Topic: a society question about vegans - page 5. (Read 867 times)

that documentary was interesting

the average man needs just 60g of protein a day
with meat being 25% protein it means 240g of meat
(2 quarter pounders)

so that UFC fighter eating 2kg of steak each day was eating way more protein than needed(500g)
however vegetables only have 3% protein. meaning you need to eat 2kg of vegetables just to get 60g of protein

so yes 2kg of meat is stupid. and instead think of it as one hamburger patty size piece of meat 2 times a day is sufficient
NOT 2 huge steaks
otherwise you will need to be chewing on ALOT of vegetables if not eating meat at all

also animals dont make protein from other meat. they just get protein already created from other meat. the actual protein creation is as the documentary said made from enzymes breaking down vegetation.

but to digest and break down 2kg of vegetation and turn it into protein rather than just get it ready made is something of an adjustment
(people get smelly breath and burp and fart alot as the gut bacteria die off and decay for fresh vegetable friendly gut bacteria to do its work)

so try transitioning slowly or stick to a balanced mix diet. not too heavy on the meat, but still having meat to not go too heavy on the veg.

it takes the body 3-4 times longer to digest and convert nutrients from veg than to just get straight supply from other animals
EG converting fructose (fruit sugar) into glucose, and if there is excess, then into fat. takes alot of effort.
where as meats already have it in biological form ready for usage or storage, thus saving the fructose->glucose conversion effort(but yes with meat, more chance of storing excess and getting fat)
yes meat has some bad enzymes in it. as thats the waste us living animals need to excrete so again eating 2kg of meat instead of 240g of meat is not recommended. dont eat too much meat. you dont need it

but what the veggie crowd dont tell you is 2kg of veg also produces alot of waste too.
so this is why some athletes/vegans dont go full 2kg of veg but instead 1kg of veg and then protein shakes and vitamin supplements to get the balance.

its all about finding the right balance
if you can handle 2kg of veg a day, go for it. or find a balance that suits you either less veg and more supplements or a fair balance of 'meat and 2 veg' medium size plate twice a day

my point being though
many vegan radicals think that they can have a perfect diet on small amount of veg.. sorry they are wrong.
many people end up having to grind their veg into smoothies to get the nutrition but in a liquid form so they are not bloated as much as eating it in solid form.(plus it helps speed up the digestion and conversion delay of veg compared to meats 'ready made' nutrition intake)

Has anyone see the netflix documentary called "Game changers" ?

Yes, one could  arguably say that the documentary is bias toward a plant food diet.
But it still ask some very good questions about health and performance of our body.

We only have one body and keeping it healthy is important.

I can tell you that the same way we had adds about cigarettes in the 50s being healthy and good (and now unhelathy and banned in public place).
We will have the same change of  opinion about (some) of the animal products (probably not all animal products).

They don't really want to be vegans, they just wanted to be "in", or feel better than other people, or try something new. It's usually new converts that are most militant.

It's particularly telling that the similarity between militant vegans and antifa is they are usually composed of people in their 20s. They just haven't sorted out their lives yet and grasping on anything.

probably because the main veggie stereotype is the peace and love, 'grow what 'nature' provides and eat its fruits'. the peaceful harmony people that dont want torture and death..

.. then at a protest, violence.. which obviously goes against the peaceful harmony free life of no harm or torture.
so many would and they probably right to say.. the violent protests are not the ones against torture if they themselves want to cause harm

This is certainly true for political protests such as what we see today in the Antifa and Occupy junk movements.

But why would it be true for vegan and vegetarian stuff?

We're referring here specifically to a certain type of person who adopts a cause just so they can shout about it, not because they believe in the cause.

Analogy: You know how whenever you see a protest march about something descend into fighting against the police - often the genuine protestors who actually believe in the cause aren't the ones fighting, the fighting is by people who have joined up on the day specifically for a chance of violence.

What? they don't want to harm animal but they do eating some animals? Is they really vegan?  I don't think why some people like that acting like a weird because there are some people also want to be a unique but there are some doing they act that they are not.

It's probably because protestors tend to be those with extreme viewpoints. Vegetarianism can't really be classed as extreme, as it's a point on the scale between carnivore and vegan. Some vegans are protestors. Vegetarians probably not. If a vegetarian started to protest about people eating meat, a vegan protestor would probably shout them down for eating animal products at all.
So if you see someone protesting about eating meat, that's why it's more likely to be a vegan doing the shouting. Doesn't mean all or even most vegans, just some - I would suggest a minority.


