US Why Should We Become Vegan?

I don't want to be a part of any philisophical debate
Eating plant based is simply the best thing we can do--even if you don't bring animals into the equation
The arguments you hear presented such as:
animals eat vegetation humans cannot digest.
>this is true, but it's only a small part of some animals that are free range and grass fed. A very small part, and taking up land that could be reforested.

The arguments on needing to eat animals for health have been fully discredited. While WFPB diets have prevented and reversed so many ills, even eating processed vegan foods is better than comparitive animal based diets

Raising animals necessitates vast quantities of water, and the run off creates contamination, and many methods used for disposing of the feces polluted water is a cause for many health issues in surrounding areas

Plant based diets have repeatly been shown to be the most beneficial for maintaining healthy weight. Most Americans need less calories than ever before, and plants are nutrient dense and calorie light

And of course:
The question is not, Can they reason?, nor Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?"
If you don't have reason to interfere in anothers life you shouldn't. It really is that simple

As for taste, and being raised with meat and cheese--it's an adjustment. If you were raised on plant foods you would not crave animal foods. There is such a vast array of flavors with plants most people never experience. It's pretty amazing when you look
Honestly, most people realize it's the right thing to do--I'm finding more are willing to admit this, but still not wanting to change. I appreciate the honesty

I'm completely on board with reducing animal products. It's really the first step our culture should be taking -- to make plant based diets normalized
That's what hard for most--changing your thinking, changing your memories around food, to where no eating animal things feels totally normal
  • Like
Reactions: PTree15 and Brian W
Quite true.
Honestly, most people realize it's the right thing to do--I'm finding more are willing to admit this, but still not wanting to change. I appreciate the honesty

I'm completely on board with reducing animal products. It's really the first step our culture should be taking -- to make plant based diets normalized
That's what hard for most--changing your thinking, changing your memories around food, to where no eating animal things feels totally normal

And I think another reason is the number of deadly viruses coming out of the factory farms.

There is avian flu that is spreading through wild birds and predators. It came from a factory farm in China. It is wiping out flocks of birds. The predator birds, eagles, falcons, and hawks, are being infected. It is, also, spreading through foxes, wolves, etc. It will eventually make the jump to humans.

Seal deaths in Maine linked to avian influenza

In addition to causing the deaths of poultry and wild birds, highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) is now proving to be fatal to seals.

According to a press release from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Marine Mammals of Maine (MMoME) has responded to about three times more incidents of stranded seals than it normally would, with most of the seals being found dead. MMoME is a NOAA-authorized marine mammal stranding network partner.

NOAA stated that samples from four of the stranded seals tested positive for a strain of H5N1 HPAI, and the presence of HPAI in those samples was confirmed by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Agency (APHIS) on July 1.

The seals that were not dead, but showing symptoms of HPAI were euthanized.
  • Like
Reactions: Brian W and Lou
Not Just for the Birds: Avian Influenza Is Also Felling Wild Mammals

As a new version of bird flu spread through North America this spring, scientists began finding the virus in red foxes, bobcats and other mammals.

Foxes killed by avian flu

Wildlife officials say highly pathogenic avian influenza has killed wild foxes in Michigan, Minnesota and Ontario—the first known cases of the virus in wild mammals in North America.

On Thursday, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources reported that three red fox (Vulpes vulpes) kits died from the virus, HPAI H5N1 and a fourth recovered but developed blindness. On Wednesday, Minnesota reported the virus killed a wild fox there. On May 2, two wild red fox kits in Ontario tested positive for the virus.

Take this scenario within the utilitarian approach - the scenario wherein animals' happiness also contributes to the point system.

Take into account that humans are not the only omnivores. There are even carnivorous animals out there. It's all part of the food chain that's taught in middle school biology courses. Lions are carnivores. Tigers are carnivores. Bears are omnivores. Tigers chase antelope down and eat them. Some animals eat other animals while they are still alive.

What about those animals? If we're promoting veganism here, should we try to ask the non-human meat eaters kindly to become herbivores? It won't work because it's not in their natures. So why are we asking humans to do the same exact thing that specific animals will never do?
For starters, it's possible to act primarily on behalf of herbivores. When I adopted cats from a local shelter back in the 1990s through the 2000s, I made an effort to adopt individuals with a low "prey drive" by bringing my hamster or two of my gerbils with me. I'm not sure that a cat in a shelter will act the same way as one who's adjusted to their new home, so I still denied my cats access to the room where I kept my small animals. (I also adopted 1 hamster, 3 rabbits, and 5 gerbils- NOT all at the same time- although some folks might be able to care for that many). The cats' food still contained meat (along with some vegan ingredients); I saw this as a compromise.

