Options

Fundamentalist Militant [Vegetarianism] and [Veganism]

145791018

Posts

  • Options
    nescientistnescientist Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Honestly, if you really want to gross someone out with something that they already eat all the time, gelatin is fine but cochineal is the reigning king.

    nescientist on
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Dracil wrote: »
    About the meat vs. veggie is more destructive for the environment thing. Why not sustainable farming instead? You get both products and it's less environmentally destructive than focusing on either, at least from what I understood from the Omnivore's Dilemma book.

    This is something I generally try to go for. Which means I tend to end up on a pseudo vegetarian diet most of the time since humanely raised sustainable meat tends to be pricey (especially on an island) and I prefer to have a large portion every few days as the center of a meal than small portions with every one.

    Though apparently doing this makes no sense since because animals still die because of my eating habits, we might as well raise them in a horrific, unsustainable manner.

    Quid on
  • Options
    PerpetualPerpetual Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Quid wrote: »
    Dracil wrote: »
    About the meat vs. veggie is more destructive for the environment thing. Why not sustainable farming instead? You get both products and it's less environmentally destructive than focusing on either, at least from what I understood from the Omnivore's Dilemma book.

    This is something I generally try to go for. Which means I tend to end up on a pseudo vegetarian diet most of the time since humanely raised sustainable meat tends to be pricey (especially on an island) and I prefer to have a large portion every few days as the center of a meal than small portions with every one.

    I reckon wild-caught fish should be pretty cheap in Hawaii, no?

    Perpetual on
  • Options
    WazzaWazza Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Honestly, if you really want to gross someone out with something that they already eat all the time, gelatin is fine but cochineal is the reigning king.

    Bleh, I linked that earlier but no one noticed. I mean really, though, where do people draw the line when it comes to eating animals for ethical reasons? Is there some sort of cuteness scale I am unaware of? I am sure at some point in time everyone in the western world has eaten some scale insects.

    Wazza on
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Perpetual wrote: »
    So you're saying that vegetarianism is not enough, and that we should all become vegans (since that arguably does even less harm).

    Next time I see a vegetarian I'm going to give them lots of shit for not having the balls to go all the way.

    Did you give some disposable income to charity in the last year?

    Did you give all of your disposable income to charity in the last year?

    Quid on
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    [QUOTE=Perpetual;15015849I reckon wild-caught fish should be pretty cheap in Hawaii, no?[/QUOTE]

    Not especially. I'm assuming the huge sushi market and Japanese tourists cause the prices to shoot up.

    Quid on
  • Options
    OrganichuOrganichu poops peesRegistered User, Moderator mod
    edited May 2010
    when a friend answers 'no thanks, i'm vegetarian' or 'no thanks, i'm vegan' when i offer them food i will go on to say "that's not a problem, you still get hungry! i'll try to make something that works for you" but i don't get annoyed or anything. it feels like they are trying to be polite and not a bother. that seems nice of them.

    Organichu on
  • Options
    PerpetualPerpetual Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Organichu wrote: »
    when a friend answers 'no thanks, i'm vegetarian' or 'no thanks, i'm vegan' when i offer them food i will go on to say "that's not a problem, you still get hungry! i'll try to make something that works for you" but i don't get annoyed or anything. it feels like they are trying to be polite and not a bother. that seems nice of them.

    It really depends on the tone. I've met a lot of vegetarians and vegans that say "no thanks" with a tone of extreme disgust combined with an air of superiority.

    Perpetual on
  • Options
    PerpetualPerpetual Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Quid wrote: »
    Perpetual wrote: »
    So you're saying that vegetarianism is not enough, and that we should all become vegans (since that arguably does even less harm).

    Next time I see a vegetarian I'm going to give them lots of shit for not having the balls to go all the way.

    Did you give some disposable income to charity in the last year?

    Did you give all of your disposable income to charity in the last year?

    Apples and oranges. Giving all my money to charity is quite unrealistic, as it would mean I would have to live on the streets and eventually starve to death. Whereas veganism is quite possible, especially if you live in the US.

