Absolutley Right :

 

 

 

Was just trying to snuff out, the last of the resistance. :twisted:

I reckon a poor ol' country boy like me can't always win in the technicalities side of things.

 

 

 

Reducing out of control parts of industry is always helpful, though. Trim the fat...

I, personally, think that the most viable solution is a reductions of the out-of-controls meat industry, but eradication by any means is a ridiculous concept. We could stand to produce less cows a year, perhaps by stopping forced procreation, and that would reduce global food supply on meat and raise it in terms of vegetation, while still not overflowing the market with newly diverted food sources.

 

 

 

We could always stand to use less cows. Those things are terrible. The less amount of organic compound CH4 we have, the better.

 

 

 

Mmm...organic molecule chains...

 

 

 

At any rate, a balance is what's important. Less meat, more green, is, I feel, the way to go, but the extremists who shove to one end of the spectrum aren't really helping.

 

I would like to point out that currently there are less large meaty mammals on this planet than there was a over a hundred years ago. I mean, Buffalo used to number in the Billion in the United States. So there is less CH4 now then there was back then produced by cattle and such.

 

 

 

And i would like to point out, being a vegetarian is expensive! To get all the nutrients you need from plants you need to spend more than you would on meat or grow your own stuff. And for someone like me (factory worker parents in Indiana) thats not really an option.

I reckon a poor ol' country boy like me can't always win in the technicalities side of things.

 

 

 

What?! But you're the heir to the entire animal kingdom.

 

 

 

To War Junky, please read page 15 then this.

 

 

 

Many times the mention of vegetarianism elicits the predictable reaction, "What about protein?" To this the vegetarian might well reply, "What about the elephant? And the bull? And the rhinoceros?" The ideas that meat has a monopoly on protein and that large amounts of protein are required for energy and strength are both myths. While it is being digested, most protein breaks down into its constituent amino acids, which are reconverted and used by the body for growth and tissue replacement. Of these twenty-two amino acids, all but eight can be synthesized by the body itself, and these eight "essential amino acids" exist in abundance in non-flesh foods. Dairy products, grains, beans, and nuts are all concentrated sources of protein. Cheese, peanuts, and lentils, for instance, contain more protein per ounce than hamburger, pork, or porterhouse steak. A study by Dr. Fred Stare of Harvard and Dr. Mervyn Hoarding of Loma Linda University made extensive comparisons between the protein intake of vegetarians and flesh-eaters. They concluded that "each group exceeded twice its requirement for every essential amino acid and surpassed this amount by large margins for most of them."

 

And i would like to point out, being a vegetarian is expensive! To get all the nutrients you need from plants you need to spend more than you would on meat or grow your own stuff. And for someone like me (factory worker parents in Indiana) thats not really an option.

 

 

 

Not true, really.

 

 

 

I'm a vegetarian, and I have no problem supporting myself while making a few dollars more than my state's minimum wage.

 

 

 

If you do your research, you'll actually find that a vegetarian diet is cheaper than a diet that includes meat. Sure, at the grocery store you may initially pay a few extra cents per pound of food, but the food lasts longer than meat does, and it provides more nutrients for your body than meat does -- simply, in the long run, you get more bang for your buck.

 

 

 

I would go into it more, but I already posted a few posts in a topic on this same subject...

 

 

 

http://forum.tip.it/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=775610&start=40

I reckon it'd be a whole lot more expensive if the whole wide world was eating their optimal amounts in vegetarianism.

People don't seem to understand, however, that it takes a lot less resources to produce vegetables for human consumption.

 

 

 

I'm totally making these numbers up, but think about it this way:

 

 

 

It takes 10 pounds of corn to feed and sustain a single cow. This one cow, when slaughtered, provides 1 pound of edible meat for 1 person. In essence, you use 10 pounds of plant matter to provide meat for one person.

 

 

 

If you took out the middle-man (or, middle-cow), you could simply use the 10 pounds of corn to feed 10 people, at 1 pound each.

 

 

 

It's really cost-effective.

People don't seem to understand, however, that it takes a lot less resources to produce vegetables for human consumption.

 

 

 

I'm totally making these numbers up, but think about it this way:

 

 

 

It takes 10 pounds of corn to feed and sustain a single cow. This one cow, when slaughtered, provides 1 pound of edible meat for 1 person. In essence, you use 10 pounds of plant matter to provide meat for one person.

