? It does happen, and in happens in wide and large scale.
The meat you pay in the supermarket doesn´t come from the sky. It belongs to dead animals that once lived. If no one payed for dead animals to eat, like you do, meat production would certainly end. There is a thing called "action and consequences". And our actions do have consequences. So, your action in contribute to meat production with your money, to eat dead animals makes you co-responsable for their suffering and for the negative impacts in environment.
So you still go to neanderthal? Wake up! We are homo sapiens sapiens, and we don´t hunt. We produce animals. Dogs are carnivores, don´t compare our teeth or our digestive system with them, is ridiculous. Some gorilas eat insects, they do have high levels of protein. But some gorilas are 100% vegan.
But again, Vegans are proff that we don´t nead to eat animals. So there are to kind of human animals, the strongest that can be healhy and live longer without causing suffering to animals and without ruin envirornment; and the weaker kind that thinks that with out meat their life is going to end.
You are fat? Try to cut in meat and you will see yourself going much better. Really, humans need proteins? Uau... and where do you thing vegans and vegan athletes get their protein? From animals? No. From Mars? No. From vegetables, of course
I hate animals for 20 years and I don´t eat them for 11 years now. Never to late to change for better.
You are also very confused in what vegan is all about. Vegans reject any kind of animal explotation. Of course we don´t drink milk from cows. That is ridiculous. The only mammal that drinks milk from other species, in adulthood, is the human species. Also milk for cows have pus, anthibiotics, bovine grow hormone and their milk should go to baby calves, not to us. Milk from cow is also bad for our health.
Now: Go to google and check what is Cargill (that serves McDonalds and KFC) is doing to Amazonia. During the last 4 years 70000 km2 of forest was destroyed in Amazonia for the production of soya that is not used to feed people, but used to feed cattle - this is not sustainable (economicaly) and is socialy unfair because who pays (with hunger) the absence of soya and corn are the poor people who depends on this very nutritive diets.
According to UN report "meat industry produces more greenhouse gases than all the SUVs, cars, trucks, planes, and ships in the world combined", it pollutes water, it degrades land, and ruines biodiversity. Livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global. As I said before, meat industry contributes 18% of all emissions of greenhouse gasses.
"Livestock's Long Shadow - Environmental Issues and Options"
Based on this report, senior U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization official Dr. Henning Steinfeld stated that the meat industry is “one of the most significant contributors to today’s most serious environmental problems" and that "urgent action is required to remedy the situation."
United Nations is Vegan propaganda?
And you still reproduce propaganda and myths:
"If meat production stops, many people in the world ie, because meat and dairy make up almost 75% of my diet." (maybe that is the reason you are fat?)
We both still agree that the United Nations isen´t vegan and they don´t make propaganda. So what do they say about meat industry and world hunger?
A 2010 report from United Nations Environment Program's (UNEP) International Panel of Sustainable Resource Management, states that global shift towards a vegan diet is critical for mitigating global issues of hunger, fuel poverty and the worst impacts of climate change. The panel declared: "Impacts from agriculture are expected to increase substantially due to population growth and increasing consumption of animal products. Unlike fossil fuels, it is difficult to look for alternatives: people have to eat. A substantial reduction of impacts would only be possible with a substantial worldwide diet change, away from animal products."[19][20]
** Please, do ourselves a favor. If you want to continue this discution I hope you use serious sources to state what you say. And please,
stop reproducing myths or propaganda.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Wasn't done, battery died.
Dogs are omnivores, and we have simalar teeth, we have the same numbers of K9 teeth, thus, we eat meat.
I am fat because of four things, chips, pizza, pop and inactivity. FYI, I have lost weight recently, without taking meat outta my diet. Ha! And how many stalks of celery does it take to equal 1, 6oz steak with BBQ sauce?
The most significant is the oil companies, and like I siad, do you drive a car?
UN truths mate, the methane from cows is very unhealth to the atmosphere, that is why we should LOWER our meat intake, which I have done, but I will never stop completely.
Like I siad, my fatness is the result of pizza, chips, pop and inactivity, but, it also means there is more to love. What is propaganda there? If meat production stops, many people, espieacally the ones in Texas, will die of starvation, because they don't like just veggies. Although, I bet you're grocery bill is next to nothing.
No, the UN is a terrific source, but, how can the stoppage of meat production possiblt lower world hunger. It would increase it would it not? What they say is true, there are too many farms, and too many cows, that is why a cut down is needed, but a stoppage will never happen.
Well, while I agree with that last statement, this proud Canadian man will never stop eating meat, untill I get on a Sea Shepherd ship, they are all vegan, I'll make sure I have miney for meat on shore then.
What myths? And I was the one who brought up propaganda, so, well, since you went all UN enviroment crap on me, it is hard to call the propaganda, but, you have failed to comment on my humanity argument for my second last post, so I consider that a victory.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
A person who thinks the majority of farms of the most developed countries are like his grandmother; who believes his organism is like lyons, sharks and dogs and other carnivors; who thinks that one he stops eating corpes that the health will pay the bill; a person who eats animals, says that loved them and that they are not harmed because he gives money to the supermarket; a person that states "UN is a terrific source",or "UN enviroment crap on me", etc...
