"Humans eat meat, but meat-eating is not in the human's nature. When we kill animals to eat them, they end up killing us because of the meat loaded with cholesterol and saturated fat we consume. Humans, by nature, are herbivores." - Dr. Roberts, editor of the American Journal of Cardiovascular Diseases in 2013.
Consumption of meat leads to:
- Heart diseases and clogged arteries
- Diabetes
- The reaction of heterocyclic amines due to cooking meat, which causes cancer
- And many other diseases
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath
@GreenPathForAll
Consumption of meat leads to:
- Heart diseases and clogged arteries
- Diabetes
- The reaction of heterocyclic amines due to cooking meat, which causes cancer
- And many other diseases
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath
@GreenPathForAll
π9β€8
π± Pythagoras: The earth has spread before us a generous table of sin-free food. As long as man is a cruel destroyer of other creatures, he will never experience health and peace because, as long as men kill animals, they will kill each other.
π± Confucius: He who has once heard the cry of an animal being killed can never eat meat.
π± Leonardo da Vinci: The day will come when people will look at the killing of an animal the same way they look at the killing of a human today. There will come a time when we will judge eating animals with the same vision as today eating our own kind, cannibalism.
π± G. L. Rudd: Killing is the negation of love. To kill or eat what another has killed is to participate in cruelty, and cruelty turns our hearts to stone and blinds us so that we are unable to see that those we kill are our brothers and sisters in the family of creation.
π± Peter Rosegger: An animal has a heart that feels, just like you. An animal has pleasure and pain, just like you. An animal has a desire to live, just like you. An animal has the right to live, just like you.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
@GreenPathForAll π±
π± Confucius: He who has once heard the cry of an animal being killed can never eat meat.
π± Leonardo da Vinci: The day will come when people will look at the killing of an animal the same way they look at the killing of a human today. There will come a time when we will judge eating animals with the same vision as today eating our own kind, cannibalism.
π± G. L. Rudd: Killing is the negation of love. To kill or eat what another has killed is to participate in cruelty, and cruelty turns our hearts to stone and blinds us so that we are unable to see that those we kill are our brothers and sisters in the family of creation.
π± Peter Rosegger: An animal has a heart that feels, just like you. An animal has pleasure and pain, just like you. An animal has a desire to live, just like you. An animal has the right to live, just like you.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
@GreenPathForAll π±
β€4π2π1π±1
Formation of Heterocyclic Amines during Meat Cooking and Their Carcinogenic Potential
When meat is cooked at high temperatures, particularly through methods such as grilling, frying, or broiling, a series of complex chemical reactions occur. One significant outcome of these reactions is the formation of heterocyclic amines (HCAs). HCAs are organic compounds that are formed when amino acids (the building blocks of proteins) react with creatine (a substance found in muscle) at elevated temperatures.
Research has shown that the cooking process can lead to the Maillard reaction, where sugars react with amino acids, resulting in the production of various compounds, including HCAs. The specific types and amounts of HCAs formed depend on several factors, including the cooking temperature, duration, and the type of meat being cooked.
Studies have indicated that some HCAs are mutagenic, meaning they can cause changes in DNA that may lead to cancer. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the World Health Organization (WHO), has classified certain HCAs as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A).
For further reading, you may refer to the following source:
- Sinha, R., & Rothman, N. (2008). "Heterocyclic amines in cooked meats and risk of colorectal cancer." Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 17(6), 1214-1223. DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0011
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
@GreenPathForAll π±
When meat is cooked at high temperatures, particularly through methods such as grilling, frying, or broiling, a series of complex chemical reactions occur. One significant outcome of these reactions is the formation of heterocyclic amines (HCAs). HCAs are organic compounds that are formed when amino acids (the building blocks of proteins) react with creatine (a substance found in muscle) at elevated temperatures.
Research has shown that the cooking process can lead to the Maillard reaction, where sugars react with amino acids, resulting in the production of various compounds, including HCAs. The specific types and amounts of HCAs formed depend on several factors, including the cooking temperature, duration, and the type of meat being cooked.
Studies have indicated that some HCAs are mutagenic, meaning they can cause changes in DNA that may lead to cancer. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the World Health Organization (WHO), has classified certain HCAs as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A).
For further reading, you may refer to the following source:
- Sinha, R., & Rothman, N. (2008). "Heterocyclic amines in cooked meats and risk of colorectal cancer." Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 17(6), 1214-1223. DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0011
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
@GreenPathForAll π±
π5β€4π2
Here's a detailed explanation about the lack of pain perception in plants, incorporating scientific evidence and sources:
Do Plants Feel Pain? Science Says No.
While plants are incredibly complex living organisms, they don't experience pain the way humans and animals do. Here's why:
1. The Missing Ingredient: A Central Nervous System
* Pain requires a brain: Pain is a complex sensation processed by the brain. Plants lack a central nervous system, the network of nerves and brain responsible for processing sensory information and generating feelings like pain.
* No pain receptors: Animals have specialized nerve cells called nociceptors that detect potentially harmful stimuli like heat, pressure, or chemicals, and send signals to the brain, which interprets them as pain. Plants do not possess these receptors.
Source:
* "Plant Neurobiology: An Integrated View of Plant Signaling" by FrantiΕ‘ek BaluΕ‘ka, Dieter Volkmann, and Stefano Mancuso, Peter W Barlow [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2819436/]
2. Plant Responses vs. Pain
* Plants react, they don't feel: Plants exhibit remarkable responses to their environment, such as growing towards light, releasing chemicals to deter pests, or even snapping shut like the Venus flytrap. However, these are automatic, pre-programmed responses, not conscious decisions driven by pain.
* Chemical signaling, not pain signals: Plants utilize hormones and electrical signals to coordinate these responses, which are fundamentally different from the complex electrochemical signaling involved in animal nervous systems.
Source:
"The Sensitive Plant" by Daniel Chamovitz
3. Ethical Implications
* Focus on animal welfare: The absence of pain perception in plants allows us to focus our ethical considerations on the treatment of animals, which do possess the capacity to feel pain and suffer.
In Conclusion
Scientific evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that plants lack the biological mechanisms required for experiencing pain. Their remarkable responses to the environment are sophisticated survival mechanisms but should not be mistaken for conscious suffering.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
@GreenPathForAll π±
Do Plants Feel Pain? Science Says No.
While plants are incredibly complex living organisms, they don't experience pain the way humans and animals do. Here's why:
1. The Missing Ingredient: A Central Nervous System
* Pain requires a brain: Pain is a complex sensation processed by the brain. Plants lack a central nervous system, the network of nerves and brain responsible for processing sensory information and generating feelings like pain.
* No pain receptors: Animals have specialized nerve cells called nociceptors that detect potentially harmful stimuli like heat, pressure, or chemicals, and send signals to the brain, which interprets them as pain. Plants do not possess these receptors.
Source:
* "Plant Neurobiology: An Integrated View of Plant Signaling" by FrantiΕ‘ek BaluΕ‘ka, Dieter Volkmann, and Stefano Mancuso, Peter W Barlow [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2819436/]
2. Plant Responses vs. Pain
* Plants react, they don't feel: Plants exhibit remarkable responses to their environment, such as growing towards light, releasing chemicals to deter pests, or even snapping shut like the Venus flytrap. However, these are automatic, pre-programmed responses, not conscious decisions driven by pain.
* Chemical signaling, not pain signals: Plants utilize hormones and electrical signals to coordinate these responses, which are fundamentally different from the complex electrochemical signaling involved in animal nervous systems.
Source:
"The Sensitive Plant" by Daniel Chamovitz
3. Ethical Implications
* Focus on animal welfare: The absence of pain perception in plants allows us to focus our ethical considerations on the treatment of animals, which do possess the capacity to feel pain and suffer.
In Conclusion
Scientific evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that plants lack the biological mechanisms required for experiencing pain. Their remarkable responses to the environment are sophisticated survival mechanisms but should not be mistaken for conscious suffering.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
@GreenPathForAll π±
PubMed Central (PMC)
The βroot-brainβ hypothesis of Charles and Francis Darwin: Revival after more than 125 years
This year celebrates the 200th aniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin, best known for his theory of evolution summarized in On the Origin of Species. Less well known is that, in the second half of his life, Darwinβs major scientific focus turned ...
π8β€6π1
The Environmental Impact of Animal Agriculture
Animal agriculture is responsible for a significant portion of the world's agricultural land use and has profound implications for our planet's ecosystems. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), approximately 80% of the world's agricultural land is dedicated to livestock production, including grazing and feed crops. This extensive land use not only contributes to deforestation but also leads to habitat destruction, loss of biodiversity, and increased greenhouse gas emissions.
Each year, an estimated 70 billion land animals are killed for human consumption. This staggering number includes cattle, pigs, sheep, and poultry. In addition to these figures, millions of animals are exploited for dairy and egg production. For instance, dairy cows are often kept in confined conditions and can produce milk for several years before being sent to slaughter. Similarly, hens raised for egg production are typically kept in battery cages, leading to severe welfare issues.
The demand for animal products also drives the cultivation of vast amounts of feed crops. It is estimated that around one-third of global cereal production is used to feed livestock rather than humans. This leads to the use of pesticides and fertilizers that can harm local ecosystems, including insects and other wildlife.
Furthermore, the conversion of natural habitats into agricultural land for animal feed contributes to the decline of insect populations. Studies indicate that intensive farming practices can lead to a loss of biodiversity, with some estimates suggesting that insect populations have declined by as much as 75% in certain regions over the past few decades.
References:
1. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). (2013). "Tackling Climate Change Through Livestock: A Global Assessment of Emissions and Mitigation Opportunities."
2. World Animal Protection. (2019). "The Impact of Animal Agriculture on Climate Change."
3. Hallmann, C.A., et al. (2017). "Declines in insect abundance and diversity." Nature Ecology & Evolution.
By understanding these facts, we can make more informed choices about our diets and their impact on the environment and animal welfare. Choosing plant-based options not only helps reduce the suffering of billions of animals but also promotes a more sustainable use of our planet's resources.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
@GreenPathForAll π±
Animal agriculture is responsible for a significant portion of the world's agricultural land use and has profound implications for our planet's ecosystems. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), approximately 80% of the world's agricultural land is dedicated to livestock production, including grazing and feed crops. This extensive land use not only contributes to deforestation but also leads to habitat destruction, loss of biodiversity, and increased greenhouse gas emissions.
Each year, an estimated 70 billion land animals are killed for human consumption. This staggering number includes cattle, pigs, sheep, and poultry. In addition to these figures, millions of animals are exploited for dairy and egg production. For instance, dairy cows are often kept in confined conditions and can produce milk for several years before being sent to slaughter. Similarly, hens raised for egg production are typically kept in battery cages, leading to severe welfare issues.
The demand for animal products also drives the cultivation of vast amounts of feed crops. It is estimated that around one-third of global cereal production is used to feed livestock rather than humans. This leads to the use of pesticides and fertilizers that can harm local ecosystems, including insects and other wildlife.
Furthermore, the conversion of natural habitats into agricultural land for animal feed contributes to the decline of insect populations. Studies indicate that intensive farming practices can lead to a loss of biodiversity, with some estimates suggesting that insect populations have declined by as much as 75% in certain regions over the past few decades.
References:
1. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). (2013). "Tackling Climate Change Through Livestock: A Global Assessment of Emissions and Mitigation Opportunities."
2. World Animal Protection. (2019). "The Impact of Animal Agriculture on Climate Change."
3. Hallmann, C.A., et al. (2017). "Declines in insect abundance and diversity." Nature Ecology & Evolution.
By understanding these facts, we can make more informed choices about our diets and their impact on the environment and animal welfare. Choosing plant-based options not only helps reduce the suffering of billions of animals but also promotes a more sustainable use of our planet's resources.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
@GreenPathForAll π±
β€16π5π₯1π1π1
Hereβs a detailed explanation of how animal fat consumption can contribute to elevated blood sugar levels and diabetes, along with scientific sources and recommendations for a plant-based diet.
1. Animal Fat and Insulin Resistance πβ‘οΈπ
Explanation: High consumption of saturated fats, particularly from animal sources like meat and dairy, can lead to insulin resistance. When the bodyβs cells become less responsive to insulin, glucose remains in the bloodstream instead of being absorbed, resulting in elevated blood sugar levels.
Source: A study published in Diabetes Care shows that diets high in saturated fats can impair insulin sensitivity (Liu et al., 2010).
2. Fat Accumulation and Vascular Health π©Έ
Explanation: Saturated fats can accumulate in blood vessels, leading to atherosclerosis (hardening of the arteries). These fatty deposits can obstruct blood flow, causing glucose to remain in circulation longer, which raises blood sugar levels.
Source: Research in Nature Reviews Cardiology discusses how dietary fats influence vascular health and insulin resistance (Mozaffarian et al., 2010).
3. Uric Acid Production π§ͺ
Explanation: Animal products are rich in purines, which the body metabolizes into uric acid. Humans lack certain enzymes (like uricase) that can break down uric acid effectively. Elevated uric acid levels can interfere with insulin signaling, further contributing to insulin resistance and high blood sugar.
Source: A study in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found a correlation between high uric acid levels and insulin resistance (Choi et al., 2008).
4. Chronic Inflammation π₯
Explanation: Diets high in saturated fats can lead to chronic inflammation, which is a significant contributor to insulin resistance. Inflammatory markers can disrupt insulin signaling pathways, making it difficult for the body to regulate blood sugar.
