this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2023
1537 points (99.8% liked)

Memes

45187 readers
1489 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] notenoughbutter@lemmy.ml 42 points 1 year ago (3 children)

taste

what about vitamins? proteins and other nutrients

like omega 3 fatty acid majorly found in fishes

[–] agoseris@lemm.ee 53 points 1 year ago (10 children)

There are plenty of plant sources of Omega 3. Flax seeds, walnuts, soybeans, and canola oil all have decent amounts of omega 3 in them. As for protein, legumes generally have a bunch.

Really, the only thing a vegan needs to supplement is B12, but even that gets added to a bunch of stuff like breakfast cereals and plant milks if you consume those.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Azathoth@feddit.de 39 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can take them as supplements. It's the same for your body. Oh and you are already doing that, because they give supplements to the animals they raise and kill, we are just eliminating the middleman.

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] Azzu@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Cyanide occurs naturally. Water can be made in a lab by mixing Hydrogen and Oxygen and applying heat.

Is Cyanide good for you when occurring naturally and water bad for you when artificially synthesized?

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

no. But it is also not the case that nature intended for us to consume artificially synthesized anything

[–] Azathoth@feddit.de 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Natural is such a stupid argument. Is it natural for us to use a smartphone? Sit in a car and drive around? Work 8h a day instead of being with your peer group? Breed a fast growing special kind of animal, feed it with chemical ingredients and plants that don't grow here only to eat them? Eat processed sugar? I think you get where I am going. Stop using this bullshit argument and take some supplements, your body will thank you.

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'm not saying that supplements are bad. What I am saying is that getting those things from their original source is not bad either. And no argument will get me to see it as such. You can have your supplements, it doesn't affect me. But I will not feel guilty of doing what nature always intended me to do: i.e. eat stuff

[–] Vegoon@feddit.de 13 points 1 year ago

You eat others who have been feed the same unnatural supplements and much more. Nothing about the Animal industry is natural (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy) But I guess you live in the woods and only spear hunt there?

Animal industry is the biggest destroyer of nature and not only kills them but in the long run us too.

[–] 4ce@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

nature intended

Nature doesn't intend anything, it simply is. We are, in the grand scheme of things, not separate from nature, and in this sense everything we do is natural. If you're using "natural" to distinguish things from the results of human civilization, then eating animal products stemming from animal agriculture is just as "unnatural" as supplements, as both are products of civilization.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] projectd@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Worth noting that many non-vegans are vitamin deficient and some medical authorities, including the UK's, even recommend that everyone take vitamin D supplements. Also, please reconsider using your Internet connection, that isn't very natural either.

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

as I said to the other guy, I'm not saying not natural is bad. But what op is implying is that getting the same stuff from natural sources is bad. That I just don't agree with. It's just the natural order of things. I have other options, yes, but I don't consider the default natural source of things to be bad, so I don't feel the need to switch. Animals eat animals all the time. And they don't do it "humanely" either.

[–] irmoz@reddthat.com 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Animals don't have the options we do. That argument fails.

Plus, that argument could be used to justify rape and murder. Perfectly natural. They don't breed humanely.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] projectd@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why is it worse to get things from less natural sources? Ignoring that everybody get some of their vitamins from less natural sources, e.g. animals injected with B12, cereals fortified with iron, water and toothpaste with fluoride, synthesised morphines instead of smoking opium - would you say these things are bad too because they are less natural? And if so, why?

Also, do you take all of your moral code from the worst things animals do? I hold myself to a higher standard and don't eat my kids, rape, or fling shit at each others.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] m532@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

Those factory farmed animals are further away from "natural" than a smartphone

[–] RedCanasta@lemmy.fmhy.ml 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)
[–] Grumpy@sh.itjust.works 34 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

This isn't whataboutism. Whataboutism isn't about using the words "what about", it's about misdirecting the conversation to a seemingly related but actually an unrelated topic in order to counter argue the point. It's a sub-type of ad-hominem attack, a fallacy.

The person you're responding to is directly answering why people need to eat fish (I'm not validating the claim, just explaining) with sarcastic questions starting with what about.

[–] Rhoeri@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Dude actually said “what about….”

[–] Silviecat44@aussie.zone 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Again, the wording is not the issue

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] exu@feditown.com 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Actual proteins you need supplements for if you go vegan

[–] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.de 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

No you don't. Literally every plant contains EVERY amino acid in varying amounts. You don't need to supplement protein as a vegan.

[–] people_are_cute@lemmy.sdf.org 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Literally every plant contains EVERY amino acid in varying amounts.

Guess we can all survive on grass then. Agriculture and societies were a mistake, let's just become cattle and chill all day /s

[–] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.de 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or you can just eat plants that you can actually digest but that wouldn't make for a snarky comment huh?

[–] people_are_cute@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You said "Literally every plant". It's right up there.

[–] irmoz@reddthat.com 4 points 1 year ago

They also said, "in varying amounts". That would imply you need to vary your diet. But again, not useful for snark.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 5 points 1 year ago

Sorry, I can't stomach grass without some mayo or tomato sauce.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] osmn@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Would you believe that I don't want to eat just plants and pills for each meal? Would you also believe that I disagree with the industrialization of farming and the animal abuse that is so commonly paired with it.

There are humane ways to eat meat, and while they're difficult to find, it's a lot easier than eating what most people would consider disgusting everyday.

[–] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.de 18 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Yes you don't want to just eat plants, hence you are eating animals for taste pleasure.

Why do you think it's okay to kill someone for pleasure? What's humane about that?

[–] MarioSpeedWagon@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Ploughing fields for plants kills animals too

[–] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.de 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah and having an accident with your car may also kill people. Should that count as murder? You know, since apparently intention is irrelevant.

[–] MarioSpeedWagon@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago (3 children)
[–] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.de 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You don't know what you are talking about.

[–] door_in_the_face@feddit.nl 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You should look up the definition of murder. Murder requires intent, otherwise it's manslaughter.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Sturgist@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

Vehicular manslaughter under a variety of different names is a crime in many many maaaaannnny countries.

[–] coffeekomrade@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 year ago

Man, you are gonna be real mad when you learn how conservation and wildlife management works

[–] osmn@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Animals other than humans aren't people, that's why it's okay. You should be the first law enforcement official that prosecutes predatorial non-human animals

[–] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.de 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

It's shocking to me how many people don't understand that saying "they aren't the same species as us, so because of that we can treat them with impunity" is analogous to saying "they aren't the same skin color as us, so because of that we can treat them with impunity"

[–] osmn@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

See, now you're actually just forcing your worldview on people. They literally are not people, they are not sentient, intelligent, nor do they have language. They are not analagous to people, and you comparing this to racism is a really shitty attempt at ad hominem.

Grow up.

[–] 4ce@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

they are not sentient

Science disagrees with you here. Most of the animals being used for meat are in fact not just sentient, but also conscious:

Convergent evidence indicates that non-human animals have the neuroanatomical, neurochemical, and neurophysiological substrates of conscious states along with the capacity to exhibit intentional behaviors. Consequently, the weight of evidence indicates that humans are not unique in possessing the neurological substrates that generate consciousness. Non-human animals, including all mammals and birds, and many other creatures, including octopuses, also possess these neurological substrates.

-- From the Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] osmn@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago
load more comments (1 replies)