Meat, Dairy, and Hurt Feelings?

[Gan]

Wait...people don't seriously think farts are destroying the planet do they?


The REAL enemy.

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/e/ee/Vancamps.jpg

[Methais]

The REAL enemy.

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/e/ee/Vancamps.jpg

And here's the result:
http://www.doublespeakshow.com/images/2006/08/bush_fart.jpg

[Gan]

:rofl:

That just caused some strange looks from the person passing by my office as I just busted out laughing.

[CrystalTears]

:rofl:

That just caused some strange looks from the person passing by my office as I just busted out laughing.
It's cause you passed one yourself, huh?

[Gan]

It's cause you passed one yourself, huh?

Only if you see my eyes water. ;)

A fart that doesnt smell is wasted effort.

[CrystalTears]

You're one of those silent but deadly types, I'm betting.

I can't believe you've tainted this sacred and honest thread with such off-topic tripe. You people disgust me.

[Gan]

I've been known to ambush folks. :whistle:

My favorite is walking down the hall (crop dusting) or loading up someone elses chair with one and letting them enjoy it the next time they sit back down at their desk. I do love to share. :)

[Necromancer]

1. If you refer to the WHO, UN, and FDA as crazy, random sources no one has heard of, I'm not really going to indulge you in further conversation.

2. If you think someone is an idiot because they say livestock is an environmental hazard, you've proven yourself far too ignorant on the subject to be worth discussing it with as well. Go do some research on it then you'll realize what an asinine statement that was. Be sure to focus on water supply issues.

3. Cows are responsible for 25% of the methane gas release into the environment, while people are responsible for 5%. Yes, the massive amount of livestock the world raises has been implicated in global warming trends. You can discuss the merits of that after reading up on it, but making fart jokes and posting pictures do not a coherent argument make.

[Methais]

1. If you refer to the WHO, UN, and FDA as crazy, random sources no one has heard of, I'm not really going to indulge you in further conversation.

2. If you think someone is an idiot because they say livestock is an environmental hazard, you've proven yourself far too ignorant on the subject to be worth discussing it with as well. Go do some research on it then you'll realize what an asinine statement that was. Be sure to focus on water supply issues.

3. Cows are responsible for 25% of the methane gas release into the environment, while people are responsible for 5%. Yes, the massive amount of livestock the world raises has been implicated in global warming trends. You can discuss the merits of that after reading up on it, but making fart jokes and posting pictures do not a coherent argument make.

This thread sucked from the start anyway and is full of fail. It is now about fart jokes.
http://hijackapp.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/hahashow.jpeg
http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/jlv/lowres/jlvn63l.jpg
http://www.jokesandhumor.com/jokes/pictures/fart.jpg
http://mahopa.de/bilder/lustige-forenbilder/thread-hijack.jpg

[Gan]

1. If you refer to the WHO, UN, and FDA as crazy, random sources no one has heard of, I'm not really going to indulge you in further conversation.

2. If you think someone is an idiot because they say livestock is an environmental hazard, you've proven yourself far too ignorant on the subject to be worth discussing it with as well. Go do some research on it then you'll realize what an asinine statement that was. Be sure to focus on water supply issues.

3. Cows are responsible for 25% of the methane gas release into the environment, while people are responsible for 5%. Yes, the massive amount of livestock the world raises has been implicated in global warming trends. You can discuss the merits of that after reading up on it, but making fart jokes and posting pictures do not a coherent argument make.

Go preach it to Al Gore. He'll buy your global warming alarmism but dont be offended if he makes you talk about it over a nice big juicy steak.

[Gan]

This thread sucked from the start anyway and is full of fail. It is now about fart jokes.
http://hijackapp.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/hahashow.jpeg
http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/jlv/lowres/jlvn63l.jpg
http://www.jokesandhumor.com/jokes/pictures/fart.jpg
http://mahopa.de/bilder/lustige-forenbilder/thread-hijack.jpg

LOL

Methais officially wins this thread.

[Tea & Strumpets]

It sickens me how you filthy neanderthals blithely disregard the facts that prove vegetarians are the next step in evolution.

[Keller]

For future reference, I've determined the Necro post-recipe:

2 part bullshit statistics
1 part superiority complex
3 parts I'm right till proven wrong, and even then I'll just change the argument

[CrystalTears]

1. If you refer to the WHO, UN, and FDA as crazy, random sources no one has heard of, I'm not really going to indulge you in further conversation.
And they've said we have to do away with livestock? C'mon.


2. If you think someone is an idiot because they say livestock is an environmental hazard, you've proven yourself far too ignorant on the subject to be worth discussing it with as well. Go do some research on it then you'll realize what an asinine statement that was. Be sure to focus on water supply issues.
If you're insinuating that we should get rid of the cows because of their farts, yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.


3. Cows are responsible for 25% of the methane gas release into the environment, while people are responsible for 5%. Yes, the massive amount of livestock the world raises has been implicated in global warming trends. You can discuss the merits of that after reading up on it, but making fart jokes and posting pictures do not a coherent argument make.
At least let me get some burgers out of them before you turn all Hindu and decide to ruin my life by getting rid of cows, alright?

You really are a pompous ass.

[Necromancer]

Tsa-

Allow me to begin with a quote I found:

"The world must create five billions vegans in the next several decades, or triple its total farm output without using more land."
Dennis Avery, Director of the Centre for Global Food Issues


Your post is rife with inaccuracies and oversimplification.

You're almost correct on your conversion rate, currently the conversion is about 7 lbs of feed to 1 lb of cow. When one is looking into consumable material from feed-lot beef (the most inefficient energy converter and most commonly used), the percentages hover at 2.5%-5.0% of gross feed energy put in (professor Smil U. Manitoba Canada) The conversion rate is much more efficient for dairy cows, the most efficien tof whom convert 55%-65% of their feed into something consumable by humans. At one point in time, we were feeding livestock food that was produced already that humans couldn't eat. Now, we clear out space that could be growing human consumable foods and instead grow grain (which is also consumable) and feed it to cattle. Livestock now *competes* with humans for space to produce food.

Additionally, the continued raising of livestock helps to create a continued desire for meat. According to the FAO, as of 2002 there were 21 billion livestock being raised- 3.5 times the human population in the world. 2/3 of Agricultural Land in the world and 1/3 of available land is now being used to raise livestock. (FAO/USAID) 10% of grain was going to livestock in 1900, but it has skyrocketed to 45%.

You try to brush aside the issue of land efficiency by saying that just because raising livestock isn't efficient doesn't mean that there's something else more efficient. You are correct. So let me demonstrate some efficiency comparisons taken from Agriculture, Ecosystems, and the Environment (academic journal):

Food Source:
Land used to feed one person per year if all calories came from that source (m2)

Beef:
8,173 m2
Eggs: 2,395 m2
Milk: 2,053 m2
Fruit: 1,369 m2
Vegetables: 1,314 m2
Potatos: 274 m2

The report found that a varied diet that was complete in calories and protein based on fruits, vegetables, potatoes, and legumes (soy) could be done in 700 m2 of land while changing 1/3 of those calories to egg and milk would double the needed land. The standard European omnivorous diet was found to require 5x the land (or approximately 3,500 m2 per year per person). This information does NOT, by the way, include the separate land required to grow food for livestock. It just counts the land used by the livestock themselves and the feed-farm operations compared to the land needed to grow food crops and their farm operations. So the numbers are quite a bit higher for livestock.

So no, one cannot live on only grain, but beef stands are THE most inefficient land use, not even counting energy conversion, of any of our common food sources. So replacing it with *anything* (even pork) would actually be more efficient use of land.

Now, things get worse for the developing world. The industrialized nations of the world can feed their people but not their livestock (European Union recently stated that harsh reality). Europe, which raises less livestock than the US, imports 60% of its animal proteins needed for feed. The result is what the Centre of Food Policy calls "Ghost Acres" in the developing world. The huge demand for livestock feed from industrialized nations means that land is being used in the developing world to grow soy and grain for the cattle in the rest of the world instead of food for themselves, increasing malnutrition issues. Additionally, since the land isn't being rotated, it's leaving acres and acres unfit for growing crops as it robs the soil of nutrients. It's not sustainable, and 2/3 of our agricultural land is being used for this purpose.

