Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Bumber]

Våffelgjutjärn?

[Iduno]

I get an intense illish headache when I rat waffles. I'm not sure why. But I have all my life.

It makes me miserable because I love waffles.

Oh, Eat waffles. Could be dairy or gluten problems. Try giving up one or the other for a bit over a week (until you feel well), and then eat enough of that thing that you'll know what caused it (or don't, it isn't pleasant). I accidentally did that one to myself, which at least meant I knew what was causing my issues.

There are many reasons for a person to have a dietary requirement.  There's vegetarianism or veganism, obviously.  Celiacs or general gluten intolerance.  Religious strictures.  That-thing-what-the-deer-ticks-give-you-where-eating-any-mammal-or-dairy-makes-you-intensely-ill, which my ex-housemate had.  He was not the most careful, so I got to see the aftermath of that.  Fun times, let me tell you.

Agreed.

[scriver]

Våffelgjutjärn?

Gjutvåffeljärn

[dragdeler]

--

[Reelya]

I get an intense illish headache when I rat waffles. I'm not sure why. But I have all my life.

It makes me miserable because I love waffles.

Personally i don't much like making rat waffles, they make the most horrendous squealing noise and wriggle when you push the top down.

[scriver]

Bumber's post finally makes sense. Yeah, rat waffles are terrible.

[wierd]

Here I was thinking it was like ratting hair.  I imagined him shredding waffles all up into a fluffy pile of debris.

[Rolan7]

A new year, a new ask:
How to you justify eating meat?
I do so, sometimes, but you don't get my justification when you don't even know it.

[Vector]

I spent like 14 years as a strict vegetarian and I've had to be treated for anemia at least three times, plus vitamin B12 deficiency once and vitamin D deficiency once.

I eventually decided that enough was enough after years of being told "you just need to do vegetarianism right and put more effort into it," so I eat fish fairly regularly and sometimes (rarely) other things. My health is better and I have more energy.

I don't have a car or children and I buy most things used, which I consider to be an adequate carbon offset.

[MaxTheFox]

Because let's be honest I don't give a single fuck about the cows/pigs/whatever.

[wierd]

The ethical and moral dilemmas concerning food, and food availability, extends to veganism also, just in different capacities.

Often, the moral vegan fails to consider the serious consequences that heavy agriculture has in general.  I know that slippery slope is a kind of fallacy, but so is the "meat is torture!!" rhetoric (eg, it also is a slippery slope, the argument then boils down to where on the slope you wish to focus attention.)


To avoid the slippery slope, I view that the human fossil record shows that rapid braincase evolution occurred after humans integrated meat (in the form of fish and shellfish) into their diet.   This does not mean that humans NEED meat in their diet, but does hint strongly that the increased nutritional density was/is helpful.


I take to the "non-absolute morality" world view.  As such, strongly cased "MEAT IS BAD!!" arguments are immediately red-flagged to me.  Since I ascribe more to "moral relativism", I see the focus more in the terms of a spectrum:  Which is worse, the extreme ecosphere impacts of intensive agriculture (including the aggressive manufacture and use of nitrogen fertilizers), or the suffering of free ranged beef, with the greater perspective that wholesale removal of industrialized food production (including meat production) would result in widespread human suffering.

Since none of the choices include "no suffering", some degree of suffering must be accepted.  When, where, and what kind of suffering is then the context in which to make the rational decision.

Again, the ethical vegan often fails to properly conceptualize the impacts of monoculture, and instead presumes that all animal feed comes from human-edible foodstuffs, which is simply untrue.  (See also, humans cannot eat silage.  Silage is the left-over vegetable matter of corn production, such as whole corn stalks, cobs, etc.. It is a byproduct of corn cultivation for human consumption, that is used to feed cattle. The notion that it could be diverted to human use is nonsense. Arguments that revolve around this false presumption are rightly dismissed.)