Source: Research published in Nature Reviews Endocrinology discusses how inflammation from excess fat contributes to metabolic disorders (Hotamisligil, 2006).
5. Dietary Patterns and Diabetes Risk π₯©βπ½οΈ
Explanation: High consumption of red and processed meats is associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes. This is partly due to the effects of saturated fats on insulin sensitivity and inflammation.
Source: A meta-analysis in Diabetes Care found that higher consumption of red and processed meats correlates with an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes (Pan et al., 2011).
Conclusion & Recommendations π±
Given the evidence linking animal fat consumption to insulin resistance and elevated blood sugar levels, it may be beneficial to consider dietary changes. A plant-based diet rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, nuts, and seeds can improve overall health and may help regulate blood sugar levels.
Research supports the benefits of plant-based diets for reducing the risk of diabetes and improving metabolic health. For instance, a study published in *Nutrients* highlights that plant-based diets can enhance insulin sensitivity and lower inflammation (Tuso et al., 2013).
By opting for a diet that emphasizes plant foods, individuals may not only improve their blood sugar control but also promote overall well-being.π π
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
@GreenPathForAllπ
1. Animal Fat and Insulin Resistance πβ‘οΈπ
Explanation: High consumption of saturated fats, particularly from animal sources like meat and dairy, can lead to insulin resistance. When the bodyβs cells become less responsive to insulin, glucose remains in the bloodstream instead of being absorbed, resulting in elevated blood sugar levels.
Source: A study published in Diabetes Care shows that diets high in saturated fats can impair insulin sensitivity (Liu et al., 2010).
2. Fat Accumulation and Vascular Health π©Έ
Explanation: Saturated fats can accumulate in blood vessels, leading to atherosclerosis (hardening of the arteries). These fatty deposits can obstruct blood flow, causing glucose to remain in circulation longer, which raises blood sugar levels.
Source: Research in Nature Reviews Cardiology discusses how dietary fats influence vascular health and insulin resistance (Mozaffarian et al., 2010).
3. Uric Acid Production π§ͺ
Explanation: Animal products are rich in purines, which the body metabolizes into uric acid. Humans lack certain enzymes (like uricase) that can break down uric acid effectively. Elevated uric acid levels can interfere with insulin signaling, further contributing to insulin resistance and high blood sugar.
Source: A study in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found a correlation between high uric acid levels and insulin resistance (Choi et al., 2008).
4. Chronic Inflammation π₯
Explanation: Diets high in saturated fats can lead to chronic inflammation, which is a significant contributor to insulin resistance. Inflammatory markers can disrupt insulin signaling pathways, making it difficult for the body to regulate blood sugar.
Source: Research published in Nature Reviews Endocrinology discusses how inflammation from excess fat contributes to metabolic disorders (Hotamisligil, 2006).
5. Dietary Patterns and Diabetes Risk π₯©βπ½οΈ
Explanation: High consumption of red and processed meats is associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes. This is partly due to the effects of saturated fats on insulin sensitivity and inflammation.
Source: A meta-analysis in Diabetes Care found that higher consumption of red and processed meats correlates with an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes (Pan et al., 2011).
Conclusion & Recommendations π±
Given the evidence linking animal fat consumption to insulin resistance and elevated blood sugar levels, it may be beneficial to consider dietary changes. A plant-based diet rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, nuts, and seeds can improve overall health and may help regulate blood sugar levels.
Research supports the benefits of plant-based diets for reducing the risk of diabetes and improving metabolic health. For instance, a study published in *Nutrients* highlights that plant-based diets can enhance insulin sensitivity and lower inflammation (Tuso et al., 2013).
By opting for a diet that emphasizes plant foods, individuals may not only improve their blood sugar control but also promote overall well-being.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
@GreenPathForAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
π16β€10π5π1
The essence of peace and love is fundamentally opposed to the act of killing an innocent creature, such as a sheep. Regardless of who advocates for such actions, participating in violence against a defenseless being aligns one with darkness and cruelty, not light.
Even if this act is presented as divinely sanctioned, the truth remains that taking the life of an innocent animalβwho struggles for its existenceβis an act of oppression and a crime against compassion.
No justification, religious or traditional, can erase the truth: to take a life that wants to live is an act of brutality.
The deception of evil can be subtle, leading individuals to believe they are on the right path while actually fulfilling the desires of darkness. This act contradicts the principles of peace, love, and justice.
It is far better to turn away from beliefs rooted in darkness and embrace true peace and justice.
Truth cannot be erased. You are not following truth but a darkness whose consequences are evident in your actions. Where there is action against peace, love, and justice, darkness prevails.
Alignment with peace, love, and justice cannot result in the suffering of a being that cries out, that does not want to die.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
@GreenPathForAllπ
Even if this act is presented as divinely sanctioned, the truth remains that taking the life of an innocent animalβwho struggles for its existenceβis an act of oppression and a crime against compassion.
No justification, religious or traditional, can erase the truth: to take a life that wants to live is an act of brutality.
The deception of evil can be subtle, leading individuals to believe they are on the right path while actually fulfilling the desires of darkness. This act contradicts the principles of peace, love, and justice.
It is far better to turn away from beliefs rooted in darkness and embrace true peace and justice.
Truth cannot be erased. You are not following truth but a darkness whose consequences are evident in your actions. Where there is action against peace, love, and justice, darkness prevails.
Alignment with peace, love, and justice cannot result in the suffering of a being that cries out, that does not want to die.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
@GreenPathForAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
π80β€28π₯°8π7π₯6
Your words about justice and kindness are hollow and meaningless when your meals consist of the suffering and slaughtered bodies of animals.
The voice of peace, the voice of truth. ποΈβ¨
@GreenPathForAll β
The voice of peace, the voice of truth. ποΈβ¨
@GreenPathForAll β
β€20π₯7π±4π2π1
Animal Testing is a Crime Against Peace and Justice
Animal testing is cruel and unjust, causing immense suffering to innocent creatures. Products tested on animalsβlike cosmetics (e.g., makeup, shampoos), household cleaners, and some medicinesβperpetuate this cruelty. Avoid them!
Choose cruelty-free alternatives:
- Cosmetics: Look for brands with "cruelty-free" or vegan logos (e.g., Lush, The Body Shop).
- Household Products: Buy from brands like Ecover or Method, certified cruelty-free.
- Medicines: Support companies exploring non-animal testing methods, like 3D cell cultures.
Wherever there is oppression and injustice, we will take aim.
#CrueltyFree #Peace #Vegan #EndAnimalTesting
@GreenPathForAll π
Animal testing is cruel and unjust, causing immense suffering to innocent creatures. Products tested on animalsβlike cosmetics (e.g., makeup, shampoos), household cleaners, and some medicinesβperpetuate this cruelty. Avoid them!
Choose cruelty-free alternatives:
- Cosmetics: Look for brands with "cruelty-free" or vegan logos (e.g., Lush, The Body Shop).
- Household Products: Buy from brands like Ecover or Method, certified cruelty-free.
- Medicines: Support companies exploring non-animal testing methods, like 3D cell cultures.
Wherever there is oppression and injustice, we will take aim.
#CrueltyFree #Peace #Vegan #EndAnimalTesting
@GreenPathForAll π
β€46π₯5π3π2
Are Vegetarians Also βKillersβ? A Deeper Look at a Common Excuse
One of the most common arguments against vegetarianism goes like this:
"You're a killer too! Thousands of insects and small creatures die during farming and harvesting of your crops!"
At first glance, this might sound logical. But in reality, itβs a clever excuse to hide from a much bigger and darker truth. Letβs examine this claim using logic and real statistics.
Point One: The concern isnβt really about insects.
The person making this argument isnβt genuinely worried about the lives of insects. Their goal is simply to justify their own choice (meat consumption) and to find a flaw in yours, so they can ease their conscience.
Point Two (and the key): Who are agricultural lands really for?
This is where their entire argument collapses. According to global statistics (including reports from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations β FAO), around 80% of all agricultural land worldwide is not used for direct human consumption, but rather to produce animal feed.
Yes, you read that correctly. A massive portion of corn, soy, and grain farms exist solely to feed animals that are ultimately slaughtered.
Logical Conclusion:
Now letβs revisit the idea of βkillingβ:
A vegetarian is responsible for the unintended deaths of small creatures in crop fields (that 20% of farmland).
A meat-eater is not only responsible for the direct killing of animals (chickens, cows, sheep), but also for the indirect killing of countless small creatures in the 80% of farmland used to grow feed for those animals.
Put simply:
Meat consumption involves two layers of killingβthe intentional slaughter of animals, and a far greater share in the unintentional deaths of field creatures.
The motive is an excuse, not compassion.
Most people who bring up the βinsect deathsβ argument arenβt truly concerned about those creatures. Itβs a tactic to dodge responsibility and justify continued meat consumption. They hide behind this excuse to say: βSince no one is perfect, trying to be better is pointlessβand I can keep doing what I know is wrong.β
If our true concern is reducing pain, suffering, and harm to all living beings, then the most logical and effective step is to eliminate or reduce the product that causes the most damage. And that product, without a doubt, is meat and animal-based products.
Final Thought:
Choosing vegetarianism doesnβt mean claiming perfection or zero harm. Itβs a conscious decision to minimize harm as much as possible.
So next time someone brings up this excuse, ask them:
βIf youβre truly worried about the tiny creatures in crop fields, why not choose the path that uses only 20% of those fields instead of 80%?β
Awareness means looking beyond excuses and seeing the full cycle of a choice. Letβs choose consciously.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
@GreenPathForAllπ
One of the most common arguments against vegetarianism goes like this:
"You're a killer too! Thousands of insects and small creatures die during farming and harvesting of your crops!"
At first glance, this might sound logical. But in reality, itβs a clever excuse to hide from a much bigger and darker truth. Letβs examine this claim using logic and real statistics.
Point One: The concern isnβt really about insects.
The person making this argument isnβt genuinely worried about the lives of insects. Their goal is simply to justify their own choice (meat consumption) and to find a flaw in yours, so they can ease their conscience.
Point Two (and the key): Who are agricultural lands really for?
This is where their entire argument collapses. According to global statistics (including reports from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations β FAO), around 80% of all agricultural land worldwide is not used for direct human consumption, but rather to produce animal feed.
Yes, you read that correctly. A massive portion of corn, soy, and grain farms exist solely to feed animals that are ultimately slaughtered.
Logical Conclusion:
Now letβs revisit the idea of βkillingβ:
A vegetarian is responsible for the unintended deaths of small creatures in crop fields (that 20% of farmland).
A meat-eater is not only responsible for the direct killing of animals (chickens, cows, sheep), but also for the indirect killing of countless small creatures in the 80% of farmland used to grow feed for those animals.
Put simply:
Meat consumption involves two layers of killingβthe intentional slaughter of animals, and a far greater share in the unintentional deaths of field creatures.
The motive is an excuse, not compassion.
Most people who bring up the βinsect deathsβ argument arenβt truly concerned about those creatures. Itβs a tactic to dodge responsibility and justify continued meat consumption. They hide behind this excuse to say: βSince no one is perfect, trying to be better is pointlessβand I can keep doing what I know is wrong.β
If our true concern is reducing pain, suffering, and harm to all living beings, then the most logical and effective step is to eliminate or reduce the product that causes the most damage. And that product, without a doubt, is meat and animal-based products.
Final Thought:
Choosing vegetarianism doesnβt mean claiming perfection or zero harm. Itβs a conscious decision to minimize harm as much as possible.
So next time someone brings up this excuse, ask them:
βIf youβre truly worried about the tiny creatures in crop fields, why not choose the path that uses only 20% of those fields instead of 80%?β
Awareness means looking beyond excuses and seeing the full cycle of a choice. Letβs choose consciously.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
@GreenPathForAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
β€51π₯5π4π±2
Cast Out to Die: The Price of Ignorance
A helpless pigeon suffering from PMV (Newcastle disease)βstruggling with a twisted neck and unable to eat or drink on his ownβneeded only one thing: Compassion.
Medical facts say he just needed 2 weeks of hand-feeding and warmth to fight the virus and return to life. But what did he face in this world? Rejection. Cruelty. Disrespect.
He was thrown out of the house. Cast away into the cold to die alone in his sickness, simply because he was seen as "inconvenient."
We witnessed this atrocity. We will not look away. Wherever we see injustice and oppression against the innocent, we will expose it.
Ask yourself: Why does society build idols out of celebrities and obsess over famous people, yet treats a suffering living beingβwho desperately needs nursingβlike garbage? Why do we allow a sentient being to endure such a tragic fate when saving him was so easy?
This must change. In the near future, we must build a dedicated hospital for animals and birds. A place where no life is considered "disposable."
This is not merely a personal desire. This is the will of Peace and Love. This is the voice of Consciousness and true Humanity.
#AnimalRights #Veganism #EndSpeciesism #Compassion #Justice #vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #scientific #science
@GreenPathForAllπ
A helpless pigeon suffering from PMV (Newcastle disease)βstruggling with a twisted neck and unable to eat or drink on his ownβneeded only one thing: Compassion.
Medical facts say he just needed 2 weeks of hand-feeding and warmth to fight the virus and return to life. But what did he face in this world? Rejection. Cruelty. Disrespect.
He was thrown out of the house. Cast away into the cold to die alone in his sickness, simply because he was seen as "inconvenient."
We witnessed this atrocity. We will not look away. Wherever we see injustice and oppression against the innocent, we will expose it.