And that doesn't even touch on the over 500 million pounds of waste created by livestock every year in the US alone. Talk about inefficient use of land, that waste then has to be used. Yes there is some technology out there to convert it to energy, but by and large it isn't being used. In fact, in the last few years conferences have sprung up en mass as global academics have tried to come up with new ways to use as much waste as possible since the industry is largely living on fossil fuels right now and finds it more economically efficient to dispose of the waste rather than find uses for it. As of yet, there's no substantial demand for livestock waste as an energy source. Our heavily polluted rivers are good proof of that, by the by. The EPA has declared the livestock is the US's largest source of water pollution.

And if you think that livestock are walking themselves to slaughterhouses, it's time to take your meds. They're shipped, in cruel ways, to slaughterhouses where the meat is then shipped (it does not walk itself there in pieces) to markets. Thus livestock actually requires two different travels to get to the grocery store, whereas fruits and vegetables generally require only one. Additionally, livestock is not space efficient (while alive), and you can ship far fewer pounds of livestock in the same train cart than you can non-meat sources of food. So that point falls flat.

And all of your analysis ignores the environmental impact that livestock have. Most of the new land used for livestock comes from forest, with rain forest depletion being a key problem. The grazing of livestock, particularly cattle, on land destroys it, often leaving land that once grew abundant plant life into wasteland. Between 1995 and 1998, according to OxFam, one billion fish were killed from livestock-related water pollution in North Caroline alone. How's that for additional inefficiency. Not only could that land for livestock have been used to produce far more vegetables, not only could the land being used to grow grain to feed the livestock have been used to feed humans directly, BUT another billion fish that could have fed people were lost *In just one state in just three years* as well. And most of the waste, 2.3 trillion tons of it every year in the US alone from livestock, is generally pumped into open air lagoons. When those get too full, the excess is sprayed a "fertilizer" on local crop land. Unfortunately, the growth hormones, antibiotics, pesticides, and the like fed to livestock end up in toxic concentrations in the excrement (duh, it's poison, so the livestock bodies get rid of as much of it as possible), which then ruins the land it's sprayed on. Over time, the land becomes less and less usable to grow crops until it must be abandoned. The problem is so bad, that a recent case in federal Court upheld the right of citizens to sue feed farms for the rampant environmental damage they're causing to the areas they're in.

People, it's time to wake up. Argue all you want, but you people need to realize that the livestock industry is considered to be a world health and world environmental crisis by all experts. And with VERY good reason.

[Necromancer]

Quick note: I quoted 500 million pounds of livestock waste in the US, that should have said 500 million pounds put directly into water supplies.

[Gan]

http://www.chickfilapressroom.com/images/eatmorchikin/3-cows.jpg


People, it's time to wake up. Argue all you want, but you people need to realize that the livestock industry is considered to be a world health and world environmental crisis by all experts. And with VERY good reason.

Ok, we know who you are now. Its time to start dispensing with the coupons.

http://www.chick-fil-a.com/images/40thAnnivCow.jpg

[Tolwynn]

Unfortunately, the growth hormones, antibiotics, pesticides, and the like fed to livestock end up in toxic concentrations in the excrement (duh, it's poison, so the livestock bodies get rid of as much of it as possible), which then ruins the land it's sprayed on. Over time, the land becomes less and less usable to grow crops until it must be abandoned.

And of course all of those tons of pesticides are fed directly to animals instead of sprayed on super-dee-duper healthy plants. Duh indeed.

[Necromancer]

Bullshit statistics, huh?

So far I've got stats from Johns Hopkins University, OxFam, the UN, FAO, FDA, EPA, EU, Cambridge, Harvard, and Penn to name a few.

Pompous is thinking that you caclaim these organizations and individuals are all wrong because what they say doesn't jive with your world view. Ass is spending more time critiquing a poster than their evidence.

I may not agree with Tsa at all, but at least he bothers bringing information to the conversation.

[Necromancer]

No, we're not putting growth hormones or antibiotics into and onto our plants. 50% of antibiotics in this country go directly to livestock to keep them alive in the conditions they live in.

And, hey, I'm against using pesticides on crops. But there's no comparing the amount of chemicals in livestock production with crop production, the former is many times worse than the latter.

[Methais]

I think the point you're failing to realize is that no one really cares either way.

[CrystalTears]

Ok, we know who you are now. Its time to start dispensing with the coupons.
Are you indirectly calling Necromancer a cow? Tsk, tsk.

[Gan]

Are you indirectly calling Necromancer a cow? Tsk, tsk.

I think Necro is starting to sound like a corporate sponsor for Chic-fil-a (http://www.chick-fil-a.com/). Which is some tasty stuff, if you like chicken. (Dont know if its on the east coast, but down here in the south, its a great quick option other than a burger).

[Keller]

How long until we get to this argument:

Athlete to win Ironman Triathlon more than twice: Dave Scott (6 time winner)
Food choice of Dave Scott: Vegetarian
Largest meat eater that ever lived: Tyrannosaurus Rex (Where is he today?)


http://www.vegsource.com/how_to_win.htm

[Harli]

Ok, I dont know if anyone asked this already since while i was trying to read all 27 pages it went to 28 im skipping ahead. How many vegan's/veggie's make sure thier food is organic?

I have a friend that is slowly getting on my nerves about the whole organic thing (which i dont mind, and i buy when i can afford it,but i dont like to be lectured about shit i already know), but i was wondering if that was as important to them as it being non-animal?

[Keller]

50% of antibiotics in this country go directly to livestock to keep them alive in the conditions they live in.

Every source I've found says 70%.

Here's a hint: when you make up statistics, be sure not to underestimate.

[Tolwynn]

But there's no comparing the amount of chemicals in livestock production with crop production, the former is many times worse than the latter.

http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2005/1291/

And this is long after attempts to curb use of certain pesticides have been implemented.

[Keller]

the former is many times worse than the latter.

This is better bullshit. It's hard to pin down how incorrect one is when they are intentionally vague.

[Gan]

This is what this thead is starting to resemble.

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/DoyleHargraves/insidermot9.jpg

[Methais]

With a dash of this.
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/DoyleHargraves/ethug.jpg

And a hint of this.
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/DoyleHargraves/dumbass.jpg

[Necromancer]

The source I used said 50%, but it was published a few years ago. You may have stuff more updated. The growth rate of livestock is immense, and it's not surprising that the anitbiotic rate would jump as well. Stats being outdated doesn't make them bullshit.

As far as organic, personally I never gave a damn until I read the book "Skinny Bitch" (OMG SO FUNNY AND SO INFORMATIVE. Beware it's a hidden "BE VEGAN!" book. It didn't bother me for obvious reasons, but even I had to raise en eyebrow at it. But the nutrition information is awesome).

Now I really care. Ironically I care for health reasons, and as much as I've been pushing the health issues with meat consumption, it never had a thing to do with me becoming vegetarian. Health did influence me becoming vegan, but it still wasn't a huge issue. Still, the stuff in our food is a major contributor to cancer and obesity. If you read up on the FDA and USDA histories, you'll scream. They do almost nothing to protect us. The FDA can't even call a recall on its own in most instances (not all), it generally requires an outside approval. And most of its tracking programs illegal chemicals and microbes are voluntary. Also, don't trust anything that is only certified organic by the USDA. Their standards are heavily criticized.

[CrystalTears]

I think Necro is starting to sound like a corporate sponsor for Chic-fil-a (http://www.chick-fil-a.com/). Which is some tasty stuff, if you like chicken. (Dont know if its on the east coast, but down here in the south, its a great quick option other than a burger).
We don't have Chic-fil-a's up here, and I resent you for mentioning them because that's my favorite chicken place. Bastard.

[Bobmuhthol]

I've never eaten anything at Chic-fil-a :( There's one in the nearest mall, tho.

