Sustainable, Free-Range Farms and Other Tall Tales

Factory Farming’s Not the Problem -- It's Animal Farming

Large health care corporations are doing it. Trendy groceries are doing it. Environmental advocacy groups are doing it. Suddenly, it’s all the rage to tout animal-based farming that’s sustainable and healthful.

<snip>

Even if eating animal products could make us healthy -- and that’s not a particularly persuasive proposition -- animals fed an all-organic diet would make for an end product that’s beyond financial means of most of the world’s households.



And if corporations were to take free-range seriously -- not just removing cages, but buying access to pasture -- then it's a matter of finding those communities able to pay for the bodies of animals who, when living, took up the most space. That flunks the straight-face test. From both an animal rights and an environmental perspective, space for animal agribusiness doesn't need to be expanded; it needs to be phased out.

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Nov05/Hall1118.htm

Have you been hiding out, avoiding us?

I missed you!

Greener pastures, my friend.

It's...it's VF, isn't it? They've lured you away from us!

Sometimes the anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-choice, anti-animal attitudes leave me looking for a safer haven. You should join us. :)

Join us. Join us. Join us.

I really did!

I'm a little shy (check out the post count, after 4+ years here)--I signed up there and by the time I got up my nerve to post, they'd deactivated my account. I emailed them, but never heard back.

:cry:

PM me your name over there and I'll straighten it out. :)

Not the cause du jour I guess?

But go ahead, proseltyze anyway.

:popcorn:

If it tastes good, do it, right?

Actually, I find it refreshing when the animal rights crowd cops to the fact that telling everyone else to stop eating meat is the real agenda, instead of making noise about "ending inhumane treatment and factory farming".

Just like I would vastly prefer it if the pro-life gang would admit that what they're really interested in is keeping people from fucking. Intellectual honesty, dig?

And we're overdue for one of these threads. Knock yourself out. :patriot:

eating meat is both unethical and environmentally unsustainable. How about commenting on the points raised in the article as opposed to simply posting variations of "BUT I NEEDS MEATS!!!111" over and over again?

who agree completely that it is environmentally unsustainable, that prion diseases are a looming health crisis, but nonetheless love a good steak once in a while.

However, I do dissent on the whole animal rights aspect. Animal is animal. Human is human. Frankly I don't care about an animal's feelings one bit. While I suport the idea of clean killing animals, and reducing unnecessary suffering, I don't think they have rights in any sense.

I agree completely on the environmental aspect, but I think over playing the animal rights aspect hurts the chances of successful action on the issue more than it helps. I'm no rancher, I'm a rather extreme liberal, but it does tweak my sensibilities when someone insists animals have rights. They're not human. They're not special. They're just critters. Less progressive mindsets will simply disregard anything you have to say once you begin insisting on animal rights, regardless of how correct you may be on the environmental aspect.

Mainly, the right not to suffer.

It's clear that animals feel pain. If you don't care, well that says more about you than it does about them. I thought one of the main tenents of liberalism was compassion for those who are most unable to protect themselves.

Animals eat other animals. Animals eat plants, which are also alive.

Your arguments could easily be the exact ones drawn by pro-lifers. Trouble is, most people don't accept that there's a moral equivalence between a 3 day old zygote the size of a pinhead, and a walking, talking human being. And -news flash- most people (aside from the ones writing PETA ad campaigns) don't think there's a moral equivalence between eating a fish and killing a human being, or between someone in a Concentration camp and a chicken on its way to Col. Sanders.

Good comeback. Most people are against gay marriage. I guess that makes bigotry okay too, right?

Animals eat other animals because they have to. We don't. We eat other animals because we like the way they taste. They have the right not to suffer the very unnatural and horrible ways we treat them. And most of the animals whose flesh we buy in the supermarket are vegetarians, anyway.

I was wondering when someone would mention the big bad P-word. Name another animal rights organization and I'll owe you coke.

Just because you missed the point of the concentration camp/factory farm analogy doesn't make it less true. Try reading Eternal Triblinka by Isaac Baschevis Singer. He's the one that came up with that analogy not me. It's valid in that the same mechanism which allows humans to brutalize another group of humans because their lives are worth less according to completely arbitrary standards is the same mechanism which allows humans to brutalize animals. Violence against innocent creatures, human or non-human, bother me equally. But if your being obtuse helps you sleep at night, congrats.

I lived with animal rights activists in college. I'm fully familiar with the rant.

And if you want to go out and say, like PETA did, that kentucky fried chicken is morally equivalent to Hitler, go ahead. But don't wonder why "most people", even here, think your agenda is noxious.

I call bullshit on your ad hominem guilt-by-assosciation logic, by the way. (Like, if you can eat a burger, you can eat a human, so you must be a Dahmer-like Serial killer?) Minimizing the REAL SUFFERING of human beings in concentration camps by comparing them to chickens is far more the kind of thinking which leads to extremism and violence than being realistic about the difference between an amoeba, a bird, and a human being. Yes, animals are capable of suffering, but there is a range of consciousness and cognition. I sleep perfectly well after stepping on a bug in my house. I try to avoid it, I don't do it for "fun", but there is a big difference, in my mind, between a bug and a person.