    Perpetual on
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Perpetual wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Perpetual wrote: »
    So you're saying that vegetarianism is not enough, and that we should all become vegans (since that arguably does even less harm).

    Next time I see a vegetarian I'm going to give them lots of shit for not having the balls to go all the way.

    Did you give some disposable income to charity in the last year?

    Did you give all of your disposable income to charity in the last year?

    Apples and oranges. Giving all my money to charity is quite unrealistic, as it would mean I would have to live on the streets and eventually starve to death. Whereas veganism is quite possible, especially if you live in the US.

    I did not say all of your money. I said all of your disposable income. As in money you didn't need to survive. Did you? If not you clearly lack the balls to go all the way and shouldn't even bother.

    Quid on
  • Options
    PerpetualPerpetual Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Quid wrote: »
    Perpetual wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Perpetual wrote: »
    So you're saying that vegetarianism is not enough, and that we should all become vegans (since that arguably does even less harm).

    Next time I see a vegetarian I'm going to give them lots of shit for not having the balls to go all the way.

    Did you give some disposable income to charity in the last year?

    Did you give all of your disposable income to charity in the last year?

    Apples and oranges. Giving all my money to charity is quite unrealistic, as it would mean I would have to live on the streets and eventually starve to death. Whereas veganism is quite possible, especially if you live in the US.

    I did not say all of your money. I said all of your disposable income. Did you? If not you clearly lack the balls to go all the way and shouldn't even bother.

    Err, do you know what "disposable income" means? It means the money that is left to you after you pay income taxes on it. So yes, it does literally mean that you cannot pay rent or feed yourself if you give all your disposable income to charity.

    Are you going to continue this non-sequitor, or should we continue to laugh at how stupid you are?

    Perpetual on
  • Options
    OrganichuOrganichu poops peesRegistered User, Moderator mod
    edited May 2010
    Perpetual wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »
    when a friend answers 'no thanks, i'm vegetarian' or 'no thanks, i'm vegan' when i offer them food i will go on to say "that's not a problem, you still get hungry! i'll try to make something that works for you" but i don't get annoyed or anything. it feels like they are trying to be polite and not a bother. that seems nice of them.

    It really depends on the tone. I've met a lot of vegetarians and vegans that say "no thanks" with a tone of extreme disgust combined with an air of superiority.

    i knew those douche bags... in high school

    i live in a big liberal city, 6th largest in the country, with a huge population of cyclists, vegans, local farmers, etc.- the whole young liberal pastiche

    and none of my vegetarian or vegan friends are like this

    *shrug*

    i feel like it's a red herring, to be terribly honest

    Organichu on
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Perpetual wrote: »
    Err, do you know what "disposable income" means? It means the money that is left to you after you pay income taxes on it. So yes, it does literally mean that you cannot pay rent or feed yourself if you give all your disposable income to charity.

    Are you going to continue this non-sequitor, or should we continue to laugh at how stupid you are?

    Indeed it is, my mistake.

    Back to the point, did you give all of the money you did not personally need to charity or only a portion of it?

    Quid on
  • Options
    PerpetualPerpetual Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Orginachu: I think you're just lucky, man.

    Perpetual on
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Organichu wrote: »
    i feel like it's a red herring, to be terribly honest

    I'm married to one. Met plenty of others. One was a goose, but in all reality she was annoying in general. Vegetarianism was merely one of the many outlets for her to be so.

    Quid on
  • Options
    PerpetualPerpetual Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Quid wrote: »
    Perpetual wrote: »
    Err, do you know what "disposable income" means? It means the money that is left to you after you pay income taxes on it. So yes, it does literally mean that you cannot pay rent or feed yourself if you give all your disposable income to charity.

    Are you going to continue this non-sequitor, or should we continue to laugh at how stupid you are?

    Indeed it is, my mistake.

    Back to the point, did you give all of the money you did not personally need to charity or only a portion of it?