What to say more? I could be here for hours pointing you more United Nations "crap" about envirnorment; some statistics of the World Cancer Research that point meat as one of main causes for cancers, heart atacks, strockes, obesity, etc.; I could point some data from World Health Organization pointing that meat production is responsable for the increasing for world hunger; I could be here for hours poiting that humans do not need to eat animals; but for what? For you to say that is propaganda, or "crap"?
You know, reality sucks, is hard to accept it, specially when you are co-responsable for bad things. Is much easy to sit on couch scratching balls, eating pizza and believing in fary tails. IT´s your choice. If you want to know reality read repports of (non vegan) NGOs concerning the impacts of meat production worldwide, in animals, in human health, in envirornment, in the third world food networks. If you want the repports and can point links to you and you will find reality is much more wider than your grandmother.
Good Luck.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Seeing as I buy my meat from local, small farms, knowing what happens at big commercial farms, their goes that argument. Also, the conditions of commercial farms has gotton better in the last decade. When did I say "UN enviroment crap on me" As for the rest of that paragargh, I have no clue what you mean, the grammar is that of a Japanese person.
Look, I know the meat industry has a huge impact on the enviroment, that is why we need to cut down meat consuption, but you know what, more enviromental problems comes from the oil companies. And I know the health risks, and even though I eat meat, and a lot of it, although it is reducing, my life expentancy is still over 8 decades, and that is long enough for me. You show me one artcle that proves that the meat industry increases world hunger.
Yeah, reality does suck, so when are you going to admit that man has been eating meat for 10,000 years, and we will eat iot for 10,000 more! Provided humans manage to get themselves out of the dire straights we are in now. Well, when I turn 18, I'm ridin a boat to Australia, and sailing off with Sea Shepherd [link] to protect whales in the Southern ocean whale sanctuary from Japanese harpoons, so I sit for now. Give me those links please.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Envirnomental impacts of meat production
Source: LIVESTOCK'S LONG SHADOW environmental issues and options - [link]
"Industrial monoculture is harvesting large quantities of a single food species, such as maize, or cattle. Monoculture is commonly practiced in industrial agriculture, which is more environmentally damaging than sustainable farming practices such as organic farming, permaculture, arable, pastoral, and rain-fed agriculture [3]. According to a 2006 Food and Agriculture Organization report, industrialized agriculture contributes on a “massive scale” to climate change, air pollution, land degradation, energy use, deforestation, and biodiversity decline [4].
Industrialized agriculture damages fresh air through greenhouse gas emissions and overuse of fossil fuels. According to Livestock’s Long Shadow, an FAO report, the meat industry contributes about 18 percent of global greenhouse-gas emissions [5]. Furthermore, Carbon Dioxide is not the only greenhouse gas. Methane has about 21 times more GWP (GWP) than Carbon Dioxide and Nitrous Oxide has 296 times the GWP of CO2 .[6]. The livestock industry is a major contributor of these gases through fossil fuel use. Data of a USDA study indicate that about 0.9 percent of energy use in the United States is accounted for by raising food-producing livestock and poultry. In this context, energy use includes energy from fossil, nuclear, hydroelectric, biomass, geothermal, technological solar, and wind sources. The estimated energy use in agricultural production includes embodied energy in purchased inputs. [7].
Another agricultural effect is on land degradation. More than half the world's crops are used to feed animals.[8]. With 30 percent of the earth's land devoted to raising livestock [9], a major cutback is needed to keep up with growing population. A 2010 UN report explained that Western dietary preferences for meat would be unsustainable as the world population rose to the forecasted 9.1 billion by 2050.[8] Demand for meat is expected to double by this date; meat consumption is steadily rising in countries such as China that once followed more sustainable, vegetable-based diets.
A person existing chiefly on animal protein requires 10 times more land to provide adequate food than someone living on vegetable sources of protein.[citation needed] The environmental impacts of animal production vary[clarification needed] with the method of production. A grazing-based production can limit soil erosion and also allow farmers to control pest problems with less pesticides through rotating crops with grass. In arid areas, however, it may catalyze a desertification process.[citation needed] The ability of soil to absorb water by infiltration is important for minimizing runoff and soil erosion. Researchers in Iowa reported that a soil under perennial pasture grasses grazed by livestock was able to absorb far more water than the same kind of soil under two annual crops: corn and soybeans.[10] Corn and soybean crops commonly provide food for human consumption, biofuels, livestock feed, or some combination of these.
The FAO initiative concluded that "the livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global."[4]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Consumption of "meat and colorectal cancer" (an example)- "RED AND
PROCESSED MEAT: finding the balance for cancer prevention" Source: World Cancer Research
[link]
"The evidence examined by the Report regarding red meat
is particularly convincing. A review of 87 different studies
shows that eating too much red meat (beef, lamb, pork
and goat) increases the risk of bowel cancer. The
evidence shows that eating up to 500g (cooked weight)
of red meat per week does not significantly raise cancer
risk. Eating more than this, however, definitely increases
your risk of bowel cancer."
"After reviewing 58 studies, the Expert Panel found
convincing evidence that eating processed meat is
linked to an increased risk of bowel cancer. This
research shows that the risk is higher than the risk
linked to fresh red meat. The Panel could find no
amount of processed meat that can be confidently
shown not to increase cancer risk.