Animals are clearly capable of suffering, which is why I support free range and cruelty-free farming, the exact things the author in your OP is railing against.

(I come from a position that it's wrong to kill animals for food period, regardless of how they are treated. For the sake of this argument, I'll take the welfarist position.)

If one chooses to eat free-range meat for ethical reasons, that's commendable. Most people don't even bother to wonder where their food comes from, so it's always a step in the right direction to make yourself aware.

The point of this article is that while it's commendable to be concerned about treatment of farm animals, this so-called "cruelty-free" method of farming is unsustainable. It is still damaging to the environment, and prohibitively expensive to many people, so while it may make you feel better, it doesn't fix the problem.

So while I admire anyone who stops to think about the suffering in animal agriculture, the alternative that many people choose in patronizing "cruelty-free" brands is still pretty bad.

Does that clear it up?

they should be allowed to serve a beef, chicken, or fish entree at the reception, if they so choose.

'Nite.

My cat eats other animals because he likes to kill other animals. He gets plenty of food at home and really doesn't need to kill other animals he just enjoys killing things.

that's just plain goofy.

are you saying that if i break a leg, i have a right not to expect pain?

what if i'm an antelope that doesn't run as fast as the rest of the herd...do i have a right not to suffer as the lioness digs her claws into my flesh? or as the rest of the pride starts eating me alive...are they infringing on my "rights"?

suffering is a part of life...ask any jewish person.

people like meat. people are designed to eat meat. people are going to continue to eat meat. get used to it.

Rather, I'm challenging a narrow, counter-productive (organic and free range farms are the problem?) agenda, pushed by my-way-or-the-highway ideological purists who can't seem to deal with the fact that other people have just as much right to determine their own diets as they do.

Your right to pollute my water, cause climate change on my planet because of the huge amounts of rainforest being cleared for your steak, cause huge amounts of air pollution because factory farms are not regulated by the same guidelines as any other manufacturer, and cause the bird flu pandemic end where my right to exist without all these things begin.

Never mind the right of the animal not to be brutalized because you like the way they taste.

It was about those bogus, phony liberals who think it's okay to eat "organic" and "free range" meat.

Doesn't mean I don't think it's incredibly self-centered on your part.

I'll wait here.

Sorry.

You still haven't taken me up on my offer to name even one other AR organization.

in the matter . . . it costs a small fortune to raise, say, beef cattle, and at some point it's the human diet is going to have to move away from meat . . . oh, meat will still be available, but only the wealthiest will be able to afford it . . . and for the environment and for human health, that's a good thing . . .

this is just one more reality that we humans will avoid facing until it's right on top of us . . . much like the reality that we're going to have to reduce our energy consumption by 50% or more . . .

And I haven't eaten any beef in close to a decade.

But that doesn't mean I'm going to wage war on organic, free range farmers just for the benefit of someone's strident anti-meat agenda.

eating meat 10 years ago. We do not need meat. There's plenty of plant-based foods to supply needed protein.

Due to my medical condition, I'm on a low-phosphorus, low-potassium, low-calcium and low-fiber diet. Tofu and beans just aren't right for everyone. For those for whom it is right, I have no arguments or disagreements; just a reminder that one way of eating does not work for all.

on your signature.

Can you tell yourself with a shred of honesty that animals on farms in those deplorable conditions do not have feelings? They get lonely, scared, hurt, terrified and live in misery and sadness because you chose to dine on cruelty. It's easier, more convenient, I'm sure to fill your stomach with the flesh of other living beings. Where there is a will, there is a way. If you really do care anything about animals, you'll begin to find a way of not killing them by proxy. I don't believe for a moment that it is impossible for a person to live without eating other living beings.

I find it incredible in this country how we point fingers at asian communities and screech "Barbarians! How could they eat cats and dogs and skin them alive for fur?" whilst we do the EXACT SAME THING every single day to hundreds of thousands of animals in unimaginable cruelty and then burp it up at our local fast food dive after we down our blood pressure and cholesterol meds with a nice shake full of pus.

:rant:

I figured I'd was on thin ice as it is, so I decided to leave that one alone. :)

:applause: :applause: :applause:

then we should be supporting organic, cruelty-free, and free range farmers.

If it's about a self-righteous minority trying to dictate the diets of everyone else, that's something completely different.

You may think it's not impossible for someone to live on a vegan diet, but you've never had to deal with kidney failure or Crohn's disease, have you?

You are very quick to judge, even when you do not have all the facts. That makes your position weak.

On edit: my total cholesterol is 90, and I do not take cholesterol-lowering drugs. What's yours?

I very seldom eat tofu, only if it is in a prepared dish at a restaurant. And I stay away from beans because they do terrible things to my stomach.

