On Mar 5, 8:07*pm, dh@. wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Mar 2012 03:43:46 -0800 (PST), Rupert >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On 1 Mrz., 23:46, dh@. 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.

This is false; you obviously lack the capacity to understand why.

> 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?
>

I never gave an estimate for that.

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