Ask yourself: Why does society build idols out of celebrities and obsess over famous people, yet treats a suffering living beingβwho desperately needs nursingβlike garbage? Why do we allow a sentient being to endure such a tragic fate when saving him was so easy?
This must change. In the near future, we must build a dedicated hospital for animals and birds. A place where no life is considered "disposable."
This is not merely a personal desire. This is the will of Peace and Love. This is the voice of Consciousness and true Humanity.
#AnimalRights #Veganism #EndSpeciesism #Compassion #Justice #vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #scientific #science
@GreenPathForAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
β€74π₯6π2π1
The B12 Question: A Lost Vitamin Is Not Proof of a Carnivorous Past π±
The most common attack on plant-based living is: "You need supplements β
so your diet is unnatural." Here is what that argument leaves out.
1. No Animal on Earth Produces B12
Not a cow. Not a lion. Not a human. Not one animal in the history of life.
B12 is built by a chain of roughly thirty enzymes found only in bacteria
and archaea β microorganisms. No animal, plant, or fungus has ever carried
those genes. Not one.
This matters, because people often claim humans "lost" the ability to make
B12 when we started eating meat. That is biologically impossible. You
cannot lose what no ancestor ever had. The gene does not exist in animals,
and never did.
Animal flesh is not a source of B12. It is a storage container for
bacterial B12.
2. Then Why Does a Cow Have It and You Don't?
This is the real question, and the answer is not evolution or diet.
It is the physical layout of the gut.
A cow is a foregut fermenter. Her rumen β an enormous fermentation chamber
holding billions of bacteria β sits BEFORE her small intestine. The
bacteria there manufacture B12, and it flows downstream into the intestine,
where it is absorbed. Production comes first, absorption second.
A human is a hindgut fermenter. Our fermentation chamber β the colon β
sits AFTER the small intestine. Bacteria in the human colon are
synthesizing B12 right now, inside every person reading this. But
absorption occurs in the ileum, upstream. The vitamin is manufactured
past the only door it could enter through, and leaves the body unused.
We are not missing the bacteria. We are not missing a gene.
The plumbing simply runs in the wrong order.
3. The Same "Limitation" Exists in Gorillas, Horses, and Rabbits
Here is why this destroys the carnivore argument rather than supporting it.
Every hindgut fermenter has exactly the same problem β and nearly all of
them are strict herbivores:
Rabbit β solves it by cecotrophy: it re-ingests soft cecal pellets
directly, running them through the gut a second time. A rabbit
prevented from doing this becomes deficient and dies.
Gorilla β a pure herbivore, and documented in the wild practicing
coprophagy, alongside soil and incidentally eaten insects.
Horse β a pure herbivore with an enormous cecum, relying on gut
microbes and on cobalt-rich soil in its forage.
Not one of these animals eats meat. Not one of them synthesizes B12
internally. Every one of them depends on bacteria and on contact with the
earth, exactly as we once did.
A trait shared with gorillas, horses, and rabbits is not evidence of a
carnivorous past. It is evidence of a herbivorous one.
4. Where Our Ancestors Got It
Early humans drank from rivers and springs, ate plants pulled from the
ground with soil still clinging to them, and lived without sanitation.
B12-producing bacteria live in soil, in untreated water, and on unwashed
roots and leaves. Our ancestors consumed B12 constantly β not from
hunting, but from dirt and water.
5. What Modern Life Removed
Chlorinated water. Washed and packaged produce. Sterile agriculture.
Antibacterial everything. Modern hygiene β which saved millions of lives
from cholera and dysentery β also severed the oldest link between humans
and this bacterial vitamin.
We did not lose B12 because we stopped eating meat.
We lost it because we started washing our food.
6. The Fact Almost Nobody Mentions
The overwhelming majority of B12 produced commercially in the world is not
sold to humans. It is added to livestock feed. Farmed animals are raised
in confinement, on processed feed, cut off from soil β so they are
deficient too, and the industry supplements them.
Even grazing cattle need help: B12 contains cobalt at its core, and herds
on cobalt-poor pasture develop wasting disease. Farmers dose them with
cobalt specifically so their gut bacteria can build the vitamin.
So the real choice is not "natural versus supplemented." It is:
take B12 directly, or pay for it to be fed to an animal first.
7. The Argument That Ends the Debate
If needing to obtain a nutrient from outside the body proves what a species
is "designed" to eat, then consider vitamin C.
Dogs, cats, cows, and nearly all mammals synthesize their own vitamin C
internally. They never need to eat it. Humans cannot. We carry a broken
gene β GULO β that was disabled in our primate ancestors millions of years
ago. We must consume vitamin C from outside, continuously, or we develop
scurvy and die.
Why did we lose it? Because our ancestors ate so much fruit that the
ability became redundant and the gene decayed.
Note the contrast carefully:
B12 β no animal ever had the gene. Nothing was lost.
Vitamin C β humans DID have the gene, and lost it, because of fruit.
The one real genetic loss in this entire discussion points directly at a
plant-eating ancestry.
True carnivores make their own vitamin C and never need fruit.
Humans cannot make vitamin C and will die without plants.
8. Deficiency Is Not a Vegan Problem
B12 deficiency is widespread among meat-eaters as well, especially after
age 50, and in anyone taking metformin or acid-reducing medication β
because the limiting factor is absorption, not intake. Eating meat
protects no one from it.
In Conclusion
B12 is a bacterial vitamin that modern sanitation removed from everyone's
diet. Humans never produced it, because no animal ever has. We simply sit,
like the gorilla and the horse, on the wrong side of our own fermentation
chamber β and until recently, soil and water filled the gap.
A small, cheap, cruelty-free tablet restores a link that hygiene broke.
That is not a weakness of plant-based living. It is a consequence of
civilization β and the meat industry solves it in exactly the same way,
only by routing it through an animal first.
Sources:
- Watanabe F, Yabuta Y, Bito T, Teng F. (2014). "Vitamin B12-Containing
Plant Food Sources for Vegetarians." Nutrients, 6(5), 1861-1873.
DOI: 10.3390/nu6051861
- Albert MJ, Mathan VI, Baker SJ. (1980). "Vitamin B12 synthesis by human
small intestinal bacteria." Nature, 283, 781-782. DOI: 10.1038/283781a0
- Allen LH. (2009). "How common is vitamin B-12 deficiency?" American
Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 89(2), 693S-696S.
DOI: 10.3945/ajcn.2008.26947A
- Nishikimi M, et al. (1994). "Cloning and chromosomal mapping of the human
nonfunctional gene for L-gulono-gamma-lactone oxidase." Journal of
Biological Chemistry, 269(18), 13685-13688.
- Harcourt AH, Stewart KJ. (1978). "Coprophagy by wild mountain gorilla."
African Journal of Ecology, 16(3), 223-225.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science #b12
@GreenPathForAllπ
The most common attack on plant-based living is: "You need supplements β
so your diet is unnatural." Here is what that argument leaves out.
1. No Animal on Earth Produces B12
Not a cow. Not a lion. Not a human. Not one animal in the history of life.
B12 is built by a chain of roughly thirty enzymes found only in bacteria
and archaea β microorganisms. No animal, plant, or fungus has ever carried
those genes. Not one.
This matters, because people often claim humans "lost" the ability to make
B12 when we started eating meat. That is biologically impossible. You
cannot lose what no ancestor ever had. The gene does not exist in animals,
and never did.
Animal flesh is not a source of B12. It is a storage container for
bacterial B12.
2. Then Why Does a Cow Have It and You Don't?
This is the real question, and the answer is not evolution or diet.
It is the physical layout of the gut.
A cow is a foregut fermenter. Her rumen β an enormous fermentation chamber
holding billions of bacteria β sits BEFORE her small intestine. The
bacteria there manufacture B12, and it flows downstream into the intestine,
where it is absorbed. Production comes first, absorption second.
A human is a hindgut fermenter. Our fermentation chamber β the colon β
sits AFTER the small intestine. Bacteria in the human colon are
synthesizing B12 right now, inside every person reading this. But
absorption occurs in the ileum, upstream. The vitamin is manufactured
past the only door it could enter through, and leaves the body unused.
We are not missing the bacteria. We are not missing a gene.
The plumbing simply runs in the wrong order.
3. The Same "Limitation" Exists in Gorillas, Horses, and Rabbits
Here is why this destroys the carnivore argument rather than supporting it.
Every hindgut fermenter has exactly the same problem β and nearly all of
them are strict herbivores:
Rabbit β solves it by cecotrophy: it re-ingests soft cecal pellets
directly, running them through the gut a second time. A rabbit
prevented from doing this becomes deficient and dies.
Gorilla β a pure herbivore, and documented in the wild practicing
coprophagy, alongside soil and incidentally eaten insects.
Horse β a pure herbivore with an enormous cecum, relying on gut
microbes and on cobalt-rich soil in its forage.
Not one of these animals eats meat. Not one of them synthesizes B12
internally. Every one of them depends on bacteria and on contact with the
earth, exactly as we once did.
A trait shared with gorillas, horses, and rabbits is not evidence of a
carnivorous past. It is evidence of a herbivorous one.
4. Where Our Ancestors Got It
Early humans drank from rivers and springs, ate plants pulled from the
ground with soil still clinging to them, and lived without sanitation.
B12-producing bacteria live in soil, in untreated water, and on unwashed
roots and leaves. Our ancestors consumed B12 constantly β not from
hunting, but from dirt and water.
5. What Modern Life Removed
Chlorinated water. Washed and packaged produce. Sterile agriculture.
Antibacterial everything. Modern hygiene β which saved millions of lives
from cholera and dysentery β also severed the oldest link between humans
and this bacterial vitamin.
We did not lose B12 because we stopped eating meat.
We lost it because we started washing our food.
6. The Fact Almost Nobody Mentions
The overwhelming majority of B12 produced commercially in the world is not
sold to humans. It is added to livestock feed. Farmed animals are raised
in confinement, on processed feed, cut off from soil β so they are
deficient too, and the industry supplements them.
Even grazing cattle need help: B12 contains cobalt at its core, and herds
on cobalt-poor pasture develop wasting disease. Farmers dose them with
cobalt specifically so their gut bacteria can build the vitamin.
So the real choice is not "natural versus supplemented." It is:
take B12 directly, or pay for it to be fed to an animal first.
7. The Argument That Ends the Debate
If needing to obtain a nutrient from outside the body proves what a species
is "designed" to eat, then consider vitamin C.
Dogs, cats, cows, and nearly all mammals synthesize their own vitamin C
internally. They never need to eat it. Humans cannot. We carry a broken
gene β GULO β that was disabled in our primate ancestors millions of years
ago. We must consume vitamin C from outside, continuously, or we develop
scurvy and die.
Why did we lose it? Because our ancestors ate so much fruit that the
ability became redundant and the gene decayed.
Note the contrast carefully:
B12 β no animal ever had the gene. Nothing was lost.
Vitamin C β humans DID have the gene, and lost it, because of fruit.
The one real genetic loss in this entire discussion points directly at a
plant-eating ancestry.
True carnivores make their own vitamin C and never need fruit.
Humans cannot make vitamin C and will die without plants.
8. Deficiency Is Not a Vegan Problem
B12 deficiency is widespread among meat-eaters as well, especially after
age 50, and in anyone taking metformin or acid-reducing medication β
because the limiting factor is absorption, not intake. Eating meat
protects no one from it.
In Conclusion
B12 is a bacterial vitamin that modern sanitation removed from everyone's
diet. Humans never produced it, because no animal ever has. We simply sit,
like the gorilla and the horse, on the wrong side of our own fermentation
chamber β and until recently, soil and water filled the gap.
A small, cheap, cruelty-free tablet restores a link that hygiene broke.
That is not a weakness of plant-based living. It is a consequence of
civilization β and the meat industry solves it in exactly the same way,
only by routing it through an animal first.
Sources:
- Watanabe F, Yabuta Y, Bito T, Teng F. (2014). "Vitamin B12-Containing
Plant Food Sources for Vegetarians." Nutrients, 6(5), 1861-1873.
DOI: 10.3390/nu6051861
- Albert MJ, Mathan VI, Baker SJ. (1980). "Vitamin B12 synthesis by human
small intestinal bacteria." Nature, 283, 781-782. DOI: 10.1038/283781a0
- Allen LH. (2009). "How common is vitamin B-12 deficiency?" American
Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 89(2), 693S-696S.
DOI: 10.3945/ajcn.2008.26947A
- Nishikimi M, et al. (1994). "Cloning and chromosomal mapping of the human
nonfunctional gene for L-gulono-gamma-lactone oxidase." Journal of
Biological Chemistry, 269(18), 13685-13688.
- Harcourt AH, Stewart KJ. (1978). "Coprophagy by wild mountain gorilla."
African Journal of Ecology, 16(3), 223-225.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science #b12
@GreenPathForAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
β€1
Speciesism and the Geography of Habit: Who Actually Chose Your Plate? π
Before defending your diet, answer one question honestly:
did you ever choose it?
1. The Test
A cow is sacred in India, dinner in Argentina, and a luxury steak in Japan.
A pig is forbidden across the Middle East and a national dish in Spain.
A horse is a companion in Britain and a meal in Kazakhstan.
A dog is family in Europe and food in a few regions of Asia.
A guinea pig is a pet in New York and a traditional meal in Peru.
Same animal. Same nervous system. Same capacity to suffer.
Completely different verdict β depending entirely on where the person
judging it happened to be born.