[Caz]

I just think vegan activists are hypocrites. Being alive causes the death of other creatures. I don't see them crying over the millions of insects tortured to death to make wheat. I mean if you're vegetarian/vegan(it's usually the vegans) then fine, but when you start running around spreading nutritional disinformation and calling people 'murderers' and 'cow rapists' etc you lose all credibility.

Also wierd made some great points. I've yet to find a vegan who can refute the argument that a diet of large herbivore raised on pasture right on your doorstep causing less suffering than a standard western vegan diet with bits and pieces of agriculture flown in from half a world away.

But in saying that I also think that industrial livestock production is disgusting, cruel, terrible for the environment and humans in general. I'm not just talking about the meat itself (which is basically worse by every metric than animals reared in more traditional husbandry methods, also in USA you've got ractopamine and other horrors), but the conditions the animals are raised make the 'farms' an uncontrolled disease-generating plant, the consequences of which we have all seen this last year.  We're already having troubles with antibiotic-resistant bacteria and the meat industry is just using our one main defense against anyone who has surgery dying of sepsis to *make animals fatter* so we can gorge ourselves with even cheaper meat.

I don't really buy animal meat anymore. I eat it sometimes if it's a gift or I'm eating at another's house or something. I told myself if I want some chicken I can go out with the axe and pick the most annoying one but I'm not that desperate for it really. Though every time I go to the store and see whole butchered chickens for £2 it scares me more and more. Meat would be cheap at 10x the price it is.

[NJW2000]

Insect pain being the dumbest take I've read in a long time. The nervous systems of mammals are very clearly different from those of insects used to produce crops - it's hard to prove that insect pain even exists, given what we know about their nervous systems. Besides, - if wheat is so terrible, we really shouldn't be giving almost half of it to livestock.
The vegans I know mainly stick to food grown in our country. They mostly cite environmental impact as a reason for not eating meat, animal pain being a secondary consideration. I know wierd gets pretty triggered by these arguments, but it's certainly a reason not to eat the majority of supermarket meat, especially for city-dwellers. And some people are a little hard up to visit small, independently supplies butchers in affluent university towns.

I just think vegan activists are hypocrites...
But in saying that I also think that industrial livestock production is disgusting, cruel, terrible for the environment and humans in general.

Preserving for posterity.


Also, rule of thumb: whenever someone mentions evolution in a moral argument, it's almost always stupid. This applies in this case: the fact that meat played a role in our development as animals has no bearing on our current situation - what matters is the nutritional packages we are capable of getting hold of today.

Since none of the choices include "no suffering", some degree of suffering must be accepted.  When, where, and what kind of suffering is then the context in which to make the rational decision.

This isn't moral relativism, it's just some kind of consequentialism. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm very much in favour.



I don't justify eating environmentally unsustainable or cruelly produced meat, just as I try not to justify the other things I do that I shouldn't. I do still do it.

[wierd]

Again, I was quite careful to avoid begging the question there.

It does not indicate that humans (currently) need meat.  (as indeed, with the right sets of prevailing circumstances, suitable nutritional yeilds can be attained with purely vegetable sources.)  What it does indicate, is that it was helpful as a concentrated energy and nutritional source, for that purpose.


However, the argument just tendered:

"---the fact that meat played a role in our development as animals has no bearing on our current situation - what matters is the nutritional packages we are capable of getting hold of today."

Makes incorrect presumptions about the availability of food sources, even in our modern environment.  Food poverty is a thing.  It is important to consider how much nutritional yield is present even in inexpensive chicken, and its relatively low modern costs.   

Under more "normal" conditions, IIRC the statistic is 1:5 people suffers from food poverty in the US.  It is much more prevalent right now due to COVID.

[Caz]

Insect pain being the dumbest take I've read in a long time. The nervous systems of mammals are very clearly different from those of insects used to produce crops - it's hard to prove that insect pain even exists, given what we know about their nervous systems.

When did they discover this? This is good news. Can you link the study?

Besides, - if wheat is so terrible, we really shouldn't be giving almost half of it to livestock.

Exactly.