Processed meat may increase our chances of
developing bowel cancer in a number of ways.
Processing can produce several cancer-causing
substances including N-nitroso compounds, which
are the product of nitrates – a common preservative
in processed meat. Processed meat, like bacon and
ham, may produce higher levels of N-nitroso
compounds than fresh red meat. This may be why
the evidence linking it to cancer risk is stronger.
Processed meat made from red meat also contains
haem, which may also pose a risk."
Colorectal cancer
Due to the many studies that have found a link between red meat intake and colorectal cancer,[9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] the American Institute for Cancer Research and World Cancer Research Fund stated that there is "convincing" evidence that red meat intake increases the risk for colorectal cancer.[17]
Professor Sheila Bingham of the Dunn Human Nutrition Unit attributes this to the haemoglobin and myoglobin molecules which are found in red meat. She suggests these molecules, when ingested trigger a process called nitrosation in the gut which leads to the formation of carcinogens.[18][19][20] Others have suggested that it is due to the presence of carcinogenic compounds called heterocyclic amines, which are created in the cooking process.[10][21][22] However, this may not be limited to red meat, since a study from the Harvard School of Public Health found that people who ate skinless chicken five times or more per week had a 52% higher risk of developing bladder cancer although not people who ate chicken with skin.[23]
A 2011 study of 17,000 individuals found that people consuming the most grilled and well-done meat had a 56 and 59% higher rate of cancer.[24]
Other cancers
Some people do not believe that red meat may cause cancer but there is "suggestive" evidence that red meat intake increases the risk of oesophageal, lung, pancreatic and endometrial cancer.[17] As a result, they recommend limiting intake of red meat to less than 300g (11 oz) cooked weight per week, "very little, if any of which to be processed."[25]
Some studies have linked consumption of large amounts of red meat with breast cancer,[26][27] stomach cancer,[28] lymphoma,[29] bladder cancer,[30] lung cancer[31] and prostate cancer[30][32][33] (although other studies have found no relationship between red meat and prostate cancer[34][35]).
A 2011 study of almost 500,000 participants found that those in the highest quintile of red meat consumption had a 19% increased risk of kidney cancer.[36]
Cardiovascular diseases
Some studies have associated red meat consumption with cardiovascular diseases, possibly because of its high content of saturated fat.[30] Specifically, increased beef intake is associated with ischemic heart disease.[30] Some mechanisms that have been suggested for why red meat consumption is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease include: its impact on serum cholesterol,[37] that red meat contains arachidonic acid,[38] heme iron,[39] and homocysteine.[40] A later study has indicated that it is not associated with cardiovascular diseases.[41]
A 1999 study funded by the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, an advocacy group for beef producers, involved 191 persons with high cholesterol on diets where at least 80% of the meat intake came from either lean red meat in one group, or lean white meat in another. The results of this study showed nearly identical cholesterol, and triglyceride levels in both groups. This study suggests that lean red meat may play a role in a low-fat diet for persons with high cholesterol.[42][43]
Red meat consumption is also associated with acute coronary syndrome,[44] as well as stroke.[45] It has also been associated with greater intima-media thickness, an indicator of atherosclerosis.[46]
A 2008 article published in Nature found that red meat consumption was "strongly associated" with increased odds of acute coronary syndrome, with those eating more than 8 servings of red meat per month being 4.9 times more likely to have cardiac events than those eating less than four servings per month.[47]
A 21 year follow up of about thirty thousand Seventh Day Adventists (adventists are known for presenting a "health message" that recommends vegetarianism) found that people who ate red meat daily were 60% more likely to die of heart disease than those who ate red meat less than once per week.[48]
The Seven Countries Study found a significant correlation between red meat consumption and risk of CHD.[49] A significant relationship between red meat and CHD has been found specifically for women,[50] most strongly with regards to processed red meat.[51]
A 2009 study by the National Cancer Institute revealed a correlation between the consumption of red meat and increased mortality from cardiovascular diseases, as well as increased mortality from all causes.[52] This study has been criticized for using an improperly validated food frequency questionnaire,[53] which has been shown to have low levels of accuracy.[54][55]
Diabetes
Red meat intake has been associated with an increased risk of type II diabetes.[56][57][58] Interventions in which red meat is removed from the diet can lower albuminuria levels.[59] Replacing red meat with a low protein or chicken diet can improve glomerular filtration rate.[60]
Other findings have suggested that the association may be due to saturated fat, trans fat and dietary cholesterol, rather than red meat per se.[61][62][63] An additional confound is that diets high in processed meat could increase the risk for developing Type 2 diabetes.[64]
One study estimated that “substitutions of one serving of nuts, low-fat dairy, and whole grains per day for one serving of red meat per day were associated with a 16–35% lower risk of type 2 diabetes”.[65]
Obesity
The Diogenes project used data from ninety thousand men and women over about seven years and found that "higher intake of total protein, and protein from animal sources was associated with subsequent weight gain for both genders, strongest among women, and the association was mainly attributable to protein from red and processed meat and poultry rather than from fish and dairy sources. There was no overall association between intake of plant protein and subsequent changes in weight."[66] They also found an association between red meat consumption and increased waist circumference.