2. What That Reveals
Notice your own reaction. For most readers, "dog" produced discomfort and
"cow" produced nothing. But nothing about the two animals justifies that
gap. A pig outperforms a dog on most cognitive tests. A cow forms lasting
friendships and grieves when separated from her calf.
The difference is not in the animal. The difference is in which animals
your culture placed inside the circle of concern and which it placed
outside β before you were old enough to have an opinion.
3. The Definition
Speciesism is assigning moral worth based on species membership rather
than on the capacity to suffer. It is the same logical structure as any
other arbitrary in-group preference: a trait irrelevant to suffering is
used to decide whose suffering counts.
4. Geographic Determinism
Here is the uncomfortable part. If you had been born 3,000 kilometers east
or west, you would be defending a completely different diet with exactly
the same confidence you defend this one β and you would find your current
diet disgusting.
That is the definition of conditioning, not conviction.
A belief that changes with longitude was never a conclusion.
It was an inheritance.
Our eating habits are learned by imitation: from parents, from neighbors,
from whatever happened to grow or graze within walking distance of our
ancestors. No research was done. No evidence was weighed. No one in that
chain ever asked whether it was right. They simply copied the people
around them β and so did we.
5. The Invisible System
We are taught to see veganism as an ideology and meat-eating as neutral.
It is the reverse: meat-eating is the belief system so dominant that it
became invisible. The psychologist Melanie Joy named it carnism β the
unexamined framework that teaches us to love some animals, eat others,
and never notice the contradiction.
6. The Four Justifications
Research has shown that when people defend meat consumption, almost every
answer falls into four categories, known as the 4 Ns:
Natural β "Our ancestors did it." (So did infanticide and slavery.)
Normal β "Everyone does it." (Popularity is not ethics.)
Necessary β "We need it to survive." (Major health bodies disagree.)
Nice β "It tastes good." (Pleasure does not justify harm.)
Every one of these defends the habit. Not one of them defends the animal.
7. The Way Out
Awareness is simply the act of asking a question your culture never asked
on your behalf:
If I would not accept this being done to a dog,
what exactly makes it acceptable when done to a pig?
If no answer survives that question except "because that is how I was
raised" β then the choice was never yours. Until now.
Sources:
- Joy, M. (2010). Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs, and Wear Cows: An
Introduction to Carnism. Conari Press.
- Piazza J, Ruby MB, Loughnan S, et al. (2015). "Rationalizing meat
consumption. The 4Ns." Appetite, 91, 114-128.
DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2015.04.011
- Singer, P. (1975). Animal Liberation. HarperCollins.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #speciesism #carnism
@GreenPathForAllπ
Before defending your diet, answer one question honestly:
did you ever choose it?
1. The Test
A cow is sacred in India, dinner in Argentina, and a luxury steak in Japan.
A pig is forbidden across the Middle East and a national dish in Spain.
A horse is a companion in Britain and a meal in Kazakhstan.
A dog is family in Europe and food in a few regions of Asia.
A guinea pig is a pet in New York and a traditional meal in Peru.
Same animal. Same nervous system. Same capacity to suffer.
Completely different verdict β depending entirely on where the person
judging it happened to be born.
2. What That Reveals
Notice your own reaction. For most readers, "dog" produced discomfort and
"cow" produced nothing. But nothing about the two animals justifies that
gap. A pig outperforms a dog on most cognitive tests. A cow forms lasting
friendships and grieves when separated from her calf.
The difference is not in the animal. The difference is in which animals
your culture placed inside the circle of concern and which it placed
outside β before you were old enough to have an opinion.
3. The Definition
Speciesism is assigning moral worth based on species membership rather
than on the capacity to suffer. It is the same logical structure as any
other arbitrary in-group preference: a trait irrelevant to suffering is
used to decide whose suffering counts.
4. Geographic Determinism
Here is the uncomfortable part. If you had been born 3,000 kilometers east
or west, you would be defending a completely different diet with exactly
the same confidence you defend this one β and you would find your current
diet disgusting.
That is the definition of conditioning, not conviction.
A belief that changes with longitude was never a conclusion.
It was an inheritance.
Our eating habits are learned by imitation: from parents, from neighbors,
from whatever happened to grow or graze within walking distance of our
ancestors. No research was done. No evidence was weighed. No one in that
chain ever asked whether it was right. They simply copied the people
around them β and so did we.
5. The Invisible System
We are taught to see veganism as an ideology and meat-eating as neutral.
It is the reverse: meat-eating is the belief system so dominant that it
became invisible. The psychologist Melanie Joy named it carnism β the
unexamined framework that teaches us to love some animals, eat others,
and never notice the contradiction.
6. The Four Justifications
Research has shown that when people defend meat consumption, almost every
answer falls into four categories, known as the 4 Ns:
Natural β "Our ancestors did it." (So did infanticide and slavery.)
Normal β "Everyone does it." (Popularity is not ethics.)
Necessary β "We need it to survive." (Major health bodies disagree.)
Nice β "It tastes good." (Pleasure does not justify harm.)
Every one of these defends the habit. Not one of them defends the animal.
7. The Way Out
Awareness is simply the act of asking a question your culture never asked
on your behalf:
If I would not accept this being done to a dog,
what exactly makes it acceptable when done to a pig?
If no answer survives that question except "because that is how I was
raised" β then the choice was never yours. Until now.
Sources:
- Joy, M. (2010). Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs, and Wear Cows: An
Introduction to Carnism. Conari Press.
- Piazza J, Ruby MB, Loughnan S, et al. (2015). "Rationalizing meat
consumption. The 4Ns." Appetite, 91, 114-128.
DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2015.04.011
- Singer, P. (1975). Animal Liberation. HarperCollins.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #speciesism #carnism
@GreenPathForAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
β€1
Plant Protein: Complete, Abundant, and Nothing Like "Just Grass" πΏ
"Where do you get your protein?" is the most repeated question in
nutrition β and the one with the clearest answer.
1. The Word "Incomplete" Is Wrong
Every plant food contains all 20 amino acids, including all 9 essential
ones. Not one is missing from lentils, rice, beans, or broccoli.
"Incomplete" never meant absent. It meant a food has a lower proportion
of one or two amino acids relative to human requirements. That is a
difference of ratio, not of presence β and the word has misled two
generations of people.
2. The Combining Myth β Retracted by Its Own Author
In 1971, the book Diet for a Small Planet popularized the idea that
plant proteins must be carefully combined within a single meal. The claim
spread worldwide.
Its author, Frances Moore LappΓ©, formally retracted it in the 1981 edition
after the science caught up. The human liver maintains a circulating pool
of amino acids and draws on it for hours. Protein eaten at breakfast is
still available to the body at lunch. There is nothing to combine, time,
or calculate.
3. Plants That Are Complete on Their Own
Soy (tofu, tempeh, edamame, soy milk) β protein quality score of 1.0,
the maximum on the PDCAAS scale, equal to egg white and milk protein
Quinoa
Buckwheat
Amaranth
Hemp seeds
Chia seeds
Pistachios
Potatoes (small amount, but excellent quality)
4. The Pairing Traditional Kitchens Solved Centuries Ago
Legumes are high in lysine and lower in methionine.
Grains are high in methionine and lower in lysine.
Together they are a perfect amino acid profile.
Notice what humanity figured out without any nutrition science at all:
Rice and lentils β Iran, India
Beans and rice β Latin America, the Caribbean
Hummus and bread β the Levant
Tofu and rice β East Asia
Beans and corn β Mesoamerica
Every major food culture on Earth independently arrived at the same
pairing. It was never a problem that needed solving.
5. The Actual Numbers
The adult requirement is 0.8 g of protein per kg of body weight.
A 70 kg adult needs about 56 g per day.
Per 100 g, cooked unless noted:
Seitan 25 g
Tempeh 19 g
Tofu, firm 17 g
Lentils 9 g
Chickpeas 9 g
Black beans 9 g
Quinoa 4.4 g
Green peas 5 g
Pumpkin seeds 30 g (raw)
Peanuts 26 g (raw)
Almonds 21 g (raw)
Oats 13-17 g (dry)
Whole wheat bread 13 g
One ordinary day β lentil stew, chickpeas, bread, oats, a handful of nuts
β passes 56 g without any planning at all. Protein deficiency is
essentially unknown in anyone eating enough calories from varied plants.
6. The Question That Answers Itself
A bull weighs a ton and is solid muscle.
An elephant is the largest land animal alive.
A gorilla is roughly six times stronger than a human.
A horse outruns everything we breed it against.
Every one of them is a herbivore. Not one eats meat.
So where does the protein in a steak come from in the first place?
From plants. The cow assembled it from grass. Eating the animal is simply
collecting plant protein after it has passed through a living being β
losing most of the calories, adding cholesterol, and costing a life.
7. What About the Vitamins?
Iron β lentils, chickpeas, tofu, pumpkin seeds, dark leafy greens.
Pair with vitamin C (lemon, pepper, tomato) to multiply
absorption several times over.
Calcium β tahini, fortified plant milk, kale, bok choy, almonds,
tofu set with calcium.
Zinc β legumes, seeds, nuts, whole grains. Soaking and sprouting
increase absorption.
Omega-3 β flaxseed, chia, walnuts; algae oil for direct EPA and DHA.
Fish do not make omega-3 β they accumulate it from algae.
We can take it from the original source.
Vitamin D β sunlight, or supplementation in winter. Meat-eaters need
this just as much.
Iodine β iodized salt or seaweed.
Vitamin A, C, E, K, folate, fiber, antioxidants β overwhelmingly plant
foods. Meat contains no fiber and almost no vitamin C.
B12 is the only genuine addition. One tablet. See our separate post on
why that has nothing to do with being carnivores.
8. It Was Never "Just Grass"
The picture most people hold of plant-based eating β a sad plate of raw
leaves β describes nothing anyone actually eats.
It is lentil stew. Chickpea curry. Bean stew slow-cooked with turmeric,
mushrooms, carrots and local rice. Hummus and warm bread. Falafel. Dal.
Mujadara. Stuffed vegetables. Roasted eggplant with garlic. Lentil soup
in winter. Noodles with tofu and ginger. Grilled mushrooms. Fresh fruit.
Dates and walnuts. Saffron rice.
These are not substitutes for food. For most of human history, for most
of humanity, they were the food. The meat-centered plate is a recent,
local, and expensive invention β not a human default.
In Conclusion
Plant protein is complete, abundant, cheaper, higher in fiber, free of
cholesterol, and does not require a death. The question was never where
vegans get their protein. The question is why anyone believed they
couldn't.
Sources:
- Melina V, Craig W, Levin S. (2016). "Position of the Academy of Nutrition
and Dietetics: Vegetarian Diets." Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and
Dietetics, 116(12), 1970-1980. DOI: 10.1016/j.jand.2016.09.025
- Young VR, Pellett PL. (1994). "Plant proteins in relation to human protein
and amino acid nutrition." American Journal of Clinical Nutrition,
59(5), 1203S-1212S. DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/59.5.1203S
- Mariotti F, Gardner CD. (2019). "Dietary Protein and Amino Acids in
Vegetarian Diets β A Review." Nutrients, 11(11), 2661.
DOI: 10.3390/nu11112661
- LappΓ©, F.M. (1981). Diet for a Small Planet, 10th Anniversary Edition
(author's retraction of the protein-combining claim).
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
#protein
@GreenPathForAllπ
"Where do you get your protein?" is the most repeated question in
nutrition β and the one with the clearest answer.
1. The Word "Incomplete" Is Wrong
Every plant food contains all 20 amino acids, including all 9 essential
ones. Not one is missing from lentils, rice, beans, or broccoli.
"Incomplete" never meant absent. It meant a food has a lower proportion
of one or two amino acids relative to human requirements. That is a
difference of ratio, not of presence β and the word has misled two
generations of people.
2. The Combining Myth β Retracted by Its Own Author
In 1971, the book Diet for a Small Planet popularized the idea that
plant proteins must be carefully combined within a single meal. The claim
spread worldwide.
Its author, Frances Moore LappΓ©, formally retracted it in the 1981 edition
after the science caught up. The human liver maintains a circulating pool
of amino acids and draws on it for hours. Protein eaten at breakfast is
still available to the body at lunch. There is nothing to combine, time,
or calculate.
3. Plants That Are Complete on Their Own
Soy (tofu, tempeh, edamame, soy milk) β protein quality score of 1.0,
the maximum on the PDCAAS scale, equal to egg white and milk protein
Quinoa
Buckwheat
Amaranth
Hemp seeds
Chia seeds
Pistachios
Potatoes (small amount, but excellent quality)
4. The Pairing Traditional Kitchens Solved Centuries Ago
Legumes are high in lysine and lower in methionine.
Grains are high in methionine and lower in lysine.
Together they are a perfect amino acid profile.
Notice what humanity figured out without any nutrition science at all:
Rice and lentils β Iran, India
Beans and rice β Latin America, the Caribbean
Hummus and bread β the Levant
Tofu and rice β East Asia
Beans and corn β Mesoamerica
Every major food culture on Earth independently arrived at the same
pairing. It was never a problem that needed solving.
5. The Actual Numbers
The adult requirement is 0.8 g of protein per kg of body weight.
A 70 kg adult needs about 56 g per day.
