Is veganism the only ethical dietary choice for atheists?

[Dancefortwo]

Also, there are two ways humans can get energy - from glucose and from fat. The current trend is to get it mostly from glucose (all carbs transform to glucose) and look at the health results. I'll give you that it's better to draw energy the one way or the other, mixing leads to obesity and disease. Either stay away from fat, or stay away from glucose. 

Some people do better on one energy source, some on the other. I suspect it has to do with DNA and ancestry conditions.

Then why not get energy direct from source? Animals eat plants to get energy then we get the energy second hand from animals

You don't know much about nutrition, do you.  There are specific amino acids necessary to humans that only come from animals.  Carnisone is an amino acid that humans need for muscle, bone and brain development.  It also lowers blood sugar.  Creatin is an amino acid that are also used by the muscle and brain and it's levels are often too low in vegetarians.   Plant based diets don't contain vitamin B12 which is a necessary nutrient and vegetarians are subject to pernicious enemia because they don't get enough of it.  Most vegetarians have to take a supplemental form of it.  Humans are omnivore animals.  We eat both plant and animal.  

Archaeologists have found spears going back 45 thousand years.   Our ancestors weren't out hunting strawberries, they were hunting animals.  There's a reason a tribal village celebrates when the men come back with a dead wild boar hanging on a stick.  They will have full bellies for a few weeks.

[jimhabegger]

I have often felt guilty eating meat myself and I totally get where vegans are coming from, so I don't ridicule vegans for their choices. It's something I've been conflicted about for a long time. If I could sustain myself on a vegan diet though, I would. Or if lab grown meat ever becomes viable. I'm also ridiculously underweight, so there's that to take into consideration too.

I'm conflicted on this ethically which is why I wanted to bring it up in an atheist forum.

A popular reason now for going vegan is for people to reduce their carbon footprint.

I see most or all of the things that people are doing, including me, thinking that we're helping to solve some social problem, helping to save the earth, or helping to improve society, as mostly just roleplaying, acting out trying to help solve some problem, without any possibility of knowing if we are actually helping, or making things worse. At the stage of human progress that we're in now, I think that's the best thing that anyone can do, some kind of action roleplaying helping to solve some problem. I want to encourage and support people in whatever kind of roleplaying they're doing, with some exceptions. One exception is cruelty and vicious personal attacks. Another is campaigns of denunciation and intimidation. Another is when it revolves around vilifying people across some dividing line. That includes political and belief lines. I'm thinking that campaigns of denunciation and intimidation, and anything that revolves around vilifying people across some dividing line, are helping to perpetuate all the problems and make them worse, without doing anything to help solve them or to help improve society.

[no one]

The ethics involved are overrided by how good the animal tastes.

[Vera]

Person A: "The sun rises in the west."
Person B: "The sun rises in the east."
Person C: "The sun rises in the east."
Person D: "The sun rises in the east."
Person E: "The sun rises in the east."
Person F: "The sun rises in the east."

Person A: "Circle jerk! Echo chamber! Meanies!"

Also why are the handful of usual suspects so ridiculously predictable and obvious.

[Alan V]

A popular reason now for going vegan is for people to reduce their carbon footprint.

I see most or all of the things that people are doing, including me, thinking that we're helping to solve some social problem, helping to save the earth, or helping to improve society, as mostly just roleplaying, acting out trying to help solve some problem, without any possibility of knowing if we are actually helping, or making things worse. At the stage of human progress that we're in now, I think that's the best thing that anyone can do, some kind of action roleplaying helping to solve some problem.

Do you think individual efforts of getting a vaccination as roleplaying rather than useful?  In my mind they are essential small efforts that add up to dealing with the pandemic in the only effective way.

[Aractus]

If you don't believe in a neverland where we all go to live happily ever after is it ethical to consume animal products?

I honestly don't understand the hostile responses you've been given.

Unlike other people here I HAVE studied nutrition. So I can give you an objective perspective BUT in saying that people are rarely interested in evidence-based information especially as it regards something as personal to them as diet and beliefs about nutrition.

A vegan diet is an extreme fad diet. I cannot put it any simpler than that. It removes two entire food groups. Proponents claim they can get full nutrition from plant sources plus supplements. Dietary supplements are never the ideal source of nutrition. For example if a woman has low iron because you're a vegan, menstruate every month, and donates blood regularly then they will need to take iron supplements. Guess what one of the most common childhood toxicities is administered to hospital? Yep, iron. Kids see their mums take the supplements so take them themselves. So even IF the supplement solves the problem perfectly (which it never does) then there are still other real-world consequences to that decision. It's one thing to tell people to treat supplements as if it's medication and lock it away from children, it's another thing for people to actually understand that. Thankfully iron toxicity isn't fatal, but it's still not ideal and we don't need kids being administered to hospital because of dietary choices of their parents.