[Harli]

Also, don't trust anything that is only certified organic by the USDA. Their standards are heavily criticized.

That is what i was wondering about the whole Safeway generic organic thing happening now. I get the idea of lessening my footprint on the earth but with it being so expensive I really can only afford to feed organic stuff to my kid and now that its summer i take full advantage of farmers markets (mmm...strawberries).

I'm a meat eater by choice and while i would love to get more veggies in my diet, i was raised by parents that were big meat eaters and veggies were an afterthought, having a child has forced me to look into the value of my system, since i would prefer her to have a range of foods to like and if she chooses meat then thats fine and if not then thats fine too. Its amazing the level of feelings people have about their food, but i think its to be expected. Food plays an important role in everyones life and when you downgrade someone's choice of eats, you are essintally downgraded them.

[DeV]

Damn, I see mall and automatically think of my favorite mall eatery; Great Steak & Potato Company. Damnit, damnit, damnit. Now I want some.

[Gan]

We don't have Chic-fil-a's up here, and I resent you for mentioning them because that's my favorite chicken place. Bastard.


Damn, I see mall and automatically think of my favorite mall eatery; Great Steak & Potato Company. Damnit, damnit, damnit. Now I want some.

PLANET KILLERS!!!!!

(I think I'm going to have to stop by chic-fila on my way from work for a quick bite before my softball games tonight)

[Necromancer]

Yeah, that's my biggest beef (heh) with veganism, vegetarianism, and organic foods. Those of us who grew up in low-income families didn't have a lot of veggies. They're expensive. And we sure as heck didn't get texturized soy protein. I've watched my food balls SKYROCKET since getting rid of meat. Going organic/vegan has been murder on my finances (wait, what finances?).

You shouldn't have to have a certain amount of money to keep your kids healthy. It's seriously screwed up.

My advice would just to be selective about where you go organic and not. For example, the health benefits of organic meat outweigh the health benefits of organic fruits and veggies (due the difference in levels of toxins). So if you have to choose, get the organic meat.

Also, try introducing some soy-based meats into your family meals. They're actually about on par in cost when you're talking about feeding an entire family. And most of the companies like Morningstar Farms and Boca do make serious attempts to keep their stuff fairly toxin-free. Try Morningstar Farm beef strips and chicken strips and beef crumbles. They also cook WAY faster than meat, so you save yourself a lot of time in the kitchen (and as a mom, I'm sure your time is quite limited). Smart ground sells 12 oz bags of taco/burrito crumbles for about $4. Save yourself 20 minutes cooking up ground beef, no one will be able to tell the difference. One of the nice things about substitute meats is not only that they're getting really damn good but that most of the time you're using them as just part of a dish, so the other flavors of different ingredients make them indistinguishable from animal meats.

I've fed the crumbles to non-vegetarians, and people love them. I use the chicken and beef strips in salads and pasta sauces, and people love them. The best part is that one bag will feed your family for the night, and they run about $4 each. And all you do is bake them or saute them in a pan for 5 minutes. A lot of non-vegetarian young adults use this stuff as primary sources of meat at home simply because it tastes good, and it's so much easier to cook.

All of these things are found in Safeway by the way. Hope that helps some.

[Necromancer]

Erm, make that food BILLS. I swear I don't always have sex on my mind...

[Alfster]

gay sex, you always have gay sex on your mind

[Apathy]

I'm disappointed in myself I waited so long to troll this thread. I must be slipping :(

If you're spending a lot on vegetables, you really don't know how or where to shop. I'd suggest looking around a bit. For example, I know of a grocery store within 10miles where I can go and buy a fruitbox full of various peppers, artichokes, eggplants, etc. For $5. And I don't live in cheapville either.

[Methais]

I'm disappointed in myself I waited so long to troll this thread. I must be slipping :(

If you're spending a lot on vegetables, you really don't know how or where to shop. I'd suggest looking around a bit. For example, I know of a grocery store within 10miles where I can go and buy a fruitbox full of various peppers, artichokes, eggplants, etc. For $5. And I don't live in cheapville either.

Or just plant a garden.

[Soulpieced]

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/images/bigpot6.jpg

[Snapp]

I really have no opinion on the topic.. whatever floats your boat.

Just wanted to add that I too :heart: Chic-fil-a

[Harli]

Yeah, that's my biggest beef (heh) with veganism, vegetarianism, and organic foods. Those of us who grew up in low-income families didn't have a lot of veggies. They're expensive. And we sure as heck didn't get texturized soy protein. I've watched my food balls SKYROCKET since getting rid of meat. Going organic/vegan has been murder on my finances (wait, what finances?).

You shouldn't have to have a certain amount of money to keep your kids healthy. It's seriously screwed up.

My advice would just to be selective about where you go organic and not. For example, the health benefits of organic meat outweigh the health benefits of organic fruits and veggies (due the difference in levels of toxins). So if you have to choose, get the organic meat.

Also, try introducing some soy-based meats into your family meals. They're actually about on par in cost when you're talking about feeding an entire family. And most of the companies like Morningstar Farms and Boca do make serious attempts to keep their stuff fairly toxin-free. Try Morningstar Farm beef strips and chicken strips and beef crumbles. They also cook WAY faster than meat, so you save yourself a lot of time in the kitchen (and as a mom, I'm sure your time is quite limited). Smart ground sells 12 oz bags of taco/burrito crumbles for about $4. Save yourself 20 minutes cooking up ground beef, no one will be able to tell the difference. One of the nice things about substitute meats is not only that they're getting really damn good but that most of the time you're using them as just part of a dish, so the other flavors of different ingredients make them indistinguishable from animal meats.

I've fed the crumbles to non-vegetarians, and people love them. I use the chicken and beef strips in salads and pasta sauces, and people love them. The best part is that one bag will feed your family for the night, and they run about $4 each. And all you do is bake them or saute them in a pan for 5 minutes. A lot of non-vegetarian young adults use this stuff as primary sources of meat at home simply because it tastes good, and it's so much easier to cook.

All of these things are found in Safeway by the way. Hope that helps some.

Actually it does, we are not poor but im a college student and my man works full time so we are middling. I will look out for those meats, anything that will save me time and taste good.

[Gan]

It warms my heart like a long hot fart to see others joining in on the pictograph barrage of thread contribution.

I have to admit though, Methais said it all with the first picture below, the rest is as you say icing on the cake.


This thread sucked from the start anyway and is full of fail. It is now about fart jokes.
http://hijackapp.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/hahashow.jpeg
http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/jlv/lowres/jlvn63l.jpg
http://www.jokesandhumor.com/jokes/pictures/fart.jpg
http://mahopa.de/bilder/lustige-forenbilder/thread-hijack.jpg

[Necromancer]

Harli-

Some other suggestions for you, if you want to be a bit healthier without eating crap food or spending more money/time:

Earth Balance Organic Whipped Buttery Spread (it's mind blowing how good this stuff is. When I use it, if I don't tell anyone they have no clue it's not real butter, and it's not going to load your kids up with cholesterol). Whole Foods has it, and it's not much more than a tub of margarine.

Safeway Select Organic Pasta Sauces: they taste awesome, and they're like $.75 more than regular pasta sauce, which isn't too shabby.

Silk Very Vanilla Soy Milk: Holy crab this stuff is good. The Chocolate Milk is amazing too. Both flavored with kids in mind. Skip the dairy, so you're skipping all the fat. They're full of nutrients for the kids too. And it's a special treat for a kid. You can give them chocolate milk without feeling like a bad parent. Also, milk tends to cause allergic reactions in people, so a lot of "allergies" kids have are actually just reactions to dairy. You'll find your kids a bit more mucouse free.

Safeway Brand Whole Wheat Pasta: Totally organic. Nothing in it but unbleached wheat flour. Totally effing cheap. Doesn't cost you more than regular pasta. Safeway carries it. Full of nutrients for your kids. Use this, some chicken strips sauteed and added to the organic pasta sauce, and you've got a "pasta and meat" dish that was easy as hell to cook, easy as hell to shop for, and that is way healthier than the more expensive, more time-consuming alternative.