    Define "need".

    Not sure what you're trying to prove though. If anything, you're committing a gigantic logical fallacy we call Tu Quoque. Just because you do not practice what you preach does not mean what you preach is invalid.

    Perpetual on
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Perpetual wrote: »
    Not sure what you're trying to prove though. If anything, you're committing a gigantic logical fallacy we call Tu Quoque. Just because you do not practice what you preach does not mean what you preach is invalid.

    This fallacy you're claiming of me being the exact thing you just did.

    Your claim being: Vegetarians could be doing even more to help animals if they went vegan, but they don't, so you're going to give them shit for not really caring.

    My claim being: You could be doing even more to help people in need if you cut out most of the luxuries from your life etc etc.

    Hell, right now, if you really cared about helping people you wouldn't be arguing on an internet forum. Clearly you're just as bad as any vegetarian that doesn't go full vegan.

    Quid on
  • Options
    PerpetualPerpetual Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Quid wrote: »
    Perpetual wrote: »
    Not sure what you're trying to prove though. If anything, you're committing a gigantic logical fallacy we call Tu Quoque. Just because you do not practice what you preach does not mean what you preach is invalid.

    This fallacy you're claiming of me being the exact thing you just did.

    Your claim being: Vegetarians could be doing even more to help animals if they went vegan, but they don't, so you're going to give them shit for not really caring.

    My claim being: You could be doing even more to help people in need if you cut out most of the luxuries from your life etc etc.

    Hell, right now, if you really cared about helping people you wouldn't be arguing on an internet forum. Clearly you're just as bad as any vegetarian that doesn't go full vegan.

    But, again, you are missing several critical differences.

    The primary among them is that, unlike vegetarians and vegans ("veg/s"), I really don't give that much crap about the charities I donate to. I mean, you're really comparing a person donating 10 bucks to charity per year, versus them cutting out several major sources of fat and protein from a diet and majorly inconveniencing themselves AND probably people they hang out with (because the hosts also have to make them veg/s food when they go over to their house as a guest, or the group has to pick a restaurant that has veg/s options, etc.) . The fact that veg/s do that shows that they care far, far more about not harming animals than I care about charity. But that's the thing: if you ask a vegetarian why they aren't going vegan, they will never say "Oh, I don't give that much crap about animals, just enough to be a vegetarian and stay there". Rather, they will usually have some bullshit excuse.

    The secondary reason is that, while I donate 10 bucks to charity every year, I don't act all smug and superior about it like many veg/s do, I don't entertain any illusions about those 10 bucks making any major changes or preventing any suffering (like veg/s believe that their refusal to eat meat and other animal products actually saves animal lives), and I also don't try to convince others to donate using massive appeals to emotion and fake scientific facts (such as the claim that veg/s lifestyle is healthier).

    This is precisely why I said you are comparing apples and oranges. One is a major lifestyle change that happens to be a movement that is growing thanks to emotional blackmail and pseudoscience. The other is spending a negligible amount of money every now and then on a cause that you believe in.

    Perpetual on
  • Options
    PotatoNinjaPotatoNinja Fake Gamer Goat Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Quid wrote: »

    This fallacy you're claiming of me being the exact thing you just did.

    Its like he doesn't even know what sarcasm is.

    PotatoNinja on
    Two goats enter, one car leaves
  • Options
    PerpetualPerpetual Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Quid wrote: »

    This fallacy you're claiming of me being the exact thing you just did.

    Its like he doesn't even know what sarcasm is.

    I already responded. The comparison is invalid. Please read the rest of the replies before responding next time, thanks.

    Perpetual on
  • Options
    PotatoNinjaPotatoNinja Fake Gamer Goat Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Perpetual wrote: »
    But that's the thing: if you ask a vegetarian why they aren't going vegan, they will never say "Oh, I don't give that much crap about animals, just enough to be a vegetarian and stay there". Rather, they will usually have some bullshit excuse.

    Show me on the doll where the bad vegetarian touched you.