I'm nephrotic. I lose an incredible amount of protein each day, which much be replaced through diet. Keep in mind my diet must be low in potassium, phosphorus, calcium and fiber and I have to consume the normal RDA of protein + what I lose each day.

Hubby is on dialysis, which means: low potassium, low phosphorus, low sodium and high-protein diet. Also, he is diabetic, so also on a low-carb diet and is violently allergic to dried beans. So, no vegieburgers for him. Beans and meat alternatives are fine if you have no dietary limitations or allergies. Those who do will have to eat what will keep them healthy. In this case, low-fat meats.

And my nephrologist has been following the new studies, and therefore does not have me on a low-protein diet. I have idiopathic hypercalciuria and am a consecutive stone former as well, so high-oxalate foods like spinach aren't a great idea (passing so many stones, along with my chronic kidney infection, is causing scarring, which is Not Good since scarring alone can cause renal failure, and mine are failing from FSGS).

The plant-based protein diet. I was a vegetarian for 8 years, when it wasn't hip, and could tell I wasn't getting enough protein. What would you suggest? I started eating fish and chicken again about a year ago. Help? :-)

Also, beans, nuts, grains, etc.

You might also have not been getting enough iron. When people complain about lacking energy on a vegetarian diet, it can often be linked to not getting enough iron.

:)

Actually sauteed some last night with dinner. Thanks for the tips, just the same. I need to get back on the vegan wagon. :-)

I was a vegetarian for years, and had all kinds of digestive problems until they figured out that I was allergic to what I was eating. Now I eat fish and poultry mostly with organic vegetables. So no tofu, tempe, seitan, Boca Burgers or meat replacements for me unfortunately.

Humanity-at-large is a different story.

And it strikes me as a tad -erm- controlling.

:P

just practicing :hi:

...animal flesh entirely. As it is I eat very little fish a few times a week. Pretty soon that will be gone as well.

I did it both for health and moral reasons. It could no longer stomach the treatment of animals raised as feedstock. I couldn't look a cow, pig or lamb in the eyes and kill it but somehow it was okay if it was all wrapped in plastic in the supermarket. Ditto for poultry.

I don't care if others eat meat and will prepare it for them if they ask (I do all the cooking in my household.) That's their business. But I will no longer eat it. After doing much research, I am planning on going fully vegetarian some time this year, once I adjust my recipes and palate.

It's been half a year since I've quit "the hard stuff" and I look and feel much better. I'm considerably less angry. ;)

What is this other board that you post on if I may ask?

that livinginphotographs frequents is geared pretty specifically toward vegans, so it might not be a great starting-off point for you.

You may want to visit http://www.vegsource.com (they have lots of smaller boards where you can ask questions) and we have a veg group here, too. If you can't post to the v/v/ar group (you must be a donating member) you can ask questions in the Lounge and, generally speaking, some veg members will help out if they can.

Good luck with the changes you're making!

The other forum mentioned (I mod there) is for people who eare vegan or well on thier way to becoming vegan. PM me if you'd like a link, I really don't want to post it on the board for reasons that are probably somewhat obvious.

As for your 'less angry' comment, I really do think veganism is healthier both physically & spiritually. :hi:

There are great vegan recipes here: http://vegweb.com/index.php?action=recipes

And on the DU veg forum there is a thread pinned to the top with even more great recipes!!

ghandi himself even tried a vegan diet for years and proclaimed that humans need animal products. HUMANS HAVE TO CONSUME ANIMAL PRODUCTS TO SURVIVE. ethically, i find this repulsive, but it is true. a human cannot thrive on a vegan diet. the majority of the old Hygenists and fruitarians will tell you the same exact thing.

i pay $5 for a gallon of raw, organic, grass-fed jersey cow milk on a local farm near my house in austin. how is that unsustainable in our economic times? organic milk in the supermarket costs at least $3. You can thrive on a vegetarian diet with dairy products if you dont want to consume flesh.

again, ethically i think using animals as sustanance is repulsive, but this is the way it is. we need to give these creatures dignity and respect that they are due.

talking of a total non-animal agribusiness is irresponsible and unscientific. it is not totally proven either that animal farming from an environmental perspective is the way to go either. how many species are endangered or threatened every year from millions of acres of crop lands? how many acres of forest were cut down to provide ariable land for farming?

but as far as I can figure out, even organically raised animals are killed in just as horrendous a manner as conventionally raised. I know if the animal is going to be killed, some might say, who cares how, but I wish organic animal farming would adopt humane killing standards where animals aren't terrorized before they're killed.

They haven't wasted away. We don't NEED animal products. Every omnivore I've ever talked to has always ended the conversation with, "I'd just DIE without cheese!!!!" That pretty much sums it up for me.

talking of a total non-animal agribusiness is irresponsible and unscientific. it is not totally proven either that animal farming from an environmental perspective is the way to go either. how many species are endangered or threatened every year from millions of acres of crop lands? how many acres of forest were cut down to provide ariable land for farming?

