this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2023
43 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

7203 readers
377 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] baconisaveg@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why not just stop eating entirely then? Why continue to eat vegetables picked by poorly treated migrant workers? Why continue to eat grains covered in pesticides that pollute the local ground water?

Either commit to not partaking in any product that causes social issues, or get off your throne.

[–] festus@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's about reducing harm. Are all crops grown the way I would like? No. But farm animals also have to be fed these same crops, so when you eat meat you not only contributed to the animal cruelty and substantial amounts of the crop-harms you identified, while a vegetarian or vegan only contributed to a lesser amount of the crop-harms.

It's not practical to live without causing any harm somewhere, but that's not an excuse to pretend that all lifestyles are equally harmful.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

animals are mostly fed plants or parts of plants that people can't or won't eat: cows graze on grass, or are fed silage which includes things like cotton seed and corn stalks. you can eat the corn and wear the cotton and eat the cow.

[–] festus@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Maybe in some narrow cases but I'd take issue with your use of 'mostly'. Here's an article about a study that looked at the environmental damage of different diets and a vegan diet is significantly, significantly better for the environment - and that's not even considering animal welfare.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

that study depends on a number of other studies with dubious methodology. i wouldn't trust that study just based on the studies on which i know it relies.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

a vegan diet isn't any better for the environment at all. producing the parts of a vegan diet INSTEAD of the parts of some other diet WOULD be better but that's not what happens: the omnivorous products continue to be made in growing amounts while vegan products are ALSO increased.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The goal isn't perfection, but not eating animals is an easy step that we can all take, which prevents some of the worst suffering. It's also better for the planet, food security, etc.

The other points you make can already be mitigated, i.e. buy local, buy organic, grown your own, etc., but we should also strive to improve those situations overall.

Eating lower in the food chain is always going to be better than eating higher up. Farmed animals are eating those grains covered in pesticides, too, and at much higher quantities than we are.

So, not eating them remedies at least some part of your concerns.πŸ‘

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

not eating animals is an easy step that we can all take, which prevents some of the worst suffering

that doesn't prevent any suffering. if you want to prevent suffering, go to where there is suffering, and prevent it.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Pro tip: You can prevent suffering on farms by going to a grocery store and not buying animal products. Amazing, but true!

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago

that doesn't work.