Rice Dream Ice Cream: Safeway sells these too (not all of them though). It's made from rice milk instead of cow's milk. Your kids will barely tell the difference. It's in the regular ice cream aisle. It's a bit more expensive though. On the plus side, you can give your kids ice cream that's way better for them and not feel guilty about it. They'll be psyched they're getting dessert, and you can smirk because you know they're eating healthy(ish) food.

Safeway has a brand of totally vegan, all natural bread. Comes in tons of different forms. Wish I could remember what it was called; it's what I use. Get the soft wheat. Make them sandwhiches that are actually nutritious. It's not really more than regular "7-grain" breads and whatever, but it has no preservatives and has better nutritional value. It also has more substance to it than the foam they pass off as bread, so your kids will fill up on it faster. They'll start hating regular bread pretty soon (so will you, it's kind of scary).

Morningstar Farm has a breakfast mix you can buy at Safeway now. Just mix it in a skillet with some beat eggs. It's full of organic veggies and fake meat all diced up for you. Yeah they're eating real egg, but whatever, it's still better for them than actual sausage. And it's too damn easy to make! It's all done for you. Just toss the damn bag contents in the skillet with the beaten eggs, and you're ready in 5 minutes. Easy peasy breakfast for the kids so you can spend more time soaking in the tub.

Morningstar Farms Black Bean Burgers: Do they taste like regular hamburgers? Hell no. Do they taste WAY better? Hell yes. A lot of restaurants carry black bean burgers now because people like them so much. And they cook more quickly than beef. They've got all the seasoning and crap already in them. Toss them on the skillet and be done in 5 minutes. Don't waste 20 minutes cooking ground beef that isn't even good for your kids anyway. Morningstar Farms also makes a great tomato and basil burger that your kids'll go nuts over. It's really that damn good. (Not vegan sadly; I miss it!!) Again, why the hell are you paying just as much for beef burgers and spending 15 extra minutes at meal time to make plain-tasting burgers you have to drown in ketchup and shit just to give it some flavor? And you're poisoning your kids with bovine growth hormone and antibiotics. The answer: because you never realized! Now you know. Use your good karma and extra time to do an avacado mask and be beautiful.

[Harli]

Thanks a bunch Necro....it sounds really easy when you first go "oh lets start eating healthy" and then you start looking around and you go, oh fuck!

[Landrion]

Harli-
Silk Very Vanilla Soy Milk: Holy crab this stuff is good. The Chocolate Milk is amazing too. Both flavored with kids in mind. Skip the dairy, so you're skipping all the fat. They're full of nutrients for the kids too. And it's a special treat for a kid. You can give them chocolate milk without feeling like a bad parent. Also, milk tends to cause allergic reactions in people, so a lot of "allergies" kids have are actually just reactions to dairy. You'll find your kids a bit more mucouse free.


I'll second that reccomendation. We buy both flavors by the huge-cosco-pack and my three year old loves them. I even drink them myself. Just be aware theyre not *sugar* free. Theyre also a nice handy child-sized portion in the little drink boxes.

[Hulkein]

Soy makes you gay.

[Methais]

It's true.
http://www.freewilliamsburg.com/archives/gay_soy.jpg

[Necromancer]

Must be why all the women think gay guys are so much hotter than straight guys.

[Methais]

I'm sure some women will be along shortly to tell you otherwise.

[Necromancer]

Uh huh.

Ladies?

[Gan]

Must be why all the women think gay guys are so much hotter than straight guys.

Yea, thats about as useful as a car with no engine...

[Celephais]

http://www.freewilliamsburg.com/archives/gay_soy.jpg

Yeah... I'm sure girls find him reeeaaly attractive.

Girls might like the stereotypical ripped fruits you see on TV, but the majority of gay guys I've met in real life are far from it... but it's not like I'm frequenting gay bars or anything.

[Necromancer]

Or gay cities apparently. Bad body image plus gym obsession = hotter than average.

It's so bad that an entire subculture of gay men who aspire to the complete opposite of the hairless, ripped/skinny twinkie ideals in response.

The first is a response to the HIV/AIDS deaths of the 80s. The second is, as I said, a response to the first response.

Good times. If anyone needs me, I'll be drinking my protein shake and working out.

[Landrion]

Soy makes you gay.

Supposedly inhibits testosterone.

http://www.gymaddiction.com/soy.html
http://joe.endocrinology-journals.org/cgi/content/abstract/170/3/591
http://www.t-nation.com/findArticle.do?article=302poison2

Im not citing any of that stuff as "credible" or "I take it seriously". Just as the current rumor.

[Gan]

If anyone needs me, I'll be drinking my protein shake and working out.

.http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005T33A.01._PE31_.Richard-Simmons-Disco-Sweat._SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

[Methais]

Let's say for the sake of argument that you're right...every woman in the world thinks gay guys are hotter than straight guys.

The question now is: So? They're still gay.

Besides, all gay guys love meat, so your point is null.

[Skeeter]

If anyone needs me, I'll be drinking my protein shake

This needed quoted.

And I would do better with gay guys if the majority of them weren't so damn whiney

[Tea & Strumpets]

This thread is chock full of stupid, mostly by the OP.

[Hulkein]

Supposedly inhibits testosterone.

http://www.gymaddiction.com/soy.html
http://joe.endocrinology-journals.org/cgi/content/abstract/170/3/591
http://www.t-nation.com/findArticle.do?article=302poison2

Im not citing any of that stuff as "credible" or "I take it seriously". Just as the current rumor.

Yeah I read the same thing. I was more or less saying it tongue-in-cheek but it'd be hilarious if one day a legit connection was found.

[Keller]

This thread is chock full of stupid, mostly by the OP.

I think what you meant to say is:

Please clear general chat.

[Bobmuhthol]

I don't mean to brag, but I fuck 8 bitches daily. How many gay guys do that?

[Nieninque]

Uh huh.

Ladies?

I have said, in the past, that you can tell a gay man because they are usually better looking, better preened, well dressed compared to your average gay man. But lets face it, that's a stereotype and is as true to real life as the comment that all gay men are camp and wear pink lycra and mohair jumpers.

It is ridiculous to say that someone can be judged on their aesthetic presentation by way of their sexuality. Stupid nancy fuck.

[Nieninque]

I don't mean to brag, but I fuck 8 bitches daily. How many gay guys do that?

The local canine population must fear your presence.

[Gan]

I don't mean to brag, but I fuck 8 bitches daily. How many gay guys do that?

5 fingers + 3 more?

[Bobmuhthol]

<<I have said, in the past, that you can tell a gay man because they are usually better looking, better preened, well dressed compared to your average gay man.>>

Yeah, gay men do tend to dress better than average gay men. All the time.

[Nieninque]

Pwnt :(

[Necromancer]

>It is ridiculous to say that someone can be judged on their aesthetic presentation by way of their sexuality. Stupid nancy fuck.

You should probably read up a bit more on performativity as it has been applied to gender and sexuality.

That whole soy = estrogen argument ran rampant in the 'health' communities (and still does today). It's already been addressed in this thread (what, you missed it in the 32 pages?) It's just a horrible misunderstanding about the chemicals in soy (and some other vegetables). There's no estrogen in soy, there are estrogen-like compounds that are thousands of times weaker than the estrogen produced by the body. They can bind to certain estrogen receptors in women, which is useful for postmenopausal women, and they won't increase the risks of uterine cancer like actual estrogen. But otherwise, they don't increase estrogen levels in men or women. Nor do they influence testosterone production.

Wanna know what DOES increase estrogen? Estrinol, which is a cancer-causing estrogen that is routinely injected in all of the meat you eat in the US. It's so bad that Europe won't accept US beef (that's right kiddies, your meat is considered to be SO unhealthy that the entire European Union refuses to feed it to their citizens). The FDA has claimed that estrinol levels in meat are safe, but they have refused to comply with testing standards to make final determinations, choosing instead to rely on largely unpublished reports supplied by the meat industry decades ago, none of which bothered to test anyone but adult women to determine safe levels of estrinol. Did I mention that the committee that reviewed it was made mostly of vetrinarians, FDA officials, and meat industry reps? What, no *human* doctors? Fun little article below.

http://www.preventcancer.com/press/editorials/march24_97.htm

[Bobmuhthol]

It's crazy how you're smarter than the entire country...