You do realize that the majority of grains and water in this country goes towards feeding livestock, don't you? You do realize that the swaths of rainforest being chopped down is because of people looking for more land to raise cattle, don't you? Regarding the species that are threatened, talk to the fish in the Chesapeake Bay being eaten away by pfisteria due to waste from pig farms, then get back to me.

on edit: regarding your thing about "you can thrive on a vegetarian diet with dairy products." What's unscientific (and absolutely absurd) is saying that we are required to drink the mother's milk of another species.

That's not true, but it is a large part of my diet. I've tried some dairy/animal fat replacement foods, especially in baking. They suck.

People who eat and enjoy animal products are under no ethical imperative to defend their choice. It may not be an absolute necessity to eat animal products, but at one time, for humans, it was. Not only because we hadn't yet developed an agricultural society, but from the simple fact of 'eat or be eaten.' It's our ancestral history. No one has the right to dictate that we stop.

So. You want human consumption of animals to go away for good? The only real way to make that happen is to make animals go away, for good. That's not a call I'd want to make.

As in all things, moderation.

That's not true, but it is a large part of my diet. I've tried some dairy/animal fat replacement foods, especially in baking. They suck.

I find Earth Balance margarine works very well. 100% vegan. I've used it for Indian food to make my lazy American version of ghee, and others I know have used it for baking.

People who eat and enjoy animal products are under no ethical imperative to defend their choice.

If not, then you can ignore this thread. I posit that enslaving animals because they taste good is an abomination. You're welcome to rebut that, but stating, "that's just the way it is" does not count as a rebuttal.

It may not be an absolute necessity to eat animal products, but at one time, for humans, it was. Not only because we hadn't yet developed an agricultural society, but from the simple fact of 'eat or be eaten.' It's our ancestral history.

So is slavery. So are wars of aggression. So is denying certain minorities equal protection under the law. There's a laundry list of brutality that humans have inflicted upon one another throughout history. That doesn't make them right.

No one has the right to dictate that we stop.

I'm not dictating that anyone do anything. I'd just like people to see the consequences of their actions for once.

So. You want human consumption of animals to go away for good? The only real way to make that happen is to make animals go away, for good. That's not a call I'd want to make.

I'm completely confused by this line of thinking. Why do all animals have to become extinct for us to stop brutalizing them? I'd like people to feel that they can coexist with the other creatures they share this planet with, as opposed to attempting to dominate them all.

As in all things, moderation.

In this particular instance, I disagree.

So. You want human consumption of animals to go away for good? The only real way to make that happen is to make animals go away, for good. That's not a call I'd want to make.

I'm completely confused by this line of thinking. Why do all animals have to become extinct for us to stop brutalizing them? I'd like people to feel that they can coexist with the other creatures they share this planet with, as opposed to attempting to dominate them all.

You can't have it both ways: if animals have no purpose in serving human needs, all they're doing is competing against us for resources, in which case their abilities to reproduce would have to be seriously curtailed. They'd be no different from domesticated dogs and cats, animals whose reproduction we already try to control as strictly as possible. Only there's not much point in having a pet cow or a pig, is there? Maybe we can put them in the zoo, along with the lions and rhinos.

I'm also opposed to further intervention by man in breeding of domesticated cattle, pigs, etc.

There are already farm sanctuaries where these animals live out their lives in as natural a setting as can be expected after being genetically mutilated by mankind for decades. I'd rather have domesticated cows, pigs, chickens, etc. slowly grow extinct than continue to exist in torment because man thinks they taste good.

:applause:

conventional farming? Yes, conventional, monoculture, large-scale grain and legume farming is irresponsible, unsustainable, and economically unviable. We're not talking about conventional farming. We're talking mixed crop, pastoral farming. The kind that humans have been doing for the past 10,000 years.

It's the oil and the population size that are the problems, not the traditional, sustainable methods that have been in use in places like India for a few millennia. If you really study agriculture, this becomes clear as a Rocky Mountain morning.

For 500 acres to feed 10,000 people, it has to have insects, birds, ruminants, rooting omnivores, multiple grasses, water, a decay cycle and a distribution method. The birds can be chickens, ducks, geese, dickie birds, robins, egrets, whooping cranes or a mixture. Ruminants are sheep, cattle, goats. Rooting omnivores are usually pigs and dogs. It needs clover, timothy, sweetgrass, tall grasses, short grasses, bunch grasses and stem grasses. It has to get at least 12 inches of rain a year. It needs trees to act as a carbon sink, a wind break and a cooling system. What dies must go back into the system and what is taken out must be replaced somehow. And it needs wind, pollinators, creatures to disturb the soil, creatures to process the soil, insectivores...

Yeah, it takes careful management. Farmers have to be able to make a decent living, and most of the conventional ones can't. Most of the sustainable ones not only make a decent living, they enjoy their lives and work. It's not for the stupid, the lazy or those without a good eye for detail. But it is satisfying.

