@ jg2014

You seem very confused as to what you want. As long as humans are in existence animal will suffer. Even with out us they will suffer, that's nature.

Now...Humans have been constantly evolving. Due to this we are destroying the planet, and causing animals to "suffer". Here are things you should avoid to prevent the animals from further suffering, since you are so crazy about everything being wrong.(You must stop being a hypocrite)
1.paper and wood- all those trees where once homes to animals
2. food from any farm, plants included- all the field is the home for animals they could get hurt by equipment and are loosening their food source.
3.clothing- even harvesting cotton is harmful to animals
4.Cars- never know when you could run over a squirrel or hit a cat.
5. electricity- power plants ruins the planet
6. vets- all the pain they cause to save an animal
7. Doctors- the testing that got you medicine
8. pets- we should not own them according to you. Can't fix them because that causes pain, so I guess they will just keep breeding and being in more pain. But hey, as long as they are in more pain and free, then less pain and sheltered.

I'm sure there are many more, but I think you'll get the idea.
I can't take you seriously if you are not fallowing your own guidelines

(January 22, 2014 at 2:53 pm)jg2014 Wrote: I think the emotion you are describing is called empathy. All I have done is debated, I have not insulted anyone, whereas I have been called a "bitch", "prick", and "pussy" in addition to having been told to "fuck off". Please stop making these nonsense ad hominem attacks, and focus on the debate.

You are just deflecting. I hit the nail on the head. You don't like being exposed so you cry about being insulted.
The debate is nonsense. The little bit of suffering the animals experience when their flesh is harvested is irrelevant. It just doesn't matter. The only thing it actually hurts is your feelings.
Why don't you use your empathy towards things that really matter like helping children or freeing minds of religious bondage?

Won't some one empathy for the plants!

(January 22, 2014 at 1:52 pm)KUSA Wrote: @jg2014
It's obvious that animal suffering is not really what you're concerned about. If it were you would be concerned about what one animal does to another but you dismiss that because they are amoral.

Speaking for my self that is utter bullshit. I am concerned at Animal suffering, my own feelings are irrelavant

Quote:The only suffrage that you really care about is your own.

Suffrange is about voting rights

YOU are the one that suffers when people eat meat.

Hardly

Quote: I can't understand why you feel this way but it is apparent that you do. The thought of me going in the woods, shooting the lungs out of a deer, and enjoying it's tasty flesh makes your eyes water up.

Again not at all. Indeed if a hunter is a competent shot then hunting and killing an animal with a rifle is preferable to any other form of meat eating

Quote:I can tell you that deer did not suffer but you did.

i didn't

Quote: Even if the deer had a few seconds of suffering it just doesn't matter once it is dead anyway. It's not like some evil force lingers around because the deer died.

So you could torture anyone to death and it wouldn't matter once they were dead

(January 22, 2014 at 10:19 am)là bạn điên Wrote: And yet you presume to lecture me? Arrogant wanker

You're the one who assumed I've been to the US, that's arrogance.

Quote:tell you what tell your wife you are buying here a fur coat and bring home a leather one. She will tell you quickly enough.

What's the difference between fur and leather? Answer the question.

---

(January 22, 2014 at 12:36 pm)jg2014 Wrote: So essentially you are saying that all epidemiology is invalid?

No, I said you need more information before you can start drawing conclusions. DATA MINING is JUNK SCIENCE - and that's what you have. From the SDA study you have correlation, but not causation and you are assuming causation to be true, even though there are a number of other factors which have not been ruled out. You need your control group to meet exactly the same conditions except for diet. That you don't have.

Quote:Controlled trials are great but it does not invalidate epidemiological studies if they are big enough and are well controlled. It comes down to statistics, and if you have a big enough sample then the results hold true.

No they don't, you can prove anything through data mining, that's why it's junk science. You can prove whatever you want - you could prove Soy causes cancer, you could prove high protein diets result in miscarriage, whatever you want to prove you can do it using data mining. How you think this qualifies as objective science is beyond me.

Quote:If what you say is true and I am cherry picking, then show some studies that demonstrate that people on well planned vegan diets are unhealthy. You seem to demand of me decades long randomised control trials to show that veganism is healthy, but are happy to accept anecdote in support of your argument.

