The Guardian: If you want to save the world, veganism isn’t the answer.

The Guardian: If you want to save the world, veganism isn’t the answer.

22 thoughts on “The Guardian: If you want to save the world, veganism isn’t the answer.

  1. This may be the Guardian, but, it is still a badly put together article promoting the way of life that the writer makes their living from.

    In 2000, my husband and I turned our 1,400-hectare (3,500-acre) farm in West Sussex…

    In short, a snow job.

    I checked a link…

    ‘100 harvests left’

    …and did find a Farmers Weekly story form 4 years ago, but, no link to the actual study that the headline relies on…

    …in 4 years any farming study can be made nonsense.

    PS I live in the middle of one of the biggest farms in Europe, very small changes here make very large changes overall. [ 74% of the root veg for the entire country is grown here, soon 85% ]
    Which also is the subject of Cambridge Universitie’s studies and lead to many breakthrough discoveries.

  2. Lars Fosdal did you read the entire piece? She’s an animal farmer. And her level of incompetence astounds me

    1) most maize and soy are used to feed animals…

    2) She has a vested interest in people buying her product.

    3) If all animals were free gazing we would need something like 13 planets.

    4) Killing beings is wrong

    5) keeping sentient beings captive is wrong.

    6) This is a user comment and not an article written by the guardian. Don’t confuse the 2

  3. Nicolai Imset from the fields around me, Pork can be bread in coppice’d lands and need no additional ‘pasture’ and can sleep in the unerbrush cover [ sic: Boar ], I see how destructive arable farming can be.

    I use the notional ideal not the practical one.

    On the ideal that the top predator stops predating is a very short-sighted one.

    Using this reasoning:
    If we have no use for a thing, we wipe it out, it is our nature.

    We do not waste resources during tough times on things that we gain no benefit from. [ why study a thing we gain no benefit from… ]

    Having no ‘great ideal’ that surrounds the usefulness of animals we don’ eat in the mind of the average Joe and the growth of ‘democracy’, ignorance will be the key to money steering people in the direction of profit.

    In short, we protect what is useful, animals are very useful, so much so that it is actually a stupid idea to claim no dependence on animals is to reject the actual interconnectedness of all things on this rock. [ and some off of it ]

    A hunted animal has a very clean ending if the hunter wants to eat.

    A farmed animal should see a similar end.

    A wild animal is often pinned down and eaten alive of suffers a long disease before dropping dead and rotting in place.

    I have studied my diet and experimented for over 10 years and have found out many things.

    True ‘ethical’ Veganism [ funny, word not in browser dictionary… ] leaves you living in a ‘slice’ of the world the rest of us live in hoping the delivery methods around you don’t collapse.

    I live in the middle of fresh produce and struggle to have a varied diet.

    Wheat is ‘factory-farmed’ at such a rate around here I can’t eat much Bread or suffer severe hay-fever. [ most allergies are from what you eat + what you breath , because you swallow 1 litre of snot + pollen a day ]

  4. Philip Rowney PRoblmes with this is
    1) we don’t need to eat sentient being and killing is wrong.
    2) Free roaming pigs as you you yourself seem to have is not sustainable for the planet and potenitially the outmost form of discrimination where a few can eat meet and the rest don’t have food. We don’t have the space for it.
    3) keeping animals alive purely as a food source is cruel

    4) Ethical veganism is 2 words. Rest of your sentence there makes no sense to me, please clarify how using less resources pr person is worse for the planet.

    5) I have been vegan for years and have no problems having a varied diet.

    6) Humans are not predators. we are at best scavengers. but mostly we are like all great apes, plant eaters.

    7) most animals consumed (Still unsustainble but not as unsustainable as grass feed or free roaming) are kept in captivity and bred aritficially. stopping this will do exactly nothing to the balance of nature.

  5. 1) the definitions of that are not codified world-wide.

    2) it worked for 1,000,000’s of years before.

    3) let all ‘Chi9ckens’ die, they are a ‘man made’ species. That’s 100’s of billions of animals and the end of a species.
    [ Chicken = hundreds of years of selectively breeding a Indian jungle foul that can’t live naturally in most western countries ]

    4) ‘Ethical Veganism’ has a distinct definition.

    ‘Consume no animal products in food, clothing or building.’

    that is a simple statement with a very complexed operating pattern, i know because I have tried it.

    Filter tip cigarettes have pig on them, pigs are endemic to many ‘technologies’ we use now. Stopping using all pig products today would see 1,000,000,000 die in the world before 2100.

    5) that is debatable. Can you walk at a sustained 6 MPH and keep your heart rate below 100?

    I’m a 48 year old smoker and can easily.

    Also, it depends on ‘local supply’ and how rich you are.

    I make <$20k a year, you?

    6) you are showing ignorance of our 'species'.

    …roots, shoots and the odd Antelope…

    for >1,000,000 years and suddenly some guy 100 years ago knows better than Darwin, yeah…

    7) Have you even heard of the country called Africa?