(Yes, I have an ag background. My family runs a multi-based, sustainable, organic farm in Indiana. It's been self-sustaining and productive since before 1837. And that's never going to change as long as there are family members to take it over.)

But I like people who are hell-bent on dictating that other people live their lives in exactly the same way that they do, even less.

Here's what's wrong with your post:

I know people who've been vegan 15+ years. (So do I) They haven't wasted away. We don't NEED animal products.

No--- THEY don't need animal products. Not "We". Speak for yourself, or read some of the other responses in this thread. I think you've been talking to the wrong omnivores, because I don't know who the hell is so unsure of their own lifestyle choices that they feel the need to end a conversation about veganism with some weak apologia about cheese. My response would be something to the effect of, "I'll eat what I damn well please, Jack-- and you do the same."

Edit: Here's a few statements. See if you can tell the difference between them:

1) "I believe abortion is wrong, so I won't have one"
2) "I believe abortion is wrong, so YOU won't have one"

1) "I don't draw blasphemous cartoons because it's against my religion"
2) "YOU don't draw blasphemous cartoons because it's against my religion"

1) "Gay sex is a sin. I need to repent for being gay"
2) "Gay sex is a sin. YOU need to repent for being gay"

1) "Porn with consenting adults is exploitative and bad. I don't look at porn"
2) "Porn with consenting adults is exploitative and bad. YOU don't look at porn"

1) "Only God can determine when a person should die, therefore even if I'm terminally ill, I will not have my doctor assist me with a pain-free exit from this world"
2) "Only God can determine when a person should die, therefore even if YOU'RE terminally ill, YOU will not have YOUR doctor assist YOU with a pain-free exit from this world"

1) "Eating meat is wrong, so I don't do it"
2) "Eating meat is wrong, so YOU don't do it"

I've been vegan almost four years and I'm healthy. My kid's been vegan since infancy and he's big for his age, smart and very healthy. There are a shitload of healthy happy vegans on this forum and plenty more out there to meet.

For that matter, I'm much healthier as a vegan than I wasa as a lacto vegetarian because, like most people not of northern European extraction, I don't digest cow's milk well.

Body builders and other athletes who are vegans.

http://www.veganbodybuilding.com/subject/67

http://www.veganbodybuilding.com/images.html

Other famous
Vegetarian athletes: Carl Lewis, Edwin Moses, Hank Aaron, Jim Kaat, John Salley, Lawrence Phillips, Leroy Burrell, Lucy Stevens, Maartina Navratilova, Murray Rose, Pat Reeves, Robert Cheeke, Ruth Heidrich, Stan Price

Point disproven.

I will however applaud you on your choice of milk sources. Buying locally is a much more responsible choice, if one is going to choose to consume it.

If you want clean food for yourself and your family, check it out...

Community Supported Agriculture - CSA

The story of the Farms of Tomorrow

Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) offers a way for every human being to be directly involved in the care and healing of the earth, while also ensuring a supply of clean, healthy food for their families and their neighbors.

(snip)

http://www.chiron-communications.com/farms.html

It's pretty much the only kind of meat I eat anymore.

If you are going to kill animals for food, it is an absolute ethical requirement that we owe them decent lives before that.

Vegan research isn't really my area but some of the comments on meat and nutrition touched on an issue that I have read a little bit about. You might be interested in the following article on hemp seed in nutrition, it gives some decent info and a number of names in the field to research for more.

http://organicconsumers.com/organic/hemp011405.cfm

... is unsustainable, but we carry on anyway. People make trade-offs every day in every way, some are justifiable, others less so.

Don't like abortions? Don't GET one. Don't like eating meat? Don't eat it.

Don't buy from the grocery stores, buy from the local ranchers. I sell an average of 40 head a year to the locals in this area. These cows have never seen a feed lot, they've never seen hormone shots, they consume native grass's and vegetation, with a small amount of supplemental feed during the dry years. These cows are about as organic as they can be, as is most cows raised on ranch's. It's the feed lot cows you have to worry about.

I buy local beef, chicken, and eggs. I know the animals are well treated because I can SEE them. I drive by the cattle every morning on my way to work.

I'm usually the one who hauls them to the processor. Our processor uses what i can only describe as a loaded hammer, which kills them instantly. I've even had people ask me to dispatch the animal for them because they wanted to do the processing them selves, again they die instantly.

Unless you can hit the cow in the correct spot every single time, I'd be willing to bet that not all of them are killed instantly before their throats are slit and they are bled out.

Had feeling you were going to came back with something like this, so i made a phone call to the processor. According to him, he's never had any animal do anything but die instantly. Personally i prefer my method to his, but his is just as effective.

I guess.... :yoiks:

Our processor uses the same method and kills the cow with my husband standing at it's side. They are a very small, local butchery and every animal we've raised has died instantly. We are so fortunate to have local people every step of the way from grain and hay suppliers through the vet and butcher.