[Gan]

It's crazy how you're smarter than the entire country...

That should be in italics. (well, it is now that its quoted)

[Tolwynn]

smarter than the entire country, and don't forget more evolved *and* all women desire him more because of his sexual preferences.

The original issue brought up by the OP was along the lines of why do people have such trouble discussing eating preferences between vegans and non-vegans. Here's the newsflash - most people can discuss such things pretty rationally, whether disparate choices in diet, religion, politics, sexuality, what have you.

But when one side is so full of themselves, and then holds that information that is questionable at best is instead inviolable truth, and then on top of that condescends, insults, and so forth - is it any wonder what should be an otherwise rational discussion devolves into an argument or worse?

[Sean]

I wonder why I've never heard for a vegan athlete on the professional level.

[Nieninque]

>It is ridiculous to say that someone can be judged on their aesthetic presentation by way of their sexuality. Stupid nancy fuck.

You should probably read up a bit more on performativity as it has been applied to gender and sexuality.


Oi! Daffyd!
Take the dick out of your mouth and speak English.

[Alfster]

I don't get why gay guys would care if chicks dig them more than straight men. Straight men don't care, why do the fags?

[Numbers]

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c140/Javadran/die-thread.jpg

[Gan]

I wonder why I've never heard for a vegan athlete on the professional level.

I wonder how many Vegans have had their asses kicked acting like this at a social function or party...

You come into my house with an attitude and aire of superiority like that and you're going to be outside munching on my nice green vegan lawn after I throw you through the doorway. I'll turn on the sprinklers so you dont have to choke it down and you can have a rose or two from the front flower beds for desert... mind the thorns though.

[Sean]

Well the whole 756 thing got me thinking if all the Victor Contes of the world are looking to create the next super athlete why even push steroids if the best possible thing for your body is to not eat meat because we can't properly break it down or whatever. Why don't all the sports medicine doctors of the world predominantly push vegan diets?

[Nieninque]

I wonder how many Vegans have had their asses kicked acting like this at a social function or party...

Necroponcer =/= all vegans.
He doesnt even speak for all vegans.

He is a prick.

[Necromancer]

Robbie Hazeley and Pat Reeves, world famous vegan bodybuilder and 2006 world champion powerlifter also vegan

Probably because you've never actually bothered reading up on vegan athletes. Just because YOU haven't heard about something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

"YOU'RE SO FULL OF YOURSELF! Responding to people's points with evidence, and your googling, and your reading. STOP BEING SO FANCY!"

It's kind of funny actually. But let me direct you to my point made a few posts ago...

Just because you are reading doesn't mean anyone is talking to you.

When YOU'RE the one who posts something about possible estrogen levels in soy, then YOU'RE the one I'm replying to when I respond to the post. When you're not, you're just overhearing another conversation between two people. Feel free to be a part of the conversation, but don't be so self-aggrandizing as to think that anyone is posting to impress you.

[Gan]

The country's effort to move away from a dependence on foreign oil and embrace green initiatives appears to be behind a change in one of New York's purest traditions, the menu of the classic steakhouse.

The production of ethanol, which is made from corn, is one major reason classic cuts of prime beef are becoming more and more expensive, an analyst at the cattle market analysis firm Cattle-Fax, Tod Kalous (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Tod+Kalous), said.

"It's getting worse," the owner of Ben Benson (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Ben+Benson)'s Steakhouse, Ben Benson, said. "The problems the ranchers are having are making it more difficult because feed is getting more expensive."

Brooklyn's Peter Luger Steakhouse (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Peter+Luger+Inc.) now serves a rib eye. On some nights at Ben Benson's in Midtown, diners can order buffalo steak. The Old Homestead of the meatpacking district serves one of the city's best Kobe burgers.

The new menu items at some city steakhouses are a result of an increase in the price of top-notch beef and a decrease in its availability.

Corn is the primary feed for cattle that produce USDA (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=U.S.+Department+of+Agricu lture)-grade prime beef. Corn is also the main ingredient for what many believe is the fuel of the future, ethanol. The production of ethanol has not only increased the demand for corn, it has made harvests more profitable for farmers, who receive the fruits of government subsidies when it is sold to ethanol producers.

more...

http://www.nysun.com/article/60032

[Numbers]

And now for something completely different.

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g30/Kardde/fork.jpg

[Keller]

And now for something completely different.

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g30/Kardde/fork.jpg

:wtf:

[Gan]

THAT made my eyes water just imagining how it must have felt.

[Harli]

And now for something completely different.

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g30/Kardde/fork.jpg

This is why moms yell so much....dont run with shit in your hands dammit!!

[Artha]

That kid really sucks at eating.

[Methais]

Robbie Hazeley and Pat Reeves, world famous vegan bodybuilder and 2006 world champion powerlifter also vegan

Arnold Schwarzenegger - World champion bodybuilder and meat eater.

Chuck Norris - Eats meat and will kick your ass.

Mr. T - Eats meat and will kick your ass, and does it while saving money on his phone calls by dialing 10-10-220.

Adolf Hitler - Vegeterian

[Nieninque]

I really disagree with parents letting their kids get piercings at young ages.

[Sean of the Thread]

That kid really sucks at eating.

wtf hospital visit for that? Give it a fucking yank.. slop some peroxide on it and then slap the kid in the back of the head.

[CrystalTears]

Must be why all the women think gay guys are so much hotter than straight guys.
You are seriously a small fry short of a Happy Meal.

Why do you even presume to know what a woman finds hot? Oh that's right. You put on your wizard hat and dress and you know everything with a quick change of pronoun. My bad.

[Tea & Strumpets]

I wonder how many Vegans have had their asses kicked acting like this at a social function or party...

You come into my house with an attitude and aire of superiority like that and you're going to be outside munching on my nice green vegan lawn after I throw you through the doorway.

Uh...no, that's now how it would happen. If you were every crazy enough to try to throw a gay vegan bodybuilder anywhere, you would get your ass handed to you. You just don't have enough going for you as a heterosexual meat eater:

1. Your wife would probably leave with Necromancer because he is way more attractive to females.
2. You are one rung below a gay vegan bodybuilder on the evolutionary ladder.
3. The food you eat is mostly growth hormones and pesticides.

It's all well and good to pretend an average person would have a chance against one of the X-men, but let's face the facts.

[Gan]

LOL

:lol:

[Tsa`ah]

1. If you refer to the WHO, UN, and FDA as crazy, random sources no one has heard of, I'm not really going to indulge you in further conversation.

I personally chalk it up to your inability to see the larger picture ... let alone grasp the basic ins and outs of agriculture.


2. If you think someone is an idiot because they say livestock is an environmental hazard, you've proven yourself far too ignorant on the subject to be worth discussing it with as well. Go do some research on it then you'll realize what an asinine statement that was. Be sure to focus on water supply issues.

Yes, I think these people are idiots of the grandest magnitude. I suggest you do some research that isn't one sided.

Converting feed crops to crops for human consumption will also cause water supply issues .... as well as contamination issues.


3. Cows are responsible for 25% of the methane gas release into the environment, while people are responsible for 5%. Yes, the massive amount of livestock the world raises has been implicated in global warming trends. You can discuss the merits of that after reading up on it, but making fart jokes and posting pictures do not a coherent argument make.

This is why the only thing that separates you from the common slack jaw happens to be vocabulary.

You, and every other rabid vegan out there doesn't understand that MOST OF THE WORLD'S CROP TREATMENTS ARE PETROLEUM BASED

Your only solution is to convert as many people to a vegan lifestyle as possible. This increases many things.

1. Water consumption for crops
2. Petroleum consumption for crops (everything from prep, treatment ... all the way to harvest).
3. Water table contamination.
4. Passive animal cruelty.

You're not offering solutions, nor do you care to offer solutions.