A 1998 survey of about five thousand vegetarian and non-vegetarian people found that vegetarians had about 30% lower BMIs.[67] A 2006 survey of fifty thousand women found that those with higher "western diet pattern" scores gained about two more kilograms over the course of four years than those who lowered their scores.[68]
A ten-year follow up of 80,000 men and women found that "ten-year changes in body mass index was associated positively with meat consumption" as well as with weight gain at the waist.[69] In a Mediterranean population of 8,000 men and women, meat consumption was significantly associated with weight gain.[70] Data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey showed "consistent positive associations between meat consumption and BMI, waist circumference, obesity and central obesity."[71]
A survey of twins found that processed meat intake was associated with weight gain.[72] Western diets, which include higher consumption of red meats, are often associated with obesity.
.....................................................
Meat and world hunger
THE STATE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE (Food and Agriculture Org. UN)
[link]
THE REAL COSTS OF BEEF:
GLOBAL HUNGER AND
POVERTY
Beef production causes human hunger and poverty by diverting grain and cropland to support livestock instead of people. In developing countries, beef production perpetuates and intensifies poverty and injustice, particularly if beef or livestock feed is produced for export.
Seventy percent of all U.S. grain -- and one third of the world's total grain harvest -- is fed to cattle and other livestock. At the same time, between 40 and 60 million people die each year from hunger and diseases related to hunger. As many as one billion suffer from chronic hunger and malnourishment.1
U.S. livestock -- mostly cattle -- consumes almost twice as much grain as is eaten by the entire American population. Globally, about 600 million tons of grain are fed to livestock, much of it to cattle.2
Two-thirds of all U.S. grain exports foes to feed cattle and other livestock rather than hungry people.3
In Africa, nearly one in three people is undernourished. In Latin America, nearly one out of every seven people goes to bed hungry each night. In Asia and the Pacific, 22 percent of the people live at the edge of starvation. In the Near East, one in nine is underfed.4
Chronic hunger and related disease affect more than 1.3 billion people, according to the World Health Organization. Never before in human history has such a large percentage of our species -- more than 20 percent -- been undernourished.5
Undernutrition affects nearly 40 percent of all children in developing nations and contributes directly to an estimated 60 percent of all childhood deaths, according to the U.S. Agency for International Development. More than 15 million children die every year from diseases resulting from, or complicated by, undernourishment.6
If worldwide agricultural production were shifted fron? livestock feed to food grains for direct human consumption, more than a billion people could be fed -- the precise number which currently suffer from hunger and malnourishment.8
Feeding grain to livestock is an extremely wasteful method of producing protein. Feedlot cattle require nine pounds of feed to make one pound of gain. Only 11 percent of the feed goes to produce the beef itself. The rest is burned off as energy in the conversion process, used to maintain normal body functions, absorbed into parts of the cattle that are not eaten -- such as hair or bones -- or excreted.8
Cattle have a feed protein conversion efficiency of only 6 percent, producing less than 50 kg of flesh protein from more than 790 kg of plant protein. A feedlot steer consumes 2,700 pounds of grain by the time it is ready for slaughter.9
Asian adults consume between 300 and 400 pounds of grain a year; three-fourths or more of the diet of the average Asian is composed of grain. A middle-class American, by contrast, consumes over a ton of grain each year, 80 percent of it through eating cattle and other grain-fed livestock.10
Two out of every three people around the world consume a primarily vegetarian diet. With one-third of global grain output now going to cattle and other livestock, and with the human population growing by almost 20 percent in the next decade, a worldwide food crisis is imminent.11
Three quaners of America's public western land -- covering 40 percent of the eleven western statss -- is leased to cattlemen at prices far below market value.12
Nearly half of the earth's landmass is used as pasture for cattle and other livestock. On very rich grasslands, two and a half acres can support a cow for a year. On marginal grazing land, 50 or more acres may be required.13
In the 1960s, with the help of loans from the World Bank and the Inter- American Development Bank, many Central and South America governments began converting millions of acres of tropical rain forest and cropland to pastureland for the international beef market. Between 1971 and 1977, more than $3.5 billion in loans and technical assistance went to Latin America for cattle production.14
Many major U.S. corporations invested heavily in beef production throughout Central America in the 1970s and 80s, including Borden, United Brands, and International Foods. Other American multinational companies such as Cargill, Ralston Purina, W.R. Grace, Weyerhauser-, Crown Zellerbach, and Fort Dodge Labs, provided most of the technological support for the Central American beef industry, from frozen semen to refrigeration equipment, grass seeds, feed, and medicine. 15
The beef industry in Central America has enriched the lives of a select few, pauperized much of the rural peasantry, and spawned widespread social unrest and political upheaval. More than half the rural families in Central America -- 35 million people -- are now landless or own too little land to support themselves, while powerful ranchers and large corporations continue to acquire more land for pasture.16