Per 100 g, cooked unless noted:
Seitan 25 g
Tempeh 19 g
Tofu, firm 17 g
Lentils 9 g
Chickpeas 9 g
Black beans 9 g
Quinoa 4.4 g
Green peas 5 g
Pumpkin seeds 30 g (raw)
Peanuts 26 g (raw)
Almonds 21 g (raw)
Oats 13-17 g (dry)
Whole wheat bread 13 g
One ordinary day β lentil stew, chickpeas, bread, oats, a handful of nuts
β passes 56 g without any planning at all. Protein deficiency is
essentially unknown in anyone eating enough calories from varied plants.
6. The Question That Answers Itself
A bull weighs a ton and is solid muscle.
An elephant is the largest land animal alive.
A gorilla is roughly six times stronger than a human.
A horse outruns everything we breed it against.
Every one of them is a herbivore. Not one eats meat.
So where does the protein in a steak come from in the first place?
From plants. The cow assembled it from grass. Eating the animal is simply
collecting plant protein after it has passed through a living being β
losing most of the calories, adding cholesterol, and costing a life.
7. What About the Vitamins?
Iron β lentils, chickpeas, tofu, pumpkin seeds, dark leafy greens.
Pair with vitamin C (lemon, pepper, tomato) to multiply
absorption several times over.
Calcium β tahini, fortified plant milk, kale, bok choy, almonds,
tofu set with calcium.
Zinc β legumes, seeds, nuts, whole grains. Soaking and sprouting
increase absorption.
Omega-3 β flaxseed, chia, walnuts; algae oil for direct EPA and DHA.
Fish do not make omega-3 β they accumulate it from algae.
We can take it from the original source.
Vitamin D β sunlight, or supplementation in winter. Meat-eaters need
this just as much.
Iodine β iodized salt or seaweed.
Vitamin A, C, E, K, folate, fiber, antioxidants β overwhelmingly plant
foods. Meat contains no fiber and almost no vitamin C.
B12 is the only genuine addition. One tablet. See our separate post on
why that has nothing to do with being carnivores.
8. It Was Never "Just Grass"
The picture most people hold of plant-based eating β a sad plate of raw
leaves β describes nothing anyone actually eats.
It is lentil stew. Chickpea curry. Bean stew slow-cooked with turmeric,
mushrooms, carrots and local rice. Hummus and warm bread. Falafel. Dal.
Mujadara. Stuffed vegetables. Roasted eggplant with garlic. Lentil soup
in winter. Noodles with tofu and ginger. Grilled mushrooms. Fresh fruit.
Dates and walnuts. Saffron rice.
These are not substitutes for food. For most of human history, for most
of humanity, they were the food. The meat-centered plate is a recent,
local, and expensive invention β not a human default.
In Conclusion
Plant protein is complete, abundant, cheaper, higher in fiber, free of
cholesterol, and does not require a death. The question was never where
vegans get their protein. The question is why anyone believed they
couldn't.
Sources:
- Melina V, Craig W, Levin S. (2016). "Position of the Academy of Nutrition
and Dietetics: Vegetarian Diets." Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and
Dietetics, 116(12), 1970-1980. DOI: 10.1016/j.jand.2016.09.025
- Young VR, Pellett PL. (1994). "Plant proteins in relation to human protein
and amino acid nutrition." American Journal of Clinical Nutrition,
59(5), 1203S-1212S. DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/59.5.1203S
- Mariotti F, Gardner CD. (2019). "Dietary Protein and Amino Acids in
Vegetarian Diets β A Review." Nutrients, 11(11), 2661.
DOI: 10.3390/nu11112661
- LappΓ©, F.M. (1981). Diet for a Small Planet, 10th Anniversary Edition
(author's retraction of the protein-combining claim).
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
#protein
@GreenPathForAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
β€1
π THE COMPLETE GUIDE: Every Argument Against Veganism, Answered
Seven posts. Seven of the most common objections. Each one answered with
science, sources, and logic β not opinion.
Save this post. The next time someone repeats one of these, send them
the link.
ββββββββββββββββββββββ
PART 1 β "We have canine teeth. Humans are omnivores."
22 Reasons Why Humans Are Herbivores
Jaw movement, intestine length, stomach acid, hands, sweat, instinct β
twenty-two anatomical facts, every one of them pointing the same way.
π [LINK]
PART 2 β "Where do you get your protein? Plants aren't complete."
Plant Protein: Complete, Abundant, and Nothing Like "Just Grass"
The "incomplete protein" myth, the combining myth its own author
retracted, the real numbers, and the question that answers itself:
where does the cow get its protein?
π [LINK]
PART 3 β "You need supplements. That proves it's unnatural."
The B12 Question: A Lost Vitamin Is Not Proof of a Carnivorous Past
No animal on Earth makes B12 β not even a lion. Why gorillas, horses
and rabbits share our exact "limitation," and why the one gene humans
really did lose proves the opposite of what meat-eaters claim.
π [LINK]
PART 4 β "Plants feel pain too."
Do Plants Feel Pain? Science Says No
No brain. No nervous system. No nociceptors. Reaction is not sensation.
π [LINK]
PART 5 β "Vegetarians are killers too β crops kill insects."
Are Vegetarians Also "Killers"? A Deeper Look at a Common Excuse
80% of farmland on Earth grows animal feed. Meat-eating is two layers
of killing, not one. The argument collapses on its own arithmetic.
π [LINK]
PART 6 β "Meat isn't harmful."
Heterocyclic Amines in Cooked Meat and Their Carcinogenic Potential
What forms in flesh at high temperature, why the WHO classifies it,
and what it does to DNA.
π [LINK]
PART 7 β "It's our culture. Everyone eats meat."
Speciesism and the Geography of Habit: Who Actually Chose Your Plate?
A cow is sacred in India and dinner in Argentina. A dog is family in
Europe and food elsewhere. If your ethics change with your postal code,
they were never ethics. They were an inheritance.
π [LINK]
ββββββββββββββββββββββ
Every claim in these seven posts is sourced from peer-reviewed research.
Read them in order, or jump to the one you need.
No one is asking you to be perfect.
Only to stop using excuses you have never examined.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
#guide #faq
@GreenPathForAll π
Seven posts. Seven of the most common objections. Each one answered with
science, sources, and logic β not opinion.
Save this post. The next time someone repeats one of these, send them
the link.
ββββββββββββββββββββββ
PART 1 β "We have canine teeth. Humans are omnivores."
22 Reasons Why Humans Are Herbivores
Jaw movement, intestine length, stomach acid, hands, sweat, instinct β
twenty-two anatomical facts, every one of them pointing the same way.
π [LINK]
PART 2 β "Where do you get your protein? Plants aren't complete."
Plant Protein: Complete, Abundant, and Nothing Like "Just Grass"
The "incomplete protein" myth, the combining myth its own author
retracted, the real numbers, and the question that answers itself:
where does the cow get its protein?
π [LINK]
PART 3 β "You need supplements. That proves it's unnatural."
The B12 Question: A Lost Vitamin Is Not Proof of a Carnivorous Past
No animal on Earth makes B12 β not even a lion. Why gorillas, horses
and rabbits share our exact "limitation," and why the one gene humans
really did lose proves the opposite of what meat-eaters claim.
π [LINK]
PART 4 β "Plants feel pain too."
Do Plants Feel Pain? Science Says No
No brain. No nervous system. No nociceptors. Reaction is not sensation.
π [LINK]
PART 5 β "Vegetarians are killers too β crops kill insects."
Are Vegetarians Also "Killers"? A Deeper Look at a Common Excuse
80% of farmland on Earth grows animal feed. Meat-eating is two layers
of killing, not one. The argument collapses on its own arithmetic.
π [LINK]
PART 6 β "Meat isn't harmful."
Heterocyclic Amines in Cooked Meat and Their Carcinogenic Potential
What forms in flesh at high temperature, why the WHO classifies it,
and what it does to DNA.
π [LINK]
PART 7 β "It's our culture. Everyone eats meat."
Speciesism and the Geography of Habit: Who Actually Chose Your Plate?
A cow is sacred in India and dinner in Argentina. A dog is family in
Europe and food elsewhere. If your ethics change with your postal code,
they were never ethics. They were an inheritance.
π [LINK]
ββββββββββββββββββββββ
Every claim in these seven posts is sourced from peer-reviewed research.
Read them in order, or jump to the one you need.
No one is asking you to be perfect.
Only to stop using excuses you have never examined.
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
#guide #faq
@GreenPathForAll π
β€1
π PART 8 OF 8 β The Complete Guide
The Fire Test: If Humans Are Carnivores, Why Must We Cook? π₯
There is one question meat-eaters have never answered, and it requires no
laboratory, no study, and no expert. Just honesty.
1. The Observation
Not a single carnivore on Earth cooks its food.
The lion does not. The wolf, the tiger, the eagle, the shark, the crocodile
β none of them. They tear into raw flesh, still warm, and digest it
without harm, without illness, without preparation of any kind.
Humans cannot. Hand someone a raw chicken breast and watch what happens.
No one eats it. No mother would give it to her child. We do not even want
to touch it without washing our hands afterward.
If we were designed to eat flesh, why is fire mandatory?
2. We Do Not Cook Meat for Flavour. We Cook It to Survive It.
This is the part people avoid. Cooking meat is not a culinary preference.
It is a decontamination procedure.
Heat exists in that process for one purpose: to kill what is living inside
the flesh before it can live inside you.
3. What Is Actually in Raw Flesh
Taenia saginata β the beef tapeworm. Reaches ten metres inside the human
intestine.
Taenia solium β the pork tapeworm. Its larvae do not stay in the gut. They
travel through the bloodstream and form cysts in muscle, in the eye, and
in the brain. The resulting condition, neurocysticercosis, is recognised
by the World Health Organization as the most common preventable cause of
acquired epilepsy in the world.
Trichinella spiralis β larvae that burrow into muscle tissue, including
the diaphragm and the heart.
Toxoplasma gondii β a parasite that crosses the placenta and can damage a
developing child.
Salmonella, Campylobacter, Listeria, E. coli O157:H7.
Read that list again and remember: a wolf eats all of this and walks away
fine. A human eats it and ends up in a hospital.
That is not a small difference. That is two different species of animal.
4. "But Some People Eat Raw Meat!"
Yes β and look closely at what that actually requires.
Steak tartare and sashimi demand extreme freshness, commercial freezing,
veterinary inspection, cold-chain transport, and specific cuts only. Remove
any one of those and people get sick.
Ethiopia, where raw beef is a traditional food, carries one of the highest
tapeworm infection rates on Earth. The tradition and the parasite arrived
together.
Inuit communities eat raw meat and fish β frozen in arctic conditions.
Freezing is itself a parasite-killing step. The cold is doing the work
that fire does elsewhere.
And notice what no culture anywhere on the planet has ever done:
eat raw pork or raw chicken. Not one. Not ever.
A lion needs no refrigerator. No inspector. No freezing standard. No
cooking thermometer. No "sushi-grade" certification.
Humanity built an entire global food-safety infrastructure β and the
overwhelming majority of it exists for one reason only: to make flesh
survivable for a body that was never built to process it.
5. "But You Cook Too! Rice, Bread, Corn β That Is Cooking as Well."
This is the most common reply, and it collapses under one question:
What happens if you skip the fire?
Skip cooking rice β it is hard and unpleasant. You spit it out.
Skip cooking chicken β you may end up in a hospital.
One is an inconvenience. The other is an infection. Calling both of them
"cooking" hides the only detail that matters.
WHY WE HEAT PLANTS | WHY WE HEAT FLESH
----------------------------|------------------------------
To soften fibre | To kill tapeworms
To release starch | To kill bacteria
To improve taste | To kill viruses
|
Destroys a molecule | Destroys a living organism
| that was infecting the animal
|
Skip it: less pleasant | Skip it: parasites, illness,
| sometimes death
|
Produces: nothing harmful | Produces: heterocyclic amines,
when boiled or steamed | classified by the WHO as probable
| human carcinogens
We cook plants to make them better.
We cook flesh to make it survivable.
THE DECISIVE TEST
If the two were truly equivalent, then a 100% raw plant diet and a 100%
raw meat diet would be equally possible. So test it.
Raw veganism exists. It has a name, a community, and people who have lived
on it for decades β apples, dates, grapes, oranges, pomegranates, figs,
lettuce, carrots, cucumbers, tomatoes, almonds, walnuts, pistachios,
sprouted seeds and legumes. No fire at any point. They are alive and well.
Now find the equivalent: a population living on 100% raw flesh with no
freezing, no refrigeration, no inspection. It does not exist anywhere on
Earth, and never has, because it cannot.
Remove fire from a plant-eater's life and they still eat.
Remove fire from a meat-eater's life and they get worms.
LOOK AT THE THREE FOODS YOU JUST NAMED
Corn β sweet corn is eaten raw, straight off the cob, in salads worldwide.
Perfectly safe.
Wheat β wheat is soaked and sprouted and eaten raw across the Middle East,
and has been for thousands of years.
Rice β rice can be soaked and sprouted and eaten without any heat at all.
Not one of them will give you a tapeworm. Not one of them requires a
veterinary inspector. We heat them because heat makes them softer and
tastier β not because they are trying to infect us.
And one detail worth knowing: when raw flour does occasionally carry
E. coli, the contamination comes from animal manure used as fertiliser in
the field. Even the rare danger in raw grain traces back to animals.
AN HONEST ADMISSION
A small number of plants genuinely must be cooked. Raw kidney beans
contain a toxin. Bitter cassava must be processed. That is a handful of
items out of thousands of edible plants β and in every case the danger is
a chemical the plant manufactures, destroyed completely by heat, leaving
nothing behind.