Let's have it your way and cut our expected petroleum life span by a third and cause economic havoc to boot.

Here's a solution to your problem. Let's not make the attempt to convert people, but rather let them make up their own mine with real facts across the board. Let's start processing livestock waste for fuel and fertilizer ... and hey, let's throw up some gas collectors (like many livestock farmers are already doing) to catch a good chunk of that gas you're so concerned about.

This not only reduces petroleum consumption (thus extending the life expectancy on our global supply), but gosh darn it .... it'll shut some annoying sons of bitches up for maybe a decade.

Oh .... and you haven't even suggested what crops we should replace feed crops with. I'm still waiting for that pearl of intelligent thought.


Tsa-

Allow me to begin with a quote I found:

"The world must create five billions vegans in the next several decades, or triple its total farm output without using more land."
Dennis Avery, Director of the Centre for Global Food Issues

Ok, first off it's probably not a very good idea to use Dennis Avery as any basis for your opinion or argument. Go read up on the guy.

I mean just because he's the director of CfGFI, doesn't necessarily mean he's qualified to wipe his own ass. I could probably justifiably compare this guy to Michael Brown.


Your post is rife with inaccuracies and oversimplification.

This should be good ... you opened up a thesaurus just to post that much.


You're almost correct on your conversion rate, currently the conversion is about 7 lbs of feed to 1 lb of cow. When one is looking into consumable material from feed-lot beef (the most inefficient energy converter and most commonly used), the percentages hover at 2.5%-5.0% of gross feed energy put in (professor Smil U. Manitoba Canada) The conversion rate is much more efficient for dairy cows, the most efficien tof whom convert 55%-65% of their feed into something consumable by humans. At one point in time, we were feeding livestock food that was produced already that humans couldn't eat. Now, we clear out space that could be growing human consumable foods and instead grow grain (which is also consumable) and feed it to cattle. Livestock now *competes* with humans for space to produce food.

Actually, my numbers are pretty damned close to the mark since I compared statistics from the Dept of Ags ranging several states .... maybe you should look up the hard numbers put out by agencies that actually deal with this every year. I looked lbs of feed per pound of beef produced, not pound of cow


Additionally, the continued raising of livestock helps to create a continued desire for meat. According to the FAO, as of 2002 there were 21 billion livestock being raised- 3.5 times the human population in the world. 2/3 of Agricultural Land in the world and 1/3 of available land is now being used to raise livestock. (FAO/USAID) 10% of grain was going to livestock in 1900, but it has skyrocketed to 45%.

So now you've demonstrated you can ad-lib cumulative source data ... you've yet to demonstrate you understand it.


You try to brush aside the issue of land efficiency by saying that just because raising livestock isn't efficient doesn't mean that there's something else more efficient. You are correct. So let me demonstrate some efficiency comparisons taken from Agriculture, Ecosystems, and the Environment (academic journal):

Food Source:
Land used to feed one person per year if all calories came from that source (m2)

Beef:
8,173 m2
Eggs: 2,395 m2
Milk: 2,053 m2
Fruit: 1,369 m2
Vegetables: 1,314 m2
Potatos: 274 m2

The report found that a varied diet that was complete in calories and protein based on fruits, vegetables, potatoes, and legumes (soy) could be done in 700 m2 of land while changing 1/3 of those calories to egg and milk would double the needed land. The standard European omnivorous diet was found to require 5x the land (or approximately 3,500 m2 per year per person). This information does NOT, by the way, include the separate land required to grow food for livestock. It just counts the land used by the livestock themselves and the feed-farm operations compared to the land needed to grow food crops and their farm operations. So the numbers are quite a bit higher for livestock.

I love, just fucking love, that you're using a source pulling a Michael Moore.

First off, I'll go back to my original question ... WHAT FUCKING FRUIT OR VEGETABLE WILL WE REPLACE FEED CORN WITH THAT PROVIDES A HIGH ENOUGH YIELD TO JUSTIFY THE INCREASED LABOR AND RESOURCE CONSUMPTION THAT WILL FEED AS MANY PEOPLE AS FEED CROPS FOR LIVESTOCK?

Will you answer the question instead of going back to these sources that are only giving half the picture.


So no, one cannot live on only grain, but beef stands are THE most inefficient land use, not even counting energy conversion, of any of our common food sources. So replacing it with *anything* (even pork) would actually be more efficient use of land.

Sorry, you haven't demonstrated this to be true in the least. You have pulled data from sources (and not the best mind you) that reflect an abstract theory based on selective statistics.

Please go back and read my posts and actually respond to them.


Now, things get worse for the developing world. The industrialized nations of the world can feed their people but not their livestock (European Union recently stated that harsh reality). Europe, which raises less livestock than the US, imports 60% of its animal proteins needed for feed. The result is what the Centre of Food Policy calls "Ghost Acres" in the developing world. The huge demand for livestock feed from industrialized nations means that land is being used in the developing world to grow soy and grain for the cattle in the rest of the world instead of food for themselves, increasing malnutrition issues. Additionally, since the land isn't being rotated, it's leaving acres and acres unfit for growing crops as it robs the soil of nutrients. It's not sustainable, and 2/3 of our agricultural land is being used for this purpose.

Psst ... I'll let you in on a little secret ... Europe is smaller than the US, and it's agriculture (total yield to acre) isn't even on par with US yields ... so if you want to use an agricultural system as a reference, use the larger more efficient systems.


And that doesn't even touch on the over 500 million pounds of waste created by livestock every year in the US alone.

I won't even bother quoting the full paragraph as you're only regurgitating what you have read from biased findings and have made no attempt what so ever to actually comprehend what you're reading.

Actually go back and read my previous response to your redundant cutting and pasting.


And if you think that livestock are walking themselves to slaughterhouses, it's time to take your meds. They're shipped, in cruel ways, to slaughterhouses where the meat is then shipped (it does not walk itself there in pieces) to markets. Thus livestock actually requires two different travels to get to the grocery store, whereas fruits and vegetables generally require only one. Additionally, livestock is not space efficient (while alive), and you can ship far fewer pounds of livestock in the same train cart than you can non-meat sources of food. So that point falls flat.

Again you demonstrate your inability to comprehend the most basic elementary explanation of the system.

Plants are stationary ... constant use of resources are required to transport every inch of the way.

Animals are ambulatory ... No machinery is required to load and unload livestock at any point. No machinery is required at any point except long distance transportation and processing, at which point they're no longer ambulatory and all of the traditional means of food locomotion are required at that point.

Do I need to open up MS paint and produce some grade school level graphics for you to understand now?

Here's another point you need to comprehend, space isn't an issue for livestock at any point ... comparing space and even weight is really irrelevant as the consumption of fuel, pound for pound, doesn't change from plant matter to animal matter.

That's like saying paper cups are better for the environment when compared to polystyrene produces ... never mind that transporting a truck full of paper cups consumes a hell of a lot more fuel when compared to transporting a truck full of polystyrene.

The point you've missed all along this little debate is that one alternative is no better than the other

However, livestock has a larger margin of flexibility and workable alternatives to many aspects of the environment and economy ... the vegan suggestion is far less flexible and offers up more ways to fuck up the environment and economy.


And all of your analysis ignores the environmental impact that livestock have. Most of the new land used for livestock comes from forest, with rain forest depletion being a key problem. The grazing of livestock, particularly cattle, on land destroys it, often leaving land that once grew abundant plant life into wasteland. Between 1995 and 1998, according to OxFam, one billion fish were killed from livestock-related water pollution in North Caroline alone. How's that for additional inefficiency. Not only could that land for livestock have been used to produce far more vegetables, not only could the land being used to grow grain to feed the livestock have been used to feed humans directly, BUT another billion fish that could have fed people were lost *In just one state in just three years* as well. And most of the waste, 2.3 trillion tons of it every year in the US alone from livestock, is generally pumped into open air lagoons. When those get too full, the excess is sprayed a "fertilizer" on local crop land. Unfortunately, the growth hormones, antibiotics, pesticides, and the like fed to livestock end up in toxic concentrations in the excrement (duh, it's poison, so the livestock bodies get rid of as much of it as possible), which then ruins the land it's sprayed on. Over time, the land becomes less and less usable to grow crops until it must be abandoned. The problem is so bad, that a recent case in federal Court upheld the right of citizens to sue feed farms for the rampant environmental damage they're causing to the areas they're in.