In Costa Rica, cattle interests cleared 80 percent of the tropical forests in just 20 years, turning half the arable land into cattle pastures. Today, just 2,000 powerful ranchincg families own over half the productive land in Costa Rica, grazing 2 million cattle most of whose meat is exported to the United States.17
In Guatemala, less than 3 percent of the population owns 70 percent of the agriculitural land, much of it used for raising cattle. Nearly one third of Guatemala's beef production was exported to the U.S. in 1990.18
In Honduras, land used for cattle pasture increased from just over 40 percent in 1952 to more than 60 percent in 1974. Total beef production tripled between 1960 and 1980 to over 62,000 metric tons annually. In 1990, more than 30 percent of the beef produced in Honduras was exported to the United States.19
In Nicaragua, beef production increased threefold and beef exports increased five and a half times between 1960 and 1980.20
By the mid 1980s, Central America had 80 percent more cattle than 20 years before, and produced 170 percent more beef.21
In Brazil, 4.5 percent of the landowners own 81 percent of the farmland, while 70 percent of the rural households are landless. Between 1966 and 1983, nearly 40,000 square miles of Amazon forest were cleared for commercial development. The Brazilian government estimated that 38 percent of all the rain forest destroyed during that period was attributable to large-scale cattle development benefitting only a few wealthy ranchers.22
In developing countries, the poor receive no benefit from cattle ranching. Modern beef production is capital intensive but not labor intensive. The average rain forest cattle ranch employs one person per 2,000 head of cattle, or about one person per twelve square miles. By contrast, peasant agriculture can often sustain a hundred people per square mile.23
Latin American countries are using more of their land to graze cattle, and to grow feed crops. In Mexico, where millions of people are malnourished, one-third of the grain produced is being fed to livestock. Twenty-five years ago, livestock consumed less than 6 percent of Mexico's grain.24
When land in developing countries is used to produce livestock feed, much of it for export, less land is available to peasant farmers to grow their own food, and so less food is available. As a result, staple food prices rise, and the impact is mostly felt by the poor. In Brazil, black beans, long a staple food for the poor, are becoming more expensive as farmers have switched to growing soybeans for the more lucrative international feed market.25
FOOTNOTES
[1] U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates, WASDE-256, Tables 256-6, -7, -16, -19. -23, World Bank, Poverty and Hunger (Washington DC: World Bank, 1986), 24: Susan Oakie. "Health Crisis Confronts 1.3 Billion," Washington Post, September 25, 1989, A1.
[2] USDA, Economic Research Service, World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimares, WASDE-256, Tables 256-6, -7, -16, -19, -23; World Bank, Poverty. and Hunger. (Washington DC: World Bank, 1986), 24. For two times the entire American population see USDA figures. For third world grain production see World Bank report.
[3] USDA, Economic Research Service, WASDE 256-6,-16.
[4] World Resources Institute, World Resources 1990-91, 87; CTnited Nations World Food Council, "The Global State of Hunger and Malnutrition and the Impact of Economic Adjustment on Food and Hunger," World Food Council, Thirteenth Ministerial Session, Report by the Secretariat, Beijing, China, 1987, 16.
[5] Susan Okie, Al.
[6] Katrina Galway et al., Child Survival: Risks and the Road to Health; (Columbia, MD: Institute for Resource Development, 1987), 31.
[7] David Pimentel. Food Energy And The Future of Society (New York: Wiley, 1979), 26. U.S Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates, WASDE-256, July 11, 1991,table 256-6; World Bank, Poverty and Hunger (Washington DC: World Bank, 1986). 24. Pimentel estimates that a conversion of the present American grass/grain livestock system to a totally grass-fed system would free up in the United States alone about 130 million tons of grain for direct human consumption, enough to feed about 400 million people. Today worldwide, about one-third of the 1.7 billion metric tons of total grain production is fed to livestock, which would suggest, using Pimentel's rationale, that a totally grass-fed livestock system worldwide might free enough grain up to feed over a billion people.
[8] M.E. Ensminger, Animal Science (Danville, IL: Interstate Publishers, 1991). 23, fig 1-25, 20.
[9] David Pimentel and Marcia Pimentel, Fond Energy and Society (New York: Wiley, 1979), 58; Ensminger, 23:"Assuming a feeding period of 140 davs and a gain of 450 pounds in the lot, the total market weight (10501h) would represent 2.57 Ib of feed grain expended for each pound of gain (450 x 6 =2,700)."
[10] Paul Ehrlich et al., Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment (San Francisco: W.H. Freeman. 1977), 315: Ensminger 20, 27; Pimentel et al., " Energy and Land Constraints in Food Protein production." Science, issue 190; 754.
[11] David Pimentel and Carl W. Hall, eds., Food and Natural Resources (San Diego: Academic Press, 1989), 38; Jack Doyle, Altered Harvest (New York, NY: Viking/Penguin, 1985), 288; Lester Brown et al., Stare of the World 1990 (New York, NY: W.W. Norton and Co., 1990), 5, table 1-1.
[12] Ensminger, 22; Lynn Jacobs, "Amazing Graze: How the Livestock Industry is Ruining the American West." in Desertification ControlBullerin. No. 17 (Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Environment Program, 1988); Public Lands Ranching Statistics.l990 (Free Our Public Lands. P.O Box 5784, Tuscon AZ 85703).
[13] Paul Ehrlich and Ann Ehrlich, The Population Explosion (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1990), 35; David Pimentel and Carl Hall, eds. Food and Natural Resources, 80.
