View Single Post
  #51 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 05-03-2012, 07:07 PM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animals,alt.food.vegan,alt.food.vegan.science
[email protected] dh@. is offline
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,652
Default The 'vegan' shuffle

On Fri, 2 Mar 2012 03:43:46 -0800 (PST), Rupert
wrote:

On 1 Mrz., 23:46, [email protected] wrote:
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 10:36:50 -0800, Goo wrote:
"veganism" is not a reliable means


* Vegans contribute to the deaths of animals by their use of
wood and paper products, electricity, roads and all types of
buildings, their own diet, etc... just as everyone else does.
What they try to avoid are products which provide life
(and death) for farm animals, but even then they would have
to avoid the following items containing animal by-products
in order to be successful:

tires, paper, upholstery, floor waxes, glass, water
filters, rubber, fertilizer, antifreeze, ceramics, insecticides,
insulation, linoleum, plastic, textiles, blood factors, collagen,
heparin, insulin, solvents, biodegradable detergents, herbicides,
gelatin capsules, *adhesive tape, laminated wood products,
plywood, paneling, wallpaper and wallpaper paste, cellophane
wrap and tape, abrasives, steel ball bearings

* * The meat industry provides life for the animals that it
slaughters, and the animals live and die as a result of it
as animals do in other habitats. They also depend on it for
their lives as animals do in other habitats. If people consume
animal products from animals they think are raised in decent
ways, they will be promoting life for more such animals in the
future. People who want to contribute to decent lives for
livestock with their lifestyle must do it by being conscientious
consumers of animal products, because they can not do it by
being vegan.
* * From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised
steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people
get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well
over 500 servings of meat. From a grass raised dairy cow people
get thousands of dairy servings. Due to the influence of farm
machinery, and *icides, and in the case of rice the flooding and
draining of fields, one serving of soy or rice based product is
likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of servings
derived from grass raised animals.


You keep on making this claim over and over again, just as you have
for at least six years, but when challenged to provide actual evidence
for it you are unable to provide any.

If you were able to provide evidence for it, you would. One can only
conclude that you are making the claim in the absence of any real
evidence.


If we factor in all by-products and divide the deaths among them TOO it
comes out to a much smaller number than if we don't. If we don't but only factor
in servings of human quality food as we SHOULD, then the number per serving goes
up for food and becomes N/A for things made from byproducts, but the number per
serving still stays at probably around 100 times less. How many deaths per
serving of tofu did you estimate, do you remember?

Grass raised animal products
contribute to fewer wildlife deaths, better wildlife habitat, and
better lives for livestock than soy or rice products.