Doctors and Nutritionists say that vegan diets are a bad idea. They also say it's a very bad idea for people who have certain allergies (eg nuts and soy). We have science which shows what foods are healthy and what diets are healthiest.

What you have is a very small number of doctors and nutritionists who have fringe ideas. There are doctors that believe AIDS is not a virus, there are doctors that believe Immunization is a bad thing for children, and there are doctors addicted to painkillers and morphine. If you're willing to believe something supported by only a few doctors - then why not believe everything supported by only a few doctors?

You keep saying that Vegans are healthier than those with an Omnivorous diet - and yet you've not proven it at all.

No ancient society thrived on a vegetarian or vegan diet.

The USA has a hugely higher number of centenarians per head of population than say India where about 40% of the population are vegetarian. I pointed this out to you earlier. The country with the highest number of centenarians per head of population is Japan - a country where (comparatively) there are virtually no vegetarians!!

Quote:The fact is all the available evidence shows that a vegan diet is healthy and is protective against a number of diseases, including some cancers, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and rheumatoid arthritis.

Nope, you're just hearing what you want to hear and then parroting it back. There is NO evidence, none whatsoever, that there are any health benefits in the areas you mentioned between vegetarians and vegans. Milk and Eggs are two of the healthiest foods available to humans.

Quote:
Now you may very well be right, and better and bigger studies may come along and over turn all these findings. But until they do the evidence is clear. Veganism is healthy. That's why the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (whose membership includes 150,000 health care professionals) say...

"Vegetarian diets, which contain no meat (beef, pork, poultry, or fish and shellfish), are naturally low in saturated fat, high in fiber, and full of vitamins, minerals, and cancer-fighting compounds. A multitude of scientific studies have shown that vegetarian diets have remarkable health benefits and can help prevent certain diseases, such as cancer, diabetes, and heart disease. We encourage vegetarian diets as a way of improving general health and preventing diet-related illnesses.
Vegan diets, which contain no animal products (meat, dairy, eggs, or other animal products), are even healthier than vegetarian diets. Vegan diets contain no cholesterol and even less fat, saturated fat, and calories than vegetarian diets because they exclude dairy and eggs. Scientific research shows that health benefits increase as the amount of food from animal sources in the diet decreases, making vegan diets the healthiest overall."

I'm not interested in what biased groups have to say on the matter. And I would urge people not to take this as proper medical advice, and to talk to their doctor or nutritionist before deciding about a change in their diet. It is simply irresponsible of them, medically, to give out universal advice which is not right for everyone.

I guess you've conceded the point on vegan cat food.

You ignored my question about babies being fed formulated milk, so I'll ask again:

Quote:Vegan breast milk is not deficient in any nutrients if the mother has a well planned diet, and there are always supplements that can be take. Soya milk infant formula milk, has also been shown to be as safe as cows milk, although breast milk is still best.

What if the baby is allergic to Soy, AND Breast Milk is unavailable??

Quote:

(January 22, 2014 at 3:53 am)Aractus Wrote: Try this one:

• 
  
  So, I've been vegan for 5 years, vegetarian for 10 years before that. Here's the problem:
  
  I am allergic to soy, which I have done fine with. Somehow, I've developed a severe peanut allergy, and am starting to show symptoms of other allergies to legumes and nuts. I'm not sure how much longer I can remain vegan and survive.
  
  But I don't want to not be vegan.
  
  Does anyone know of any really useful alternative protein sources? Solutions to the problem? I can go on shots and such, but many of the allergen preventatives are animal tested or animal derived. This is such a pain in the butt.
  
  I suppose I'm writing because the depression of this is simply hitting me so hard, I don't know how to deal with this.

If a physician or nutritionist tells you to eat meat or dairy or take animal-derived supplements for your health, according to you, they'd be wrong?

Yes, they would be wrong. The patient could still acquire complete protein from both mycoprotein and quinoa. Additionally the amino acid that is lacking from grains is lysine, which is made synthetically and sold in supplements. Therefore a diet based on grains, mushrooms, mycoprotein, vegetables and fruits with supplemented lysine and multivitamins would be a very healthy diet indeed. With appropriate monitoring from a trained nutritionist, the patient could acquire all protein from vegan sources.

