you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -24 points 22 hours ago (19 children)

...or in some cases it's much simpler: some of us have conditions that make it impossible for us to survive or to thrive on a vegan diet and we're sick unto death of vegoons pushing Evangelical Veganism and acting like we don't exist or we're making it up to justify the moral failing of eating meat. And there's the constant push to normalize veganism, which just expands the number of places I can't eat and/or people I can't eat with.

If that type of vegan didn't exist I wouldn't immediately start side-eying vegans until I find out of they're safe or not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 hours ago

    Huh. I haven't heard of anything that explicitly requires meat protein for you to live, what do you have? And if you prefer not to say, obviously that is fine, I'm just curious. And not a vegan.

    You must be like the only person in 100,000 to have a good reason to fear a vegan restaurant opening up nearby.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

    Additionally, what conditions make it impossible to survive or thrive on a vegan diet? I'm not challenging you, I'm genuinely curious. Is it like multiple allergies? I know some people believe the "you can't get nutritionally complete diet from veganism" thing, which isn't true. All vitamins, proteins, and nutrients we need are available while vegan. Is it like a fiber sensitivity or allergy problem?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

    Copy-paste from another comment I made:

    The problem is that's an elitist and exclusionary take.

    Vegan and vegetarian replacements are way too expensive for almost the 99% of the population, and while you can theoretically replace some of these with medication and supplementation, it will never be the same as the synthetic replacements will never have the exact nutritional matrix that the natural animal source has, and as such it will not interact the same with our metabolism and our organs, thus causing a higher probability on related diseases and health issues.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 31 minutes ago*

    This take is also especially crazy to me because I'm dirt poor, like one missed check from homelessness poor. I'm living entirely off of savings while I try to earn a certification and also work full time to survive. Kinda insulting to call it elitist when I'm barely surviving.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 36 minutes ago

    What? You don't need replacement meats. I eat veggies and cheap plant protein crumbles or tofu, both cheaper than meat equivalents, and I have regular blood work done and all levels are normal. I don't take any supplementary vitamins either. Going vegetarian is definitely not more expensive, and going vegan isn't either if you're willing to change your diet. Obviously, one to one replacements for egg, cheese, and meats are gonna be pricey, but you don't need those.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 9 hours ago

    You're taking veganism much too personally. I can count on one hand all the places that don't serve meat at all within my city. Your options are not limited. Other's dietary choices are not a slight to you. It is so easy to find a place that has at least one dish for either dietary preference. What if they were Buddhist, or another religion that restricts diet around meat, would that irk you as well? Why must others consume meat for your comfort?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 9 points 21 hours ago (10 children)

    I should note that technology is increasingly helping provide more options. With precision fermentation, there is a lot of ways to biologically identical proteins, enzymes, etc. For instance, you can now buy non-animal whey protein, egg white protein, non-animal heme iron, and more in the stores. It's super cool stuff and ironically the dairy industry was a big pioneer of it in the 90s for one of the enzymes they use widely in cheese. There's a lot more coming down the pipeline with it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 hours ago (3 children)

    The problem is that's an elitist and exclusionary take.

    Vegan and vegetarian replacements are way too expensive for almost the 99% of the population, and while you can theoretically replace some of these with medication and supplementation, it will never be the same as the synthetic replacements will never have the exact nutritional matrix that the natural animal source has, and as such it will not interact the same with our metabolism and our organs, thus causing a higher probability on related diseases and health issues.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 4 hours ago* (2 children)

    As they scale up, the costs will be lower. It's a supply chain thing, not a fundamental limitation. The input costs are lower. In the broader sense, plant-based diets from whole-foods are actually already cheaper

    It found that in high-income countries:

    • Vegan diets were the most affordable and reduced food costs by up to one third.

    • Vegetarian diets were a close second.

    • Flexitarian diets with low amounts of meat and dairy reduced costs by 14%.