Compare the two failure modes honestly:
Eat a raw kidney bean β you vomit for a few hours and recover.
Eat raw pork β larvae can encyst in your brain and cause epilepsy for
the rest of your life.
Nobody has ever caught a parasite from a bean.
THE CHEMISTRY THAT SETTLES IT
Heterocyclic amines form when creatine reacts with amino acids at high
temperature. Creatine is stored in muscle tissue. It exists only in
animals.
There is no creatine in rice. There is no creatine in wheat or corn.
This is not an opinion or a preference β it is chemistry. The carcinogens
produced by cooking flesh cannot form when you cook a plant, because the
required ingredient is only found in a body.
So the comparison fails at every level:
Most plants need no fire at all. All flesh does.
Plants can be eaten raw for life. Flesh cannot be, for a month.
Heating plants creates no carcinogen. Heating flesh does.
Raw plants cause discomfort. Raw flesh causes infection.
6. The Trap That Closes From Both Sides
Here is where it becomes almost absurd.
Raw, flesh carries parasites and bacteria. So we cook it.
Cooked at the temperatures required to make it safe, it generates
compounds the World Health Organization classifies as probable human
carcinogens. (See Part 6.)
Raw: worms. Cooked: carcinogens.
There is no safe way for a human being to eat flesh. There is only a
choice of which risk to accept. A species' natural food does not force a
trade-off between parasites and cancer.
7. The Timeline Nobody Mentions
The human digestive system is millions of years old. Widespread controlled
use of fire is, at most, a few hundred thousand years old.
Our gut did not evolve expecting a stove.
The stove was invented to compensate for a gut that could not cope.
8. Slow Transit, Long Exposure
Food passes through a cat's digestive tract in roughly twelve hours. In a
human being it takes between twenty-four and seventy-two hours.
A carnivore's gut is a short, fast tube designed to push flesh through
before it putrefies. Ours is long and slow β excellent for fermenting
fibre, catastrophic for holding decomposing animal tissue for three days.
The Fire Test: If Humans Are Carnivores, Why Must We Cook? π₯
There is one question meat-eaters have never answered, and it requires no
laboratory, no study, and no expert. Just honesty.
1. The Observation
Not a single carnivore on Earth cooks its food.
The lion does not. The wolf, the tiger, the eagle, the shark, the crocodile
β none of them. They tear into raw flesh, still warm, and digest it
without harm, without illness, without preparation of any kind.
Humans cannot. Hand someone a raw chicken breast and watch what happens.
No one eats it. No mother would give it to her child. We do not even want
to touch it without washing our hands afterward.
If we were designed to eat flesh, why is fire mandatory?
2. We Do Not Cook Meat for Flavour. We Cook It to Survive It.
This is the part people avoid. Cooking meat is not a culinary preference.
It is a decontamination procedure.
Heat exists in that process for one purpose: to kill what is living inside
the flesh before it can live inside you.
3. What Is Actually in Raw Flesh
Taenia saginata β the beef tapeworm. Reaches ten metres inside the human
intestine.
Taenia solium β the pork tapeworm. Its larvae do not stay in the gut. They
travel through the bloodstream and form cysts in muscle, in the eye, and
in the brain. The resulting condition, neurocysticercosis, is recognised
by the World Health Organization as the most common preventable cause of
acquired epilepsy in the world.
Trichinella spiralis β larvae that burrow into muscle tissue, including
the diaphragm and the heart.
Toxoplasma gondii β a parasite that crosses the placenta and can damage a
developing child.
Salmonella, Campylobacter, Listeria, E. coli O157:H7.
Read that list again and remember: a wolf eats all of this and walks away
fine. A human eats it and ends up in a hospital.
That is not a small difference. That is two different species of animal.
4. "But Some People Eat Raw Meat!"
Yes β and look closely at what that actually requires.
Steak tartare and sashimi demand extreme freshness, commercial freezing,
veterinary inspection, cold-chain transport, and specific cuts only. Remove
any one of those and people get sick.
Ethiopia, where raw beef is a traditional food, carries one of the highest
tapeworm infection rates on Earth. The tradition and the parasite arrived
together.
Inuit communities eat raw meat and fish β frozen in arctic conditions.
Freezing is itself a parasite-killing step. The cold is doing the work
that fire does elsewhere.
And notice what no culture anywhere on the planet has ever done:
eat raw pork or raw chicken. Not one. Not ever.
A lion needs no refrigerator. No inspector. No freezing standard. No
cooking thermometer. No "sushi-grade" certification.
Humanity built an entire global food-safety infrastructure β and the
overwhelming majority of it exists for one reason only: to make flesh
survivable for a body that was never built to process it.
5. "But You Cook Too! Rice, Bread, Corn β That Is Cooking as Well."
This is the most common reply, and it collapses under one question:
What happens if you skip the fire?
Skip cooking rice β it is hard and unpleasant. You spit it out.
Skip cooking chicken β you may end up in a hospital.
One is an inconvenience. The other is an infection. Calling both of them
"cooking" hides the only detail that matters.
WHY WE HEAT PLANTS | WHY WE HEAT FLESH
----------------------------|------------------------------
To soften fibre | To kill tapeworms
To release starch | To kill bacteria
To improve taste | To kill viruses
|
Destroys a molecule | Destroys a living organism
| that was infecting the animal
|
Skip it: less pleasant | Skip it: parasites, illness,
| sometimes death
|
Produces: nothing harmful | Produces: heterocyclic amines,
when boiled or steamed | classified by the WHO as probable
| human carcinogens
We cook plants to make them better.
We cook flesh to make it survivable.
THE DECISIVE TEST
If the two were truly equivalent, then a 100% raw plant diet and a 100%
raw meat diet would be equally possible. So test it.
Raw veganism exists. It has a name, a community, and people who have lived
on it for decades β apples, dates, grapes, oranges, pomegranates, figs,
lettuce, carrots, cucumbers, tomatoes, almonds, walnuts, pistachios,
sprouted seeds and legumes. No fire at any point. They are alive and well.
Now find the equivalent: a population living on 100% raw flesh with no
freezing, no refrigeration, no inspection. It does not exist anywhere on
Earth, and never has, because it cannot.
Remove fire from a plant-eater's life and they still eat.
Remove fire from a meat-eater's life and they get worms.
LOOK AT THE THREE FOODS YOU JUST NAMED
Corn β sweet corn is eaten raw, straight off the cob, in salads worldwide.
Perfectly safe.
Wheat β wheat is soaked and sprouted and eaten raw across the Middle East,
and has been for thousands of years.
Rice β rice can be soaked and sprouted and eaten without any heat at all.
Not one of them will give you a tapeworm. Not one of them requires a
veterinary inspector. We heat them because heat makes them softer and
tastier β not because they are trying to infect us.
And one detail worth knowing: when raw flour does occasionally carry
E. coli, the contamination comes from animal manure used as fertiliser in
the field. Even the rare danger in raw grain traces back to animals.
AN HONEST ADMISSION
A small number of plants genuinely must be cooked. Raw kidney beans
contain a toxin. Bitter cassava must be processed. That is a handful of
items out of thousands of edible plants β and in every case the danger is
a chemical the plant manufactures, destroyed completely by heat, leaving
nothing behind.
Compare the two failure modes honestly:
Eat a raw kidney bean β you vomit for a few hours and recover.
Eat raw pork β larvae can encyst in your brain and cause epilepsy for
the rest of your life.
Nobody has ever caught a parasite from a bean.
THE CHEMISTRY THAT SETTLES IT
Heterocyclic amines form when creatine reacts with amino acids at high
temperature. Creatine is stored in muscle tissue. It exists only in
animals.
There is no creatine in rice. There is no creatine in wheat or corn.
This is not an opinion or a preference β it is chemistry. The carcinogens
produced by cooking flesh cannot form when you cook a plant, because the
required ingredient is only found in a body.
So the comparison fails at every level:
Most plants need no fire at all. All flesh does.
Plants can be eaten raw for life. Flesh cannot be, for a month.
Heating plants creates no carcinogen. Heating flesh does.
Raw plants cause discomfort. Raw flesh causes infection.
6. The Trap That Closes From Both Sides
Here is where it becomes almost absurd.
Raw, flesh carries parasites and bacteria. So we cook it.
Cooked at the temperatures required to make it safe, it generates
compounds the World Health Organization classifies as probable human
carcinogens. (See Part 6.)
Raw: worms. Cooked: carcinogens.
There is no safe way for a human being to eat flesh. There is only a
choice of which risk to accept. A species' natural food does not force a
trade-off between parasites and cancer.
7. The Timeline Nobody Mentions
The human digestive system is millions of years old. Widespread controlled
use of fire is, at most, a few hundred thousand years old.
Our gut did not evolve expecting a stove.
The stove was invented to compensate for a gut that could not cope.
8. Slow Transit, Long Exposure
Food passes through a cat's digestive tract in roughly twelve hours. In a
human being it takes between twenty-four and seventy-two hours.
A carnivore's gut is a short, fast tube designed to push flesh through
before it putrefies. Ours is long and slow β excellent for fermenting
fibre, catastrophic for holding decomposing animal tissue for three days.
In Conclusion
Every animal on Earth eats its natural food exactly as it finds it.
Only one species must set its food on fire first.
Only one species needs refrigeration, inspection, freezing standards and
cooking temperatures to survive a meal.
Only one species faces a choice between parasites and carcinogens every
time it sits down to eat.
That species is not a carnivore struggling with a difficult food.
It is a herbivore using technology to force down something its body was
never built to receive.
If meat were truly our natural food, we could eat it the way a lion does.
Try it, and you will discover very quickly why we don't.
Sources:
- World Health Organization. Taeniasis/Cysticercosis Fact Sheet β on
Taenia solium as a leading preventable cause of acquired epilepsy.
- International Agency for Research on Cancer (WHO). Monographs on
heterocyclic aromatic amines and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.
- Wrangham, R. (2009). Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human.
Basic Books. (On human dependence on cooked food β a dependence no
other animal shares.)
- Carmody RN, Wrangham RW. (2009). "The energetic significance of
cooking." Journal of Human Evolution, 57(4), 379-391.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2009.02.011
β Previous: [Part 7 β Speciesism and the Geography of Habit]
π All eight: [The Complete Guide]
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
#rawmeat #cooking
@GreenPathForAllπ
Every animal on Earth eats its natural food exactly as it finds it.
Only one species must set its food on fire first.
Only one species needs refrigeration, inspection, freezing standards and
cooking temperatures to survive a meal.
Only one species faces a choice between parasites and carcinogens every
time it sits down to eat.
That species is not a carnivore struggling with a difficult food.
It is a herbivore using technology to force down something its body was
never built to receive.
If meat were truly our natural food, we could eat it the way a lion does.
Try it, and you will discover very quickly why we don't.
Sources:
- World Health Organization. Taeniasis/Cysticercosis Fact Sheet β on
Taenia solium as a leading preventable cause of acquired epilepsy.
- International Agency for Research on Cancer (WHO). Monographs on
heterocyclic aromatic amines and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.
- Wrangham, R. (2009). Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human.
Basic Books. (On human dependence on cooked food β a dependence no
other animal shares.)
- Carmody RN, Wrangham RW. (2009). "The energetic significance of
cooking." Journal of Human Evolution, 57(4), 379-391.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2009.02.011
β Previous: [Part 7 β Speciesism and the Geography of Habit]
π All eight: [The Complete Guide]
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
#rawmeat #cooking
@GreenPathForAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
β€1
π PART 9 OF 15 β The Complete Guide
"It's Natural β Animals Eat Each Other" π¦
This is the oldest defence of meat, and it fails for a reason most people
have never stopped to consider.
1. Look at What Else Is "Natural"
A male lion taking over a pride kills the existing cubs so the females
come into heat sooner. Male ducks forcibly mate with females. Chimpanzees
raid neighbouring groups and kill the infants. Some animals eat their own
young. Disease, parasites, and starvation are natural. So is dying at
twenty-five from an infected tooth.
Nature is not a moral instruction manual. It is a description of what
happens, not a statement of what is right.
If "animals do it" justified an action, it would justify all of these.
Nobody accepts that β which means nobody actually believes the argument.
They only use it for meat.
2. The Asymmetry Nobody Mentions
A lion is an obligate carnivore. It physically cannot survive on plants.
It cannot synthesise taurine, cannot convert beta-carotene into vitamin A,
and cannot produce arachidonic acid. A lion fed only plants goes blind,
develops heart failure, and dies.
A lion has no alternative. It has no moral choice to make, and therefore
no moral responsibility. A lion is not immoral β it is amoral.
Now look at yourself.
You are not starving on a savannah. You are standing in a supermarket
surrounded by rice, lentils, beans, bread, fruit, vegetables, nuts, and
oil. You will not go blind without flesh. You will not die.
You have what the lion does not have: a choice.
And where there is a choice, there is responsibility.
Comparing yourself to a predator is not an argument. It is a confession
that you would prefer not to have options.
3. "We Are at the Top of the Food Chain"
We are not in the food chain at all. We removed ourselves from it with
walls, weapons, and agriculture. Place an unarmed human in a forest with
a tiger and watch where they rank.
But set that aside, because the real problem with this sentence is what
it actually says: that power justifies use. That being stronger makes
something permissible.
Apply that standard honestly. It would justify the strong harming the
weak in every human context too β and you would reject it instantly if
it were pointed at you or your family.