It's possible to do meat processing correctly and humanely. It's the way it used to be done and can still be done.

I can, and have, helped slaughter the chickens that end up on my plate. I've raised lambs and eaten them. I've helped dress pigs. The only reason I haven't helped with the cattle is that I'm too small - I'm 5'2" and weigh far less than a tenth what a cow or bull at maturity does. But I've helped process beeves.

I can, with perfect conscience, look at the meat in my freezer. I can pet the cows, feed the chickens and play with the pigs. I know they have good lives, play their part in the natural, evolutionary cycle, and die quickly and easily - far more easily than does an abandoned dog or cat at the shelter. Our pigs and chickens are never crowded, lonely, abandoned or abused. We care for them, and they care for us.

We're all part of the ecosystem, humans as much as anything else. A cow or a chicken can't survive without us, and pigs need us almost as much as dogs do. There are too many of us. Short of taking a rifle to an overpass, I'm doing my part about that - we're not reproducing. And while there are some cell-phone-yakkers-while-driving that could use a high velocity cranial lead injection, evolution will take care of them when their SUVs go up in a ball of hydrocarbons after they flip on an icy road.

And yes, there have been animals that I have felt ambivalent about letting go for slaughter. I know animals can feel pain, something like affection, and pleasure. I know that there is something like self-consciousness in some. And I'd be a liar if I said that I have no qualms about being at the top of the food chain. But that's the difference between me and the cows we raise. It's highly unlikely that cows feel bad about the blades of grass that they eat, or regret that patch of clover.

I won't apologize for my ancestors' domestication of animals. And they wouldn't forgive me if I abandoned their creation to starvation, loneliness, and a painful death as a coyote's supper.

I grew up eating lamb and goat we bought from a friend of my mother's a few days a week.

Look at the cute little piggy. They live to be 30 years old and have the intelligence of a 6-7 year old child.
Isn't that sweet... ahhhhh.....ok now lets go have some bacon. :mad:

The Pigs page @ Worldkids.net

MZr7

When they read and write and are capable of having a conversation, then we'll talk about that ridiculous statement.

I'd be happy if they could just learn to wipe their butts.

I don't think anyone if claiming "higher order" intelligence like reading & writing, there are other measures of intelligence that the experts are equating to here. Below are a few of the many articles discussing the subject. Why don't you give them a read and get back to me on your "beliefs". ;)

MZr7

The Hidden Lives of Pigs


Study backs up pig-intelligence claims


Fun Pig Facts


How much to Intelligent Pigs Suffer?

I'll stand behind my original statement.

humanish?

I have a feeling that owners of pet piggies would disagree with his sentiments.

Sorry, I had to do it. :P

:rofl:

The animal called human is the only one stupid enough to destroy the planet it's living on.

But I'm sure clutching those intelligence tests we created will save us, in the end.

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

snort, snort, snort

brain--the ones that enable humans to read and write--are two completely different things.

As are having the skeletal/muscular structure and opposable thumbs that would allow butt wiping. Being able to wipe one's ass in no way makes one Einstein.

Even if eating animal products could make us healthy -- and that’s not a particularly persuasive proposition -- animals fed an all-organic diet would make for an end product that’s beyond financial means of most of the world’s households.

What makes you say that? Several studies have shown organic agriculture to be less costly and less energy-intensive (and increasingly, the cost in agriculture will be energy) than non-organic agriculture. The cost becomes a problem when you try to mirror the non-organic distribution network. But as more people "go organic", that will start to be alleviated too. So you can't just say "if everybody did it nobody could afford it", because more people doing organic farming and ranching makes the distribution costs cheaper.

And if corporations were to take free-range seriously -- not just removing cages, but buying access to pasture -- then it's a matter of finding those communities able to pay for the bodies of animals who, when living, took up the most space.

Really? How many additional acres of pasturage would be needed? And how many acres are fallow in a given year? I don't have any data on that but I'm not inclined to simply say it's a ludicrous idea, particularly without the data in front of us.

This is sounding close to that old argument that we should not raise cattle because their pasturage could be more efficiently used for cereals. Well, if cattle could only pasture on arable land, sure, but a cow can live off a lot larger variety of landscapes than a stalk of corn can.

For all the evils of corporate animal factory "farms", I still have yet to see anything nearly as egregious or evil as what the Monsanto's and ADM's of the world are doing with corn, soybeans and wheat. And of corporate free-ranging eats into that pasturage, so much the better...

As I stated above, I was a vegetarian for years with all kinds of digestive and health problems until they realized that I was eating what I was allergic to. I eat meat from small farms like this one: http://www.riverrockfarm.com/
I also eat local seafood and poultry. I don't eat pork because of the whole pig farming issue.

Sorry I couldn't be a good vegetarian without almost having part of my colon removed. I wasn't really excited about the idea of walking around with a colostomy bag when I was 29.