    Some people need to learn how to use Google before debating with someone who was coding at the same time as Brin and Page :0þ – Africa Is Way Bigger Than You Think

  6. I’ve got nothing against vegans nor carnivores. The best point in the article is how a varied use of the land is far better for the plants and animals, in life and as food. We need to stop thinking that we can use poison as the primary means to improve farming.

  7. Exactly, biodiversity.

    Not every Human on the planet lives in the 21st century, many forget this.

    A rich westerner has the luxury of choice, a poor westerner does not, poor anywhere else, you eat what you can.

    Applying ‘blanket’ ideals have been the problem to date.

  8. Philip Rowney don’t be retarded.

    First learn what veganism is.

    “Veganism is a way of living which seeks to exclude, as far as is possible and practicable, all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose.” – Definition of veganism

    as to your numbewred responses.

    1) what do you mean?
    2) No. since ww1 we have grown 5x the number of people and on average we eat 3 times as much meat pr person.
    3) We have several examples of genetic modification for food. don’t understand your point..
    4) adressed above from the vegansociety
    5) that depends on amount you work out not what you eat.. one of the stronges men in the world is vegan and increased his perfomance 20% on changing diets (or so he claims) (
    6) we have not been around for a million year and look at how well equipped you are to hunt and eat prey. you are not. We are scavengers and herbivores. even great apes with proper fangs are mostly herbivores
    7) you are switcihng subject. most of africa is malnoursihed and underfed. ( and yeah i know it’s massive and the map distorts it)

    Lars Fosdal : no the article is bollocks. Using animals as slaves is wrong. full stop.

    I tend to nomrally not bash on people who sitll use animals. But everyone will move away from using animals soon. We don’t have the land or water to live as we do today, also it’s one of the very worst causes for global warming.

  9. Using animals as slaves, lol. I’d trade places with my chickens in a heartbeat. And they do fine here in Denmark, living mostly ferally.

    God, I hates me an ideologue.

  10. Ted Ewen the funny thing about CHickens in their current form is that it is ‘Ethically Vegan’ to eat eggs.

    The notion is to reduce suffering.

    Listen carefully:
    Chickens will lay eggs, even without a Cock, the Cock abuses the Hens to a certain extent, without a Cock, the eggs are all duds, never will live, just a daily period [ if you feed them well ]

    In a run we protect them from all predators.. BETTER THAN WILD

    If they die we remove the body before they are eaten by their ‘sister’s [ they are friggin Raptors, look up ‘Dinosaur’ ] and bury it with respect. [ returned to Earth ]
    BETTER THAN WILD. [ where hey would be eaten whilst still dieing… ]

    They have a better life than ‘wild’ if you keep them for eggs.

    This is not agreed by ‘Vegans’, the single-mindedness of some people gets in the way of rational debate.

    That situation would be untenable to most [ so-called ] Vegans.

    I strive on eating to survive.

    1/2 my last shop was just drinking water!

  11. Dude, listen carefully:
    Take your lectures elsewhere. I know them better than you.

    The behavior you describe is well, wrong. is there the potential for cannibalism? yes- have we ever experienced it? Nope, and we have had deaths as part of the natural cycle of things.

    Roosters abuse? No friend, they are roosters. They are caring and loving critters who sacrifice regularly for their flocks, including their own lives, if necessary.

    For someone who cares about the animalz, you surely are ignorant of them

    10:1 hen to rooster flock stability. That means that 4 of 10 eggs will be meat birds. Excess roosters, right? That’s nature, not me. The excess roo’s would fight, be predated, or run off. Nature at work, friend. Try being part of it, instead of thinking you are somehow above it – and us.

  12. Ted Ewen my ‘behavior’ is due to Autism. My words are due to information.

    I can resolve the details because I know them well, Veganism [ not in the USA lexicon according to Firefox ] only works in a rich or heavily agrarian society.

    It’s the solace of the pompous rich and the hippy poor in the UK.

    Do you keep Chickens? [ qualifier to comment with any kind of knowledge ]

    Flocks of Chickens.

    You do understand the Chicken is a flightless birds and a flock is only Birds on the wing.

    The word Moron was invented in the USA…

    You have interesting ‘commons’ to me, old as you are, the new watch comes in…

    Mr ‘first’ =]8¬_D

  13. On the spectrum too, not an excuse. That you know to comment on it shows you could change it.

    Pedantry, no, thanks.
    And apparently, reading comprehension is missing as well.

    So no, we are done.

  14. Ted Ewen I am an idealist, not to be confused.

    I do swing polemic at times.

    Animals are smeared on 21st century existence.

    Whatever, kid…

    [ notices that not a single person he has in common has changed their profile picture in over 6 years… ]

    [ ed ]
    My first comment will gain plusses and show the general idea ;0)

Leave a Reply