Great Vegan Debate

A place to discuss health and fitness, including healthy diets, etc.
tatpurusa
Posts: 616
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:17 am

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by tatpurusa » Fri Jan 03, 2020 7:19 pm

Simon E. wrote:
Fri Jan 03, 2020 4:59 pm
I hope the courts decision in favour of the employee stands. I think it is in accord with natural justice that an employee should be able to disclose actions made by employees which seem not to accord with that organisations own stated ethical stance when that employee can be seen to hold a coherent philosophical position, even when that position is not shared by a majority.
For example in my view Mormonism is illogical and contrary to all known facts concerning the history of the Americas, but I would uphold the right of Mormons to hold their beliefs without fear of reprisal from employers.
Just so, I would support the right of Vegans to hold their views without fear of prejudice in matters to do with employment law.
Within this context of employee rights, yes, I agree.

Simon E.
Posts: 7652
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by Simon E. » Fri Jan 03, 2020 7:27 pm

That is what the case is about. Of course the media is focusing on the Vegan aspect, but the judge made it clear that his findings spoke to the rights of employees to hold philosophical views.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 3793
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 4:23 pm
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by DNS » Sat Jan 04, 2020 12:17 am

Meat has been taken off the menu at this year's Golden Globe Awards dinner.

It appears to be vegan:
Guests will be served a vibrant chilled golden beet soup topped with shaved candy-striped beets and pistachios.
For the main course, mushrooms are taking center stage, featured in King Oyster mushroom "scallops" and wild mushroom risotto.
In a final flourish, a vegan opera dome dessert will provide a sweet ending.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/03/entertai ... index.html

User avatar
PeterC
Posts: 2105
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by PeterC » Sat Jan 04, 2020 1:48 am

Malcolm wrote:
Fri Jan 03, 2020 4:43 pm
There will be water wars long before that happens.
Could be. Desertification is the major cause of loss of arable land in Asia, and there’s about two billion people who rely on rivers coming from the Himalayas in some form. It is possible technologically to address water constraints in most places, but practically it won’t happen because resources are shared across countries and the legal frameworks to share costs and usage either don’t exist or are very badly designed, even within individual countries. War is simpler and quicker as a dispute resolution. But the drug-resistant disease issue is also here now. We’ve been very, very lucky that there hasn’t been a major epidemic incident since SARS - all you need is something with a long latency period becoming widespread in a city with a major air hub. But epidemics won’t kill the most people. Before too long these diseases will become endemic in hospitals themselves, and invasive procedures will become vastly more dangerous due to the risk of postoperative infection.

All of which, really, just takes us back to where we were a century ago - just with about five billion or so excess people that the world can’t support. The idea that this can all be avoided if we take fewer flights and eat fewer steaks is fantasy, unfortunately.

User avatar
Vasana
Posts: 2098
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by Vasana » Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:54 am

PeterC wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 1:48 am
The idea that this can all be avoided if we take fewer flights and eat fewer steaks is fantasy, unfortunately.
It's a fantasy, but it's a step in the right direction at least.
The trouble with sustainability and planetary health is that it's a wicked problem with multiple interdependent risk factors yet our institutions have created rigid path-dependencies and lock-ins where a joined-up, systems-thinking approach is neither viable ,pallatable nor comprehensible in the political sphere because it completely lays bear our short sightedness, knowledge and epistemological failures. It undermines the very social and economic frameworks that enabled us to discover complex systems and network theory in the first place. Threre's no scientific justification for capitalism or economic optimization and the overlooking of this fact by both economists, poloticians and even the UN's sustainable development goals is a testament to how averse we are to the truth. Earlier instances of the science-policy gap were probably the earliest sign that the post-truth era had begun. Even before consensus on human driven warming, the 'limits to growth' study came out in the 70s spoke about all of the expected population and economic dips we could see as our industrial systems unravel, yet 50 years later, and systems thinking is rarely applied outside of academia and small scale instances.

And so all we see are these piecemeal, disjointed solutions to interdependent problems falsey seen in isolation like our myopic focus on carbon or meat instead of the 50 other issues that need tackling simultaneously within a systems approach.