Additionally, I would also enquire about their vitamin status as B12 deficiency can also cause depression. Are they getting enough iodine and is that causing hypothyroidism. Many things could be affecting the patients health, but none of them need meat to treat these conditions.

You're impossible. You'd rather that somebody have to eat meals planned so meticulously that they have no freedom to go out and eat, or to go to parties and have to bring their own food.

Someone I know is completely allergic to gluten AND to most nuts. This person is therefore unable to eat almost any processed food. No doubt you'd recommend that they go "vegan" for their health as well wouldn't you?

(January 22, 2014 at 4:32 pm)StoryBook Wrote: @ jg2014

You seem very confused as to what you want. As long as humans are in existence animal will suffer. Even with out us they will suffer, that's nature.

Now...Humans have been constantly evolving. Due to this we are destroying the planet, and causing animals to "suffer". Here are things you should avoid to prevent the animals from further suffering, since you are so crazy about everything being wrong.(You must stop being a hypocrite)
1.paper and wood- all those trees where once homes to animals
2. food from any farm, plants included- all the field is the home for animals they could get hurt by equipment and are loosening their food source.
3.clothing- even harvesting cotton is harmful to animals
4.Cars- never know when you could run over a squirrel or hit a cat.
5. electricity- power plants ruins the planet
6. vets- all the pain they cause to save an animal
7. Doctors- the testing that got you medicine
8. pets- we should not own them according to you. Can't fix them because that causes pain, so I guess they will just keep breeding and being in more pain. But hey, as long as they are in more pain and free, then less pain and sheltered.

I'm sure there are many more, but I think you'll get the idea.
I can't take you seriously if you are not fallowing your own guidelines

Firstly, I dont not solely value reducing animal suffering, I also value human suffering.

Secondly, as power plants are destroying the planet, surely that means they will harms humans as well. Does that mean you want to get rid of them? No, electricity is essential to our lives and our population could not be supported without it. Should we get rid of cars because they kill children? No, but we should ensure that safety measures in place.

The same could be said of all the things you mention, getting rid of them would all cause significant suffering to humans. We should however try to ensure our usage of these things causes as little impact as possible.

Meat eating goes directly against this principle, it is merely cruel.

---

(January 23, 2014 at 2:10 am)Aractus Wrote: What you have is a very small number of doctors and nutritionists who have fringe ideas.

How many doctors do you think the NHS represents in the UK?

Re Breast milk, I would ensure that the baby could get milk donated from another mother.

I have provided you with a multitude of studies which show a well balanced vegan diet is healthy. Why don't you provide any?

(January 23, 2014 at 12:42 am)là bạn điên Wrote: So you could torture anyone to death and it wouldn't matter once they were dead

You are confused. I gave a scenario where I hunted an animal not a person.
Actually I don't think you are confused. You obviously place equal value on animals and humans. I don't.

(January 23, 2014 at 7:40 am)KUSA Wrote:

(January 23, 2014 at 12:42 am)là bạn điên Wrote: So you could torture anyone to death and it wouldn't matter once they were dead

You are confused. I gave a scenario where I hunted an animal not a person.
Actually I don't think you are confused. You obviously place equal value on animals and humans. I don't.

I was replying to arcturus.

I value my family more than I value people outside my family that doesn't mean I think it is OK for my family members to kill non family members.

I value my dogs vastly more than I value people that I don't know.

(January 23, 2014 at 3:34 am)jg2014 Wrote: I have provided you with a multitude of studies which show a well balanced vegan diet is healthy. Why don't you provide any?

I already explained that data mining is junk science and doesn't qualify - it's not objective and you could easily rove that children need private education by that standard.

Answer my question. My friend is allergic to most nuts and gluten. Cannot east most processed foods (including cereals). Should he eat a vegan diet and will it be healthier?

---

(January 23, 2014 at 7:45 am)là bạn điên Wrote: I was replying to arcturus.

No you weren't and my pseudonym is Aractus or you can call me by my Christian name: Daniel.