A principle you refuse to accept when it is aimed at you is not a
principle. It is a convenience.
4. The Test That Exposes It
If "natural" is genuinely your standard, apply it consistently:
Give up antibiotics. Not natural.
Give up surgery, glasses, dentistry, vaccines. Not natural.
Give up clothing, housing, heating, electricity. Not natural.
Give up your phone, your car, cooked food. Not natural.
Nobody does this. We fight nature every single day of our lives β we
built civilisation specifically to escape it.
"It's natural" appears exactly once in a person's reasoning: at the moment
they are asked to justify something they already wanted to do.
That is not a principle. It is an excuse wearing the costume of one.
5. "But Meat Made Our Brains Grow"
Two answers.
First, the science is genuinely contested. The leading alternative
explanation credits cooking in general β including starchy tubers and
roots β with unlocking the calories that fuelled brain growth, not flesh
specifically.
Second, and more importantly: even if it were entirely true, it is an
argument about the past, not a justification for the present.
Our ancestors also died at thirty, lost most of their children in infancy,
and had no medicine. We do not organise modern life around copying them.
What was once necessary for survival is not automatically right once the
necessity is gone.
Slavery built economies. Necessity is not morality, and history is not
permission.
In Conclusion
The lion kills because it must. You buy because you prefer to.
Those are not the same act, and no amount of appealing to nature will
make them the same.
The moment you have a choice, "it's natural" stops being a description
of biology and becomes a description of your own unwillingness to look
at what you are choosing.
Sources:
- Packer C, Pusey AE. (1983). "Adaptations of Female Lions to Infanticide
by Incoming Males." The American Naturalist, 121(5), 716-728.
- Hayes KC, Carey RE, Schmidt SY. (1975). "Retinal degeneration associated
with taurine deficiency in the cat." Science, 188(4191), 949-951.
DOI: 10.1126/science.1138364
- Hume, D. (1739). A Treatise of Human Nature. (The is/ought distinction β
the origin of the naturalistic fallacy.)
- Wrangham, R. (2009). Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human.
β Previous: [Part 8 β The Fire Test]
β Next: [Part 10 β "But My Meat Is Humane"]
π All fifteen: [The Complete Guide]
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
#natural #foodchain
@GreenPathForAllπ
"It's Natural β Animals Eat Each Other" π¦
This is the oldest defence of meat, and it fails for a reason most people
have never stopped to consider.
1. Look at What Else Is "Natural"
A male lion taking over a pride kills the existing cubs so the females
come into heat sooner. Male ducks forcibly mate with females. Chimpanzees
raid neighbouring groups and kill the infants. Some animals eat their own
young. Disease, parasites, and starvation are natural. So is dying at
twenty-five from an infected tooth.
Nature is not a moral instruction manual. It is a description of what
happens, not a statement of what is right.
If "animals do it" justified an action, it would justify all of these.
Nobody accepts that β which means nobody actually believes the argument.
They only use it for meat.
2. The Asymmetry Nobody Mentions
A lion is an obligate carnivore. It physically cannot survive on plants.
It cannot synthesise taurine, cannot convert beta-carotene into vitamin A,
and cannot produce arachidonic acid. A lion fed only plants goes blind,
develops heart failure, and dies.
A lion has no alternative. It has no moral choice to make, and therefore
no moral responsibility. A lion is not immoral β it is amoral.
Now look at yourself.
You are not starving on a savannah. You are standing in a supermarket
surrounded by rice, lentils, beans, bread, fruit, vegetables, nuts, and
oil. You will not go blind without flesh. You will not die.
You have what the lion does not have: a choice.
And where there is a choice, there is responsibility.
Comparing yourself to a predator is not an argument. It is a confession
that you would prefer not to have options.
3. "We Are at the Top of the Food Chain"
We are not in the food chain at all. We removed ourselves from it with
walls, weapons, and agriculture. Place an unarmed human in a forest with
a tiger and watch where they rank.
But set that aside, because the real problem with this sentence is what
it actually says: that power justifies use. That being stronger makes
something permissible.
Apply that standard honestly. It would justify the strong harming the
weak in every human context too β and you would reject it instantly if
it were pointed at you or your family.
A principle you refuse to accept when it is aimed at you is not a
principle. It is a convenience.
4. The Test That Exposes It
If "natural" is genuinely your standard, apply it consistently:
Give up antibiotics. Not natural.
Give up surgery, glasses, dentistry, vaccines. Not natural.
Give up clothing, housing, heating, electricity. Not natural.
Give up your phone, your car, cooked food. Not natural.
Nobody does this. We fight nature every single day of our lives β we
built civilisation specifically to escape it.
"It's natural" appears exactly once in a person's reasoning: at the moment
they are asked to justify something they already wanted to do.
That is not a principle. It is an excuse wearing the costume of one.
5. "But Meat Made Our Brains Grow"
Two answers.
First, the science is genuinely contested. The leading alternative
explanation credits cooking in general β including starchy tubers and
roots β with unlocking the calories that fuelled brain growth, not flesh
specifically.
Second, and more importantly: even if it were entirely true, it is an
argument about the past, not a justification for the present.
Our ancestors also died at thirty, lost most of their children in infancy,
and had no medicine. We do not organise modern life around copying them.
What was once necessary for survival is not automatically right once the
necessity is gone.
Slavery built economies. Necessity is not morality, and history is not
permission.
In Conclusion
The lion kills because it must. You buy because you prefer to.
Those are not the same act, and no amount of appealing to nature will
make them the same.
The moment you have a choice, "it's natural" stops being a description
of biology and becomes a description of your own unwillingness to look
at what you are choosing.
Sources:
- Packer C, Pusey AE. (1983). "Adaptations of Female Lions to Infanticide
by Incoming Males." The American Naturalist, 121(5), 716-728.
- Hayes KC, Carey RE, Schmidt SY. (1975). "Retinal degeneration associated
with taurine deficiency in the cat." Science, 188(4191), 949-951.
DOI: 10.1126/science.1138364
- Hume, D. (1739). A Treatise of Human Nature. (The is/ought distinction β
the origin of the naturalistic fallacy.)
- Wrangham, R. (2009). Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human.
β Previous: [Part 8 β The Fire Test]
β Next: [Part 10 β "But My Meat Is Humane"]
π All fifteen: [The Complete Guide]
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #scientific #science
#natural #foodchain
@GreenPathForAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
β€1
π PART 10 OF 15 β The Complete Guide
"But My Meat Is Humane, Free-Range and Grass-Fed" π·οΈ
This is the most comfortable belief in modern eating, and the most
carefully manufactured one.
1. What the Labels Actually Mean
"Free-range" β for chickens, this generally requires access to an outdoor
area. It does not specify that the birds use it, and in large sheds
housing tens of thousands of birds, most never find the openings or
reach them. Access is not the same as a life outdoors.
"Cage-free" β not a cage. Still a crowded indoor shed.
"Grass-fed" β describes diet only. It says nothing about living
conditions, about separation of mothers and young, or about slaughter.
Most grass-fed cattle are still grain-finished before killing.
"Organic" β regulates feed, medication and chemicals. It regulates the
product, not the animal's experience.
"Humanely raised" β in most jurisdictions this is a marketing phrase, not
a legally enforced standard with inspections.
Every one of these labels describes a slightly modified beginning.
Not one of them changes the ending.
2. The Ending Is Identical
There is no humane abattoir that sends animals home.
The free-range chicken and the caged chicken arrive at the same facility,
in the same truck, and meet the same blade. The grass-fed cow and the
feedlot cow die in the same room. The label changes the price and it
changes how you feel. It does not change what happens on the final day.
3. The Numbers That End the Conversation
Killed at Natural lifespan
Chicken 6 weeks 6-8 years
Pig 6 months 15-20 years
Lamb 6-8 months 12 years
Beef cattle 18 months 20 years
Dairy cow 4-6 years 20 years
Laying hen 18 months 8+ years
Look at that first column again. Every single animal in the food system
is killed in infancy or adolescence. A six-week-old chicken is a baby. A
six-month-old pig is a child.
"Humane" never once includes growing old. There is no farm anywhere
selling meat from an animal that died of old age, because an old animal
is an unprofitable animal.
Whatever "humane" means, it does not mean a full life.
4. The Contradiction Inside the Phrase
Set aside the conditions entirely and consider what is being claimed:
that it is humane to kill a healthy young individual who is not sick, not
suffering, and wants to continue living.
Ask yourself a simple question.
If someone took your dog, gave her a comfortable field, treated her
kindly for a year, and then killed her painlessly at the age of two β
would you accept "but it was humane" as an answer?
You would not. And the reason you would not is that the harm of killing
is not only the pain of dying. It is the removal of everything that
would have come after.
A painless death is still a death. It erases every day the individual
would have had. Kindness before an unnecessary killing does not cancel
the killing β it just makes the person doing it feel better about it.
5. Even the Painless Part Is Not Guaranteed
Stunning is designed to render animals unconscious before slaughter, and
when it works it does. But industry audits conducted by animal-welfare
specialists themselves have repeatedly documented stunning failures β
animals mis-stunned, animals regaining consciousness, animals reaching
the bleed stage still aware.
At the speeds modern slaughter lines run, with thousands of animals per
hour, errors are not rare accidents. They are a statistical certainty.
6. Who the Label Is Really For
Here is the honest answer: the label is not for the animal. It is for you.
"Humane" is not a welfare standard. It is a product feature, developed
by marketing departments the moment consumers began feeling uneasy. It
was created to solve a problem in your conscience, not a problem in the
animal's life.
It works beautifully. It allows a person to keep doing exactly what they
were doing, at a slightly higher price, while feeling that they have
addressed the issue.
7. The Question That Settles It
Imagine a dog farm.
Spacious. Clean. Outdoor access. Kind staff. The dogs are well treated for
six months, then killed quickly and painlessly, and sold as meat. The
packaging says Humane, Free-Range, Certified Welfare.
Would you buy it?
If the answer is no β then your objection was never about the conditions.
It was about the killing. You already understand the argument perfectly.
You simply apply it to one species and not another.
That is Part 7 of this guide, arriving again by a different road.
In Conclusion
Better conditions are genuinely better than worse conditions, and nobody
should pretend otherwise. A larger space matters. Less pain matters.
But "humane" answers the question of HOW an animal is treated while we
wait to kill them. It has never once answered the question of WHETHER
they needed to be killed at all.
And when you are standing in a supermarket with a thousand alternatives
behind you, that is the only question on the table.
Sources:
- Grandin, T. (2017). "On-farm conditions that compromise animal welfare
that can be monitored at the slaughter plant." Meat Science, 132, 52-58.
DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2017.05.004
- Grandin, T. (2010). "Auditing animal welfare at slaughter plants."
Meat Science, 86(1), 56-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.04.022
- USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service β label definitions for
"free-range," "cage-free," "grass-fed," and "natural."
β Previous: [Part 9 β "It's Natural"]
β Next: [Part 11 β Dairy and Eggs]
π All fifteen: [The Complete Guide]
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #humanewashing
#freerange #grassfed
@GreenPathForAllπ
"But My Meat Is Humane, Free-Range and Grass-Fed" π·οΈ
This is the most comfortable belief in modern eating, and the most
carefully manufactured one.
1. What the Labels Actually Mean
"Free-range" β for chickens, this generally requires access to an outdoor
area. It does not specify that the birds use it, and in large sheds
housing tens of thousands of birds, most never find the openings or
reach them. Access is not the same as a life outdoors.
"Cage-free" β not a cage. Still a crowded indoor shed.
"Grass-fed" β describes diet only. It says nothing about living
conditions, about separation of mothers and young, or about slaughter.
Most grass-fed cattle are still grain-finished before killing.
"Organic" β regulates feed, medication and chemicals. It regulates the
product, not the animal's experience.
"Humanely raised" β in most jurisdictions this is a marketing phrase, not
a legally enforced standard with inspections.
Every one of these labels describes a slightly modified beginning.
Not one of them changes the ending.
2. The Ending Is Identical
There is no humane abattoir that sends animals home.
The free-range chicken and the caged chicken arrive at the same facility,
in the same truck, and meet the same blade. The grass-fed cow and the
feedlot cow die in the same room. The label changes the price and it
changes how you feel. It does not change what happens on the final day.
3. The Numbers That End the Conversation
Killed at Natural lifespan
Chicken 6 weeks 6-8 years
Pig 6 months 15-20 years
Lamb 6-8 months 12 years
Beef cattle 18 months 20 years
Dairy cow 4-6 years 20 years
Laying hen 18 months 8+ years
Look at that first column again. Every single animal in the food system
is killed in infancy or adolescence. A six-week-old chicken is a baby. A
six-month-old pig is a child.
"Humane" never once includes growing old. There is no farm anywhere
selling meat from an animal that died of old age, because an old animal
is an unprofitable animal.
Whatever "humane" means, it does not mean a full life.
4. The Contradiction Inside the Phrase
Set aside the conditions entirely and consider what is being claimed:
that it is humane to kill a healthy young individual who is not sick, not
suffering, and wants to continue living.
Ask yourself a simple question.
If someone took your dog, gave her a comfortable field, treated her
kindly for a year, and then killed her painlessly at the age of two β
would you accept "but it was humane" as an answer?
You would not. And the reason you would not is that the harm of killing
is not only the pain of dying. It is the removal of everything that
would have come after.
A painless death is still a death. It erases every day the individual
would have had. Kindness before an unnecessary killing does not cancel
the killing β it just makes the person doing it feel better about it.