Also, this issue is a primary reason I don't argue that "a rat is a pig is a dog is a boy": you can't always hold an animal to human standards of behavior. (I say "can't always" because I have known maybe 2 humans who appeared to have less grasp of ethics than several animals I have known- including at least 3 cats)
I don't remember the name of this show, but back in the late 20th century, these two guys tamed a tiger and would get on stage and play tricks with it. They had raised it from birth, and it had never shown any violent tendencies before. Yet, one day, during a show, it randomly attacked one of the guys and permanently injured him (it might have actually killed him, I don't remember exactly).
I think it was "Sigfried and Roy" (sp?), but I'm not sure.
I feel like a lot of the time, when promoting veganism, you're only referring to animals that are herbivores. You won't be able to convince carnivores or even some omnivores (humans included) to become vegan, so what's your argument for that? For the animals who eat other animals simply because it's in their nature? Who don't quite think like humans do, and who, even after being domesticated, have the potential to act violently?
I touched on this above. Quite a few people are pescatarian- eating fishes, but not warm-blooded animals. I suppose one could expand this to including only predators such as lions and tigers and coyotes and alligators (OK, bears too)... 😛 Seriously, coyotes are supposedly a problem in some areas (very possibly because wolves, which formerly kept them out, have been eliminated). And a woman was recently killed by two gators in Florida. But I can't help noticing that most folks simply use the fact that nature is violent to justify their own violence toward animals- and in fact, many meat eaters are somewhat put off by the thought of eating animals they're not used to eating.
Deontologically, however, finding substitutes for the protein and other nutrients that meat provides you will leave you weaker. How is that better for innovating society?
Huh? Food of animal origin is not necessary for health, although supplementation may be necessary- vitamin B-12, for example, if you're vegan; possibly vitamin D or occasionally calcium. Protein isn't normally an issue unless you're eating a lot of junk.
I understand that the ways in which animals are treated is inhumane. However, think about this example: a person is attached to a tube in a hospital. They're miserable, but they can live as long as the tube is attached. Now, apply that to animals.

If an animal was miserable and living would equal suffering, would it be humane to just end its suffering or to let if suffer as long as it was alive?
For quite some time now, I've wanted hospice care to be available for animals.

Also, here's a different argument - if we're eating plants, are we not eating the animals' food?
We have at least as much right to eat as animals do. Somebody's been munching on my kale and pole beans lately. But there's still plenty for me, so I can deal with it. There's a Black Walnut tree on my property, and I eat some of the nuts. The local squirrels get a lot of the nuts too, but their ancestors probably planted it the year before I bought the place. So are they eating my food.. or am I eating theirs?
I can't read it, can you very briefly summarise the gist of the article?
Oh sorry, I thought I had... or maybe I was just planning on it...

How about I just put in the lead.

Imagine living the life of every human being who has ever existed — in order of birth.​
Your first life begins about 300,000 years ago in Africa. After living that life and dying, you travel back in time to be reincarnated as the second-ever person, born slightly later than the first, then the third-ever person, and so on.​
One hundred billion (or so) lives later, you are the youngest person alive today. Your life has lasted somewhere in the ballpark of four trillion years. You have spent approximately 10 percent of it as a hunter-gatherer and 60 percent as a farmer, a full 20 percent raising children, and over 1 percent suffering from malaria or smallpox. You spent 1.5 billion years having sex and 250 million giving birth.​
That’s your life so far — from the birth of Homo sapiens until the present.​
But now imagine that you live all future lives, too. Your life, we hope, would be just beginning. Even if humanity lasts only as long as the typical mammal species (about one million years), and even if the world population falls to a tenth of its current size, 99.5 percent of your life would still be ahead of you. On the scale of a typical human life, you in the present would be just a few months old. The future is big.​
I offer this thought experiment because morality, at its core, is about putting ourselves in others’ shoes and treating their interests as we do our own. When we do this at the full scale of human history, the future — where almost everyone lives and where almost all potential for joy and misery lies — comes to the fore.​
If you knew you were going to live all these future lives, what would you hope we do in the present? How much carbon dioxide would you want us to emit into the atmosphere? How careful would you want us to be with new technologies that could destroy, or permanently derail, your future? How much attention would you want us to give to the impact of today’s actions on the long term?​
  • Like
Reactions: g0rph
Veganism has been linked to increased energy levels, healthier skin, and clearer thinking - plus, if you're an animal lover, it's an awesome way to contribute to a more responsible and sustainable way of treating our environment and fellow creatures. Plus, it can be surprisingly delicious and lots of fun trying different recipes. Being vegan is kind of a win-win situation, if you ask me.