Next up, the sky is blue.
I wish it was more obvious to the average person as it is needed to counter the mainstream media’s false narrative that “processed plant-based protein alternatives are less healthy than meat”
Not that I doubt you, but where are you seeing them talk about it AT ALL?
I’m maybe just looking in the wrong places but beyond the occasional adverpinion piece, it’s not even brought up.
It’s a common talking point amongst those who have a murderous hatred of vegans.
Both sides suck at arguing this and all it does is make both sides insufferable. Meat eaters like to point out things like protein deficiency, and high amounts of salts and sugars in meat substitutes. Vegans like to point out the saturated fats, cancer rates, and green house emissions. Problem is you’re both right.
From the article
The studies authors are calling for “greater nuance” when it comes to discussing the healthiness of plant-based alternatives, as there is considerable disparity between categories in terms of health.
“Grouping all plant-based alternatives into a single category is an unhelpful strategy for encouraging a shift away from meat and towards more plant-rich diets as it hides a wide variety of options with differing nutrition and health profiles within the plant-based alternative category,” the authors wrote.
While the study acknowledged that plant-based meat alternatives can be a “useful stepping stone” for encouraging people to shift their diets, they stressed that the less processed alternatives – notably beans and grains – offer “the greatest number of co-benefits.”
Personally I’m not going to stop eating meat but I’m fine with eating less of it or lab grown after a while (though I’m worried about what the industry would look like on a mass scale). But calling for things like moving all livestock subsidies to meat alternatives and claiming all meat substitutes are inherently healthier is just naive, reactionary, and lack nuance. Discussions between vegans and carnivores go exactly how you expect most internet debates to go.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
They’re gonna take down the post for “unhealthy diets” lol
No, as we humans are omnivores. We can digest non animal fats and dont need directly a heck load of chemicals injected into a block of soy beans paste.
Additionally WE can make that choice but cats that are obligatory carnivore would never choose vegan as they are obligated to do so.
If a vegan diet is ethical for a cat is unknown.
a heck load of chemicals injected into a block of soy beans paste.
Everything’s a chemical, this is just language used to make things sound scary. The taurin that cats need that isn’t found in vegan cat food is identical to the taurin in meat.
Additionally WE can make that choice but cats that are obligatory carnivore would never choose vegan as they are obligated to do so.
If you’re so concerned about a cat having a supposedly harmful (the science on this disagrees with you, to be clear) choice made for itself by the human who is keeping it, why are you fine with the choices made for the animals that are kept in awful conditions and then killed for cat food with meat in it? Those animals are also kept by humans and have choices made for them that are unnatural to them, and they are most certainly being harmed.
If a vegan diet is ethical for a cat is unknown.
The science on this is pretty clear, and there are plenty of examples of cats thriving on a vegan diet for many many years. Of course, it’s important to consult a specialist and give the cat regular checkups if switching its diet like this.
Water - wet.
That’s what my thoughts were with this. The sheer amount of water alone to produce meat1 makes the bar very low for plant-based alternatives
1 https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/06/water-footprint-food-sustainability/
wait till your hear how much water is needed for those vats for lab meat…
Do you have a source? I’d be interested in seeing how the numbers look at present. I otherwise looked into this briefly myself, and this article from ScienceFocus mentions a 2019 study by Oxford University that found more greenhouse gases are released growing lab meat than regular meat, although ScienceFocus argued that if mass produced on a similar scale to regular meat and if renewable energy was used instead, the emissions could be better than regular meat.
Another website indicates in future tense that lab-grown meat “could cut down on water usage by 90%”
I only have common sense. of course the whole thing is less water intensive then having to nurture an animal for 2 years and then kill it. but you can’t compare industrial waste water and water usage on a farm.
well, renewable energy… you could say the same for a farm. just put solar on the roof, like they do anyway. yes, you need less diesel for a factory product. but you still need an agricultural product, you don’t grow the stuff out of thin air. so diesel will be the same.
then you will need lots more of energy. you need technology. you need chemicals. and so on. you need specialist, chemists, industrial mechanics. all that costs a whole lot of ressources, and ratches up co2 footprint as well.
its like the idea of insect protein.
i dont think this will realize into reality at all, in a meaningfull scale, i mean. the whole thing is just a technical nightmare.
its like urban farms with indoor lights and hydroponics. its just not efficient.
I prefer my veggies in veggie form. Veggie meat seems like the nicotine patch of the food world to me.