As for other nutrients, there is a different bioavailability based on the food source. This is well know, it's in the nutrition databases. For some nutrients supplements are almost completely worthless/non-bioavailable. For the meat based nutrients, including protein (amino acids), plant sources are much less bioavailable. The reason for this is thought to be plants lectins that bind to nutrients. Some people are better at unlocking plant nutrients than others (that is to say for some people plant nutrients are more bioavailable than for others). We do not know what most lectins do, some won't have any effect at all to humans, ricin as popularised in Breaking Bad is so toxic that it will kill people even in small amounts. So that's the science - in the real world if you're seeing a nutritionist or a dietician because you have a nutrient deficiency what they're going to do is test out different foods to see if they can fix the problem (again - supplementation is a last resort).

I just came back from my aunt's farm. Guess what she grows on her farm? Yes that's right, grass and lots of it. She's been getting quite a lot of rain. There are a few ways she can use that grass. Firstly she could buy more horses. I'm not a huge fan of horses myself, but she is. Secondly she could get a ride-on lawn mower and mow the farm. Or she could do what she's doing, and grow livestock.

It really amazes me when people imagine livestock being raised in some completely artificial way. What is far more artificial is to clear the land, plant mutated genomic monoculture and then heavily irrigate it (where exactly would my aunt get the water to irrigate agriculture from - out of her ass?!) I don't know how many cows she has at the moment because I didn't bother going over to that paddock, but suffice to say they're doing what cows do which is to convert grass into something that humans can eat. Cow is one of my favourite types of meat, I have some dead cow out in the kitchen right now waiting for me to go and cook it. Yes it is a big shame the auroch was driven to extinction to make it, however like I said before almost every single plant food is not natural either - it is mutated through decades, centuries, and millennia of selective breeding. With animal sources we do still have the choice to go completely natural, which is one of my other favourite foods roo.

[jimhabegger]

Do you think individual efforts of getting a vaccination as roleplaying rather than useful?  In my mind they are essential small efforts that add up to dealing with the pandemic in the only effective way.

Roleplaying and actually being useful are not mutually exclusive. What I'm thinking is that at the stage of human progress that we're in, it's impossible for most people to know if what they're doing is actually helping, or making things worse, and yes, that includes getting vaccinated. Even so, I want to encourage and support whatever people are doing, thinking that they're helping, whether it's getting vaccinated or not getting vaccinated, with some exceptions including the ones I mentioned earlier. I think that it is possible to see clearly some kinds of behavior to avoid, that only help perpetuate the problems and make them worse, without doing anything to help solve them. One example of that is denunciation campaigns promoting hatred against people who choose not to be vaccinated, and who think that that vaccination campaigns are doing more harm than good.

[Alan V]

Do you think individual efforts of getting a vaccination as roleplaying rather than useful?  In my mind they are essential small efforts that add up to dealing with the pandemic in the only effective way.

Roleplaying and actually being useful are not mutually exclusive. What I'm thinking is that at the stage of human progress that we're in, it's impossible for most people to know if what they're doing is actually helping, or making things worse, and yes, that includes getting vaccinated. Even so, I want to encourage and support whatever people are doing, thinking that they're helping, whether it's getting vaccinated or not getting vaccinated, with some exceptions including the ones I mentioned earlier. I think that it is possible to see clearly some kinds of behavior to avoid, that only help perpetuate the problems and make them worse, without doing anything to help solve them. One example of that is denunciation campaigns promoting hatred against people who choose not to be vaccinated, and who think that that vaccination campaigns are doing more harm than good.

Vaccines save lives.  What is ambiguous about that?  People who are anti-vaccine should be ashamed of themselves, since they are the ones who have contempt for others in the most direct way possible.

Perhaps you could explain what you mean by "roleplaying."  That seems a kind of put-down to me, perhaps even hate speech. 

[jimhabegger]

Perhaps you could explain what you mean by "roleplaying."

Maybe "make-believe" or "play acting" would be a better way to say it, or whatever you would call it when children play house.

Make believe - Wikipedia

That seems a kind of put-down to me, perhaps even hate speech. 

Hate speech against children? I'm not saying that to insult people. I think that it can be very healthy, and like I said, I think that it might be mostly the best that people can do to help solve the problems, in the world as it is today.