I only found out I was gluten intolerant after I became vegan. And those who are gluten intolerant often find they have many allergies in addition, because of a damaged digestive system and weakened immunity.

Now I eat a gluten-free vegan diet and go to a NAET practitioner for allergy treatments.

http://allergyfree.tripod.com/

NAET can typically test, treat, and permanently eliminate any allergy, food intolerance, and environmental sensitivity within 25 hours. In most cases, that's all it takes... one session to permanently eliminate an allergy. Individuals who are highly sensitive may sometimes require additional combination clearings.

What is NAET?

NAET stands for Nambudripad's Allergy Elimination Technique, named after the founder of NAET, Dr. Devi Nambudripad. NAET is a revolutionary new allergy treatment that uses Chiropractic, Acupuncture, and Kinesiology to permanently desensitize people to all kinds of allergies. Clinical studies with NAET have demonstrated that it is by far the most successful and succinct treatment for the elimination of allergies.

*********

FYI -- Anything you google on NAET by Quackwatch and their related sites(Stephen Barrett)is a smear. Quackwatch is funded by corporations including pharmaceutical companies like Merck, and they slam chiropractic and related treatments, mercury amalgam poisoning, alternative Lyme disease testing, and anything that eats into traditional medicine's profits.

My sister has Lyme disease, and is fighting the medical establishment who won't give her the drugs she needs to get better. Meanwhile, her quality of life is deteriorating. :-(

I just had a QRibb test for Lyme sent to the Bowen Lab on Thursday. It's supposed to be the most accurate test, because it doesn't just test for antibodies like the conventional medical tests, but for the actual number of bugs you have and which kind.

I started taking TOA-free Cat's Claw (which my naturopath recommended) for Lyme last week and saw improvements within just a few days. I would rarely advocate herbal remedies as a first, or only, choice of treatment but I think this case is an exception. I've already been on constant rounds of antibiotics for at least five years, and infections keep coming back.

The two main brands of TOA-free Cat's Claw are Samento and Saventero. There are a bunch of articles about it and Lyme Disease here:

http://www.samento.com.ec/sciencelib/sammain.html

This excerpt comes from the article The New Great Imposter:

One recent study showed that a particular extract of the Peruvian medicinal plant commonly known as cat’s claw (Uncaria tomentosa) was actually more effective than antibiotic therapy in eliminating the Lyme spirochete.

The six-month study consisted of 28 patients and was conducted by US cardiologist Dr. William Lee Cowden. All of the individuals were suffering from advanced chronic Lyme, and tested positive for the Lyme spirochete Bb using the Western Blot test. Half the individuals were given the conventional antibiotic therapy and half were given the specific cat’s claw product.

At the end of the six-month study, three in the antibiotic group showed slight improvement, three were worse, and the rest remained the same. All of those in the cat’s claw group experienced a dramatic improvement, and 12 of the 14 tested Bb negative at the end of the study. (Presentation at The International Symposium for Natural Treatment of Intracellular Microorganisms, Munich, Germany, March 29, 2003)

**********

There is also an interesting forum I found with people whose Lyme has improved on a gluten-free diet. I suspect that's the main reason I noticed improvement with Cat's Claw so fast. Gluten-intolerance tends to fun in families too so your sister could certainly have that. Most definitely the Lyme could trigger it.

http://brain.hastypastry.net/forums/showthread.php?t=3964

I hope this helps. I wish the best of luck to your sister! :hug:

Meat, milk, eggs. These contain B-12. I understand that some seaweeds contain B-12, but it's not an equivalent.

B-12 deficiency can be debilitating and if not treated it will be lethal. Sometimes the deficiency is caused by a body that's incapable of taking from the diet (like me). Sometimes, the deficiency is caused by a deficiency of diet, such as a vegan diet.

I do not share this to be inflammatory, only to alert those vegans that it is essential for you to take a good multi-vitamin, or at least a regular b-12 supplement.

With all respect, those who say the human body can survive (live a long healthy life) on a completely vegan diet are wrong.

Your "concern" is well-known to 99.9% of vegans.

With all respect, those who say the human body can survive (live a long healthy life) on a completely vegan diet are wrong.

With all respect, the human body CAN survive just fine on a vegan diet. Just ask the founder of the Vegan Society. Or what about this person?

It's you who are wrong.

Did he supplement with vitamins?

I wasn't trying to be inflammatory, only to pass along a health "concern." :eyes:

Many nutritionists recommend that ALL people (vegan or otherwise) supplement anyway. You made it sound like it was 100% impossible to survive on a vegan diet. That's patently untrue.

I simply wanted to share a valid health concern.

I have no argument with vegans.

Non-animal sources of B12




MZr7

I'm much happier being a self-appointed nutrition expert! /sarcasm

You're right. The body needs very little B-12 in the diet in order to survive, as the body's liver stores VAST quantities of B-12. That "little" amount however is still essential to survival.