    PotatoNinja on
    Two goats enter, one car leaves
  • Options
    oldsakoldsak Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    It seems a lot of people are assuming that because killing and eating animals causes them pain, that it is immoral.

    I'm no philosopher, but that only seems like half the analysis. Shouldn't the other half be the extent of the benefit it gives?

    I think I'm also in the camp that I'm not sure why pain or ability to feel pain is the appropriate standard instead of harm caused.

    oldsak on
  • Options
    OrganichuOrganichu poops peesRegistered User, Moderator mod
    edited May 2010
    wait, let me understand this

    you're admitting that you only have a 'minor' amount of empathy for other people in need? is that what i'm getting from this?

    Organichu on
  • Options
    TarranonTarranon Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Perpetual wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Perpetual wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Perpetual wrote: »
    So you're saying that vegetarianism is not enough, and that we should all become vegans (since that arguably does even less harm).

    Next time I see a vegetarian I'm going to give them lots of shit for not having the balls to go all the way.

    Did you give some disposable income to charity in the last year?

    Did you give all of your disposable income to charity in the last year?

    Apples and oranges. Giving all my money to charity is quite unrealistic, as it would mean I would have to live on the streets and eventually starve to death. Whereas veganism is quite possible, especially if you live in the US.

    I did not say all of your money. I said all of your disposable income. Did you? If not you clearly lack the balls to go all the way and shouldn't even bother.

    Err, do you know what "disposable income" means? It means the money that is left to you after you pay income taxes on it. So yes, it does literally mean that you cannot pay rent or feed yourself if you give all your disposable income to charity.

    Are you going to continue this non-sequitor, or should we continue to laugh at how stupid you are?

    You're getting on vegans for being haughty, and yet here you are calling someone stupid for daring to mix up the layman's definition of disposable income with the technical economic one. This is very poor form.

    Tarranon on
    You could be anywhere
    On the black screen
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Perpetual wrote: »
    The fact that veg/s do that shows that they care far, far more about not harming animals than I care about charity. But that's the thing: if you ask a vegetarian why they aren't going vegan, they will never say "Oh, I don't give that much crap about animals, just enough to be a vegetarian and stay there". Rather, they will usually have some bullshit excuse.

    It is not bullshit. Some vegetarians care about something more than you do. This does not require them to go vegan, spend every moment of their free time fighting animal cruelty, or strive for utter, perfect human/animal coexistence. Vegetarians are also not unique among people in being jerks. In fact, I can think of far more, larger, and powerful groups of people that stereotypically do way worse to humanity in general.

    But still, you're ignoring the point. You clearly care about those charities more than other people do. Yet you don't give all your unnecessary income to them. You're still just as bad as any average vegetarian that doesn't go full vegan. And there are plenty of people who act like pious jerks after giving to charity.
    Perpetual wrote: »
    But that's the thing: if you ask a vegetarian why they aren't going vegan, they will never say "Oh, I don't give that much crap about animals, just enough to be a vegetarian and stay there". Rather, they will usually have some bullshit excuse.

    Show me on the doll where the bad vegetarian touched you.

    Pretty much. It's either vegetarians by default act like jerks, a claim based pretty much entirely on anecdotal evidence he's decided to use to harass other people, or they're somehow a major inconvenience to themselves and everyone they know which is just blatantly false. I live with one. When my brother wasn't thinking and invited us to a barbecue place so she could meet some of our family that were visiting, all my wife did was laugh. We showed up, he apologized profusely, she told him not to worry and ordered the crappy house salad, and we picked up a pizza on the way back home. The jerk.

    Quid on
  • Options
    CervetusCervetus Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    oldsak wrote: »
    I think I'm also in the camp that I'm not sure why pain or ability to feel pain is the appropriate standard instead of harm caused.