[Alan V]

I'm not saying that to insult people. I think that it can be very healthy, and like I said, I think that it might be mostly the best that people can do to help solve the problems, in the world as it is today.

You seem to want guarantees that what we do is effective to solve problems.  But as I see it there are no guarantees of success even if what we do is working, since counter-forces can be too strong and overwhelming in some cases.

Because of the many unknowns, I see no reason to call any efforts "roleplaying."

[TinyDave]

You don't know much about nutrition, do you.  

No, I don't know much about nutrition. I don't know much about a lot of things, hence the questions.

[Peebothuhlu]

If you don't believe in a neverland where we all go to live happily ever after is it ethical to consume animal products?

Hello.

So.. basically, yeah. Meat is tasty, tasty murder.

For most of our species existence we've had to partake in the killing and eating of other things to simply survive.

At on point our more distant ancestors were both competing for food as well as being food, so there's also that.

I've read/heard/seen it posited that as our tech gets better and access to fundamental rescourses increases we'll actually be able to do away with tasty meat murder and simply 'Make' our protien snacks in situe. With out all the messy, blood filled preparation in between.

However, we're no where near doing anything like that at the moment so tasty meat murder it seems it'll continue to be.

 

Cheers

Not at work.

[SYZ]

If you don't believe in a neverland where we all go to live happily ever after is it ethical to consume animal products?

I've just now considered your opening comment in this thread, and people's responses
(excepting, of course, the page of rubbish from our resident bullshit artist Aractus.)

So... number one; there is  and cannot be any conflation between a paranormal event—or
a purported "afterlife"—with the human ethics of what one consumes as food.  

And as another member has said; human beings are omnivores, eating both plant and
animal matter.  Further, in the natural world many other animals are defined as such;
bears, squirrels, dingoes, mice and rats, pigs, crows, lizards and turtles, and chimpanzees.

You've really got to define precisely what you mean by going to a "neverland" (afterlife?)
before you can debate any/all scenarios including that term.  Science uses precise terminology
and logic and empirical evidence.

—Incidentally, and considering your short-term (2 days) presence here, it may pay you to tone
down your confrontational attitude somewhat; your response to a popular, trusted, and longer
term member, Vera was, simply put, offensive and totally out of order.  It'd probably be helpful
if you spent some more time getting to know us, rather than simply barging in all gung-ho but
with obviously little knowledge of this forum's general netiquette.     

[TinyDave]

If you don't believe in a neverland where we all go to live happily ever after is it ethical to consume animal products?

I've just now considered your opening comment in this thread, and people's responses
(excepting, of course, the page of rubbish from our resident bullshit artist Aractus.)

So... number one; there is and cannot be any conflation between a paranormal event—or
a purported "afterlife"—with the human ethics of what one consumes as food.

I'm not sure about that. Maybe I am getting ahead of myself in posing a question of ethics relating to our treatment of other beings.
The question should have been better considered.  
 

And as another member has said; human beings are omnivores, eating both plant and
animal matter.  Further, in the natural world many other animals are defined as such;
bears, squirrels, dingoes, mice and rats, pigs, crows, lizards and turtles, and chimpanzees.

I don't understand where you are going with this?

You've really got to define precisely what you mean by going to a "neverland" (afterlife?)
before you can debate any/all scenarios including that term.  Science uses precise terminology
and logic and empirical evidence.

I was using a euphemism which was understood, but yes in future I will use precise terminology.
 

—Incidentally, and considering your short-term (2 days) presence here, it may pay you to tone
down your confrontational attitude somewhat; your response to a popular, trusted, and longer
term member, Vera was, simply put, offensive and totally out of order.  It'd probably be helpful
if you spent some more time getting to know us, rather than simply barging in all gung-ho but
with obviously little knowledge of this forum's general netiquette.     

Noted.

[Mr Greene]

If you don't believe in a neverland where we all go to live happily ever after is it ethical to consume animal products?

You have as your avatar a cat. An animal that has evolved to be a highly specialised killing machine.
It has retractible claws, enlarged canines, a turn of speed and maneuverability that athletes would commit serious crimes to approach and an array of senses vastly superior to our own.
As soon as they've been weened they're capable of fighting a campaign of extermination against whatever moves in their area.
Is it unethical for a cat to eat meat? 
Do you think a cat has greater rights than a human?
Are we lesser animals?

[Dom]

If you don't believe in a neverland where we all go to live happily ever after is it ethical to consume animal products?