[14] Office of Technology Assessment, Technologies to Sustain Tropical Forest Resources, U.S. Congress, OTA-F-214, March 1984, Forest Resources, 96-97.
[15] Tom Barry, Roots of Rebellion (Boston: South End Press, 1987), 84.
[16] Norman Myers, The Primary Source (New York: W.W. Nonon, 1983), 133.
[17] Catherine Caulfield, "A Reporter at Large: The Rain Forests," New Yorker, Jan. 14, 1985, 79; Norman Meyers, 134.
[18] Norman Meyers, 133; export and production figures from USDA, Foreign Agriculture Service as Summarized by Scott Lewis, "The Hamburger Connection Revisited," Rainforest Action Network, San Francisco, 1991.
[19] Billie DeWalt. "The Cattle are Eating the Forest," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, January 1983, 19; Export and production figures from USDA, Foreign Agriculture Service as summarized by Scott Leuis.
[20] Meyers 133; Export figures from USDA.
[21] DeWalt, 19.
[22] Caulfield. 49; lames Parsons, "The Scourge of Cows." Whole Earth Review, Spring 1988, 43.
[23] Caulfield, 80.
[24] David Barkin and Billie DeWalt. "Sorghum, the Internationalization of Capital and the Mexican Food Crisis," paper presented at the American Anthropological Association meeting. Denver, November 16 1983. 16; acreage figures from Scott Lewis, "The Hamburger Connection Revisited..."; grain figures from Barkin and DeWalt. p16; Steven Sanderson. The Transformation ofMesican Agriculture (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
[25] Associacao Promorora de Estudus da Economica, A Economica Brasil-eira e Suas perspectives. Apecan XXIX, 1990 (Rio de Janeiro: APEC. 1990). 5. FAO of the United Nations, Trade, Commerce. Commercio. 1989 Yearbook (Rome:Italy: FAO, 1990) Vol 43, 29; Femando Homen de Melo, "Unbalanced Technological Change and Income Disparity in a Semi-Open Economy: The Case of Brazil," in Tullis F. Lammond and W. Ladd Hollist, eds. Food, State, and International Political Economy (Lincoln:University of Nebraska, 1986), 262-275.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Vegan athletes (strong, non animal protein)
[link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fricken 10 mile long ass reply. This will take a while to read, mostly because it is dinner time, and like I said, I agree with the enviroment problems meat causes, won't stop me from eating it though. I never said vegan athletes were not strong, but I bet Mark Henry, meat eater, is stronger than any vegan, or non-vegan man alive today.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
... much more wider than your grandmother farm******
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
That propaganda film shows a huge minority in famrs. Go watch any REAL documentary on farms, or livestock ships, and you will see, those pigs and cows, in most cases live a better life than the farmers. ex: My grandma, her house was falling down, and she had tp repiar the farm. That shows that farmers deeply care about their livestsock. A disease riddled, broken down cow or pig will yield very little for sale, simple economics.
The meat I pay for comes from local, Saskatchewan and Alberta farms, right here in the Great White North, and it tastes damn good with BBQ sauce.
I eat dead animals yes, as does the lion, tiger, shark, lepord, wild dog and wolf, an other various animals.
We are homosapiens, the hughest form that the himo genis has taken, right after homohibillious and homohydlebregenza, which may or may not be Sasquatch. My greatest enemy bow hunts deer, humans hunt. There are nomads all over the place in Canada, meaningk, they hunt their food, purify their own water, and survive in the perfect way, no government. And no whiney vegans either.
You hated animals for two decades? I don't hate animals, I love animals, I also eat them, and their is no problem with that.
Milk is good, and I can say this with 100% authenticity, as I have a 4 liter jug right beside me. But, I guess that is you're decision, and I cannot judge you for it, but you attack my eating habits, and I will defend them.
I don't eat Mcdinks or Kentucy Fried Crap, just A&W and Burger Baron, and various pizza parlours. McDinks and KFC is a corrupt, piece a crap comanies that exploit everything and everyone, I eat from smaller places because they have a much smaller carbon footprint.
Nope, not propaganda, truth, the methane from cows is great, but the methane from humans is even greater. The oil companies are to blame for the increase in temp, and yes, farms contribute to it, but much smaller. Tell me, do you drive a car? I ride the bus and walk.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thank you so much for posting this. 
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
that's so sad. nothing can make me stop eating meat, but i wish they would improve the conditions of the animals
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
May I ask you what animals do you eat?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
cow and chicken mainly. and turkey.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Why you eat cows, chickens, turkeys, and not dogs, lyons, wales?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
because i'm not from a culture that does so, so i wasn't raised on those animals. you may as well ask why i don't eat humans when humans are also meat. seriously tho, i really don't care what you say. i won't stop eating meat.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I don´t want to convince you of nothing. I was just ask you a simple question. I understand that way of thinking. Our culture legitimize that we should like cats and dogs, we create relations with them, but other animals are just "meat" even tho all animals are like humans, sentient. In some countries there are genital mutilations for women and many people (even women) believe their culture is correct. Of course is not. And of course humans don´t need to eat animals
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
yes, a question that really had no point as you pointed out by agreeing with me about the cultures.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I see many points in this questions, we don´t have to be nervous when we speak about them. I agree cultures produce ways of thinking and behavieurs but that doesn´t mean they are ethical.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
how can it be unethical to eat meat when the amount of meat eaters greatly outweighs the vegans? to be unethical it would have to be a minority in a culture that widely doesn't accept it.