    I used to think that I should be a vegetarian and I was just too lazy and selfish a person to bother, but this is more in line with my current food philosophy. If the food animals are given good lives and treated humanely before their swift execution then it's a positive experience for every creature involved. Now I have the phrase "harm caused" to use in my argument because it seems to fit well.
    Quid wrote: »
    I live with one. When my brother wasn't thinking and invited us to a barbecue place so she could meet some of our family that were visiting, all my wife did was laugh. We showed up, he apologized profusely, she told him not to worry and ordered the crappy house salad, and we picked up a pizza on the way back home. The jerk.

    You should just divorce her, man. There's no reason you need to put up with that sort of abuse.

    Cervetus on
  • Options
    ElitistbElitistb Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    It's honestly just easier to fix something for myself at a later time than it is to have the due diligence to make sure that there is nothing in whatever dish that has been suggested for me to eat. Also, keep in mind that if I accidentally eat something that's not vegetarian, I will throw it back up even if I don't know that hit had meat in it. It's kind of horrible considering that these people made an honest effort to be good hosts to me, but have made me sick.

    I have difficulty seeing the all of statements presented in this paragraph as consistent.

    The host didn't make you sick, you made yourself sick. Unless you are somehow actually allergic to ingested animal proteins?

    Elitistb on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    Pi-r8Pi-r8 Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    So, anyone want to talk about the other big reason for vegetarianism? health reasons?

    Personally I don't really care that much if cows feel pain, but I care a lot about whether eating beef is going to give me cancer.

    Pi-r8 on
  • Options
    PotatoNinjaPotatoNinja Fake Gamer Goat Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Pi-r8 wrote: »
    So, anyone want to talk about the other big reason for vegetarianism? health reasons?

    Personally I don't really care that much if cows feel pain, but I care a lot about whether eating beef is going to give me cancer.

    Generally speaking, meat can either be bad for you because its shit-food (deep fried BACON yay!) or because the animals are so pumped full of chemicals what you eat barely qualifies as "food" anymore.

    You can say the same thing about veggies.

    Its probably a little easier to create an "ideal" diet with meat instead of without (lean protein can be difficult to come by for a vegan), but overall you're probably better off giving up junk food instead of giving up meat in particular. You can have a very healthy vegan diet (ignore the OP article, its full of nerdrage against vegans) and you can have a very healthy non-vegan diet.

    If you're concerned about additives in your food explore options for organic or locally-grown / managed food.

    PotatoNinja on
    Two goats enter, one car leaves
  • Options
    OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Perpetual wrote: »
    But that's the thing: if you ask a vegetarian why they aren't going vegan, they will never say "Oh, I don't give that much crap about animals, just enough to be a vegetarian and stay there". Rather, they will usually have some bullshit excuse.
    "How dare you drive an electric car, power your home via solar panels and do charity work installing renewable energy sources in Africa?

    If you're not willing to go live in the woods with absolutely no contact with fossil fuels, you don't have the balls to help."

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • Options
    SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2010
    Qingu wrote: »
    First, you switched from "cheaper" to "more beneficial." What the hell. =

    I did no such thing. Again, you're being dishonest.

    I said that veganism/vegetarianism is a luxury for some people. You said it wasn't and that meat was more expensive. I said it wasn't. I can buy meat for very cheap and said so. A pound of ground beef is ridiculously cheap. Offal even more so.

    Secondly, you know, I actually went and started looking shit up to support this when I realized it is so obviously true on the face of it that I'm not going to bother. X weight of corn is cheaper to produce than X weight of factory-farmed cow. This is simply not a controversial statement. In fact, it is nonsensical to claim otherwise, as it would be impossible to raise the cow on corn if the corn was just as expensive as the damn cow.

    I'm asking you to verify this. You need to compare. We're not simply comparing a certain amount of each product per cost. Cows are raised and slaughtered for reasons along with producing meat. There are plenty of valuable byproducts.
    Perhaps we are somehow talking past each other.

