Posted by Nobonezone at 03/01/18 19:09:05Please believe ITS BETTER TO EAT MORE VEGETABLES AND FRUITS EVERY than to eat animal products .... can u imagine i cow is been feed fish head ... to let the cow have a fish taste ..... also for the environment less cruelty to living animals water and land for farms world wide
Posted by ForestNymph at 03/11/18 04:44:01Ugh ....there are already huge disgusting amounts of land and water being used for corn and soy that are fed to "food animals" instead of people, so anyone who makes the lame monoculture argument is just pathetically trying to defend their flesh eating ways.
Soy and livestock: wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/footprint/agriculture/soy/consumers/
The United States also subsidized corn farming for years which created a surplus which is why high fructose corn syrup used to be in everything except for the cardboard boxes the food came in.
Read this article and the associated study on how vegan diets are the best bet for maintaining biodiversity, feeding the world without further deforestation:
The only valid argument for lack of sustainability in vegan diets is comparing someone who literally eats a lacto veg or ovo veg diet ENTIRELY LOCALLY SOURCED FROM WHOLE FOODS - meaning the person literally only buys produce from farmer's markets, shops in co-op bulk bins, grows a lot of their own stuff, and gets eggs or goat cheese from Farmer Bob down the road - and a vegan who lives in an urban area who eats almost all processed foods which have been shipped to the city from various parts of the world (there by wasting fossil fuels).
HOWEVER those are two very extreme examples. There's no place for meat in a sustainable world, and the "uber local eating zero waste" lacto/ovo vegetarian is a rare person and the vegan who eats only processed boxed foods from other countries or from many states away is also an extreme.
Veganism is the best bet for saving land and water. Period. Fossil fuels only enter the discussion in terms of processed vegan foods, and if you try to obtain foods whenever possible from your town, city or state, your eco-footprint is significantly smaller than any idiot arguing with you about monocultures, unless they're literally a subsistence farmer or live in a commune.
Posted by swissglobetrotter at 03/11/18 15:23:37When anyone claims that veganism is not good for their environment, you know they have no idea what they are talking about and are just making up excuses in advance for not wanting to commit themselves to doing anything good. Monocultures are mainly to feed BILLIONS of farmed which are killed to provide a little meat, while even less than those plantations would be more than enough to feed the whole world population. Soy is the perfect example as always claimed to be for vegans while vegans consume a ridicolously low amount of soy in the big picture...and being vegan does not even mean you have to consume soy if you don't want to. You could be vegan living only from your backyard. Of course the majority of us are more than happy to shop for our food and consume processed foods as long as no animals have been harmed. Being vegan definitely has the least impact on the planet by getting nutrients at the source reducing massively the need for deforestation, water consumption,... and more important than anything else not killing other living beings simply because we like the way they taste