Blah bla blah bla bla bla blah ...

Do you use old paint chips as a form of dietary supplement? Am I using concept and words that are just beyond your ability to grasp? Am I aiming too high here?

Animal waste is biological. It has the potential for a myriad of uses ... chemicals are singular in use and pose more of a threat than any billion cows pissing and shitting all hours of the day and night.

Was that thrown low enough for you to understand?

I don't like the idea of deforestation ... in fact it's rather counter productive. That being said it's probably the ONLY valid point you have made this entire thread. There are alternatives to it .... and of course you left those out because pointing out alternatives only hurts your argument.

Well, not your argument ... just the arguments you're able to google.


People, it's time to wake up. Argue all you want, but you people need to realize that the livestock industry is considered to be a world health and world environmental crisis by all experts. And with VERY good reason.

I'm sorry, but it appears you hate being human, but not enough to do what you need to.

That's pretty much the feeling I get from the most rabid environmentalist and PETA banner waiving vegans.

Look, if you hate the human existence so much and you're more hell bent on changing everything to your standards rather than exploring alternatives ... go drink some battery acid. It will be a favor to the world.


I'm disappointed in myself I waited so long to troll this thread. I must be slipping :(

If you're spending a lot on vegetables, you really don't know how or where to shop. I'd suggest looking around a bit. For example, I know of a grocery store within 10miles where I can go and buy a fruitbox full of various peppers, artichokes, eggplants, etc. For $5. And I don't live in cheapville either.

Ok, I'll contain most of the standard insults and suggest you actually do some traveling before making such a statement.

The world at large is not confined to your little spec on the planet. You could live in an area where there are spectacular markets the meet a high demand for fresh produce, or you could just be in an area some very diverse local crops. Whatever the case may be ... IT IS NOT FUCKING UNIVERSAL. IT DOES NOT TRANSCEND EVERY REGION OF THE US THAT LIES BETWEEN THE TWO VERY LARGE BODIES OF WATER THAT CONTAIN OUR LANDMASS.

I live in East Central IL and outside of the farmers market that happens once a week during the late spring to early autumn, we do not have a large variety to choose from.

Lettuce, in any variety outside of iceburg, costs plenty and changes price daily. Any variety of bell pepper, outside of green, is going to run a buck and a half to two ... per pepper. We've got a nice selection of apples, and the standard run of every day vegetables (onions, lettuce, carrots, peppers, various (but limited) greens, potatoes, tomatoes ... nothing spectacular. That's ANY FUCKING STORE FROM HERE TO CHICAGO OR ST LOUIS that is NOT ALONG THE MISSI FUCKING SSIPPI RIVER.

You want fresh fennel here? Not happening. Blood oranges? I'll perform an emergency tracheotomy on the first slow ass old fuck blocking me from progressing more than 6 inches down the isle in the next five minute and plug the fucking hole with a florida orange for you.

We do NOT have the selection, and we have to pay out the ass for the selection we do have ... BECAUSE of the season and the COST of fresh produce that has to be transported to areas it doesn't grow well in.

This is why we pay .99 per pound for chicken. This is why I can pick up a choice sirloin at 2.00-3.00 per pound. This is why I can get a range of ground beef from .99 - 1.49 per pound.

I can prepare a nice steak dinner and pay more for the potato, salad, and veg I'll serve with it than I will for the steak.

I don't need anyone to show me how to shop ... I've been doing just fine for the past 15 years.

Incidentally I'm really curious as to how "vegan" some of you are.

Is it a "what I don't know is fine so long as I don't know" vegan? Or are you "informed" vegans who have absolutely nothing to do with animal bi-products?

[Keller]

Tsa'ah dispenses a verbal ass whooping

Ouch.

[CrystalTears]

Must... not... make... ass... jokes...

[Warriorbird]

Yeah. I skipped to the end of this thread to drop a "most vegetarians/vegans don't understand agriculture or economics" but it has been said. Oh...it has been said.

[Tsa`ah]

Must... not... make... ass... jokes...

You not making an ass joke is like you not posting a cat with logo ... do both, but it has to be funny and on topic.

[Gan]

Ouch.

x2

[CrystalTears]

Oh the peer pressure!

Keller, I doubt he'd say ouch for an ass whopping.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v412/Jemah/IM-IN-UR/i-has-a-butt.jpg

[Tsa`ah]

The impossible is no longer impossible.

[Keller]

The sheer pink cloth is the best part about that. Fucking awesome.

[DeV]

Must be why all the women think gay guys are so much hotter than straight guys.


Just because you are reading doesn't mean anyone is talking to you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrjwaqZfjIY x2

[Gan]

First off, I'll go back to my original question ... WHAT FUCKING FRUIT OR VEGETABLE WILL WE REPLACE FEED CORN WITH THAT PROVIDES A HIGH ENOUGH YIELD TO JUSTIFY THE INCREASED LABOR AND RESOURCE CONSUMPTION THAT WILL FEED AS MANY PEOPLE AS FEED CROPS FOR LIVESTOCK?

I dont think he can answer this because, based on my limited reading (and knowledge of farming/crop yields) there doesnt seem to be an organic crop of any kind that has the same yield as a mass produced (non-organic) crop, much less producing feed crop levels that are not fit for human consumption.

I would say the argumant has a double fatality to it, since it cant be done organically either way.

Allright, there's my ontopic contribution. Now back to trolling this thread.

[CrystalTears]

:lol: DeV that was awesome.

[Jazuela]

Okay wait. If everyone suddenly decides that the vegans are right, and we all go vegan -

What will happen to all those COWS! I mean, we have millions of cows all over the world who have been raised for slaughter and dairy. If we let them roam free, they'll cause traffic jams and invade our homes and eat our lawns and omg what other kind of havoc will they wreak on our planet?

Do we taper off, and just cut back on eating meat? And what about fish? I mean, we have plenty of fish that are endangered species and we don't kill those (mostly). But what about the fish people have consumed for millenia, that live in abundance? What will happen to the oceanic ecosystem if humans suddenly stop consuming them?

Please Vegans - think about the animals. Think about poor Flipper. Save a dolphin - eat a grouper today.

[Sean]

Robbie Hazeley and Pat Reeves, world famous vegan bodybuilder and 2006 world champion powerlifter also vegan

Probably because you've never actually bothered reading up on vegan athletes. Just because YOU haven't heard about something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

What do you mean because I haven't heard it doesn't mean it doesn't exist?!?! First of all count to 10 and calm down man. Second of all my post wasn't to claim they don't existing.

Now that you've counted to 10 consider this.. It wasn't an inflammatory post it was a genuine curiosity. If veganism is supposedly so much healthier and better for you I think it's a fair question why it's not the mainstream for athletes. I don't think anyone would be surprised that there there are vegan athletes but I don't think anyone could honestly argue that they are of greater number than omnivorous athletes on the professional level. Which in turn makes me wonder why given the amount of analysis that goes into maintaining a professional athlete there aren't more vegans amongst them?

[CrystalTears]

No worries, Dennis Leary and I are never, never, never, never, EVER going to stop eating meat. Rest assured, I will be here for them!

[CrystalTears]

Which in turn makes me wonder why given the amount of analysis that goes into maintaining a professional athlete there aren't more vegans amongst them?
Because it's more manly to eat a steak before a game than a froofroo salad.

[Tsa`ah]

What will happen to all those COWS! I mean, we have millions of cows all over the world who have been raised for slaughter and dairy.

Actually that's billions and we won't have to worry about it 15 years after the decree because they'll die a "natural" death full of pain, misery, and suffering, as will all pork and poultry (though much sooner). That is the "humane" way of doing it.

I'm more concerned about the sheep that will ultimately starve to death because they'll be unable to move due to their unshorn fleeces ... unless wool is ok with vegans.