don't get me wrong, i think vegans should be proud for standing up for what they believe in. but i also think that vegans should not be protesting meat eating, but instead the way the animals are treated. i think that is a cause that would be better heard and responded to than "don't eat meat" because you are trying to change the way people live, and no one responds well to that. ever. if you just try and understand that trying to stop people from eating meat is a useless protest and nothing will ever truly change, you will be able to do much more. people will always eat meat. but you can do much more if you set yourself to instead try to better the lives of the animals that are set for slaughter. that's something people are apt to listen to. think about it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The majority of the people in Congo, for example, agree with female genial mutilation. Mothers who have their daughters undergo genital cutting believe they are doing the right thing because their children would become social outcasts if they did not. Genital mutilation is a cultural convention and I think we both agree is not ethical because women do really suffer.
Once again, lets consider culture VS ethics: Many people in the west to eat cows, correct? Well, in India cows are scacred animals and no one eats cows. In fact thousands of cows do walk among people in India. They do it by cultural convention, not by ethics, but they believe eating cows is really a bad thing to do. In some regions of Asia, they convert dogs and cats to "meat" and as you know many people in our culture get anoyed with that.
Veganism is all about ethics, and has nothing of cultural. So what are the ethical claims of veganism? There exist 4 ethical impacts about industrial meat production and consumption:
- Human health (cancers, strokes, obesity, heart atacks, etc., are correlated with meat, milk and other animal products)
- Environrment (United Nations reports in the study called "Livestock Long Shadow, environmental issues and problems" (2006) that meat industry is the most polluting industry in the planet that affects water, soil, forests, ecossystems, etc,). Amazonia is a mess because of companies like Cargil, KFC, MCDonalds, and others.
- Unsustainability. The meat production demands lots of resources (water, soil, grain vegetables, energy). 70% of production of production of vegetables and cereals are fed by animals and thouse animals are converted in food to only 2billion people in the world (richest countries). The amount of vegetables and cereals would be enough to end world hunger, but unfortunetely animals are being fed instead of people.
- Sentience. ~I don´t know if you have dogs or cats, or any pets. I do have 3 dogs, 3 cats and I am uncapable of eating them or harming them (for some asians they would taste very well). Humans, cats, dogs, pigs, cows, chickens, daulphins, lyons, etc., we are all sentient - that means we have the capacity of feeling pain, pleasure, fear, joy, we have conscience the spaces we are inserted, we have family contections, etc. And, for course, humans don´t need to eat animals.
Everything I said to you are facts, and you can check them all. They are not opinions.
Now, if you want to take a look at a symple video, just go ahead!
[link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
whatever. you didn't even get what i was saying. it flew completely over your head. let's take one of your examples..in asia, they eat dogs and cats. in america, it is unethical. but in asia, it's completely ok, and therefore it's ethical to eat them over there. you can't say one culture is unethical just because you or another culture doesn't agree to it's standards. it's right to them. maybe you should try watching "taboo" once in a while. and you know what? i may be horrified by some things another culture does, such as the thing in the congo, but it's their way. they have their reasons for doing it, and we can't wrap our head around it because we aren't used to that sort of thing, but it's totally normal for them. over here in america, that shit wouldn't fly, but it's not being done in america. it's being done in a place that obviously accepts it because all the girls have to get it done.
and another thing, you seem to be all about changing people just because you don't agree with them, and it's honestly just as annoying to talk to you as it is a bible-thumper. you're all about your way and only your way is right, and you pull out facts that really have nothing to do with what the other person is saying. you were the one that brought up ethics and culture, not me. and i told you i respected you for being a vegan. you don't have to give a hundred reasons why you are one and why it's "right" to be one.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
In part we are saying the same thing about culture. And we also agree that culture and ethics are diferent things. Culture and social norms are not static in the West, they are slowly changing on a constant going time. For instance, in the West it was a part of our culture slavoring, dicriminating black people, not allowing women to vote, etc. This things were a part of our culture, but we might both agree that we find them unethical, deeply wrong. Now, fortunetely, discrimination is a crime, women can vote and slavory has been abolished. And for this changes to happen, people like you and me had to fight to gain their rights. Nothing was given.
If you want to be anoyed about what I say, just have in mind that I am not giving my opinion, I am quoting facts from non incontroversial sources: if I say "meat industry is “one of the most significant contributors to today’s most serious environmental problems" and that "urgent action is required to remedy the situation." - this is not my oppinion, is from the report "Livestock's Long Shadow - Environmental Issues and Options", by the United NAtions.