    No we're not. I've asked you to be specific, and so far you've been dishonest and otherwise bragging on your cat, which you put on a vegan diet with expensive vegan catfood, kinda reinforcing some of the things I said earlier.
    This was originally in response to your claim that eating meat is cheaper

    Never said it. You said meat was expensive. I said it wasn't.
    is to begin with is because cows are raised in Satanic conditions and the government has economic policies that favor producing an abundance of their feed crops.

    So beef is expensive... but it's not? And it's only cheap because the government has tampered with the market to keep the price at a certain level? Which is the same thing they do with other agriculture.

    If you have a problem with environmental impacts and government tampering, shouldn't you also not eat corn or products made from corn byproducts? Corn is a relatively wasteful crop to grow, and a certain percentage is wasted and wastes energy converting it to ethanol.

    Sheep on
  • Options
    surrealitychecksurrealitycheck lonely, but not unloved dreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    What's more interesting to me is that soon we shall be able to grow meat without the animals - as animals are a relatively inefficient way of producing muscle - and at that point, it will be both economically and morally easier to grow it artificially. What I'm hoping is that a lot of farmland will return to being semi-wild.

    surrealitycheck on
    obF2Wuw.png
  • Options
    OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    What's more interesting to me is that soon we shall be able to grow meat without the animals - as animals are a relatively inefficient way of producing muscle - and at that point, it will be both economically and morally easier to grow it artificially. What I'm hoping is that a lot of farmland will return to being semi-wild.
    There's no way this happens barring massive subsidies.

    Much more likely we'll see former hog and cow land turned into farmland or used for hydroponics.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • Options
    surrealitychecksurrealitycheck lonely, but not unloved dreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    There's no way this happens barring massive subsidies.

    I don't see why it would be less efficient than, say, the manufacture of quorn.

    surrealitycheck on
    obF2Wuw.png
  • Options
    OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    There's no way this happens barring massive subsidies.

    I don't see why it would be less efficient than, say, the manufacture of quorn.
    There are already subsidies in place to help convince farmers to let fields return to a state of semi-wildness. But the output from the government is huge compared to the land that actually lies fallow.

    Now multiply that by the amount that would be freed up by ending the use of cows.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • Options
    surrealitychecksurrealitycheck lonely, but not unloved dreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    There are already subsidies in place to help convince farmers to let fields return to a state of semi-wildness. But the output from the government is huge compared to the land that actually lies fallow.

    Now multiply that by the amount that would be freed up by ending the use of cows.

    Oh I see what you mean, I thought you were talking about the necessary expense of artificially growing meat!

    surrealitycheck on
    obF2Wuw.png
  • Options
    SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2010
    OptimusZed wrote: »

    Now multiply that by the amount that would be freed up by ending the use of cows.

    Artificial muscle tissue for consumption will replace much of it, but the industries surrounding beef byproducts won't be replaced and there will always be a demand for "real" beef and offal.

    Sheep on
  • Options
    OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Sheep wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »

    Now multiply that by the amount that would be freed up by ending the use of cows.

    Artificial muscle tissue for consumption will replace much of it, but the industries surrounding beef byproducts won't be replaced and there will always be a demand for "real" beef and offal.
    If we can grow artificial beef, we can't be far off from growing artificial leather and marrow.

    That would basically turn cows into a luxury good, which is a completely sustainable option.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • Options
    surrealitychecksurrealitycheck lonely, but not unloved dreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    If we can grow artificial beef, we can't be far off from growing artificial leather and marrow.

    We're closer to skin than usable muscle tissue, imo.

    surrealitycheck on
    obF2Wuw.png
  • Options
    SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2010
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »

    Now multiply that by the amount that would be freed up by ending the use of cows.

    Artificial muscle tissue for consumption will replace much of it, but the industries surrounding beef byproducts won't be replaced and there will always be a demand for "real" beef and offal.
    If we can grow artificial beef, we can't be far off from growing artificial leather and marrow.

    That would basically turn cows into a luxury good, which is a completely sustainable option.

    I agree.

    Though the foodie in me does leave consideration for differences in taste.

    Sheep on
Sign In or Register to comment.