The Water-food-energy nexus is one systemic framework that I think is at least getting governmental attention. I think as the stressors of this nexus become more obvious over the next 5-10 years (as predicted in the 70s), then maybe ( a big maybe) we'll be wise enough to see that only an approach rooted in systems-thinking and social-ecological interdependence will help us long term.

Image

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.thegua ... g-collapse
ཨོཾ ་ མ ་ ཎི ་ པ ་ དྨེ ་ ཧཱུྃ ། འ ་ ཨ ་ ཧ ་ ཤ ་ ས ་ མ །
Om Mani Peme Hum ། 'A Ah Ha Sha Sa Ma
'When alone, watch your mind,When with others, watch your speech' - Old Kadampa saying

User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 2624
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by Aemilius » Sat Jan 04, 2020 10:14 am

The problem with that kind of statistics is that the world is not a uniform whole. All levels of tehcnology and culture exist simultaneously in different areas of the world. There are tribes on this planet that have only the numbers from on to three, and tribes that know the numbers from one to four, or from one to five or six. Different kinds of working with metal exist, and different levels of agriculture exist. Etc..
In some countries the population is declining already. It is growing mostly in poor and underdeveloped countries.

From UN Global Issues: Population

Africa: fastest growing continent

More than half of global population growth between now and 2050 is expected to occur in Africa. Africa has the highest rate of population growth among major areas. The population of sub-Saharan Africa is projected to double by 2050. A rapid population increase in Africa is anticipated even if there is a substantial reduction of fertility levels in the near future. Regardless of the uncertainty surrounding future trends in fertility in Africa, the large number of young people currently on the continent, who will reach adulthood in the coming years and have children of their own, ensures that the region will play a central role in shaping the size and distribution of the world’s population over the coming decades.

Shrinking population in Europe

In sharp contrast, the populations of 55 countries or areas in the world are expected to decrease by 2050, of which 26 may see a reduction of at least ten per cent. Several countries are expected to see their populations decline by more than 15 per cent by 2050, including Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Serbia, and Ukraine. Fertility in all European countries is now below the level required for full replacement of the population in the long run (around 2.1 children per woman), and in the majority of cases, fertility has been below the replacement level for several decades.
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)

User avatar
well wisher
Posts: 436
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2018 3:57 am

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by well wisher » Sat Jan 04, 2020 12:20 pm

Sādhaka wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 5:39 am
Of course in a ideal world, we would not have to eat food at all; or maybe have some sort of super trees that produce fruits that are literally packed with every single nutrient we need, no antinutrients, and not too much fructose.
I agree! these would be wonderful solution if it can come true. Automatic survival without having to consume, or easily growable super trees/vegetations. Because so many conflicts in this world is due to squabbling and fighting over limited resources.

Wishful thinking, but sadly too difficult to come true.

User avatar
seeker242
Posts: 1622
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:50 pm
Location: South Florida, USA

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by seeker242 » Sat Jan 04, 2020 1:53 pm

PeterC wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 1:48 am
The idea that this can all be avoided if we take fewer flights and eat fewer steaks is fantasy, unfortunately.
Sure, the world does and will have too many people. But what is the solution? Convince the people of the world to stop having babies? One could argue that convincing the people of the world to stop having sex and thus children, is also a fantasy and a much bigger one at that.
One should not kill any living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should one incite any other to kill. Do never injure any being, whether strong or weak, in this entire universe!

User avatar
PeterC
Posts: 2105
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by PeterC » Sat Jan 04, 2020 2:11 pm

seeker242 wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 1:53 pm
PeterC wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 1:48 am
The idea that this can all be avoided if we take fewer flights and eat fewer steaks is fantasy, unfortunately.
Sure, the world does and will have too many people. But what is the solution? Convince the people of the world to stop having babies? One could argue that convincing the people of the world to stop having sex and thus children, is also a fantasy and a much bigger one at that.
There is no solution. Lots of people will die. The only issue is how.

It’s interesting how people will readily accept that we are in the Kali Yuga, that there is nothing but suffering in samsara, etc. But they still cling onto hope that somehow society’s problems can be solved.