I don't like buzzwords and labels. They cause all sorts of trouble, and force people into groups and to take sides. They are used for convenience though, and as a shorthand. Semiotics really, signifier and signified. You say apple to mean, well, apple. You don't say I'm going to eat that small spherical green object. Or indeed red object, not all apples are the same, it's just a convenient label for a class of things.
If someone invites me to dinner, I will say 'Are you sure? I'm vegan and it will create extra work for you.' I don't say 'I'm vegetarian and it will create extra work for you.' If I said vegetarian I'd be given maybe a cheese dish which I wouldn't eat, and I'd then have to pretend I had a stomach ache or something. If I go to a restaurant I don't say do you have anything that's vegetarian, as again I'd probably be given cheese something, same problem.
TBH I don't often say I'm vegan, just sometimes it's unavoidable. I don't think I'm part of some elite group, I don't take a vegan's views as more important than those of a non-vegan. We're all just people really, each different.

1. plastic packaging leachs more when heated. for instance hating something in the microwave in a plastic bowl puts more plastic into the food contained than the food would have had if just refrigerating the food in the same bowl
-solution: use a glass or ceramic bowl in the mircowave
-solution: why the heck are you frying the bacon while still in its packaging

2. we do know for sure about additives. the articles analogy about finding out granny been putting arsonic on your toast is very good. its not the initial toast its what granny done to it

3. getting food processors to change the addatives or just go 'fresh to frozen', doesnt lead to needing to be organic. it just means the pigs could be factory farmed (not freerange/grassfed) and just hot receive the sodium nitrate treatment
(by the way even organic bacon has sodium nitrate)
(by the way sodium nitrate is used as part of the fertiliser of soils even in organic crop farming. so even veggies have the same stigma)

i personally go to my local farmshop that has a freezer of meat straight from the field that they take out slice it up that day and then when selling it, wrap it up in a paper wrap. (i know i know the chlorine bleech used to whiten paper, no ones perfect)
(i also prfer my sausage and chips in a paper wrap from a chip shop, not a polystyrene tray from a fastfood place)

anyway im digressing
my meander off a vegan society to point out about carcinogens was because i have heard many radicals literally say 'ha ha the pigs are fighting back for how you treat them. now die in cancer agony for eating meat'
yet its not the pigs fault/revenge/cause. its the food factory(granny adding arsenic to your toast) fault/cause.

just to question a first hand knowledger of the veggie crew
i prefer to think the healthy happy veggie crew as vegetarian. and the radicals that protest as vegans

just like the strong happy women that succeed as 'independant'. and the radicals that hate men as feminists

but what makes you want to class yourself as a vegan. i dont mean anything harsh in the question i mean why this latest trend buzzword and not just say your vegetarian. what definition do you use to define the difference between vegetarian and vegan
(i know the google search definitions. but just wondering your person choice of which buzzword your associated as)

I agree. I think that sometimes these people flit from movement to movement. Go to your radical vegan one year later, and they are eating meat again but have adopted some other cause.

but then us carnivores use our protein enriched brains and notice that its 'processed meats' due to the sodium nitrate (salts(brine) thats pumped into meat as a preservative/additive that is the threatening carcinogens.. not the meat itself.
which then just means get organic farm frozen or farm fresh meat thats not got 'preservatives' in it

or if you want to fight the vegan radical about the whole 'cancer' thing. just tell them about the salts and tell them that instead of buying meat thats preserved. your instead gonna go hunting and get meat fresh off the bone while its still warm.. as your own radical response


[/quote]

Exactly, that is how we evolved, by eating high quantities of animal proteins, not to mention fat to endure long winters. Animal protein is needed for the body to function properly, the problem is the salts and crap they put in the meat to preserve it.
[/quote]

I don't think we know for sure about the additives, not sufficiently so to justify paying the higher prices for "organic."

Say for example a person bought only organic, but used plastic containers in the fridge and microwave. Bad things can leech out of plastics, too; particularly when they are heated up.

Now here are two suspect areas, nitrites and plastic components. but there are MANY others.

That's the nature of our world today.

It seems to me that certain movements are more likely to attract those sort of people, like veganism and SJWism. I don't believe many of these "new prudes" stay in these movements, especially veganism since it actually require discipline

IMHO only movement thaf have high retention is Fat Acceptance since the longer you stay the fatter you get.

same goes for for smoking to some extent
when they say 'smoking tobacco contains xx carcinogens' what they are not saying is the tobacco alone has x carcinogens but the cigarette paper has xx carcinogens... things like chlorine and such to bleach the paper white, other chemicals in the glue to stick it together, and even the rings that prevent a continuing burn have chemicals.
even the co2 from the smoke itself leaves a carbon tar in the lungs

its not just a swap from rolling tobacco to rolling weed to announce 'cured cancer risk'. because rolling weed can have carcinogens too.. because the paper its rolled in. and the carbon tar.. which is why people use pipes to avoid the paper chemicals and use bongs instead to avoid the paper chemicals and to atleast reduce the amount of smoke,tar, carbon you inhale.