5. Even the Painless Part Is Not Guaranteed
Stunning is designed to render animals unconscious before slaughter, and
when it works it does. But industry audits conducted by animal-welfare
specialists themselves have repeatedly documented stunning failures β
animals mis-stunned, animals regaining consciousness, animals reaching
the bleed stage still aware.
At the speeds modern slaughter lines run, with thousands of animals per
hour, errors are not rare accidents. They are a statistical certainty.
6. Who the Label Is Really For
Here is the honest answer: the label is not for the animal. It is for you.
"Humane" is not a welfare standard. It is a product feature, developed
by marketing departments the moment consumers began feeling uneasy. It
was created to solve a problem in your conscience, not a problem in the
animal's life.
It works beautifully. It allows a person to keep doing exactly what they
were doing, at a slightly higher price, while feeling that they have
addressed the issue.
7. The Question That Settles It
Imagine a dog farm.
Spacious. Clean. Outdoor access. Kind staff. The dogs are well treated for
six months, then killed quickly and painlessly, and sold as meat. The
packaging says Humane, Free-Range, Certified Welfare.
Would you buy it?
If the answer is no β then your objection was never about the conditions.
It was about the killing. You already understand the argument perfectly.
You simply apply it to one species and not another.
That is Part 7 of this guide, arriving again by a different road.
In Conclusion
Better conditions are genuinely better than worse conditions, and nobody
should pretend otherwise. A larger space matters. Less pain matters.
But "humane" answers the question of HOW an animal is treated while we
wait to kill them. It has never once answered the question of WHETHER
they needed to be killed at all.
And when you are standing in a supermarket with a thousand alternatives
behind you, that is the only question on the table.
Sources:
- Grandin, T. (2017). "On-farm conditions that compromise animal welfare
that can be monitored at the slaughter plant." Meat Science, 132, 52-58.
DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2017.05.004
- Grandin, T. (2010). "Auditing animal welfare at slaughter plants."
Meat Science, 86(1), 56-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.04.022
- USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service β label definitions for
"free-range," "cage-free," "grass-fed," and "natural."
β Previous: [Part 9 β "It's Natural"]
β Next: [Part 11 β Dairy and Eggs]
π All fifteen: [The Complete Guide]
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #humanewashing
#freerange #grassfed
@GreenPathForAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
β€1
π PART 11 OF 15 β The Complete Guide
Dairy and Eggs: "But Nobody Dies for Milk" π₯
Most people who reduce meat keep dairy and eggs, believing these cause no
death. This post exists because that belief is the single most widespread
misunderstanding in the entire subject β and because the truth is worse
than the meat industry, not better.
PART ONE: MILK
1. The Fact Everyone Forgets
A cow does not produce milk because she is a cow. She produces milk
because she has given birth.
Exactly like a human mother. No pregnancy, no milk. Milk is not a
substance cows generate continuously for us to collect β it is food made
by a mother, for her newborn.
Once you remember that single biological fact, the entire industry
explains itself.
2. The Cycle
To keep milk flowing, a dairy cow must be kept almost permanently
pregnant. She is impregnated β in modern dairy, usually by artificial
insemination β and gives birth roughly once a year, every year, for her
entire productive life.
3. The Calf
Her calf is taken from her, typically within hours of birth, occasionally
within a day. It has to be. The milk she produced for that calf is the
product being sold.
Mothers call for their calves for days afterward. Dairy farmers know this
well; it is one of the most commonly described experiences of the job.
What happens to the calf depends on its sex:
Female β she is raised to replace her mother, and enters the identical
cycle: inseminated, pregnant, separated from her own calf.
Male β he cannot give milk and he is the wrong breed for efficient beef.
He is economically worthless to the dairy. He is killed shortly after
birth, or raised a few months in confinement and sold as veal.
Veal is not a separate cruel industry that exists alongside dairy.
Veal is a by-product OF dairy. The two cannot be separated.
4. The Mother
When her yield declines β around four to six years of age β she is no
longer profitable. She is sent to slaughter. Her natural lifespan is
twenty years or more.
She dies at roughly a quarter of her life, worn out by repeated
pregnancies, and her body enters the meat supply. A very large share of
processed beef and ground beef worldwide comes from retired dairy cows.
5. What This Means
"Nobody dies for milk" is simply false.
Her calf dies. She dies. The only difference between the dairy industry
and the meat industry is the length of the delay and the amount of
suffering that happens in between.
Dairy is not an alternative to meat. Dairy is a meat industry with a
longer first act.
PART TWO: EGGS
6. The Hen's Body
Wild junglefowl, the ancestor of the domestic chicken, lays roughly ten to
fifteen eggs per year.
A modern laying hen has been selectively bred to lay around three hundred.
That is not a natural capacity. It is an engineered one, and her body pays
for it continuously. Producing an eggshell drains enormous quantities of
calcium β which is why laying hens suffer from osteoporosis, bone
fractures, prolapse, and reproductive tract disease at rates that have no
parallel in wild birds.
Many hens in sanctuaries are given hormonal implants to stop them laying,
purely to save their lives.
7. The Male Chicks
A male chick cannot lay eggs. He is also the wrong breed to be raised
profitably for meat, because laying breeds have been bred for egg
production, not muscle.
He is therefore worthless to the industry on the day he hatches.
Around seven billion male chicks are killed worldwide every year, within
hours of hatching β ground up alive in industrial macerators, or gassed.
Seven billion. Every year. For eggs.
8. This Includes Free-Range and Organic
There is no commercial egg supply without hatcheries, and no hatchery
without male chicks. Free-range, organic, pasture-raised, backyard
cooperative, premium β all of them source hens from the same hatcheries,
and all of those hatcheries dispose of the males.
In recent years a small number of countries, notably Germany and France,
have banned the practice and begun using in-ovo sex determination to
identify males before hatching. This is genuine progress and deserves to
be acknowledged honestly. It also currently covers a very small fraction
of global egg production. For the overwhelming majority of eggs sold on
Earth today, the male chicks were killed.
9. The Hen's Ending
When her laying rate drops β at around eighteen months β she is
slaughtered. Her natural lifespan is eight years or more.
Her body is usually too damaged and depleted for prime cuts, so she
typically ends up in processed products: soup, stock, pet food, nuggets.
In Conclusion
The belief that dairy and eggs are the gentle option survives only because
the deaths involved happen out of sight and in a different sequence.
Milk requires a mother to be made pregnant every year and her baby taken
away every year, and it ends with her slaughter at a quarter of her
lifespan.
Eggs require a bird bred into a body that destroys itself, and the
killing of her brothers on the day they were born.
Neither of these is a by-product of a system we could reform. They are the
system. The economics do not work any other way.
If your reason for reducing meat was that you did not want animals to
suffer and die β then dairy and eggs were never the exception.
They were simply the part you had not been shown.
Sources:
- Flower FC, Weary DM. (2001). "Effects of early separation on the dairy
cow and calf." Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 70(4), 275-284.
DOI: 10.1016/S0168-1591(00)00164-7
- Weary DM, Chua B. (2000). "Effects of early separation on the dairy cow
and calf: separation at 6 h, 1 day and 4 days after birth." Applied
Animal Behaviour Science, 69(3), 177-188.
- Krautwald-Junghanns ME, et al. (2018). "Current approaches to avoid the
culling of day-old male chicks in the layer industry." Poultry Science,
97(3), 749-757. DOI: 10.3382/ps/pex389
- Whitehead CC, Fleming RH. (2000). "Osteoporosis in cage layers."
Poultry Science, 79(7), 1033-1041. DOI: 10.1093/ps/79.7.1033
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations β dairy herd
statistics and cull-cow beef data.
β Previous: [Part 10 β "But My Meat Is Humane"]
β Next: [Part 12 β "Fish Don't Feel Pain"]
π All fifteen: [The Complete Guide]
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #dairy #eggs
#scientific #science
@GreenPathForAllπ
Dairy and Eggs: "But Nobody Dies for Milk" π₯
Most people who reduce meat keep dairy and eggs, believing these cause no
death. This post exists because that belief is the single most widespread
misunderstanding in the entire subject β and because the truth is worse
than the meat industry, not better.
PART ONE: MILK
1. The Fact Everyone Forgets
A cow does not produce milk because she is a cow. She produces milk
because she has given birth.
Exactly like a human mother. No pregnancy, no milk. Milk is not a
substance cows generate continuously for us to collect β it is food made
by a mother, for her newborn.
Once you remember that single biological fact, the entire industry
explains itself.
2. The Cycle
To keep milk flowing, a dairy cow must be kept almost permanently
pregnant. She is impregnated β in modern dairy, usually by artificial
insemination β and gives birth roughly once a year, every year, for her
entire productive life.
3. The Calf
Her calf is taken from her, typically within hours of birth, occasionally
within a day. It has to be. The milk she produced for that calf is the
product being sold.
Mothers call for their calves for days afterward. Dairy farmers know this
well; it is one of the most commonly described experiences of the job.
What happens to the calf depends on its sex:
Female β she is raised to replace her mother, and enters the identical
cycle: inseminated, pregnant, separated from her own calf.
Male β he cannot give milk and he is the wrong breed for efficient beef.
He is economically worthless to the dairy. He is killed shortly after
birth, or raised a few months in confinement and sold as veal.
Veal is not a separate cruel industry that exists alongside dairy.
Veal is a by-product OF dairy. The two cannot be separated.
4. The Mother
When her yield declines β around four to six years of age β she is no
longer profitable. She is sent to slaughter. Her natural lifespan is
twenty years or more.
She dies at roughly a quarter of her life, worn out by repeated
pregnancies, and her body enters the meat supply. A very large share of
processed beef and ground beef worldwide comes from retired dairy cows.
5. What This Means
"Nobody dies for milk" is simply false.
Her calf dies. She dies. The only difference between the dairy industry
and the meat industry is the length of the delay and the amount of
suffering that happens in between.
Dairy is not an alternative to meat. Dairy is a meat industry with a
longer first act.
PART TWO: EGGS
6. The Hen's Body
Wild junglefowl, the ancestor of the domestic chicken, lays roughly ten to
fifteen eggs per year.
A modern laying hen has been selectively bred to lay around three hundred.
That is not a natural capacity. It is an engineered one, and her body pays
for it continuously. Producing an eggshell drains enormous quantities of
calcium β which is why laying hens suffer from osteoporosis, bone
fractures, prolapse, and reproductive tract disease at rates that have no
parallel in wild birds.
Many hens in sanctuaries are given hormonal implants to stop them laying,
purely to save their lives.
7. The Male Chicks
A male chick cannot lay eggs. He is also the wrong breed to be raised
profitably for meat, because laying breeds have been bred for egg
production, not muscle.
He is therefore worthless to the industry on the day he hatches.
Around seven billion male chicks are killed worldwide every year, within
hours of hatching β ground up alive in industrial macerators, or gassed.
Seven billion. Every year. For eggs.
8. This Includes Free-Range and Organic
There is no commercial egg supply without hatcheries, and no hatchery
without male chicks. Free-range, organic, pasture-raised, backyard
cooperative, premium β all of them source hens from the same hatcheries,
and all of those hatcheries dispose of the males.
In recent years a small number of countries, notably Germany and France,
have banned the practice and begun using in-ovo sex determination to
identify males before hatching. This is genuine progress and deserves to
be acknowledged honestly. It also currently covers a very small fraction
of global egg production. For the overwhelming majority of eggs sold on
Earth today, the male chicks were killed.
9. The Hen's Ending
When her laying rate drops β at around eighteen months β she is
slaughtered. Her natural lifespan is eight years or more.
Her body is usually too damaged and depleted for prime cuts, so she
typically ends up in processed products: soup, stock, pet food, nuggets.
In Conclusion
The belief that dairy and eggs are the gentle option survives only because
the deaths involved happen out of sight and in a different sequence.
Milk requires a mother to be made pregnant every year and her baby taken
away every year, and it ends with her slaughter at a quarter of her
lifespan.
Eggs require a bird bred into a body that destroys itself, and the
killing of her brothers on the day they were born.
Neither of these is a by-product of a system we could reform. They are the
system. The economics do not work any other way.
If your reason for reducing meat was that you did not want animals to
suffer and die β then dairy and eggs were never the exception.
They were simply the part you had not been shown.
Sources:
- Flower FC, Weary DM. (2001). "Effects of early separation on the dairy
cow and calf." Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 70(4), 275-284.
DOI: 10.1016/S0168-1591(00)00164-7
- Weary DM, Chua B. (2000). "Effects of early separation on the dairy cow
and calf: separation at 6 h, 1 day and 4 days after birth." Applied
Animal Behaviour Science, 69(3), 177-188.
- Krautwald-Junghanns ME, et al. (2018). "Current approaches to avoid the
culling of day-old male chicks in the layer industry." Poultry Science,
97(3), 749-757. DOI: 10.3382/ps/pex389
- Whitehead CC, Fleming RH. (2000). "Osteoporosis in cage layers."
Poultry Science, 79(7), 1033-1041. DOI: 10.1093/ps/79.7.1033
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations β dairy herd
statistics and cull-cow beef data.
β Previous: [Part 10 β "But My Meat Is Humane"]
β Next: [Part 12 β "Fish Don't Feel Pain"]
π All fifteen: [The Complete Guide]
#vegan #vegans #vegetarian #vegetarians #greenpath #dairy #eggs
#scientific #science
@GreenPathForAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
β€1