Cucumber Dildo

[The Grand Nudger]

I already answered that, even if you did give the benefit of the doubt to vegetables, eating animals uses more vegetables than eating the vegetables directly since the animals use lots of energy just by being alive.

You're getting bad info somewhere. But, as you said, we'll all do what we like and call it a day.

For those lurkers and others interested in this sort of thing:

Cows are wonderful, you see they have an organ called a rumen, which allows them to eat things which cannot be digested by human beings. A rumen is a "solar powered protein factory". With cattle, we can take land that is unsuitable for supporting human life (capable of supporting only grass), toss a few animals on it, and voila, suitable. Unfortunately, most cows are fed corn currently, turning this wonderful solar machine into a fossil fuel burner (and that's just what we need isn't it). Nonetheless, cows do not consume more food than they provide human beings with, because even in the case of corn, there is more nutritional value in the cow than all of the feed it was given. Good stuff really.

As a side note, dairy cows aren't fed corn because of the process involved. The milk would be toxic. Chickens probably come out on top as far as the calculus of protein, mainly because you dont have to kill the chicken, and it will lay many times more than it's own weight in eggs over it's lifetime. Of course then we have fish, which are pretty much a win-win-win. Pigs are of course a favorite of mine, but definitely devoid of the advantages of cattle, eggs, or fish (though they do process food wastes better than the other three). Of course, just about any type of livestock makes for great nitrogen capture, which is key, if you want to grow vegetables in anything even closing in on a sustainable system.