| This is an archived forum, so it is here for read-only purposes only. We are not accepting new members and members cannot post any longer. Members can, however, access their old private messages. Strawberry Fields was open from 2006 until 2011. There is a Strawberry Fields Beatles Forum on Facebook. If you are registered with Facebook, join us at the group there! |
| The agricultural case for vegetarianism | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 25 2007, 06:16 AM (159 Views) | |
| Bill | Mar 25 2007, 06:16 AM Post #1 |
|
I saw an interview with Peter Singer a while ago and he said something about the meat industry that makes so much sense as soon as someone points it out, but I had never thought of it before.... We grow all this grain to feed to animals so we can eat them, yet the nutritional yield of the meat is actually less than the yield of the grain we feed to them. We would be better off cutting out the middle man and just eating the grain ourselves. So even aside from the ethical issues, the idea of raising animals for meat makes no sense. It's a ridiculously inefficient way of feeding ourselves. Also, it takes ten times as much water to grow beef than it does to grow the same volumes of vegetables which again has a higher nutritional yield. Of course we are going to need milk and eggs and wool (depending on your lifestyle) but it seems to me that quite aside from animal rights issues, we need to rethink the meat industry. Thoughts? Comments? Rebuttals? |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| JeffLynnesBeard | Mar 25 2007, 09:17 AM Post #2 |
|
Administrator & Moderator
|
I agree with the conclusion that the meat industry is inefficient and that we should be cutting out the 'middleman'. The major rebuttals I have heard reading about this over the last few years are on economic grounds, that the meat industry is major bucks and destroying it would destroy people's livelihoods. The other main rebuttals have been along the lines of, "But I like eating meat!" On principle, I disagree with doing something which is wrong just because stopping doing it will cost people money & employment opportunities, which is the main argument for the Canadian Seal Hunt every year. When one door closes another one usually opens. |
| ...and in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make. | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Mar 25 2007, 09:57 AM Post #3 |
|
And I would suggest that the door that opens will be value-adding on the grain. I mean, no-one expects people to eat cattle feed. There would be a big industry in processing the raw food. I don't want to see anyone out of work, but progress is progress. I don't think anyone really pleaded the case for typesetters when they were made redundant, or for the builders of stage coaches. How many people paused to think about the plight of all the poor kodak workers who no longer have an industry before they bought their first digital camera? The market moves on. That's life. |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| beatlechick | Mar 25 2007, 04:10 PM Post #4 |
|
In Paul's Arms!
|
Bill, you won't get a rebuttal from me. I do know that the fumes from cow farts and cowpies does contribute to pollution as well. Strange how that happens but it is. I remember this from science class in college in the late 70's early 80's. cow farts from what I remember, they fart out methane gas. Yes, if we were to cutdown the use of animals for food a large industry would be effected however a new door can open by growing the grains that the animals need and use it for human consumption or start growing more fruits and vegetables. |
| |
![]() |
|
| ~LovelyRita~ | Mar 25 2007, 05:53 PM Post #5 |
|
It's never going to happen because people like meat too much. The only way I could ever see that happening is if all the cattle got some kind of disease, but even then I'm sure people would just switch over to eating more of other animals. It makes sense in theory, but it would never actually happen. Anyway, meat has nutrients that grain doesn't have. Many people are too lazy to hunt for other sources of protein. |
![]() |
|
| mozart8mytoe | Mar 26 2007, 04:34 AM Post #6 |
|
I mean the following comment about Bill's opening post in the nicest possible way. No sh*t, Sherlock. You just figured this out? What is next, guns don't kill people, bullets fired from guns kill people?
Ironically, eating vegetable protein is far easier than raising, killing, preparing and eating animals. And, no, grain does not have all the nutrition one needs. That is why nobody eats only grain. |
| Nurse, I spy gypsies. Run. | |
![]() |
|
| anthroliz | Mar 26 2007, 11:49 PM Post #7 |
|
Back in the day, like before first contact in the Americas the Natives ate Corn, Squash, and Beans and were not malnourished. So it is possible to get everything not from a meat source. If you have not already read Eric Schlosser's Fast Food Nation it really will make you want to become a vegetarian if you aren't already one. I like the quote by Linda McCartney about if Slaughterhouses had glass walls everyone would be a vegetarian, on someone's signature. It's really totally true. |
| Peace More Hip Than Hippe | |
![]() |
|
| beatlechick | Mar 27 2007, 05:34 AM Post #8 |
|
In Paul's Arms!
|
Yes, the native Americans ate grains and vegetables but they also ate meat. In those days it was for survival. They had to kill for the fur to protect them against harsh winters and the meat to survive on. Their life expectancy may have been as high as 35 yrs old, too. |
| |
![]() |
|
| anthroliz | Mar 27 2007, 02:44 PM Post #9 |
|
This is true but I was speaking more of the natives in Mexico and Central America. The difference between us and the natives is that all of the animals they did kill they used all of and many worshipped the animals somewhat. We just take for granted that meat will always be available in our supermarkets and we don't thank the animals for sacrificing themselves for us...hell we don't even thank the people who raise the animals we eat or the people who work under hellish conditions in the slaughterhouses. |
| Peace More Hip Than Hippe | |
![]() |
|
| beatlechick | Mar 28 2007, 01:15 AM Post #10 |
|
In Paul's Arms!
|
Sorry, I don't eat or drink any animal stuff. Yes I know the Native Americans used all of the animal, I said that in my post that they used the animal for survival. I think those of us, meaning the collective us, that hunt would say just about the same thing. I know the sealhunters do. I heard it all last year during the sealhunting season from the pro sealhunters on the pm.com board. |
| |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · Things We Said Today · Next Topic » |







2:11 PM Jul 11