Or if I say "consumption of red meat could generate breast cancer, stomach cancer, lymphoma, bladder cancer, lung cancer, and prostate cancer" I am quoting the World Cancer Research. The list of facts (from not vegan sources) could just go on and on. It´s up to the people to access the sources and confirm for theirselves the negative impacts of the meat industry. It´s clear that mass media aren´t going to tell this to you.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Ok not be rude or anything but please dont complain about things if you dont know what they are specifically. I have worked on a farm before and am an active member in the FFA. This thing in the picture that is "Killing" the cow is actually called a squeeze chute. It is a device that safely holds a cow while they get vaccination, are visited by a vet or are having there hoofs trimmed. It doesnt hurt the cow, it actually relaxes them. Which has been proven in the research by Dr Temple Grandin, a livestock behaviorist. What is seen as "choking" is actually just holding the cows head still, to understand this it has to be understood that the force it would take to choke a cow is much much greater then the force needed to choke a human. So while the force u see displayed is the picture could possible choke a human it is no where near enough for to choke or damage that cow, it just holds its head in place so the cow cant move more jolts it body to cause injury to its self or the person tending to it. Also it is not even in the proper position to choke an animal, it is actually hold the cow in the right place to NOT choke it, the metal doors to the chute are positioned just below where the skull ends. this is the position a person is suppose to use when they would like to retrain any animal w/o injuring them. The windpipe and all other thing that could be damaged are located farther down on the neck. And to those who believe the cows eyes are bugging out or that she is scared, that is also not ture, having work around cows before i know that the way the eyes look is just a normal look for a cow. Look i'm not here saying all this because i wanna be mean to you, i'm a huge animal welfare supporter but i believe that animal rights go to far sometimes about thins they arent fully informed on. All the comments on this picture being a perfect example. Weather this cow will end up meat, be used for dairy, is a show cow, or is just a pet cow is unknown to all of you, but you all have assumed that this device is used for killing without doing any research of your own. And i can tell you fro my research i know exactly where this picture came from, its a photo about slaughter on wikipedia, which is nvr a good site to use from your reference info. It can and is edited by anyone who feels the need to do so, is such an untrusted sore that kids cant even use it in there papers at school. o and about the comment about humans being speciests, ya its ture but every human on this planet is a speciest. Its geneticly coded into DNA to keep us safe. In order to not be speciest u'd have to love every single living creature on this planet, including parasites, bacteria and such.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"It doesnt hurt the cow, it actually relaxes them" - Animals who are assassinated should maybe thank you! In fact you deserve a medal!
"And to those who believe the cows eyes are bugging out or that she is scared, that is also not ture, having work around cows before i know that the way the eyes look is just a normal look for a cow." You are absolutely right! This and other cows they do not feel fear by getting killed and they do not suffer with their agonizing life! No! They love being transformed into corpses! Their eyes?! Nah, they are just on LSD.
"ya its ture but every human on this planet is a speciest." - No, fortunetely not every humans are speciesists. I am not speciesist and many people do not contribute to opress and genocide animals. You are a speciesist.
"Its geneticly coded into DNA to keep us safe." - Sure.. we shall all be careful with the dangerous killers like cows, pigs, chickens, etc.. Be careful people! Thay are extremely dangerous and they might kill you with their special powers!
"In order to not be speciest u'd have to love every single living creature on this planet, including parasites, bacteria and such." - PAresites and bacterias are sentient just like cows, pigs, humans, etc? Where you read that? I bet you also think carrots and tomatoes are sentient...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
you know i'm not trying to personally attack you if thats what you believe i was just trying get across the point that the picture that has been posted in of a cow in something called a squeeze chute and that it is not a device used to kill or injure a cow. Honestly i just wanted to get the point across of about what it was and how things should be understood before people go off about them. I was lookin to correct some inaccurate info and possibly have a bit of a friendly debate on it if needed. What i didnt expect was to be shot back at with sarcasm and insults. Look i'm just stating the faces I have learned through my life at work and in my vet assisting school program. But for someone who perches love for all beings You seem to show alot of hate towards humans who disagree with you.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
facts*
Also all you have done is take my statements and quotes out of context to disprove them. Which in fact doesnt disprove them because you aren't disproving anything as a whole just random statements that could be applied to anything by themselves. And that last statement you made was speciest in its self. So then it must be fine in your mind to kill bugs b/c that's what parasites normally are, either a type of bug or flatworm or something along those lines. A sentient being is defined as something that has the ability to feel pain and pleasure. And while i'm unsure as to weather or not bugs feel pleasure I do know they feel pain. So then based off of your statement it would be fine to do something like burn a tick with a magnifying, i mean its just a parasite and you just said there weren't sentient, so that must me they feel no pain or pleasure. So it'll be fine to do that based off of what you said. In the end i'm just saddened by how quickly you have attacked, insulted, tried to disprove and even ,made fun of me just because i felt i needed to share a bit of info.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The issue is humans do not need to eat meat and they do not have the right to kill animals. Why?
1. Because they are sentient, just like us.
2. Because humans just do not need to kill animals and eat them.
3. Intense meat production is just not sustainable. The planet, mainly the richest countries need to cut meat production in 70%.
4. Meat, milk, egs, etc. are proven to cause damages to human health. The studies also prove vegetarian or vegan people are more healthy.
5. Meat production is ruining the enviornement.
All this 5 issues I can easily prove to you with scientific facts, or you can search for yourself and you will find them for sure. This are the 5 reasons that are part of the consciessness of many vegan people. If you want to try to prove the opposite of what the statments afirm, you can try and do it!
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
| Next =>