[Ilvane]

Yea, because what is more manly than eating a steak? :wtf:

I guess.:shrug:

Angela

[Kainen]

All I have to say is that I am really glad I decided to go back and read the last few pages. :lol:

[CrystalTears]

Yea, because what is more manly than eating a steak?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v412/Jemah/IM-IN-UR/ok-now-ure-startin-to-bore-me.jpg

[Tsa`ah]

....

It's pointing to the few notable exceptions in an attempt to demonstrate the, or a, rule.

I'm sorry, but catching a bluegill in the Atlantic Ocean doesn't mean that freshwater fish perform better in salt water, it means ... well ... you caught a fresh water fish in a body of salt water. It could happen again, but you're likely to pull out a million fish of various salt water varieties before you catch another fresh water fish ... and the chances it's going to be the exact same kind is so remote that the lottery and lightning seem more likely.

[Jazuela]

As far as I can tell Tsa'ah, wool is okay by vegan standards. As is using lanolin (the really icky nasty smelly grease present on a sheep's fleece) in hand lotions and other skin applications. Since you aren't hurting the animal by getting the wool or lanolin.

I might be wrong. But I'm pretty sure they're fine with it.

[Tsa`ah]

We call this hypocrisy.

[Keller]

what is more manly than eating a steak?

Biting into a living cow.

[CrystalTears]

As far as I can tell Tsa'ah, wool is okay by vegan standards. As is using lanolin (the really icky nasty smelly grease present on a sheep's fleece) in hand lotions and other skin applications. Since you aren't hurting the animal by getting the wool or lanolin.

I might be wrong. But I'm pretty sure they're fine with it.
They shouldn't be. Any animal product is ANY animal product.

[Tsa`ah]

Yea, because what is more manly than eating a steak? :wtf:



Eating it rare without utensils ... like the caveman did.

[Jazuela]

Man that's harsh, CH. So no wool, no down jackets, no feather pillows...or duvets..

What did vegans do to keep themselves warm before the invention of polyester and synthetics? They're not -that- new in the scheme of technology afterall.

[CrystalTears]

From Wikipedia:
The term "animal product (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_product)" in a vegan context refers to material derived from animals for human use. Notable animal products include meat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meat), poultry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poultry), seafood (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seafood), eggs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_%28food%29), dairy products (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dairy_product), honey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honey), fur (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fur), leather (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leather), wool (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wool), and silk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk).[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegan#_note-foodcriteria) Common animal by-products include gelatin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gelatin), lanolin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanolin), rennet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rennet), whey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whey), beeswax (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beeswax) and shellac (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shellac).[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegan#_note-foodcriteria)

From the opposition section of Wool: Vegans tend to avoid wool, claiming that its production is inhumane and that sheep deserve to be free from human exploitation.

[Gan]

Man that's harsh, CH. So no wool, no down jackets, no feather pillows...or duvets..

What did vegans do to keep themselves warm before the invention of polyester and synthetics? They're not -that- new in the scheme of technology afterall.

No leather. (clothes, shoes, belts, handbags, etc.)

No elmer's glue.

No horsehair violin strings, NO CONCERTS FOR JOOOZ! :violin:

Do you feed organic food to your pets? Do you have pets?

And the list goes on... and on... and on...

[Tsa`ah]

Ultimately it will come down to this one thing when we have a real food crisis.

The vegans (I'm not talking about the people who decide to eat how they want and leave everyone else alone) will claim that since they're "healthier" and their way is the right way ... they'll just put an end to all the omnivores and solve the problem ... since they're pretty much a self loathing group to begin with, they'll have no problem attempting to get rid of everyone unlike them for that boost of self worth they're always looking for.

So the battle starts and an hour into it all of us unhealthy out of shape omnivores will be a little winded and we'll lose some numbers. The "healthy" vegans will be zipping around the throng of omnivores like light loafered forest elves out of a fan written D&D short story ... taking out the fatties, the invalids, and elderly ... the occasional mullet wearing child.

Pretty soon the vegans call a time out for a protein/energy shake break ... and we fucking pounce.

Problem solved, food for all. Vegan steak with a parsley sprig for fibre.

[Jazuela]

Ugh Gan - I remember meeting this woman in the supermarket in the pet food aisle, getting kitty litter for her cat. "Cat people" tend to like to talk to each other about how much fun it is to have a cat, and usually have no problem stopping their grocery shopping for many minutes just to chat with each other - perfect strangers, mind you!

So there I was, offering her a coupon I had for the brand she picked out since I was using a different brand, and we got to talking about pet food. Turns out she's a vegan, and she tried making her cat a vegan too. REALLY STUPID MOVE on her part. The poor kitty ended up in the vet hospital for a week due to severe malnutrition. She was telling me about how bad she feels that she has to buy raw meat to add to her kitty's veggie diet. I couldn't believe she'd be upset about that. I mean, the cat is NOT a human. Cats are carnivores, and if she couldn't handle that, she had no business owning a cat. I wanted to shoot her.

[Keller]

From the opposition section of Wool: Vegans tend to avoid wool, claiming that its production is inhumane and that sheep deserve to be free from human exploitation.

Human exploitation. :rofl:

I also deserve to be free from human exploitation. Fuck man. Those sheep have it made. They make their entire living off of growing hair that they'd grow anyways. We need to find a way to exploit them further, imo. Create little sheep-bikes attached to generators and make them ride it for 7.5 hrs a day. They can add power to the grid to help reduce their eco-footprint from all the gas they pass.

[Keller]

Vegan steak with a parsley sprig for fibre.

Can we cage them and feed them cardboard and chicken feces for a few weeks first?

Necro says that's why cow's taste so fucking good.

[Jessaril]

Ugh Gan - I remember meeting this woman in the supermarket in the pet food aisle, getting kitty litter for her cat. "Cat people" tend to like to talk to each other about how much fun it is to have a cat, and usually have no problem stopping their grocery shopping for many minutes just to chat with each other - perfect strangers, mind you!

So there I was, offering her a coupon I had for the brand she picked out since I was using a different brand, and we got to talking about pet food. Turns out she's a vegan, and she tried making her cat a vegan too. REALLY STUPID MOVE on her part. The poor kitty ended up in the vet hospital for a week due to severe malnutrition. She was telling me about how bad she feels that she has to buy raw meat to add to her kitty's veggie diet. I couldn't believe she'd be upset about that. I mean, the cat is NOT a human. Cats are carnivores, and if she couldn't handle that, she had no business owning a cat. I wanted to shoot her.


You can actually do that with dogs since they are omnivores, but cats... cats are strictly carnivores. You should have called the ASPCA on her then taken back your coupon.

[Gan]

You can actually do that with dogs since they are omnivores, but cats... cats are strictly carnivores. You should have called the ASPCA on her then taken back your coupon.

Amazing what you learn here on the PC. I mean seriously, this isnt stuff that is discussed around the water cooler at work.

More info on the diet and eating capabilities of dogs and cats.

http://www.thepetcenter.com/imtop/nutrition.html

http://www.thepetcenter.com/imtop/catsaredif.html

[Skeeter]

I thought Vegans weren't supposed to have pets. I know the peta fanatics aren't.

[CrystalTears]

This thread has been bumped to bring up a special CAD update...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v412/Jemah/CAD/eatmoremeat.jpg
We now return you to your regularly scheduled... whatever.

[Gan]

HAHA

Nice.

[Jazuela]

That reminds me - do people who are vegans because of "moral" issues with meat eating, refuse to take any prescription or FDA approved over the counter medicine? They should, because all of those medications are tested on animals. Also, all non-natural dyes, and some natural dyes, have been tested on animals. Their makeup and hygiene options are limited too, because most makeup (definitely not all anymore), soaps, shampoos, shaving cream, have been tested on animals.

It must be a very expensive lifestyle. Dangerous too, if you should happen to contract an illness that requires life-saving prescription meds to cure, and because of your moral views on animal use, you would prefer to die than to take anything that was involved in the torture of animals at some point.