Malcolm
Posts: 31849
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by Malcolm » Sat Jan 04, 2020 3:05 pm

PeterC wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 2:11 pm
seeker242 wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 1:53 pm
PeterC wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 1:48 am
The idea that this can all be avoided if we take fewer flights and eat fewer steaks is fantasy, unfortunately.
Sure, the world does and will have too many people. But what is the solution? Convince the people of the world to stop having babies? One could argue that convincing the people of the world to stop having sex and thus children, is also a fantasy and a much bigger one at that.
There is no solution. Lots of people will die. The only issue is how.

It’s interesting how people will readily accept that we are in the Kali Yuga, that there is nothing but suffering in samsara, etc. But they still cling onto hope that somehow society’s problems can be solved.
It would be morally irresponsible not to act, that’s why.

User avatar
PeterC
Posts: 2105
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by PeterC » Sat Jan 04, 2020 3:30 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 3:05 pm
PeterC wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 2:11 pm
seeker242 wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 1:53 pm


Sure, the world does and will have too many people. But what is the solution? Convince the people of the world to stop having babies? One could argue that convincing the people of the world to stop having sex and thus children, is also a fantasy and a much bigger one at that.
There is no solution. Lots of people will die. The only issue is how.

It’s interesting how people will readily accept that we are in the Kali Yuga, that there is nothing but suffering in samsara, etc. But they still cling onto hope that somehow society’s problems can be solved.
It would be morally irresponsible not to act, that’s why.
Of course we should do what we can, just as we should make a terminal patient comfortable to limit their suffering. I just don’t see a happy ending coming.

User avatar
seeker242
Posts: 1622
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:50 pm
Location: South Florida, USA

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by seeker242 » Sat Jan 04, 2020 4:37 pm

PeterC wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 2:11 pm

There is no solution. Lots of people will die. The only issue is how.
So if that's then case, then it's quite pointless to just ignore things that can be done and just continue talking about how there are too many people. AKA "Don't bother with that, there's just too many people". As if somehow efficient use and inefficient use of resources, etc, has no relation to the earth's carrying capacity for people, which it certainly does. The intelligent solution would be to maximize the carrying capacity with the minimal amount of harm, which is what this issue is all about to begin with.
Last edited by seeker242 on Sat Jan 04, 2020 4:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
One should not kill any living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should one incite any other to kill. Do never injure any being, whether strong or weak, in this entire universe!

User avatar
PeterC
Posts: 2105
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by PeterC » Sat Jan 04, 2020 4:43 pm

seeker242 wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 4:37 pm
PeterC wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 2:11 pm

There is no solution. Lots of people will die. The only issue is how.
So if that's then case, then it's quite pointless to just ignore things that can be done and just continue talking about how there are too many people. AKA "Don't bother with that, there's just too many people". As if somehow efficient use and inefficient use of resources, etc, has no relation to the earth's carrying capacity for people, which it certainly does.
That’s not what I said at all.

Malcolm
Posts: 31849
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by Malcolm » Sat Jan 04, 2020 5:41 pm

PeterC wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 3:30 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 3:05 pm
PeterC wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 2:11 pm


There is no solution. Lots of people will die. The only issue is how.

It’s interesting how people will readily accept that we are in the Kali Yuga, that there is nothing but suffering in samsara, etc. But they still cling onto hope that somehow society’s problems can be solved.
It would be morally irresponsible not to act, that’s why.
Of course we should do what we can, just as we should make a terminal patient comfortable to limit their suffering. I just don’t see a happy ending coming.
There are no happy endings in samsara at all, ever.

User avatar
Könchok Thrinley
Former staff member
Posts: 2200
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2015 11:18 am

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by Könchok Thrinley » Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:17 pm

PeterC wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 3:30 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 3:05 pm
PeterC wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 2:11 pm


There is no solution. Lots of people will die. The only issue is how.

It’s interesting how people will readily accept that we are in the Kali Yuga, that there is nothing but suffering in samsara, etc. But they still cling onto hope that somehow society’s problems can be solved.
It would be morally irresponsible not to act, that’s why.
Of course we should do what we can, just as we should make a terminal patient comfortable to limit their suffering. I just don’t see a happy ending coming.
Yes, naturaly. But for me the struggle is even more important due to its futility. As the story of a boy throwing fishes on a beach back to the water says "Yes, I cannot save all but I it makes a world difference for the one I can save."
“Observing samaya involves to remain inseparable from the union of wisdom and compassion at all times, to sustain mindfulness, and to put into practice the guru’s instructions”. Garchen Rinpoche

Formerly known as Miroku.