once people know the true facts and not the threats people can then be free to make their own decisions about what and how they put things into their bodies

take vegetarians. they know they are putting weed killer chemicals and pesticides in their body when they dont buy organic. so they can be just as at risk of getting cancer as meat eaters.

but as for the radical vegans that want everyone to cry every time beef is cut up. i should also get to say(its fair) to inform them that most people also cry when they cut up an onion.
i cant help it. when i cut up an onion. i know its gonna make me cry but im still gonna do it because my coleslaw just wont taste the same without it

[/quote]

but then us carnivores use our protein enriched brains and notice that its 'processed meats' due to the sodium nitrate (salts(brine) thats pumped into meat as a preservative/additive that is the threatening carcinogens.. not the meat itself.
which then just means get organic farm frozen or farm fresh meat thats not got 'preservatives' in it

or if you want to fight the vegan radical about the whole 'cancer' thing. just tell them about the salts and tell them that instead of buying meat thats preserved. your instead gonna go hunting and get meat fresh off the bone while its still warm.. as your own radical response


[/quote]

Exactly, that is how we evolved, by eating high quantities of animal proteins, not to mention fat to endure long winters. Animal protein is needed for the body to function properly, the problem is the salts and crap they put in the meat to preserve it.

I think that's a vague attribution as to cause, and a Hail Mary Pass as to effect, as are almost all attempts to define healthy. But here's a interesting take on the subject.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/01/bacon-cancer-processed-meats-nitrates-nitrites-sausages

but then us carnivores use our protein enriched brains and notice that its 'processed meats' due to the sodium nitrate (salts(brine) thats pumped into meat as a preservative/additive that is the threatening carcinogens.. not the meat itself.
which then just means get organic farm frozen or farm fresh meat thats not got 'preservatives' in it

or if you want to fight the vegan radical about the whole 'cancer' thing. just tell them about the salts and tell them that instead of buying meat thats preserved. your instead gonna go hunting and get meat fresh off the bone while its still warm.. as your own radical response

Yes, that does happen. They sound like attention-seeking idiots. If your aim is to get people to stop eating meat, then the way to do it is not to antagonise people with needlessly aggressive 'look at me!' comments. Especially in situations where no-one has even mentioned anything about vegans. You can't just shoehorn veganism into a topic when it's not even part of the discussion. You have to wonder at the primary motivation of these people, is it animal welfare or is it just attention-seeking? Will they still be vegans in ten years' time, or will they have forgotten about it and moved on to become 'trailblazers' for whatever is the new outrage-of-the-day?

Stay suspicious my friend. My secret aim is to break into your meat stores and replace the meat with carefully sculpted tofu replicas. You will never know the difference. Mwahahahahaha.
Or maybe I'll just say eating meat is your right, and no one person has moral authority over another person's decisions.

Not denying there are vegans who are idiots. It's a certain type of person, they flock to any cause. Anything where there's a metaphorical banner to wave, anything where they can concoct moral outrage.

OKAY but you gotta be careful and stay suspicious around these molevegans. They infiltrate our culture for decades. They have long term plans, First they side with the ones who'd like bacon off the menu. Then they solemnly agree with the Scientists That Say beef is bad. Then it's the oils that the chicken is fried in. But really, it's the gradual, relentless march of the anti-meateaters.

I suggest everyone carefully consider those who would take away our Zero Amendment, the right to eat tasty meat.

Here is study material on this subject.

http://www.ooze.com/pweeta/

i dont see styca as a radical vegan
i would think of styca as a peaceful vegetarian

however think in a vegan possible society the vegans(radicals) would not like to see animals locked up either. as many think battery chicken farming (caged) is torture in comparison to free range chicken farming
(they would argue all farming is bad as a separate layer to their beliefs. but free range is lesser of 2 evils)

so in a full vegan society i wouldnt think vegans would want zoos/fenced farmland of any kind

hense my hypothesis of the wild animal free roaming cow scenario is at play rather than a keep cows locked up and cull the escapees

my only thought would b to extend land to be enough to allow natural self sustainability (enough grass land to graze) and fense it off .. but call it a nature conservation reserve.. to atleast hide the 'zoo' / 'farm' / 'animal prison' asthetics of quarantining animals

though, im still thinking the vegans would be against culling, so gender separation would have to be part of the nature reserves quarantine policy to prevent over population