 

 

 

If you took out the middle-man (or, middle-cow), you could simply use the 10 pounds of corn to feed 10 people, at 1 pound each.

 

 

 

It's really cost-effective.

 

Most of the stuff they feed cows with is bad quality and you wouldent eat that stuff

People don't seem to understand, however, that it takes a lot less resources to produce vegetables for human consumption.

 

 

 

I'm totally making these numbers up, but think about it this way:

 

 

 

It takes 10 pounds of corn to feed and sustain a single cow. This one cow, when slaughtered, provides 1 pound of edible meat for 1 person. In essence, you use 10 pounds of plant matter to provide meat for one person.

 

 

 

If you took out the middle-man (or, middle-cow), you could simply use the 10 pounds of corn to feed 10 people, at 1 pound each.

 

 

 

It's really cost-effective.

 

 

 

You bring up a good point, but even if we weren't going to kill the cows for meat it would still be considered inhumane to just let them starve to death.

Most of the stuff they feed cows with is bad quality and you wouldent eat that stuff

 

 

 

I'm not meaning to suggest that we all go around eating cattle-feed. I'm just saying, the facts speak for themselves: it's easier and more cost-effective to feed people on a plant-based diet.

 

 

 

You bring up a good point, but even if we weren't going to kill the cows for meat it would still be considered inhumane to just let them starve to death.

 

 

 

I definently agree with you here. However, what people need to understand is that if we didn't eat meat, we wouldn't have billions and billions of livestock animals alive in this country. We would still have cows and chickens and pigs, yes, but they would be smaller and smaller amounts than what we have now.

 

 

 

And I'm not suggesting that we don't feed livestock animals, use the food for ourselves, and let them starve to death. I'm saying, if there weren't so many livestock animals to feed, we could use those grains to go a long way in feeding people.

If animals weren't delicious, you might have a defensible argument.

A good friend of mine went vegetarian as a protest against coorperate clearing of jungle and such to raise the cattle, and I wholeheartedly would support that if I didn't love chicken so much.

 

 

 

 

 

[bleep]! don't eat me please.. :ohnoes:

If animals weren't delicious, you might have a defensible argument.

 

 

 

Thread appreciates your in-depth contribution.

 

 

 

:twss:

 

 

 

Is it so hard to grasp the fact that some people don't think animals are delicious? :/

Yes, because the fact of the matter is that they are.

 

 

 

The existence of bacon alone is testament to this.

Yes, because the fact of the matter is that they are.

 

 

 

The existence of bacon alone is testament to this.

 

 

 

I've never liked bacon.

 

 

 

I actually became a vegetarian(I prefer to say that I no longer eat meat) just this past Saturday. I'm not really sure why I did, which isn't much of a reason at all, but sometime around Christmas, I suddenly felt empathy for animals. It really is quite strange. I don't mind that animals are killed for food, but I just don't think I should eat something that was once alive that I know I couldn't kill myself. (Mind you, I come from a family of hunters and have been hunting myself, and this could lead to a whole other tangent).

 

 

 

I'm carrying out a bit of cognitive dissonance at the moment to keep this going somehow. Right now I know I like the taste of meat, but thinking about eating it causes unpleasant emotions, so I don't. It's all very strange...

 

 

 

I could also care less what other people do, as long as they don't harm others, so I'm not going to argue for one side or the other.

Eating meat has become a passe.

[you]

 

I would like you to explain, just because it sounds interesting. Do you mean you don't think you could kill a cow yourself or something? Because it's very, very easy. You could likely be (well, you could attempt to) breaking a cow's neck before it even noticed you.

[you]

 

I would like you to explain, just because it sounds interesting. Do you mean you don't think you could kill a cow yourself or something? Because it's very, very easy. You could likely be (well, you could attempt to) breaking a cow's neck before it even noticed you.

 

Not couldn't as in physically able to do so, but couldn't as in I could not bring myself to do it. Maybe not even the act of killing it, but more the processing of it, what with all the blood and stuff. Not that I have a severe problem with blood, but, oh I don't know how to say this, maybe the less blood shed the better.

Ah. A mixture of the gross factor and the Disney perception of cows. A common problem when people see how gruesome the end of a cow's life is, even if their death is as painless as the owners can get it.

Like I said, it's not even really that that's holding me back. I'm not even sure. I just don't want to eat meat. I don't know why.