    • By contrast, pescatarian diets increased costs by up to 2%.

    https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-11-11-sustainable-eating-cheaper-and-healthier-oxford-study

    This is also true in real spending data

    Based on primary data (n = 1040) collected through an online survey, representative of the Portuguese population, through logistic regressions, it was possible to conclude that plant-based consumers, particularly vegan, are associated with lower food expenditures compared to omnivorous consumers. In fact, plant-based consumers are shown to spend less than all other consumers assessed

    https://agrifoodecon.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40100-022-00224-9

    Compared to meat eaters, results show that “true” vegetarians do indeed report lower food expenditures

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800915301488?via=ihub (looking at the US)

    EDIT: I should also note that in an increasing list of countries, non-whole plant-based things like this are already cheaper too. With meat prices rising further, that's only likely to increase more

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 hours ago (1 child)

    Yeah, I understad that.

    But most countries are underdeveloped, or in ways of development, and there it's not really viable now.

    Also, take into account this. The scalability IS a fundamental issue because the quantity, quality and speed of production needed to feed the global population are not compatible with the limited space, resources and the physics, chemistry and biology of soils. You will cause massive soil losses due to the mere fact that such soils will be above their limits.

    There's also enviromental and echological issues, such as the point that you'll be displacing many native species (both from plants and animals) to be able to grow others that are edible to us, massively altering ecosystems. If with the scale of plant production that we now have that's a serious problem, imagine with such a drastic increase. We wouldn't give enough.

    Moreover, think on the issues of transport: not all plants are able to grow in every country, and as such you'll have to move a massive amount of these around the globe, boosting the carbon footprints of global transport.

    And then we have all the hydric issues, and all the issues with fertilizers and insecticides.

    And it could go on, but it would never end.

    I have to look better at these studies, tho, I'll do it later because nevertheless it looks like there are interesting advances I haven't heard of before, and that makes me a bit excited because anything that can help both humanity and animals is good.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 2 points 4 hours ago

    Perhaps counterintuitively, it's the other way around. Meat, dairy, etc. production is what does not scale well. Low income countries don't have nearly as much of it because high income countries have to subsidize the hell out of animal farming to make it as common as it is. It actually takes significantly less plant farming to eat plants directly

    we show that plant-based replacements for each of the major animal categories in the United States (beef, pork, dairy, poultry, and eggs) can produce twofold to 20-fold more nutritionally similar food per unit cropland. Replacing all animal-based items with plant-based replacement diets can add enough food to feed 350 million additional people, more than the expected benefits of eliminating all supply chain food loss.

    https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.1713820115


    Pesticide and fertilizer use is significantly lower

    To produce 1 kg of protein from kidney beans required approximately eighteen times less land, ten times less water, nine times less fuel, twelve times less fertilizer and ten times less pesticide in comparison to producing 1 kg of protein from beef

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25374332/

    Even if we maximally used manure, it's still lower

    Thus, shifting from animal to plant sources of protein can substantially reduce fertilizer requirements, even with maximal use of animal manure

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921344922006528


    For transport, it's actually not the driver of food emissions. The production itself is more important, especially when it comes to animal products

    Transport is a small contributor to emissions. For most food products, it accounts for less than 10%, and it’s much smaller for the largest GHG emitters. In beef from beef herds, it’s 0.5%. Not just transport, but all processes in the supply chain after the food left the farm – processing, transport, retail and packaging – mostly account for a small share of emissions. This data shows that this is the case when we look at individual food products. But studies also shows that this holds true for actual diets; here we show the results of a study which looked at the footprint of diets across the EU. Food transport was responsible for only 6% of emissions, whilst dairy, meat and eggs accounted for 83%.

    https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 11 hours ago (5 children)

    Ah fuck. I didn't know iron was derived from animals. Fuck, it's basically blood!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 8 hours ago (4 children)

    Heme iron, specifically in animals, is in fact from blood. Heme being short for hemoglobin which is the protein in red blood cells that transfers oxygen around the body (both for humans and most non-human animals). Being able to make that from precision fermentation is pretty cool

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

    I was joking about being a vampire and that being blood on Discord, I didn't know I was twlling the truth 😭

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

    There is also plenty of non-heme iron, to be fair, which is not from blood. Plants have tons of it from the ground and such

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments