/sci/ - Science & Math

File: 86 KB, 634x593, external-content.duckduckgo.com.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 14:46:02 2021 No.12767957 [Reply] [Original]

Vegans lie to claim that health organizations agree on their diet:
1) There are many health authorities that explicitly advise against vegan diets, especially for children. [1]
2) The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics was founded by Seventh-day Adventists[2], an evangelistic vegan religion[3] that owns meat replacement companies. Every author of their position paper[4] is a career vegan, one of them is selling diet books that are cited in the paper. One author and one reviewer are Adventists who work for universities that publicly state[5] to have a religious agenda. Another author went vegan for ethical reasons[6]. They explicitly report "no potential conflict of interest". Their claims about infants and athletes are based on complete speculation (they cite no study following vegan infants from birth to childhood) and they don't even mention potentially problematic nutrients like Vitamin K[7] or Carnitine[8].
3) Many, if not all, of the institutions that agree with the AND either just echo their position, don't cite any sources at all, or have heavy conflicts of interest. E.g. the Dietitians of Canada wrote their statement with the AND[9], the USDA has the Adventist reviewer in their guidelines committee[10], the British Dietetic Association works with the Vegan Society[11], the Australian Guidelines cite the AND paper as their source[12] and Kaiser Permanente has an author that works for an Adventist university[13].
4) In the EU, all nutritional supplements, including B12, are by law[14] required to state that they should not be used as a substitute for a balanced and varied diet.
5) In Belgium, parents can get imprisoned[15] for imposing a vegan diet on children.

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 14:46:29 2021 No.12767958

>>12767957
Sources:
[1] https://pastebin.com/g72uMQr9
[2] https://vndpg.org/resources/academy-co-founder-lenna-frances-cooper/
[3] https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/9/9/251/htm
[4] https://www.eatrightpro.org/-/media/eatrightpro-files/practice/position-and-practice-papers/position-papers/vegetarian-diet.pdf
[5] https://i.imgur.com/wabV8au.jpg
[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesanto_Melina#Career
[7] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19748244
[8] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6703771
[9] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12778049
[10] https://www.nutritioncoalition.us/news/2020-dietary-guidelines-committee
[11] https://www.bda.uk.com/resource/british-dietetic-association-confirms-well-planned-vegan-diets-can-support-healthy-living-in-people-of-all-ages.html
[12] https://www.eatforhealth.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/n55_australian_dietary_guidelines.pdf#page=48
[13] http://www.llu.edu/pages/faculty/directory/faculty.html?eid=1a39e02
[14] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32002L0046
[15] https://qz.com/1622642/making-your-kids-go-vegan-can-mean-jail-time-in-belgium/

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 14:47:34 2021 No.12767963

1.2. Vegan studies are low quality and hide their conflicts of interest

The supposed science around veganism is highly exaggerated. Nutrition science is in its infancy[1] and the "best" studies on vegans rely on indisputably and fatally flawed[2] food questionnaires that ask them what they eat once and then just assume they do it for several years:
1) Vegans aren't even vegan. They frequently cheat[3] on their diet and lie[4] about it
2) Self-imposed dieting is linked to binge eating disorder[5], which makes people forget and misreport about eating the food they crave.
3) The vast majority of studies favoring vegan diets were conducted on people who reported to consume animal products[6] and by scientists trained at Seventh-day Adventist universities{7]. They have contrasting results when compared to other studies[8]. The publications of researchers like Joan Sabate[9] and Winston Craig[10] (reviewers and authors of the AND position paper, btw) show that they have a bias towards confirming their religious beliefs[11]. They brag about their global influence on diet, yet generally don't disclose this conflict of interest. They have pursued[13] people for promoting low-carbohydrate diets.
4) 80-100% of observational studies are proven wrong[14] in controlled trials.

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 14:48:37 2021 No.12767970

>>12767963
Sources:
[1] https://sandpit.bmj.com/site_images/2018/food_timeline_v13_web.png
[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4527547/
[3] https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animals-and-us/201109/why-are-there-so-few-vegetarians
[4] https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/millions-brits-lying-being-vegan-21554332
[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binge_eating_disorder#Causes
[6] https://i.imgur.com/x2sfW96.jpg
[7] https://i.imgur.com/6s35X68.jpg
[8] https://www.blv.admin.ch/dam/blv/en/dokumente/das-blv/organisation/kommissionen/eek/vor-und-nachteile-vegane-ernaehrung/vegan-report-final.pdf.download.pdf/vegan-report-final.pdf

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 14:49:41 2021 No.12767975

1.3. Veganism is unsustainable

A vegan diet is not sustainable for the average person. Ex-vegans vastly outnumber current vegans, of which the majority[1] have only been vegan for a short time. Common reasons[2] for quitting are: concerns about health (23%), cravings (37%), social problems (63%), not seeing veganism as part of their identity (58%). 29% had health problems[3] such as nutrient deficiencies, depression or thyroid issues, of which 82% improved after reintroducing meat. There are likely more people that quit veganism with health problems than there are vegans. Note that this is a major limitation of cohort studies on vegans as they only analyze the people who did not quit. (survivorship bias)

Sources:
[1] https://i.imgur.com/AQZQbIC.jpg
[2] https://faunalytics.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/HRC-Study-of-Current-Former-Vegetarians-Vegans-Dec-2014-Tables-Methodology-1.pdf#page=10
[3] https://faunalytics.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Faunalytics_Current-Former-Vegetarians_Full-Report.pdf#page=7

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 28 14:50:35 2021 No.12767978 You're not gonna stop the vegan revolution, dude.

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 14:51:24 2021 No.12767980

1.4. Putting anti-meat studies into context

Vegans use appeals to authority or observational (non-causal) studies with tiny risk factors to vilify animal products. Respectable epidemiologists outside of nutrition typically reject these[1] because they don't even reach the minimum threshold to justify a hypothesis and might compromise public health[2]. The study findings are usually accompanied by countless paradoxes such as meat being associated with positive health outcomes in Asian cohorts[3]:
1) Vegans like to say that meat causes cancer by citing the WHO's IARC[4]. But the report actually says there's no evaluation on poultry/fish and that red meat has not been established as a cause of cancer. More importantly, Gordon Guyatt (founder of evidence-based medicine, pescetarian) criticized them[5] for misleading the public and drawing conclusions from cherry-picked epidemiology[6] (they chose only 56 studies out of the supposed 800+). A third of the committee voting against meat were vegetarians[7]. Before the report was released, 23 cancer experts from eight countries looked at the same data[8] and concluded that the evidence is inconsistent and unclear.
2) The idea that dietary raised cholesterol causes heart disease has never been proven[9].
3) Here's a compilation[10] of large, government-funded clinical trials to oppose the claims made to blame meat and saturated fat for diabetes, cancer or CVD. Note that these have been ignored WHO and guidelines.
4) Much of the anti-meat push is coming from biased institutions like Adventist universities or Harvard School of Public Health who typically don't disclose their conflicts of interest. The latter conducted bribed studies for the sugar industry[11] and was chaired by a highly influential supporter of vegetarianism[12] for 26 years. He published hundreds of epidemiological anti-meat papers (e.g. the Nurses' Health Studies), tried to censor[13].

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 28 14:52:47 2021 No.12767987 OP is based, but you can't prevent the virtue signalling vegans.

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 14:53:30 2021 No.12767989

>>12767980
Sources:
[1] https://www.gwern.net/docs/statistics/causality/2004-shapiro.pdf
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primum_non_nocere
[3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3778858/
[4] https://www.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Monographs-QA_Vol114.pdf
[5] https://junkscience.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Microsoft-Word-Red-meat-and-cancer_Final.docx-file1.pdf
[6] https://www.diagnosisdiet.com/full-article/meat-and-cancer
[7] https://www.peak-human.com/post/dr-david-klurfeld-on-meat-not-causing-cancer-bogus-vegetarian-scientists-and-balanced-nutrition
[8] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0309174014000564?via%3Dihub
[9] https://pastebin.com/Pujbztr7
[10] https://pastebin.com/cqAJ0gvF
[11] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27617709
[12] https://isupportgary.com/uploads/articles/397606854-Walter-Willett-Potential-Conflicts-of-Interest.pdf
[13] https://www.tamus.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/JAMA-Article-1.15.20.pdf

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 14:54:34 2021 No.12767995

1.5. Sneaky vegan propaganda examples

Popular sources that promote "plant-based diets" are actually just vegan propaganda in disguise:
1) Blue zones are bullshit[1]. The longest living populations paradoxically consume the highest amount of meat[2]. Buettner cherry-picks and ignores areas that have both high consumption of animal products and high life expectancies (Hong Kong, Switzerland, Spain, France, ... ). He praises Adventists for their health, but doesn't do the same for Mormons. Among others, he misrepresents the Okinawa diet by using data from a post WWII famine[3]. The number of centenarians in blue zones is likely based on birth certificate fraud[4]. The franchise also belongs to the SDA church now[5].
2) The website "nutritionfacts.org" is run by a vegan doctor who is known to misinterpret and cherry-pick[6] his data. He and many other plant-based advocates like Klaper, Kahn and Davis all happen to be ethical vegans[7].
3) EAT-Lancet is pushing a nutrient deficient "planetary health diet" because it's essentially a global convention of vegans[8]. Their founder and president is the Norwegian billionaire, hypocrite[9] and animal rights activist Gunhild Stordalen. In 2017, they co-launched FReSH - a partnership[10] of fertilizer, pesticide, processed food and flavouring companies.
4) The China Study, aka the Vegan Bible, has been debunked[11] by hundreds of people including Campbell himself[12] in his actual peer-reviewed publications on the study.
5) The Guardian, a pro-vegan newspaper that frequently depicts meat as bad for health and the environment, has received two grants[13] totaling $1.78m from an investor of Impossible Foods.

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 14:55:36 2021 No.12767999

>>12767995
Sources:
[1] https://benjamindavidsteele.wordpress.com/2019/05/28/blue-zones-dietary-myth/
[2] https://i.imgur.com/koHTXmH.png
[3] https://i.imgur.com/ZrDUNi4.png
[4] https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/704080v2
[5] https://www.adventisthealth.org/blog/2020/april/adventist-health-acquires-blue-zones-as-part-of-/
[6] https://twitter.com/KevinH_PhD/status/1169630461087248390
[7] https://pastebin.com/6yanQrcS
[8] https://ninateicholz.com/majority-of-eat-authors-vegan-vegetarian/
[9] https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/environmental-campaigner-accused-hypocrisy-after-13872570
[10] https://i.imgur.com/stv6Rj0.png
[11] https://deniseminger.com/the-china-study/
[12] https://pastebin.com/D7D9FYhZ
[13] https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/farm-animal-welfare/the-guardian-journalism-factory-farming-animal-cruelty-2019

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 14:56:38 2021 No.12768004

1.6. Vegan diets aren't "proven to reverse heart disease"

A widespread lie is that the vegan diet is "clinically proven to reverse heart disease". The studies by Ornish[1] and Esselstyn[2] are made to sell their diet, but rely on confounding factors like exercise, medication or previous surgeries (Esselstyn had nearly all of them exercise while pretending it was optional). All of them have tiny sample size, extremely poor design and have never been replicated[3] in much larger clinical trials, which made Ornish suggest[4] that we should discard the scientific method. Both diets included dairy.

[1] https://www.medpagetoday.com/blogs/skeptical-cardiologist/80783
[2] https://theskepticalcardiologist.com/2015/08/04/the-incredibly-bad-science-behind-dr-esselstyns-plant-based-diet/
[3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16467234
[4] https://www.edge.org/response-detail/25497

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 14:57:57 2021 No.12768013

1.7. Factually deficient diet

Vegan diets are devoid of many nutrients and generally require more supplements than just B12. Some of them (Vitamin K2, EPA/DHA, Vitamin A) can only be obtained because they are converted from other sources, which is inefficient, limited[1] or poor[2] for a large part of the population. EPA+DHA from animal products have an anti-inflammatory effect[3], but converting it from ALA (plant sourced) does not seem to work the same[4]. Taurine is essential[5] for many people with special needs, while Creatine supplementation improves memory[6] only in those who don't eat meat.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9637947
[2] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091118072051.htm
[3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28900017
[4] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/mnfr.201801157
[5] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3501277
[6] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21118604

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 14:59:18 2021 No.12768017

1.8. Supplements

The US supplement industry is poorly regulated[1] and has a history of spiking their products with drugs. Vitamin B complexes were tainted with anabolic steroids[2] in the past, while algae supplements have been found to contain aldehydes[3]. Supplements and fortified foods can cause poisoning[4], while natural products generally don't. Even vegan doctors caution and can't agree[5] on what to supplement.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4330859/
[2] https://www.nbcnews.com/healthmain/fda-warns-steroids-vitamin-b-supplement-6C10765769
[3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30529885
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypervitaminosis
[5] https://pastebin.com/zSbZwmjZ

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 15:00:21 2021 No.12768023

1.9. Mental disorders

Restrictive dieting has psychological consequences[1] including aggressive behavior, negative emotionality, loss of libido, concentration difficulties, higher anxiety measures and reduced self-esteem. There is an extremely strong link[2] between meat abstention and mental disorders. While it's unknown what causes what, the vegan diet is low in or devoid of[3] several important brain nutrients.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8655907
[2] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10408398.2020.1741505
[3] https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200127-how-a-vegan-diet-could-affect-your-intelligence

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 15:02:03 2021 No.12768030

1.11. Patrik Baboumian

Patrik Baboumian, the strongest vegan on earth, lied about holding a world record that actually belongs to Brian Shaw[1]. Patrik has never even been invited to World's Strongest Man. He dropped the weight[2] during his "world record", which was done at a vegetarian food festival where he was the only competitor. His unofficial deadlift PR is 360kg[3], but the 2016 world record was 500kg. We can compare his height-relative strength with the Wilks Score and see that he is being completely dwarfed by Eddie Hall (208 vs 273). Patrik also lives on supplements. He pops about 25 pills a day[4] to fix common vegan nutrient deficiencies and gets over 60% of his protein intake from drinking shakes[5].

[1] https://youtu.be/iJcvZIAsTfs [Embed]
[2] https://youtu.be/ZTaGZ6KLDwI?t=82 [Embed]
[3] https://www.greatveganathletes.com/patrik-baboumian-vegan-strongman/
[4] https://youtu.be/aPJWOWePRGs?t=158 [Embed]
[5] https://barbend.com/vegan-strongman-patrik-baboumian-diet/

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 15:05:00 2021 No.12768040

1.12. Other athletes

Here's a summary[1] on almost every pro athlete that either stopped being vegan, got injured, has only been vegan a couple of years, retired or was falsely promoted as vegan.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1UKOY15ZEHjbl-j2JFkyDsx8JIsiiJLJUJmpEIXM-SxU/htmlview#

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 28 15:05:27 2021 No.12768041 not gonna lie, having to kill conscious beings to be healthy kind of sucks

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 28 15:05:29 2021 No.12768043 >>12767957 Carnism is a religious belief, the fact that you have a copy pasta of all of this shit is proof eating meat is a disease which makes people mentally ill.

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 15:06:44 2021 No.12768048

1.13. The vegan diet is not species-appropriate

Historically, humans have always needed animal products and are highly adapted to meat consumption. There has never been a recorded civilization of humans that was able to survive without animal foods. Isotopic evidence shows that the first modern humans ate lots of meat[1] and were the only natural predator of adult mammoths. Most of their historic technology and cave paintings revolved around hunting animals. Our abilities to throw[2] and sweat[3] likely developed for this reason. Our stomach's acidity is in the same range as obligate carnivores[4] and its shape has changed so much[5] that we can't even digest cellulose anymore. The vegan diet is born out of ideology, species-inappropriate and could negatively affect future generations[6].
1) The cooked starch hypothesis that vegans use is inconsistent[7] with many observations.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30872714
[2] https://phys.org/news/2013-06-chimps-humans-baseball-pitcher.html
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endurance_running_hypothesis#Endurance_running_and_persistence_hunting
[4] https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0134116
[5] https://nature.berkeley.edu/miltonlab/pdfs/kmilton_foodevolution.pdf
[6] https://youtu.be/OvQ5F6GCfgI [Embed]
[7] https://pastebin.com/wfQsQFsu

Anonymous Sun Feb 28 15:08:06 2021 No.12768052

1.14. Other anti-vegan copypastas on nutrition

Compilations of nutrition studies:
1) Veganism slaughter house[1] (80+ papers).
2) 70+ papers[2] comparing vegans to non-vegans.
3) Scrolls and tomes against the Indoctrinated.[3]
4) Zotero folder[4] of 120+ papers.

[1] https://pastebin.com/rc6QmXeQ
[2] https://pastebin.com/mfrhgayb
[3] https://www.reddit.com/r/keto/comments/328bpa/scrolls_and_tomes_against_the_indoctrinated/
[4] https://www.zotero.org/groups/2466685/ketosciencedatabase/collections/LZHCC8J3

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 28 15:15:50 2021 No.12768084 >>12768041 Not self-conscious beings

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 28 15:31:46 2021 No.12768140 >>12768043 >I have an opinion kys faggot This board is for scientific argumentation. Form an argument and present your evidence, or get out.

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 28 16:27:53 2021 No.12768366 >>12768084 what does that mean and why does the distinction matter, killing things with qualia is unfortunate - reality is cruel

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 28 18:45:00 2021 No.12768983 >>12767978 It will stop itself

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 28 18:50:58 2021 No.12769005 >>12767957 >In Belgium, parents can get imprisoned[15] for imposing a vegan diet on children. Based

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 02:02:09 2021 No.12770342 >>12768043 Post sources

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 03:26:24 2021 No.12770532 based thread is based

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 03:53:47 2021 No.12770596 Why won't a single vegan refute some of the above-posted facts with properly sourced pro-vegan arguments?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 05:02:35 2021 No.12770690 >>12767957 Based omnivore thread

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 05:10:42 2021 No.12770707

>>12767957
I hate how self-hating humans are, meat is important for everyone, it fills your stomach with more energy, strengthen your muscles and in extension your brain,vegans are filled with too much propaganda, look everywhere, only a minority of people promote meat, siding with vegan is the being a traitor to the human race

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 07:19:19 2021 No.12771014

>>12770596
Because it's pointless. It would take days to go in detail over everything. By that time the thread will die and no one will remember it. 4chan/4channel is terrible for anything other than shitposting, memes and sharing pictures. No actual discussions can be had here. Can't even know if you're replying to the same person or a troll trying to infuriate both.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 07:32:32 2021 No.12771047

>carnivore posts
>logically coherent
>academically cited
>all sources are checked for industry funding
>a variety of case studies are provided
>opinions of actual medical professionals with REAL medical experience are cited

>vegan posts
>ehh I don't have time to argue
>sorry, I have to go get my insulin levels up
>look, here is this "doctor" who is receiving money from McDonald's is agreeing with my opinion
>no, I can't provide any actual academic peer-reviewed sources
>look, here is some 5-minute youtube video, that should be enough, right?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 07:32:50 2021 No.12771048 >>12771014 cope

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 07:42:55 2021 No.12771072 Vegans are Strawmen.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 08:17:24 2021 No.12771137 >>12767957 lol, fatass cope

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 08:27:35 2021 No.12771152 >>12771137 >fatass The overwhelming majority of athletes are not vegan.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 09:01:31 2021 No.12771240 >>12771048 Proving my point.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 09:07:34 2021 No.12771253 Any data on cow's milk for human consumption? I've got a few hypotheses based purely on speculation regarding a nefarious plot.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 09:22:25 2021 No.12771297

>>12771253
The truth makes onions memers seethe, onions milk contains phytoestrogen, a plant hormone. The evidence in favor for or against is not conclusive yet.
[1] https://academic.oup.com/jn/article/125/suppl_3/757S/4774197?login=true
[2] https://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/abs/10.1024/0300-9831.73.2.120
Guess what has actual estrogen and is bad for health? Animal milk.
[3] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306987703002950
[4] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1442-200X.2009.02890.x
However some research is inconclusive
[5] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0958694611002123
As with literally anything regarding diet, we don't fully understand it and proper studies are extremely difficult to manage. Only reliable way to test it would be to close 50000 people in a facility and have them eat only the food provided and nothing else, and do many tests often on everyone, hard to make such a study.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 09:23:45 2021 No.12771302 >>12771297 Ofc, forgot this board is so retarded to change S O Y to onions. Another reason this board is shit for this discussion.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 09:25:30 2021 No.12771304 Vegans are gay. Prove me wrong.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 09:59:20 2021 No.12771386

>>12771297
>>12771302
>onions memers
>onions milk
I was wondering what in the fuck you meant by this. I originally asked because I recently became lactose intolerant and looking for dairy free alternatives. Best alternative so far was rice milk which tastes like horchata with no sugar or cinnamon. Life isn't fair - I don't even fucking like milk on its own.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 10:01:17 2021 No.12771394

>>12767957
I can’t argue that veganism is more healthy than a normal or good diet, even when done well, or that it’s sustainable for elite athletes. But the fact that there are some people who have success with it shows that it’s not impossible to live healthily on one, which is good enough for me.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 10:05:53 2021 No.12771412 >>12771394 What success? All of them cheat or consume a lot of supplements and still get deficiencies after 4-5 years.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 10:09:46 2021 No.12771427 >>12771412 ALL? Not a single one? Also i don’t see why supplementation would matter unless it has a significant effect on quality of life

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 10:14:40 2021 No.12771443

>>12771386
Rice milk is horrible imho. I'd recommend almond milk, but depending on where you live, it may be expensive. Anyway, I make my own almond and oat milk. I eyeball it all, but roughtly you need about 5% almonds/oats by volume to make it tasty (some brands use 3% and you can tell), some sugar (or sweetener, but important to put at least a bit, cow milk has sugar as well), a bit of neutral tasting oil (peanut/sunflower) for texture, a pinch of salt (vital, don't skip or it tastes like ass), blend it all and it should be good to drink. Sth in almonds acts as an emulsifier, but shake the oat one if it sits for a while (can also become slimy if you don't strain the solids). I usually add cocoa or frozen berries to mine. Onions milk is more intensive to make since you need to boil the liquid. Cheeses, yogurts, all of it can be made with plant milks, but you wont find it in stores often because the demand is low, and when you do, it's expensive. You can make them yourselves tho, if you have the time/patience
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxMAl_LiSUU

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 10:20:02 2021 No.12771463 >>12771443 what is horrible about rice milk?

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 10:24:31 2021 No.12771479

>>12771463
I said imho, so it was a personal attack on rice milk. I don't like it one bit, always makes me feel like I'm drinking the water from washing rice (which is not far off). But of all the plant based milks, it has the least nutrients and such. Especially if made from white rice like most commercial ones. I mean, white rice in itself is also pretty bad, just pure carbs.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 10:32:00 2021 No.12771508 >>12771427 Name one

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 10:32:14 2021 No.12771509 >>12771479 Ah, I misunderstood. Well regardless thank you for all the info. Making almond milk is easy as fuck - I just researched it. Might try that later today!

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 10:49:21 2021 No.12771559 >>12771014 op provided arguments, you didn't and you resorted to bitching.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 11:10:28 2021 No.12771660

>>12771559
How is what I said bitching? OP posted a wall of sources that would take days to respond to. There is no conclusive evidence either way, nutritional science is very complex and hard to properly research. Even if I do spend a great amount of time to examine it all, the thread will eventually die and no one will see it anymore. If OP is so determined to list all of this, there is probably no amount of counter arguments that would change his view. Or anyone's for that matter. When was the last time sth you saw on 4chan changed your point of view on a very complex topic such as this?

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 11:22:25 2021 No.12771709

>>12771660
>How is what I said bitching?
You didn't address a single claim
>OP posted a wall of sources
This is what scientific research is. You make a claim and support it with sources (not industry-funded, not done by religious fanatics, with taken into consideration different life factors).
>that would take days to respond to
It will take no more than 10 minutes. You will need to read 5-6 pages of the actual text.
>There is no conclusive evidence either way
There is. Humans are natural carnivores. Vegan diets don't work. Humans get anemic and crave blood.
>nutritional science is very complex and hard to properly research
So what? Any science is hard, so what?
>Even if I do spend a great amount of time examining it all, the thread will eventually die and no one will see it anymore
More vegan cope
>If OP is so determined to list all of this, there is probably no amount of counterarguments that would change his view.
If you can prove that humans are not obligatory carnivores I will switch to a fully vegan diet and promote it to all my friends and family members.
>When was the last time sth you saw on 4chan changed your point of view on a very complex topic such as this?
More cope

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 11:46:39 2021 No.12771821

>>12771709
>You didn't address a single claim
I didn't try to
>This is what scientific research is.
4chan is not a place for it
>It will take no more than 10 minutes
If all you want me to do is read abstracts and not the whole thing, cross reference it, see if the journals it was published in is reputable etc. I can do that.
>Humans are natural carnivores.
We can eat meat, bu we can eat other stuff as well, so not carnivores.
>So what? Any science is hard, so what?
Exactly, that's why 4chan is not a place to discuss research.
>More vegan cope
How is what I said strictly confined to veganism? It applies to any actual discussion.
>If you can prove that humans are not obligatory carnivores
"Obligate or "true" carnivores are those whose diet requires nutrients found only in animal flesh. While obligate carnivores might be able to ingest small amounts of plant matter, they lack the necessary physiology required to fully digest it." We can digest plants, making us not obligate carnivores.
>More cope
So you can't, understood.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 11:55:29 2021 No.12771852

>>12767957
>Vegans lie to claim that health organizations agree on their diet
Generalization, I'm vegan and never claimed that.
1) health authorities can be bought and manipulated exactly the same way you list later on
2) [2] doesn't exist [3] [4] [5] is irrelevant, bias is rampant on both sides and both do [6], not just for nutrition but almost anything [7] mother didn't supplement and didn't know what she was doing, not an argument [8] again, people not knowing what they're doing
3) Agreed, they don't provide sources as far as I can see, so irrelevant either way. Again, you can find biases on both sides and talking about it is not fruitful.
4) 5) are laws, subject to change and bias, not relevant to this discussion

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 11:58:49 2021 No.12771867 >>12771508 People I know IRL, I can name celebs like Joaquin Phoenix but obviously I can’t confirm that they don’t cheat

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:01:28 2021 No.12771883 Veganism is like a silly religion.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:03:31 2021 No.12771892 seriously fuck vegans they are the most deluded faggots on earth even trannies do better

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:04:34 2021 No.12771895 File: 133 KB, 680x680, 1584528772570.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:05:20 2021 No.12771900 >>12771883 >>12771892 Why do you care so much about other people trying to harm less life? Jainism is a silly religion too, I’m not going to go on a tirade against them for trying to be good people though.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:05:37 2021 No.12771905 File: 1.05 MB, 2000x1800, 1584526282506.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:06:40 2021 No.12771910 File: 113 KB, 680x680, 1584528376049.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:07:47 2021 No.12771921 >>12771900 because they are all pretendous faggots trying to look cool.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:09:15 2021 No.12771931 >>12771900 You are not good people.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:11:52 2021 No.12771945

>>12767957
I dunno OP, since I went vegetarian I had no problems with gut. Veganism sounds more extreme but not eating fucking meat doesn't feel crippling or anything and trusting official science (both pro vegan and anti vegan) seems kinda silly knowing there were radioactive cards that made cigarettes less harmful, and before that, cigarettes were perfectly healthy. And before that, slavery was officially approved, and before that, official science denied globe Earth, so official science will push for any shit while it's deemed socially approved.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:12:59 2021 No.12771949

>>12767963
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]all true, and it goes both ways, for all nutrition science and why arguing from this angle is pointless
[6] [7] retarded study, but pictures are hardly arguments
[8] of course the studies contrast, because nutritional science is as we said in it's infancy and many of these studies are bad, on both sides
Can't find the sources for [9]-[14], but either way arguing from individual studies is pointless. What matters is if we can get all the same compounds found in animal products in other places, be it plants or synthetic. I'm not arguing veganism is healthier.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:13:32 2021 No.12771954 File: 61 KB, 640x645, braindamage.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] OP punching the air because people eat differently than him l m a o

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:16:24 2021 No.12771972 >>12771931 Is your argument here that people who try to do good things but ultimately don’t achieve much are actively worse than people who don’t try at all?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:18:35 2021 No.12771986 >>12771910 Vegans don't eat anything that involves animal exploitation, using bees for pollination counts as well.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:19:18 2021 No.12771990 >>12771867 >Joaquin Phoenix Literally who? But I will take this bait >went vegan as an adult >man so hasn't been through pregnancy, breastfeeding and doesn't menstruate >receding hairline >bad skin >sunken eyes

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:20:32 2021 No.12771998 >>12771986 Yeah, alright. Only in definition. Just like all the people who say they're against pollution and climate change yet still buy from China. Effectively none of them give a fuck.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:20:38 2021 No.12771999 >>12771945 Wait 2 years

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:23:01 2021 No.12772012

>>12767975
>Veganism is unsustainable
>lists irrelevant info about human feelings and peer pressure
That's not what is meant by sustainability.
>not seeing veganism as part of their identity
HAHHAHAHAH, holy fuck, bugmen are the worst. Imagine having to identify with a label to eat something.
Yes, many have deficiencies, but that's humans in general. That's why we started enriching staple foods like bread, cereal, salt etc.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:24:43 2021 No.12772020 >>12767980 Even more nutritional science which is completely irrelevant as I already explained.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:26:34 2021 No.12772030 >>12767995 Again nutrition, is this really the only argument you have? That nutritional studies are inconsistent? They are, in general. Veganism should not be judged by this at all. Also, even more corruption, ofc, but it happens on both sides.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:28:26 2021 No.12772036 >>12768004 Never claimed it does that, again arguing from nutrition is pointless. If you can get it from other sources, that's all that matters. It doesn't matter what it does in your body, body treats it the same.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:28:38 2021 No.12772038
File: 21 KB, 220x301, D01AE343-1043-4C41-9C77-E8F913F98F63.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>12771990
Went vegan at 4 I believe, and looks like a normal human being in their 40s. If you expect mid-40 year olds to all have perfect skin and hairlines, then go outside more.
I don’t even necessarily consider actors and celebs good examples for veganism in any case anyways, because they obviously live completely different lifestyles and have more means of doing things, but you asked for an example.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:33:49 2021 No.12772061

>>12771998
Very true, most are retards and don't even bother learning about the consequences of their actions.
>only in definition
Yes, and by definition if they don't follow that, they're not vegan.
Also the part about pollution and climate change is true as well. I limit myself to essentials and don't buy anything unless I need it. It's not perfect, but as more people push the market towards sustainability it will become easier for everyone.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:36:02 2021 No.12772070 >>12772061 >Yes, and by definition if they don't follow that, they're not vegan. Ah, yes, the "it wasn't real communism" method.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:44:07 2021 No.12772103 >>12772070 It's not the same, but whatever. Also, what's the obsession with bringing politics to every discussion on /sci/? Could have just called it "no true Scotsman" fallacy.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 12:59:11 2021 No.12772178 >>12771998 The US has a higher per capita CO2 emission

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 13:01:32 2021 No.12772192 >>12772178 Yes, and?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 13:02:00 2021 No.12772194 >>12772178 >Higher per capita Who gives a shit? The raw CO2 matters.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 13:29:58 2021 No.12772303 >>12771986 you have no idea what you are talking about, all your vegetables and fruits would be demolished by the nature before it could get farmed. This proves exactly my previous point, vegans are retarded attentionwhores.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 13:36:53 2021 No.12772337 >>12772070 it wasn't real communism.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 13:37:04 2021 No.12772339 >>12772303 >demolished by the nature Demolished how?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 13:42:34 2021 No.12772362 >>12772339 eaten???????? holy shit arguing with trannies is more promising than trying to make vegans realise how their ideology is a lie

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 13:45:57 2021 No.12772367 >>12772362 Thats because in their thc-coated-world they imagine veggies and fruits are grown in a place where animals dont exist.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 13:50:24 2021 No.12772383

>>12772362
>eaten
So not demolished? Demolished means something else.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/demolish
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/demolished
And why would it get eaten? You take care of the land and you don't let animals get on it using multiple methods. Grow it in a greenhouse if you're paranoid something will eat it. Are you saying you have to kill all animals that are close to your field or all of your crops will get eaten and there is no other method to deter them?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 13:53:54 2021 No.12772400 >>12772383 Sorry but your bait does not reach the minimum level set before bait posts.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 13:54:14 2021 No.12772403

>>12772367
>thc-coated-world
What are you on about? Are you implying all vegans are stoners? I never even saw weed in my life nor do I want to.
>they imagine veggies and fruits are grown in a place where animals dont exist
Seriously, where did you get this idea from? You just keep the animals away or plant something they like more than your crop. Like planting cornus sanguinea for birds, they love that shit but it's inedible for humans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornus_sanguinea#Uses

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 13:55:03 2021 No.12772407 >>12772403 >>12772400

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 13:56:57 2021 No.12772417 >>12772400 How is it bait? Or is it that you don't have any way to refute it so you go for the 4chan classic of calling stuff bait and ignoring what's said?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 13:58:02 2021 No.12772421 just seeing the "reasoning" vegans come up with gives me the urge to eat more meat. altho i'd do it anyway because meat is delicious, and if it takes some lower quality life forms to suffer and die for my pleasure, so be it.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:02:52 2021 No.12772450

>>12772417
yes because the difference betwen a shitter eating your plants then...you know... shitting it out does not equal to demolishment

anon if you are really not baiting then might i suggest you to go and kill yourself? we have enough stupid shits on earth already that needs to be dealt with and you are not a part of the solution.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:06:16 2021 No.12772464 File: 40 KB, 410x598, 1587490607046.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>12772421 /thread

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:10:14 2021 No.12772479

>>12772450
No, it does not equal to demolition (demolishment is archaic form of this word), unless you redefine what demolition means.
https://wikidiff.com/demolition/demolishment
Plants aren't buildings.
>anon if you are really not baiting then might i suggest you to go and kill yourself?
No, thanks.
>we have enough stupid shits on earth already that needs to be dealt with and you are not a part of the solution
Dealt with in what way? What solution?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:11:24 2021 No.12772481 >>12772479 >using semantics to prove your argument correct

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:11:50 2021 No.12772486 >>12772479 gassing the lot of you would be a good starting-point.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:14:12 2021 No.12772493 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RW8QL7C9p0g >Real cardiologists dabs on vegan janies and promotes carnivore diet >Again, Real Cardiologist, which means that he is a MEDICAL DOCTOR and not onions nutrition science vegan shill

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:14:45 2021 No.12772494

>>12772481
>semantics
What are you on about? I'm not arguing anything, I don't understand what they meant and asked about it. Then they proceeded to avoid answering and throwing more stuff at it. I'm just trying to understand what they meant, not argue my points.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:15:09 2021 No.12772498 >>12772479 Seriously do consider what anon suggests, your corpse will provide a great vegan-bio-compost.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:16:31 2021 No.12772502 >>12772486 >gassing people for their diet You're obviously mentally ill if you really think this way and are a danger to society.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:19:10 2021 No.12772515 >>12772498 It most probably won't as it's illegal to do so. I hope alternative burial methods take hold because the current way is horrible for the environment and human health.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:19:25 2021 No.12772518 >>12772502 no, not for their diets. gassing degenerates because there are too many humans already. ofc, degenerates includes vegans, trannies, the chinesse, india, islamic-faggotry and niggers.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:25:14 2021 No.12772540 >>12772518 So utopic, a world where whites, russians and jappos live in harmony with the nature. Let the gassed territories remain unpopulated by humans, let nature have a breath.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:25:22 2021 No.12772542

>>12772518
Yes, there are too many humans, but killing them is not the solution. Having less children is. The solution is education. Birth rates are dropping drastically in advanced countries.
>ofc, degenerates includes vegans, trannies, the chinesse, india, islamic-faggotry and niggers.
How did you arrive to that view? What makes them degenerate? I can kinda understand trannies and "islamic-faggotry", but not the rest.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:28:21 2021 No.12772553 >>12772542 >the solution is to have less children yes, good luck telling that to any of the ethnic group i listed previously.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:28:21 2021 No.12772554 >>12772518 Unfortunately, people who haven’t had human contact in six months probably won’t be the ones to decide who gets gassed. In fact, they will probably be the first ones to go, which doesn’t bode well for your future.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:29:22 2021 No.12772559 >>12772554 stop projecting

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:34:24 2021 No.12772573

>>12772559
>no u
But seriously, the real world really isn’t this tense in the day-to-day and all the groups you just mentioned mostly just act like everybody else. As far as overpopulation, India and China have a lower impact on the environment per capita.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:36:35 2021 No.12772585 >>12772573 I wonder if you giggle before posting your low-effort baits

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:37:17 2021 No.12772588 >>12772585 What was just incorrect about what I said?

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:37:44 2021 No.12772591

>>12768366
>>12768041
Why killing plants is more ok then? Do you know that in Dharmic religions vegan diet isn't justified by the soulness of the plants? That's why you always have to pray before having a meal so that the food is the sacrifice to God and not for your gluttony.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:44:45 2021 No.12772624

>>12772591
It’s about the intelligence and the consciousness of the thing being killed. An animal is less self-conscious than a human, which is why killing a pig isn’t equatable to killing a human, but a pig is still more conscious and intelligent than a chicken, and a chicken more intelligent than a plant, etc. So it makes sense to feel worse about killing the pig than killing the plant, the same way killing a human is worse than killing a pig.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:50:52 2021 No.12772645 File: 35 KB, 474x664, 1598636832991.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>12772624 >makes sense to feel worse about killing the pig may i offer you a way of suicide in this trying anti-animal-rights time?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:52:11 2021 No.12772649 >>12772624 But it still sucks to kill plants to be alive in that case. And plants lack that "consciousness" thing from the perspective of our assemblage point. We can't assume they're as dull from another perspective.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:57:25 2021 No.12772663 >>12767987 >Whining about virtue signalling while virtue signalling This is a perfect example as to why you mindless retards will always lose in the long run.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 14:59:33 2021 No.12772678 >>12771900 Because this is about sheltered little children having an other to attack.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 15:01:55 2021 No.12772682

>>12772649
Sure it sucks, in an ideal perfect world we wouldn’t kill anything, but we do ultimately have to eat something to survive if we value our own lives, which most do. In such a case, it makes sense to use our best understanding of biology and the nervous system to decide which living beings would suffer the least from consumption. Sure, we may be wrong or be seeing things from the wrong perspective, but that doesn’t mean we should stop trying entirely.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 15:38:54 2021 No.12772808

>>12772649
>And plants lack that "consciousness" thing from the perspective of our assemblage point
If you worry about plants suffering then you should realize that those animals you eat also eat plants and by making animals eat plants you in fact would cause even more suffering than if you only ate plants.

>>12767957
Op, not gonna read all that but here you go:
https://old.reddit.com/r/vegan/comments/ec12os/research_papers_on_health_benefits_of_vegan/
Honestly, I think both can be equally healthy/unhealthy but some of your claims are dubious

>1.3. Veganism is unsustainable
More vegans now than ever and growing

>1.2. Vegan studies are low quality and hide their conflicts of interest
Do you think the meat, dairy and egg industry have 0 conflict of interest in their funding of studies?

>1.5. Sneaky vegan propaganda examples
Lol children are literally indoctrinated to think animals belong on farms and its OK to eat meat

>1.11. Patrik Baboumian
Who fucking cares he's plenty strong

>1.9. Mental disorders
You posted a picture of sv3rige, a guy who stabbed 4 people in highschool. You might be the mentally I'll one here

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 15:41:50 2021 No.12772818 File: 983 KB, 500x333, 1609739681737.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>12772808 >Cites r*ddit >/r/vegan >Questions conflicts of interest in meat studies You can't make this shit up.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 15:46:19 2021 No.12772832

>>12772808
>you in fact would cause even more suffering than if you only ate plants.
Wrong. You're assuming all suffering is equal. The crops that cattle eat are different from the crops human eat. Let us quantify this. If cattle eat crops X in amount N, and humans eat crops Y in amount M, and the cattle we eat is Z in amount R, then we can construct three composite suffering functions: S1 for vegan diets, S2 for omnivorous diets, S3 for carnivorous diets.

S1(Y,M)
S2(Z,R,Y,M,X,N)
S3(Z,R,X,M)

Unless you can make some quantifiable statements on these composite suffering functions, stfu.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 15:46:54 2021 No.12772833

>>12772682
This implies that killing a plant or animal is a necessary prerequisite to eating it, when scavenging exists. If minimizing the amount of killing (and the pain associated with it) is the goal, then an obvious solution is to play vulture and not actively kill anything.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 15:48:36 2021 No.12772836

>>12772818
Did you read any of the studies posted in those links? No? Because you have 0 arguments. You couldn't even debate the simple points I raised.

>Questions conflicts of interest in meat studies
You think animal agriculture has 0 conflict of interest? You have to have no brain to think that but Dont worry, I wouldn't eat you since you have the sentience of a clam.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 15:52:14 2021 No.12772858

>>12772836
>Did you read any of the studies posted in those links? No? Because you have 0 arguments
Hmm. Let's review the facts.
>>12772808
>Op, not gonna read all that but here you go
To quote a faggot: Did you read any of the studies posted in those links? No? Because you have 0 arguments.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:00:16 2021 No.12772879

>>12772645
I mean, pigs actively understand death. Slaughterhouses need to be completely soundproof to prevent slaughter-in-waiting pigs from hearing cries of the pigs currently being processed, or they'll die of a fear induced heart attack and you can't use the meat.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:01:34 2021 No.12772885 >>12772879 >they'll die of a fear induced heart attack and you can't use the meat. This is such pseud bullshit. Where did you hear that shit?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:02:06 2021 No.12772888 >>12772879 >or they'll die of a fear induced heart attack and you can't use the meat. Really? Why can't they use the meat?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:05:31 2021 No.12772899 >>12772885 >>12772888 >trying to understand the math behind vegan logic

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:13:53 2021 No.12772922 >>12772885 >https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6036995/ Pigs are not dumb animals, in fact they're one the smartest. They understand they're about to die and it stresses them, so much it can affect the quality of the final product.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:17:04 2021 No.12772940 >>12772888 >>12772899 I'm not vegan, but it's a reality about the meat industry we must accept, lest we forget what the animals provide for us. You can't use the meat because the pigs must die according to regulation.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:17:16 2021 No.12772943 >>12772922 because slitting their throat is less stressful

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:18:58 2021 No.12772954 >>12772943 Because they didn't die in the abattoir

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:20:21 2021 No.12772963 >>12772922 I couldn't find anything in the article indicating the following: >Pigs make sounds because they know they're going to die >Pigs will die of fear induced heart attacks, rendering their meat unusable

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:21:45 2021 No.12772967 >>12772940 Oh, so it's a retarded animal rights legislation that says if the animal died due to some vague notion of stress, that we have to waste its meat? That's an argument against animal rights and not against eating meat.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:25:32 2021 No.12772978

>>12772832
>Unless you can make some quantifiable statements on these composite suffering functions, stfu.
Assuming cows eat about 8x their calorie in crops per calorie, set N = 8R. Also, I assumed that crops all have equal suffering, so set X = Y. Lastly, not sure what to do about M (comparing how much crop a vegan would eat vs a non vegan that replaces those missing calories with cattle), but right away we can see the following:

X, N = cattle crops
Y, M = human crops
Z, R = cattle

S1(Y,M)
S2(Z,R, Y,M, X,N) = S2(Z,R, Y, M, Y,8R) = S2(Z,R, Y,M+8R)
S3(Z,R, X,M) = S3(Z,R, Y,M)

S1 < S2
S1 < S3

I can't help but feel that the crops would be 0 given they have 0 nervous system, and R would be on the order of magnitude of a human S(H,1) leading S1 = 0 (assuming no crop related deaths). But please, why don't you go ahead and make some quantifiable statements on S(X,1), S(Y,1) and S(R,1).

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:25:36 2021 No.12772980 >>12772940 Yeah, I figured that's what it was.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:28:14 2021 No.12772995

>>12772963
>After the transport, the animals find their arrival at the abattoir to be extremely stressful. Unloading is a delicate operation, which requires adequately trained staff to avoid the use of coercive means and the onset of phenomena of acute stress, with evident repercussions of the quality of the meat
>it has been highlighted how acoustic stimuli over 85 dB give rise to PSE (pale soft exudative) carcass quality meat in pigs
>The unloading stages constantly have a higher sound level for pigs compared to that of cattle. In fact, we have to bear in mind not only the larger number of pigs unloaded simultaneously, but also the vocalisation this species of animal emits under conditions of stress.
>As suggested by Van de Perre (2011), building slaughterhouses with sound isolation or reflective materials or with a decibel alarmcould prevent losses in meat quality.
It's been well documented that pigs can die from stress induced heart attacks when arriving, but yeah, you're probably not going to find that in that article.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:29:28 2021 No.12773002 >>12772978 None of your inequalities follow. If a function g(x,y) has more variables than a function f(x), it does not follow that g < f nor does it follow that f < g.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:31:30 2021 No.12773009

>>12772995
For the longest time I thought "meat quality" meant that the meat was no longer edible, because that's how vegans made it sound. Turns out when they say reducing meat quality, they mean they have to discard it because it doesn't follow arbitrary regulations about an animal dying humanely. The meat quality is fine, it's the aggregate meat yield that goes down.
>oy gevalt the vegans are dishonest again
I shouldn't be surprised.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:37:32 2021 No.12773032 >>12773009 Oh yeah, it's "edible", anything is "edible" if you try hard enough, but in my experience it tastes of death. I used to really hate pork, until I tried a humanely slaughtered steak.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:43:54 2021 No.12773060 File: 31 KB, 330x450, 1609926496930.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>12773032

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:49:43 2021 No.12773081 >>12773032 >in my experience lol, sure.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 16:49:44 2021 No.12773082 >>12772038 >>12771867 i mean not like they are gonna say publicly that they eat foreskin

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 17:11:17 2021 No.12773156

Ahh yes, this is /pol/ property now. This is the reason this board can't be used to actually discuss anything. It's just people with nothing better to do jerking each-other off and blaming (((them))) for everything. Even after you post some arguments, they ignore them and continue to jerk themselves off. I'm off this god-forsaken site, gotta find sth else to do while taking a shit.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 17:23:51 2021 No.12773209 >>12773009 >I, personally, want every animal I eat to be tortured before it dies As >>12773032 says, it is worth eating an animal that was treated humanely.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 17:25:09 2021 No.12773214 >>12773082 Just google 'foreskin face cream'. They brag about it on celebrity talkshows.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 17:26:39 2021 No.12773222 >>12771386 I recommend walnut milk. Best balance of Omega-3's and good flavor. Stuff is easy to make yourself if you want to drop the money on high quality organic walnuts.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 17:44:36 2021 No.12773285 >>12773209 How do you interpret this statement >I don't care how an animal was treated as this statement >I actively want every animal to be tortured are you a woman?

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 17:44:53 2021 No.12773286

>>12772858
>To quote a faggot: Did you read any of the studies posted in those links? No? Because you have 0 arguments.
At least I argued against some of the main points, you couldn't even do that. You just said "r*ddit/vegan" like a child without even addressing the fact that links were there. Point is, you have 0 arguments.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 17:49:28 2021 No.12773302 >>12773285 Anon, being indifferent to torture isn't really that far from desiring torture. Especially if the tortured meat being cheaper makes you prefer it.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 17:51:53 2021 No.12773310

>>12773002
I think it is pretty obvious that S(Z,R, Y,M, X,N) = S(Z,R) + S(Y,M) + S(X,N), I was keeping the convention of the original poster which I also thought bad but then again, the argument was bad to begin with so I didn't bring it up. Think about what those supposed suffering functions mean. If S(Z, R, X, M) represents the suffering of R cattle (Z) and M crops (X), and given that they are completely separate organisms, then it's the exact same as S(Z,R) + S(Y,M). Also, plants/fungi don't suffer so this whole model is completely retarded, I was just spoon feeding.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 17:52:02 2021 No.12773311 >>12773302 >Having no preference is a preference toward evil! Yeah, you're definitely a woman. Stfu, your mouth belongs on a cock.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 17:56:46 2021 No.12773326 >>12773310 You're abusing notation. The Zs, Rs, etc. aren't the same if you try to factorize the function. Think about it. Try using some simple numbers to justify to yourself why what you just wrote is nonsense.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 17:58:43 2021 No.12773335

>>12773311
>Yeah, you're definitely a woman

Not even close.

You also pulled the same tactic. I said that being indifferent to torture is not far from preferring it, especially if an economic incentive is all it takes for you to prefer it, as is the case for many.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 17:59:31 2021 No.12773339 >>12773335 woman, soifag, tranny, it's all the same: you have brain damage due to estrogen.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 18:03:27 2021 No.12773357

>>12773339
I think you're just attacking me to distract yourself from facing your moral failing.

Trannies are mentally ill useful idiots and I've spent years avoiding the endocrine disruptors in modern society. That includes avoiding industrially tortured meat.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 18:13:36 2021 No.12773396 >>12773357 >Trannies are mentally ill useful idiots So are you.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 19:25:30 2021 No.12773674

>>12773326
>You're abusing notation. The Zs, Rs, etc. aren't the same if you try to factorize the function
S(Z,R) + S(Y,M) != S(Z,R, Y,M) implies that the suffering of cattle and crop are coupled/depend on each other. There is literally 0 reason to believe that to be the case. But please, explain to me why S(Z,R) + S(Y,M) != S(Z,R, Y,M) other than because of factorization. What intuition do you have for this to be the case? A cow suffers the same if a hunter kills it or if a slaughterhouse worker kills it, independent of the suffering of a blade of grass, whether eaten by a cow or deer. Moreover, there is also 0 reason to believe that anything outside of the animal kingdom suffers either which makes this all nonsense anyway. But go ahead and give me estimates in terms of human suffering, and justify the coupling of cattle and grass suffering, I'd love to hear your explanation.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 19:44:35 2021 No.12773723

>>12773674
>A cow suffers the same if a hunter kills it or if a slaughterhouse worker kills it
Ah yes, because having the neck instantly snapped is just as much suffering as having a bullet or an arrow through the leg, crying for 10 minutes until the hunter approaches and shoots it in the head.

The original quantification posed was about the net suffering induced by a human's diet. The grains that humans eat are far more stressful on the environment than the grains that cattle eat. Also, what exactly is this "S" you're talking about? I defined three separate functions, S1, S2, and S3. You seem to be saying something like S3 = S1 + S2? That's nonsense. As I said, try using some numbers (realistic or not) for the suffering induced by X,Y,Z,R,M,N and justify to yourself why your approach doesn't work. Don't just sneed and whine about how I should show you why. You're the one trying to claim you can do it, so prove it.

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 20:36:04 2021 No.12773860

>>12773723
>Ah yes, because having the neck instantly snapped is just as much suffering as having a bullet or an arrow through the leg, crying for 10 minutes until the hunter approaches and shoots it in the head.
You don't understand what I am saying.

>The grains that humans eat are far more stressful on the environment than the grains that cattle eat
Environment was never the question. We were talking about whether or not plants eaten by people cause more suffering than the greater number of (different) plants eaten by cows + the suffering of the cows.

>Also, what exactly is this "S" you're talking about? I defined three separate functions, S1, S2, and S3. You seem to be saying something like S3 = S1 + S2? That's nonsense.
You really don't understand what I am saying again. Plugging in your numbers and assuming crops suffer equally, you can move things around and get inequalities. The scenarios don't matter, it's the totals of each that do. I literally just used what you defined.

>As I said, try using some numbers (realistic or not) for the suffering induced by X,Y,Z,R,M,N and justify to yourself why your approach doesn't work.
Dude just reread what I did 500 more times, you'll maybe get it, it's pretty simple. And again, plants don't even suffer, so all this composite suffering functions you defined are again, fucking retarded just like you, which is why you don't get anything I said.

>Don't just sneed and whine about ...
cope

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 20:46:24 2021 No.12773893 >>12773860 >r*ddit style debating Dropped. If you want anyone to read your nonsense, the least you can do is try to learn 4chan culture. LURK MOAR FAGGOT

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 21:50:23 2021 No.12774028 >>12767957 Thank you for that, OP, all that is now saved locally and will be used to make the vegan conspirators STFU and GTFO.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 21:52:30 2021 No.12774031 >>12773222 Walnuts don't have tits, they don't express 'milk', THEY ARE NUTS, and that shit you're drinking isn't """milk""", it's over-processed crap that happens to have ground-up walnuts in it. You're mentally ill.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 22:03:10 2021 No.12774060 >>12774031 Almond milk has been drunk since the middle ages, it's not "overprocessed". Why would other nut milks be?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 1 22:19:58 2021 No.12774114 File: 191 KB, 1282x1078, pol colony.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] has /sci/ finally been successfully colonized?

Anonymous Mon Mar 1 23:49:51 2021 No.12774389

>>12774031
>Angrily attacks someone for recommending non-dairy milk

I think you are the one that's mentally ill.

I make my own walnut milk, it's nuts soaked in water overnight and ground up.... Hardly processed. You go and drink milk from cows that are fed and injected with God knows what.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 01:20:09 2021 No.12774581 >>12767957 Based science man, gonna save this thread for later use. Thank you anon

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 01:31:30 2021 No.12774608 >>12767957 based meat eater, vegans are souless meat husks

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 03:54:51 2021 No.12774907 >Cholesterol doesn't cause heart disease. Seed oils (vegetable oils) do https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kGnfXXIKZM

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 04:05:13 2021 No.12774937 >>12767957 >sv3rige lmao that loser should be locked up forever in a mental asylum also, nice of him to stab his classmates and proving he’s a lunatic way before the raw meat eater diet of his did

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 05:30:56 2021 No.12775118 >>12773286 I'm not him, but don't join a discussion without reading what your opponent is writing. People like you who don't do are the reason democracy will never work.

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 09:22:00 2021 No.12775667

>>12773893
If you had any counter points you'd have actually addressed them but instead you look for literally any excuse to not admit you are wrong because you are a fucking child. This is why you eat meat, because you are too fucking dumb to think for yourself and you have 0 concept of suffering. If you did, you'd know why your "composite" functions are retarded in the first place and why my assumptions were valid. But yes, plants totally suffer. Keep telling yourself that. You are doing the right thing, definitely not coping.

>>12775118
>but don't join a discussion without reading what your opponent is writing
I read his actual text, not the papers because there's way too many which is why I posted a wall of research just like him. Notice how nobody reads walls of papers on 4chan? Because it's infeasible but you are too brain dead to know that. But please, address any of my points. People like you who act without any fucking thought is actually why democracy doesn't work. If you had asked yourself "why did anon not read 55 papers in a 4chan post?" then you wouldn't have posted that in the first place. But please, read the wall of research I posted and show me how it's done. I'll see you in 3 days, assuming this thread hasn't expired by then.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 09:35:27 2021 No.12775699 >>12774389 >milk vegans are on par with trannies

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 09:44:08 2021 No.12775714 >>12775699 Everyone calls it milk. Your butthurt at a word is irrelevant.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 09:47:04 2021 No.12775725 >>12775714 You will newer drink real milk

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 09:49:49 2021 No.12775735
File: 33 KB, 327x500, downloadfile-5.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>12775699
>I don't know how words work
"In English, the word "milk" has been used to refer to "milk-like plant juices" since 1200 AD."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_milk
Almost everyone that complains about almond/onions/oat/wallnut/etc. juice being called "milk" says "coconut milk" without thinking because it was marketed as such for decades and there is no alternative name that's easy to say.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 10:24:57 2021 No.12775851 >>12775667 >Notice how nobody reads walls of papers on 4chan? >I speak for everybody Did you read any of the studies posted in those links? No? Because you have 0 arguments.

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 10:32:02 2021 No.12775874

>>12775851
Not the one you're responding to, I'm the one that responed to some of those until I got bored and saw no one responded to me. His whole argument is about nutrition and effects of individual chemicals, which is irrelevant. A chemical is a chemical, regardless of where it comes from. The question is, is there anything you can get ONLY from animal products that can't either be found in plants or made artificially? Not as far as I know.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 10:35:33 2021 No.12775883 >>12775874 >The question is, is there anything you can get ONLY from animal products that can't either be found in plants or made artificially? Taste.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 10:38:29 2021 No.12775887 >>12775735 >https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_milk https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milk

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 10:43:18 2021 No.12775900

>>12775883
I meant as ina chemical needed for your body. Taste is subjective, I ate so much horrile animal products and then ate burgers literally everyday for a year straight. Now I hate the taste. But even if I did like it, taste pleasure is not above suffering of animals. If it were, one could argue breeding humans for meat is moral if cannibals like it so much.

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 10:48:02 2021 No.12775913

>>12775887
>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milk
Is your argument that milk is scientifically defined as "produced by the mammary glands of mammals"?
Because if so, I sure hope you're not calling cucumbers, eggplants, tomatoes, peppers, pumpkins etc. vegetables, because they're scientifcally fruit. But no-one in the real world is autistic enough to call things by scientific definitions.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 10:51:31 2021 No.12775930 >>12775900 >Humans and animals are equal on moral considerations I hope you dress your pet poodle in shoes and shirts and pants, because walking around nude is lewd.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 10:52:44 2021 No.12775937 >>12775913 pathetic vegan

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 10:56:43 2021 No.12775949 >>12775937 Ad-hominems are not arguments. You clearly have nothing to contribute to this conversation.

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 10:59:28 2021 No.12775959

>>12775930
Didn't say that. You implied subjective taste is above animal suffering. So if one's subjective taste is really great, then killing humans for consumption is ok. Or is there some reason why humans are put in a separate category from other animals? How about the taste of flesh from other great apes, like eating chimpanzee meat?

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 11:01:05 2021 No.12775967 >>12775949 >vegan doesn't know what an ad-hominem is

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 11:01:53 2021 No.12775969 >>12775959 >is there some reason why humans are put in a separate category from other animals? If you have to ask, then maybe you don't belong in the human category and should be treated like the animal you are.

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 11:07:31 2021 No.12775990

>>12775967
>again doesn't understand how langunage works
"Ad hominem literally means "to the person" in New Latin (Latin as first used in post-medieval texts). In centuries past, this adjective usually modified "argument." An "argument ad hominem" (or "argumentum ad hominem," to use the full New Latin phrase) was a valid method of persuasion by which a person took advantage of his or her opponent's interests or feelings in a debate, instead of just sticking to general principles. The newer sense of "ad hominem," which suggests an attack on an opponent's character instead of his or her argument, appeared only in the last century, but it is the sense more often heard today. The word still refers to putting personal issues above other matters, but perhaps because of its old association with "argument," "ad hominem" has become, in effect, "against the person.""
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ad hominem

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 11:10:52 2021 No.12775995 >>12775969 Great non answer. And as usual, ignoring everything else I said. >treated like the animal you are All humans are animals, no matter how you look at it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 11:11:32 2021 No.12775996 >>12775990 Like I said. You don't know what an ad-hominem is. He insulted you. Nothing more, nothing less. That's not an ad-hominem.

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 11:16:25 2021 No.12776010

>>12775995
So just to be clear: you want to be treated like an animal? I'll impose the following on you, and I hope you don't mind. After all, humans and animals are equal.
>You're now forced to eat out of a food bowl with your tongue
>You can only exit the house on a leash
>You will always walk around nude
>You will beg me to go outside whenever you need to piss or shit. If you do either in the house, I will rub your face in it.
>You will eat and drink only the food and liquid I provide, no matter how much you beg
Fair?

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 11:18:10 2021 No.12776016

>>12775996
"Ad hominem arguments can take many forms, from basic name-calling to more complex rhetoric. For example, an ad hominem argument can involve simply insulting a person instead of properly replying to a point that they raised, or it can involve questioning their motives in response to their criticism of the current state of things."
https://effectiviology.com/ad-hominem-fallacy/
Words can have more difintions and use cases, this is an informal discussion.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 11:18:26 2021 No.12776017 >>12775996 It's only an ad-hominem if he tacitly believes vegans are pathetic. Kek.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 11:19:54 2021 No.12776023 >>12767957 >>12767958 You forgot the source for >Vegans lie to claim that health organizations agree on their diet

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 11:25:32 2021 No.12776040 what the fuck is this thread, anti-vegans are more obsessed with veganism than vegans RENT FREE

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 11:26:05 2021 No.12776045
File: 252 KB, 1024x683, external-content.duckduckgo.com.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>12776010
>You will always walk around nude
This is the only one that can be applied to non-human animals, but even that can be debated as pic related shows. Everything else is, as you said, how humans treat other animals, it's not intrinsic to being an animal. No animal should be treated that way as there is no need for it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 11:27:03 2021 No.12776046 >>12776040 lol. Identity politics works like that. They wont admit it but they know their identity is threatened so they defend it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 11:28:31 2021 No.12776051 >>12776023 Kek, good catch. I said above that I never claimed such a thing. The whole thing OP posted is irrelevant.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 11:28:52 2021 No.12776052 >>12776045 >No animal should be treated that way as there is no need for it. Excellent, so vegans shouldn't own pets. Go to /r/vegan, make that post, and see what happens.

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 11:40:46 2021 No.12776089

>>12776052
If you're using them for personal gain instead of treating them as family members, yes. And even then, I wouldn't consider all pets in all situations vegan. If you have a cat in a house and feed it factory farmed meat, it's bad. If you have a cat that lives in the village and hunts birds etc. it's fine. It should be viewed on case by case basis.

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 12:01:55 2021 No.12776157

>>12776089
>Treating pets as family members
Holy shit. I know vegans drop a few IQ points due to not eating meat, but this takes the cake for the stupidest vegan argument I've ever heard. Do you have any nephew, nieces, or siblings? Treat any of them as you would your most cherished pet, and see what happens.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 12:04:49 2021 No.12776166 >>12776089 >hunts birds etc. it's fine why? Because cats murder their food brutally instead of as humanely as possible?

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 12:13:22 2021 No.12776199

>>12776157
By treat here, I'm using the definition of "To behave to or toward; conduct one's self in a certain manner with respect to", not my actions with them like giving them food in a bowl. I see my cat as a companion, not an machine that eats and shits. He shows love and I show love to him, same as I do with my siblings. And no, they're not the same. I don't feel the same towards my brother as I do towards my sister etc. Case by case basis.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 12:16:11 2021 No.12776210 >>12776199 This takes delusional to a whole new level. You honestly believe you show love to your cat and your siblings on equal footing? Tell your sister that you think her and your cat are equally important to you.

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 12:18:33 2021 No.12776223

>>12776166
Because cats are obligate carnovores and in this scenarion, humans don't contribute to killing animals.
>as humanely as possible
Many see this word as problematic, because unless the animal is already in great pain (which wasn't caused by humans on purpose) and there is no way of healing it, you can't compassionatelly kill.

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 12:23:25 2021 No.12776244

>>12776210
>You honestly believe you show love to your cat and your siblings on equal footing?
>equally important
You obviously can't read.
> And no, they're not the same. I don't feel the same towards my brother as I do towards my sister etc.
Do you think of your family/show love equally to your mom as you do to a family member you don't know very well and don't live with?

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 12:25:56 2021 No.12776250

>>12776244
Equal footing doesn't mean the same. Come on dude, you're a vegan. Clearly you're familiar with the language social justice advocates use. After all, veganism is part of that. Men and women aren't the same, but can be treated equally.

So you admit you view your cat as lesser than your siblings. Why?

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 12:33:58 2021 No.12776280

>>12776250
>Clearly you're familiar with the language social justice advocates use. After all, veganism is part of that.
I have no idea, I don't hang out in "vegan" chats or research veganism by reading vegan blogs.
>Men and women aren't the same, but can be treated equally.
Exactly, but this is a different issue as you're taking groups of humans and dividing them by gender, not individuals.
>So you admit you view your cat as lesser than your siblings. Why?
Didn't say as lesser, just not equal. It doesn't have to be more or less, it's just different. I don't love my sister more than my brother or vice versa, nor do I love them equally. The love I feel towards my sister is different than the one towards my brother. Same as with my cat, it's just different, not lesser. Same as I can't say I love my girlfriend the same as my sister, different type of love.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 12:35:17 2021 No.12776288 >>12776280 >don't hang out in "vegan" chats or research veganism by reading vegan blogs. Super strange, because you argue just like them.... >I didn't say lesser, just not equal Kek. If a ≠ b then either a < b or b < a. Faggot.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 12:41:01 2021 No.12776298 >>12776288 Dude, we're on the same page. Just that I'm expressing it differently. >If a ≠ b then either a < b or b < a. >feelings are science I can't compare how I feel towards my sister to how I feel towards my girlfriend.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 12:43:54 2021 No.12776307 >>12776298 You're an actual idiot. KYS.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 12:46:34 2021 No.12776323 >>12776307 >I've lost the argument, better start the insults

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 12:46:54 2021 No.12776326

>>12776298
Again, not saying anything of value. What compells you to insult others and tell them to comit suicide? I never understood that. Does it make you feel better or what? Because it's not very productive and just pushes others away. It can pass on 4chan/4channel, but I doubt you'd act like this in person.

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 12:51:08 2021 No.12776350

>>12776323
>>12776326
I'm not the guy you were debating. I just hate bad faith faggots like you. No, I wouldn't tell you to kys to your face because then I'd get arrested for a hate crime against women after you cry and call the police.
>it pushes others away
Good. Go away, faggot. Preferably to the afterlife.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 12:56:24 2021 No.12776368 >>12776350 >because then I'd get arrested I hope you're joking. In case you aren't, I feel sorry for you. >Good. Go away, faggot. No one has more right to post here than someone else (except maybe 4chan pass users, or however it's called).

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 12:59:58 2021 No.12776385 >>12776368 >No one has more right to post here than someone else I'm the original dude you were arguing with. I hope you get raped.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 13:02:53 2021 No.12776395 >>12776385 How is that a response to what I said? >I hope you get raped. Why?

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 13:08:40 2021 No.12776419 >>12776395 You deserve to be treated as the animal you are. Idgaf which animal rapes you. I just hope you get raped.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 13:10:12 2021 No.12776424 >>12771047 Topkek

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 13:14:14 2021 No.12776441 >>12773060 why is it always da joos with you /pol/acks, seriously why the fuck would jews shill veganism instead of factory farming which is infinitely more profitable?

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 13:14:24 2021 No.12776443

>>12776419
>treated as the animal you are
We already went over this. Being an animals doesn't imply how humans treat animals. All humans are animals, including you.
>Idgaf which animal rapes you. I just hope you get raped.
Ah, now it's an animal. So animals have the capacity to rape (legal definition), but can't suffer (scientific definition)?
Also, didn't answer why you hope I get raped, you just claimed it again.

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 15:26:49 2021 No.12777022

As you can see folks, my original statement is true. 4chan/4channel is not the place for any real discussion. They mocked me for not replying to OP's sources, then I replied and got ignored. They never respond to arguments, move goalposts, insult etc. They're dilusional and "arguing" with them is pointless.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 15:32:15 2021 No.12777051 Who the fuck are these vegan cucks lurking /sci/? Are you pajeets?

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 15:40:25 2021 No.12777091 >>12777051 Is the insulting really necessary?

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 15:52:14 2021 No.12777148 >>12777091 Yes. >>12776441 You braindead faggot, jews dont eat pork

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 15:55:31 2021 No.12777161 File: 111 KB, 801x673, Jewish Meat.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>12777148 Jews don't eat pork, but they do love beef.

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 15:56:40 2021 No.12777168
File: 55 KB, 600x407, 6a00d8341c018253ef0154332142a0970c-600wi.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>12777148
>jews dont eat pork
Only religious Jews, and even then not all of them. There are many pork shops in Israel. Besides, pigs aren't the only farmed animal.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 15:56:42 2021 No.12777169 >>12777051 I'm vegetarian

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 15:58:09 2021 No.12777177 >>12777168 you should be farmed fucking faggot

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:01:49 2021 No.12777194 >>12777177 Ad hominems again. You won't get anywhere in life with that. I feel sorry for you if this is the only way you can feel good about yourself, but I won't hold it against you. I just hope you'll realize it one day.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:02:22 2021 No.12777197 >>12777194 eat more meat pajeet. Your IQ is plummeting from your veganism. KYS.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:07:00 2021 No.12777220 >>12777197 I'm not Indian, IQ is pseudoscience, and I ate meat and dairy daily before I went vegan. >KYS Do you often have violent thoughts?

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:15:08 2021 No.12777249 >>12777194 at least you will get a lot farther by pretending to be civilised on an anonym anime forum, pretendous vegan faggot

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:20:16 2021 No.12777271 >>12777220 >IQ is pseudoscience Post arm, faggot. Also, post IQ.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:23:27 2021 No.12777282 >>12777249 I'm not pretending. I'm like this in day-to-day life with everyone. You're the one that doesn't act like this in real life. At least, I hope not.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:25:18 2021 No.12777286 >>12777282 well maybe stop pretending to be alive by simply killing yourself, faggot.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:26:38 2021 No.12777290 >>12777286 That makes no sense. I'm alive, unless you think I'm some bot.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:27:09 2021 No.12777294 >>12767978 Why do you choose to believe in such a bleak future?

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:31:55 2021 No.12777313

>>12771014
It's pointless because vegan diets are not healthy. Stop coping by using the "nO oNe CaReS" argument. Vegans couldn't defend their shit eating habits even if they had the time and everyone else's attention. So YOUR counterargument is pointless. Although, to be fair, you are absolutely right about 4chan's usefulness on debate.

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:34:34 2021 No.12777323
File: 1.50 MB, 3264x1836, IMG_20210302_222900.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>12777271
I'm Slavic/Germanic, not Indian. Your turn.
>post IQ
Was only tested once professionally at age 12, I think. They didn't tell me the number, just said it's above average. So 101 and up, I guess. Online tests are all bad and nothing like the real one was. IQ is valid for some limited things, but not nearly as important as 4channers make it seem.

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:38:43 2021 No.12777346

>>12777313
Did you read my other posts? It's retarded to debate the diet itself. If you can get the same chemicals from plant sources or make them in a lab be it with bacteria or whatever, then there is no need for animal agriculture. Now, again, name some compounds you can only find in animal sources and are vital for human health. Then we can discuss. Everyone ignores what I say and continue with their agenda.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:38:51 2021 No.12777348 >>12777323 >emaciated Kek, kys.

Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:45:14 2021 No.12777376

>>12777348
You saw you were wrong and instead of admiting it, you throw more insults.
>emaciated
If you're refering to my bone portruding, it's a birth defect that was noticed shortly after I was born. I'm on the lower side of BMI but I actually gained 7-8kg since I became vegan.
>kys
Again with violent thoughts.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:52:19 2021 No.12777404 >>12771386 Oat milk is goat

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:55:39 2021 No.12777419 >>12777376 I wasn't wrong. I use race baiting since I knew it'd work. I was really after seeing your physique, which is now confirmed as emaciated. You fell for the trap, faggot.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:56:27 2021 No.12777423 >>12777404 Agreed, the only time I make almond milk is when I make Müsli. Since oats are the base, feels a bit dumb to use oat milk as it doesn't bring any new taste.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 2 16:59:09 2021 No.12777438 >>12777419 Oh no, you got me. Or are you backpedaling? I think latter is more probable. >confirmed as emaciated I already explained how it's not. You're just grasping at straws at this point.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 01:19:29 2021 No.12779343 >>12772588 >per capita Converting numbers to meaningless forms so you sound right. Not incorrect but simply pathetic bait. Also I'm not the anon you were talking to, just saw this and had a good laugh at this

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 01:39:21 2021 No.12779390 >>12767957 If meat is good, why are all hunter gatherers so fucking tiny?

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 06:19:10 2021 No.12779937 File: 128 KB, 596x1044, 20210303111842.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>12779390 kys

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 06:29:22 2021 No.12779956 >>12779937 The Maasai are not hunter gatherers.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 06:32:14 2021 No.12779960 >>12779956 Their main staple is meat and blood. kys.

Anonymous Wed Mar 3 06:56:43 2021 No.12780003

>>12779960
Just because it's a staple food, doesn't mean they're hunter-gatherers. Did you even read the Wiki? They're cattle farmers, not hunters. Not the one that brought any of this up, nor am I implying anything. Just pointing out you didn't even read what you're arguing about.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 07:04:08 2021 No.12780024 >>12777323 post body

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 07:15:34 2021 No.12780045 >>12779960 >>12780003 Well I'm the one who did, and I said eating meat isn't what makes you grow large. In fact the maasai example suggests it's actually milk, not meat, what makes people grow bigger than usual

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 07:17:37 2021 No.12780051 >>12780024 No

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 07:21:02 2021 No.12780063 >>12780051 are you afraid?

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 07:32:48 2021 No.12780101 >>12768023 >>12768030 where 1.10

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 07:41:16 2021 No.12780128 >>12780063 No, I don't show any part other than forearms, hands and head. Yes, even in summer, always long pants and shirts.

Anonymous Wed Mar 3 07:46:57 2021 No.12780140
File: 90 KB, 1420x946, 69dd4f6bea4966df9c8d167c03c8c909b3-13-wojak-00.2x.h473.w710.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>12775913
>cucumbers, eggplants, tomatoes, peppers, pumpkins etc. vegetables, because they're scientifcally fruit.
Scientifically speaking vegetables are plants that go in main dishes/soups, fruits are plants that go into sweet salads/desserts

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 07:48:26 2021 No.12780144 >>12775900 >taste pleasure is not above suffering of animals Wrong.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 07:56:33 2021 No.12780178 >>12780003 The issue is diet, traditional vs vegan. In this context, hunter gatherer and herder are more or less equivalent vs vegan.

Anonymous Wed Mar 3 08:22:11 2021 No.12780269

>>12780140
>>12780140
Not scientifically, no. You're thinking of culinary definitions. Vegetable isn't even a scientific term. "In botany, a fruit is the seed-bearing structure in flowering plants (also known as angiosperms) formed from the ovary after flowering." All plants I mentioned (parts we eat) are botanically fruit, but a vegetable by culinary definition.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit

Anonymous Wed Mar 3 08:26:16 2021 No.12780283

>>12780178
That whole example is bad and doesn't say anything of value either way. Height was in focus, which is not important.
There is no longer the need in western countries to follow "traditional" diets. Which are varied from place to place anyways.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 08:54:41 2021 No.12780377 >>12780269 >Vegetable isn't even a scientific term I believe culinary is science.

Anonymous Wed Mar 3 09:05:01 2021 No.12780408

>>12780377
Then your belief is wrong. There are things that happen during cooking that are scientific, but not a lot of people cook with "science" as the focus. Companies do it for better profit ofc, and some molecular gastronomists fancy the term "scientific cooking". Unless you view everythig as scientific, as in can be explained with science. Then you're right. But the terminology is not scientific, it comes from culinary tradition.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 09:10:10 2021 No.12780426 >>12772038 Phoenix looks ill

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 11:02:19 2021 No.12780918 >>12780283 >There is no longer the need That's what fascists always say when they can't justify their policies with facts.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 11:19:32 2021 No.12781005 >>12771253 Besides the hormone angle, there's also heated Casein and the Calcium to Magnesium ratio - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYuMXm-Sui0.. The latter gets worse with cheese.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 11:21:09 2021 No.12781012 >>12780918 I have no idea what you're talking about. Can you give an example?

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 11:22:50 2021 No.12781020 >>12781012 Every dystopian novel and fascist manifesto ever.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 11:30:34 2021 No.12781052 >>12781020 Those are writings, not actions. Any real-world example?

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 11:41:58 2021 No.12781105 >>12781052 Every vegan ever, including you.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 11:48:00 2021 No.12781142 >>12781105 Are you implying veganism is a form of fascism? Because that makes no sense. If you don't have an example, that's ok, just don't start with nonsense and ad-hominems.

Anonymous Wed Mar 3 12:10:14 2021 No.12781270

>>12781142
>Are you implying veganism is a form of fascism?
No, but the majority of vegans are vegan for ideological reasons, and the disingenuous promotion of the lifestyle accompanied with implied threats of violence and/or fearmongering amounts to fascist behavior.

Anonymous Wed Mar 3 12:20:47 2021 No.12781342

>>12781105
>Every vegan ever, including you.
>the majority of vegans are vegan for ideological reasons
You're inconsistent. First you atack me personally, then you say it's not all of vegans.
>with implied threats of violence and/or fearmongering amounts to fascist behavior
That is correct and I don't condone anyone doing that, vegan or not. It's only a very vocal minority that do such things.

Anonymous Wed Mar 3 12:37:54 2021 No.12781440

>>12781342
I give you some leeway and you call me inconsistent.
>It's only a very vocal minority
No, because after arguing along your lines, most vegans then assert that killing animals is morally wrong. In human society, immoral acts are usually punished, so implicitly it follows that non-vegans should be punished with some form of violence.
As for fearmongering, practically all vegans repeat the dogma from the seed oil industry about saturated fat and cholesterol, which is absolutely unequivocally false.

Anonymous Wed Mar 3 12:47:47 2021 No.12781499

>>12781440
I never said any of that nor do I hold those beliefs.
> practically all vegans repeat the dogma from the seed oil industry about saturated fat and cholesterol, which is absolutely unequivocally false.
I don't.
>most vegans
Now you're shifting to most, you said every vegan ever, including me. Which is not true.
>immoral acts are usually punished, so implicitly it follows that non-vegans should be punished with some form of violence
I don't think any immoral act should be punished with violence.
Stop grouping people into lables and being prejudiced against them, without even asking what their position is.
Non-vegans should most definitely not be punished, that's not the way forward.

Anonymous Wed Mar 3 12:52:35 2021 No.12781543

>>12773156
Yup, this place really isn't about science anymore. What began with the 2016 election on /pol/ has only metastasized the other major boards by now, and with no signs of reversal. I agree with you, we should leave this place and never return. We have given this website far more time than it deserved from us.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 17:36:45 2021 No.12783878 >>12781543 And go where? All other websites are worse. Go to real life? Lol enjoy getting fired.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 17:38:05 2021 No.12783885 >>12773156 >sth >zoomer You won't be missed, pseud.

Anonymous Wed Mar 3 18:50:35 2021 No.12785044

>>12768041
"consciousness" is a codeword used by redditors/scientism supporters to denote something they find cute or human-like under the veneer of science. the heirarchy of how "conscious" organisms are will always conveniently line up with how bleating, big-eyed, infant-looking an organism is

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 3 22:53:59 2021 No.12786232 >>12781499 I'll give you an apology for being hyperbolic. I'm used to arguing on /pol/. However, I think you're naive about other vegans. Maybe I've just been unlucky but most vegans I've encountered were effectively Stalinists.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 4 00:37:27 2021 No.12786585 >>12767957 why are you so preachy

Anonymous Thu Mar 4 04:14:22 2021 No.12787196

>>12786232
Apology accepted.
>most vegans I've encountered were effectively Stalinists
That's because most vegans that aren't like that don't talk about it unless you really press them. I don't like those idiots any more than you do, in fact, I probably like them less since they tarnish what it means to be vegan with their nonsense. Just don't group all vegans into one basket, that's all I'm asking.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]