User avatar
treehuggingoctopus
Posts: 1890
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 6:26 pm
Location: EU

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by treehuggingoctopus » Fri Jan 10, 2020 6:07 pm

Könchok Thrinley wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:17 pm
PeterC wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 3:30 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 3:05 pm


It would be morally irresponsible not to act, that’s why.
Of course we should do what we can, just as we should make a terminal patient comfortable to limit their suffering. I just don’t see a happy ending coming.
Yes, naturaly. But for me the struggle is even more important due to its futility. As the story of a boy throwing fishes on a beach back to the water says "Yes, I cannot save all but I it makes a world difference for the one I can save."
:good:
To offer care and affection to sentient beings
In desperate situations who lack protection
Brings just as much merit as the meditation
On emptiness with compassion as its core—
So it has been said by glorious Lord Atisha.

Chatral Sangye Dorje Rinpoche

If you cannot generate an altruistic mind, even extensive retreat will be of not much benefit.
Garchen Triptrul Rinpoche

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 3793
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 4:23 pm
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by DNS » Sat Jan 11, 2020 9:23 pm

Könchok Thrinley wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:17 pm
Yes, naturaly. But for me the struggle is even more important due to its futility. As the story of a boy throwing fishes on a beach back to the water says "Yes, I cannot save all but I it makes a world difference for the one I can save."

User avatar
nowmindful
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2020 11:21 pm

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by nowmindful » Tue Jan 21, 2020 9:35 am

Grigoris wrote:
Mon Jun 10, 2019 7:09 pm
Nemo wrote:
Wed Jun 05, 2019 12:13 am
I, for example, have been a vegetarian for over 25 years. For the past few years I have been eating a little meat ritually, once or twice a month. I had blood tests recently and they found borderline high cholesterol levels!!! And that even though I exercise intensely at least three times a week.

WTF???

AND not only am I vegetarian, but I also eat really well: Heaps of fruit and vegetables. No fried foods (well, maybe once every couple of weeks I will eat some freshly fried potato chips cooked in local olive oil). Minimal high fat cheeses. Lots of locally grown products. Very little sugar. No junk food. Etc...

:shrug:
:good: Cholesterol Myths:
https://www.aarp.org/health/healthy-liv ... myths.html
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-chol ... t_b_676817

Simon E.
Posts: 7652
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by Simon E. » Tue Jan 21, 2020 11:01 am

I am not a vegetarian. My diet is high in meat, eggs, cheese and other dairy. My cholesterol is low.
There are a number of variables here.
The cholesterol thing has been presented in a simplistic and skewed way.

They have to get those statins down you somehow.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.

User avatar
Kim O'Hara
Former staff member
Posts: 4297
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2012 1:09 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Great Vegan Debate

Post by Kim O'Hara » Fri Feb 28, 2020 1:26 am

Is almond milk vegan? Not if bees are killed to make it.

Each winter, billions of honeybees are prematurely woken from hibernation, trucked into California and exposed to a “soup” of bacteria, parasites and toxic pesticides -- so they can serve as pollinators for the fast-growing almond milk industry.

They end up sick and exhausted, and many don’t make it back. Every year, up to 30 percent die.

Our fragile bees deserve better -- and almond milk drinkers deserve a truly animal-friendly product.

The good news is there are ways to grow almonds that don’t kill or harm bees. But Blue Diamond (Almond Breeze), the number-one almond milk brand in the world, won't commit to using 100 percent bee-friendly almonds. Danone, maker of Silk and Alpro, says it's aiming for bee-friendly certification, but has yet to commit to a concrete timeline for a complete transition.


We’ve got to use public pressure to get almond milk corporations in the bees' corner -- before it’s too late.


Demand bee-friendly almond milk now.
:reading: https://actions.sumofus.org/a/is-almond ... o-make-it/

There is, of course, a petition for you to sign and share if you're willing. :thanks:

But I'm just as concerned with generalising the issue this campaign illustrates: that veganism (or vegetarianism) is not necessarily good for the environment, especially when it has been hijacked by the capitalists as yet another marketing opportunity.

:namaste:
Kim

Post Reply

Return to “Wellness, Diet and Fitness”