Veganism

  On 3/28/2019 at 3:34 PM, joshuatx said:

I think if people want to eat meat they should do their best to eat as much of the animal as possible.

necks, hearts, livers, gizzards and kidneys... pretty spicy, one of my favorite dishes...

  On 3/28/2019 at 7:57 AM, Zeffolia said:

 

We shouldn't mess around too much because DNA is basically code executed on the human biological computational machine, and I'm no biologist but everything I'm aware of suggests that it's extreme spaghetti code.  You can't just change genes without externalities.  But the hate against it is mostly propagated by ignorant people

 

The entire history of human agriculture is a history of genetic engineering. We're just more accurate and precise in what we can do now.

And heading to apocalypse, woooo.

nah

https://www.google.co.uk/search?ei=sTudXKnBNqTExgPn6peYCA&q=nose+to+tail+fergus+henderson&oq=nose+to+tail+fe&gs_l=psy-ab.1.0.0j0i22i30l6.3730.4476..6260...0.0..0.74.198.3......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i71j0i67j0i22i10i30.d1llNK4MINE

Not a vegan or vegetarian however I do think that when they can grow the meat there is a kind of obligation to switch over to that and try to minimize eating animals.

Though it seems like it won't happen anytime soon considering how many hurdles there are.

I like being vegetarian. I don't give a shit what you eat.

  On 3/28/2019 at 7:44 PM, caze said:

 

  On 3/28/2019 at 7:57 AM, Zeffolia said:

 

We shouldn't mess around too much because DNA is basically code executed on the human biological computational machine, and I'm no biologist but everything I'm aware of suggests that it's extreme spaghetti code.  You can't just change genes without externalities.  But the hate against it is mostly propagated by ignorant people

 

 

The entire history of human agriculture is a history of genetic engineering. We're just more accurate and precise in what we can do now.

 

Genetic engineering through artificial selection is significantly different from genetic engineering through CRISPR

Anyway I'm not expert but this much is certainly true.

  On 3/28/2019 at 6:00 PM, Bulk VanderHooj said:

Don't basic market forces apply? Fairly elastic prices in the meat market, at least in Canada. Price of beef can fluctuate almost 50% over the course of a few weeks. 

 

Demand drops, price drops, more sold in response. I believe production is fairly static.

 

http://aimis-simia.agr.gc.ca/rp/index-eng.cfm?action=gR&r=105&signature=19C0FF8143B4262BBE21BC183CB0394D&pdctc=&pTpl=1#wb-cont

 

http://aimis-simia.agr.gc.ca/rp/index-eng.cfm?action=gR&r=111&signature=1E4EEE7FCACEBDB9795A618FFF89B47E&pdctc=&pTpl=1#wb-cont

 

 

 

 

At least these reports show stable production. Hogs are especially stable:

 

Federally inspected:

2015 - 20,332,334

2016 - 20,394,158

2017 - 20,728,785

2018 - 20,552,912

 

 

edit: worldwide all meat production is increasing of course.

Production is static because global demand is mostly predictable and correlated to population.  Drops in demand may take time to signal to the production side but the signal will happen and production incentives will change due to this.  They don't want to overproduce product so much that more of it than they are willing to accept will go unsold because it's a waste of resources that could have been invested into something else.  And if they are this ineffective at meeting market forces then it's through no fault of vegans that they fail to react to the market and thus fail to realize the vegan lack of demand through lower production.

This whole "vegans have literally no effect because the meat market is immune to supply and demand and will continue producing product even if nobody bought it" argument is very low IQ

Of course its no fault of vegans. Not sure if someone said that?

My point is only that if the philosophy is rooted in preventing harm to animals, it's not having any tangible impact because a reduction in demand through people going vegan is hugely offset by growing middle class and population in countries like China and India. The only thing you can pat yourself on the back about is that you personally didn't contribute to the butcher of an animal. It hasn't had an impact on production or slaughter. This is why (like both you and I have pointed out) production in many countries remains static while overall increasing worldwide.

So while it may be your (and I applaud it) personal choice to not eat meat, the increased affordability to growing populations means more animals are slaughtered year over year. It won't have a tangible impact until like... 50% of people quit meat cold turkey turnip.

edit: I think we're almost saying the same thing, I'm not sure.

  On 3/28/2019 at 11:39 PM, Braintree said:

I like being vegetarian. I don't give a shit what you eat.

x2

  On 3/29/2019 at 2:51 AM, Zeffolia said:

 

This whole "vegans have literally no effect because the meat market is immune to supply and demand and will continue producing product even if nobody bought it" argument is very low IQ

 

Good job wilfully misunderstanding. The point is not that the meat market doesn't change when demand changes. The point is that ridiculously small shifts in demand won't affect it. There are too few vegans to change anything and there won't be enough of them even if their number multiplies tenfold. Production surpluses / tiny aberrations in sale are compensated through price adjustments or end up as meat waste. That doesn't mean that I don't think anyone should be vegan, it's still a moral thing to do, even if it has no effect on the meat industry.