Whether it's a result of diet or of anatomy, when the body isn't assimilating enough B-12 it will tap the liver's B-12 reserves. Deficiency occurs when the liver runs out, which it will eventually. It happened to me.

B-12 defiency is most likely to occur in the elderly, individuals whose body lacks "intrinsic factor" in their digestive systems, white women of northern European ancestry, and vegans.

Vegans can use a vitamin supplement. Others will likely need injections of the vitamin on a regular basis. I self-inject 2x monthly.

THE PRESENCE OF MERCURY CAN REDUCE VITAMIN B12

In a joint article in the December 1995 issue of Heavy Metal Bulletin by Dr Ahlrot-Westerlund and Editor, Monica Kauppi, they explain that the presence of heavy metals can reduce the uptake of vitamin B12. "The transport of vitamin B12 to the brain can be disturbed or interrupted by heavy metals such as mercury, which affects the blood-brain barrier by causing leakage and hampering the active transport of nutrients. In regard to heavy metal toxicity, in many cases it can be assumed that multiple deficiencies, not always easily separable, can be found."

http://www.whale.to/w/b12.html

I hadn't heard that, and I have several mercury fillings that I've had since childhood. Being a white woman of northern euro descent in my mid-30's I was already in one of the "at risk" categories.

If I could afford it, I would gladly have all the mercury fillings pulled from my mouth. Some day I'll be able to, I hope.

Your fight is with corporatists, not DU meat eaters.

Or just go automatically into omnivore defensive mode?

The methods don't matter, according to the article. The entire practice of animal agriculture is unsustainable.

Christ, you're easy to convince of something you want to believe.

It's clear from the article that meat will become prohibitively expensive if we can't produce the enormous amounts of it that we do today, and are able to because of the horrible ways we treat animals being raised for food. Organic and "free-range" meat costs more for a reason.

If all I'm going to get is snide one-liners, let me know, and I'll save myself the effort.

I said what I said, not a quote. I didn't know I was that unclear. Frankly, I wish you would save yourself the effort.

The region I live in is a pastoral region. It has to be - with the amount of rainfall Colorado gets, the best crop is grass. The Native Americans in the area knew that, and they didn't farm here. Instead, they ranged after the bison, keeping the herds moving and the plains healthy.

Humans can't eat grass. Bison and cattle and sheep can. Raising crops in this area is environmentally irresponsible - the land does not recover if it's plowed up. (I can take you out and show you ruts in the short-grass that were made by wagons crossing to the silver and gold rushes. Those ruts are over a century old.) Old, woody grass doesn't decay; it just dries out and becomes fire fuel. We don't have enough environmental moisture to let our grasses decompose into soil. This is a fragile, delicate ecosystem that depends on large ruminants to do the decomposition for it. The animals eat the tops of the grass, digest it, and excrete a nutrient rich manure that decays better than undigested grass does. Their hooves make little shady depressions in the ground where water can collect and help germinate new seeds. And the grass feeds more and grows better if it gets regular visits from ruminants. Pasture with animals on it is more genetically diverse, more sustainable and retains water and nutrients far better than pasture without animals. (Duh, they're part of the ecosystem, and evolution is smart that way...) But since whites killed off so many of the bison, we have to treat domesticated cattle the same way, moving them from pasture to pasture and not letting them overgraze. (I agree that feeding them grain is stupid. But I think a lot grain farming is stupidly done.)

I live in a region where my options are: eat virtually oil soaked grain and soy that is imported from farms far away where they use mechanized methods that kill field mice, birds, worms and other creatures (some of which are endangered) or eat locally raised, sustainable meat, vegetables, fruit and grain (my community grows wheat) whenever possible and minimize my impact on the local landscape. I plead birthright -- I didn't have a choice to be born, I'm not reproducing, and I live in a community that behaves as ecologically and socially responsibly as is possible. I'm not going to slit my throat because other people decided to have too many children, to make stupid political and economic decisions that lead to agricultural damage, and live in houses that are extravagant. Instead, I'm going to live as lightly as possible and educate others.

If I lived in the Midwest, I'd be a vegetarian because it is the most responsible diet for the region. If I lived in the Arctic circle, I'd be a pure carnivore because that's what is appropriate for the region. But I am not going to harm the place I live by eating in an irresponsible way. This land can't support a lot of crops and it does support grazers. Therefore, that's what I do.

And don't tell me that a vegetarian diet is kinder. I've seen ground animals after a tractor has run them over. A quick, clean kill with knife or a stunner is far more merciful than the slow death a mangled prairie dog gets.

I don't eat animals, but I think that beef ranching is pretty well done here in California. Beef cattle eat non-native grasses and both reduce the fire hazard and allow vernal pool species to grow.

I used to be anti-ranching, but the more I've learned the more I have gained respect for ranching. Rangeland provides habitat for many more species than field crops or housing developments do. I'm totally opposed to feedlots, but I'd rather see a pasture with cattle than a subdivision.