  On 3/29/2019 at 4:17 AM, Bulk VanderHooj said:

 

My point is only that if the philosophy is rooted in preventing harm to animals, it's not having any tangible impact 

Yes, unfortunately.

  On 3/29/2019 at 6:14 AM, darreichungsform said:

 

  On 3/29/2019 at 2:51 AM, Zeffolia said:

 

This whole "vegans have literally no effect because the meat market is immune to supply and demand and will continue producing product even if nobody bought it" argument is very low IQ

 

 

Good job wilfully misunderstanding. The point is not that the meat market doesn't change when demand changes. The point is that ridiculously small shifts in demand won't affect it. There are too few vegans to change anything and there won't be enough of them even if their number multiplies tenfold. Production surpluses / tiny aberrations in sale are compensated through price adjustments or end up as meat waste. That doesn't mean that I don't think anyone should be vegan, it's still a moral thing to do, even if it has no effect on the meat industry.

 

So grocery store demand has no effect on meat industry production?  Predicted increases in demand don't result in increases in breeding?  Predicted decreases in those spikes of demand during reversal to meat demand rates doesn't result in decreases of breeding at some time equal to the maturation rate before the time time event is predicted to occur?

I'm honestly not even sure what you're trying to suggest here.  Is your claim that factory farms just produce a fixed quantity of meat all the time no matter how much demand they predict based on past sales and wastage rates?  That's nonsense and once again a literal claim that the meat industry is somehow immune to supply and demand

I'm not willfully misunderstanding anything, it seems that it's you who isn't understanding the absurdity of your own claim

Here is some data from the factory farm industry itself refuting your claim:

Grocery store supplier S90438 has 500,000 regular customers in their region, each consuming approximately 100 units of animal carcass and excretions per year, for a total of 50m units.  Then 0.1% of them go vegan, this is a decrease of 50k units.  They will decrease their production rates by some y%=n*0.1% with n being probably (1.0, ~1.3]  to be biased towards wastage over underproduction to maximize profits, after they account for their predicted growth.  They then incubate y% fewer Turkeys, impregnate y% fewer cows, rape y% fewer pigs than their consumption rate increases would have otherwise predicted they would have done next year.  It doesn't take a genius to figure this stuff out

And what we're saying is: right now people not eating meat does not affect that.

C'mon, doesn't take a genius to figure out women don't steal cum from the trash this out.

Vegetarians drink milk and eat eggs.

  On 3/29/2019 at 9:55 AM, darreichungsform said:

Ovo-Lacto Vegetarians drink milk and eat eggs.

  On 3/29/2019 at 9:43 AM, Zeffolia said:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/238328/snapshot-few-americans-vegetarian-vegan.aspx

 

This study claimed 5% of people are vegeterian in the US. Regardless of what the real number is, are you trying to say if they all turned carnist there would not be a corresponding 5% increase in meat production to meet that new demand? Please provide evidence for this.

In the long run production might change but in the short run it would not.

  On 3/29/2019 at 9:21 AM, hello spiral said:

And what we're saying is: right now people not eating meat does not affect that.

 

C'mon, doesn't take a genius to figure out women don't steal cum from the trash this out.

And this.

What if you eat your own scabs?

The texture alone.....

  On 3/29/2019 at 2:58 PM, Bulk VanderHooj said:

 

  On 3/29/2019 at 9:43 AM, Zeffolia said:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/238328/snapshot-few-americans-vegetarian-vegan.aspx

 

This study claimed 5% of people are vegeterian in the US. Regardless of what the real number is, are you trying to say if they all turned carnist there would not be a corresponding 5% increase in meat production to meet that new demand? Please provide evidence for this.

There would not be a 5% corresponding increase in meat production because these are live animals that must be bred, raised to the correct age to butcher, be processed and aged, etc. it’s not an assembly line. There would be an increase in price which would drop demand to match supply levels.

 

In the long run production might change but in the short run it would not.

 

Longterm vs shortterm doesn't matter

And from this why can't you guys make the logical leap that decreases in demand will result in decreases of supply?

We can. But the demand won't decrease significantly.

Today I'm not even sure what the point of this discussion is anymore. Seems like yesterday I (mis)read it as if there were no point to anyone going vegan because there are currently too few vegans? Which is uh... pretty wild as far as reasoning goes.

  On 3/29/2019 at 6:04 PM, manmower said:

Today I'm not even sure what the point of this discussion is anymore. Seems like yesterday I (mis)read it as if there were no point to anyone going vegan because there are currently too few vegans? Which is uh... pretty wild as far as reasoning goes.

yeah there's some really stupid shit being said in here the last few pages, idk and just gave up on trying to. I doubt Danny was trying to start a ethics of eating meat vs veganism but that's of course where it was gonna go.