You have as your avatar a cat. An animal that has evolved to be a highly specialised killing machine.
It has retractible claws, enlarged canines, a turn of speed and maneuverability that athletes would commit serious crimes to approach and an array of senses vastly superior to our own.
As soon as they've been weened they're capable of fighting a campaign of extermination against whatever moves in their area.
Is it unethical for a cat to eat meat? 
Do you think a cat has greater rights than a human?
Are we lesser animals?

I'm with you on all that, but to your last question, my answer is likely "yes".

[Mr Greene]

If you don't believe in a neverland where we all go to live happily ever after is it ethical to consume animal products?

You have as your avatar a cat. An animal that has evolved to be a highly specialised killing machine.
It has retractible claws, enlarged canines, a turn of speed and maneuverability that athletes would commit serious crimes to approach and an array of senses vastly superior to our own.
As soon as they've been weened they're capable of fighting a campaign of extermination against whatever moves in their area.
Is it unethical for a cat to eat meat? 
Do you think a cat has greater rights than a human?
Are we lesser animals?

I'm with you on all that, but to your last question, my answer is likely "yes".

I submit that we are better at opening tins. 

[Dom]

You have as your avatar a cat. An animal that has evolved to be a highly specialised killing machine.
It has retractible claws, enlarged canines, a turn of speed and maneuverability that athletes would commit serious crimes to approach and an array of senses vastly superior to our own.
As soon as they've been weened they're capable of fighting a campaign of extermination against whatever moves in their area.
Is it unethical for a cat to eat meat? 
Do you think a cat has greater rights than a human?
Are we lesser animals?

I'm with you on all that, but to your last question, my answer is likely "yes".

I submit that we are better at opening tins. 

Yes, but they are better at getting us to do what they want, including opening tins.

[TinyDave]

You have as your avatar a cat.

I do. That is TinyDave.

An animal that has evolved to be a highly specialised killing machine.
It has retractible claws, enlarged canines, a turn of speed and maneuverability that athletes would commit serious crimes to approach and an array of senses vastly superior to our own.
As soon as they've been weened they're capable of fighting a campaign of extermination against whatever moves in their area.
Is it unethical for a cat to eat meat?

Cats are amoral, they do not have ethics so the question of whether is is ethical or not for a cat to eat meat is non sequitur.

 
Do you think a cat has greater rights than a human?

No, I don't think that cats have greater rights than humans.
Do I think that they have equal rights to humans?
Yes, I do. They are sentient beings in that they have a perception of their existence.  

 
Are we lesser animals?

That is an interesting question. 
Are we lesser animals because we can understand that other beings experience pain and suffering but inflict it on them anyway?
Probably.

[Mr Greene]

Do you think a cat has greater rights than a human?

No, I don't think that cats have greater rights than humans.
Do I think that they have equal rights to humans?
Yes, I do. They are sentient beings in that they have a perception of their existence.  

You think equality means some are more equal than others?

[TinyDave]

Do you think a cat has greater rights than a human?

No, I don't think that cats have greater rights than humans.
Do I think that they have equal rights to humans?
Yes, I do. They are sentient beings in that they have a perception of their existence.  

You think equality means some are more equal than others?

No, that is a ridiculous premise.
That sounds like a quote from animal farm.

[Mr Greene]

No, I don't think that cats have greater rights than humans.
Do I think that they have equal rights to humans?
Yes, I do. They are sentient beings in that they have a perception of their existence.  

You think equality means some are more equal than others?

No, that is a ridiculous premise.
That sounds like a quote from animal farm.

Then what applies to the cat also applies to us.

[Thumpalumpacus]

It really amazes me when people imagine livestock being raised in some completely artificial way.

Look at what's going on in the Amazon's rainforest. Clearing vast swathes of rainforest in order to raise livestock is seriously damaging our ability to remove carbon from the atmosphere. That's certainly an aspect of dietary decisions that has an ethical dimension.

[Dom]

Lots of people who are engaged in the animal/slaughter trade, do not believe that animals feel things the way we do. That is what people used to think for eons, mostly because the stress of killing them would be too strong to bear. 

And, still today, people who work with these animals have to block that knowledge out and treat them as if they were things.

I come from a long line of simple farmers and butchers. My grandpa was still convinced that animals were inferior and had no comparable feelings. It's my parent's generation who changed that. And that change is still not universal.

And that takes me back to my constant mantra - education, education, education. Many people do not understand how central nervous systems work, or that they even exist. They don't understand hormonal balances. Until humans in general understand these things, they will remain cold and cruel.

[TinyDave]

You think equality means some are more equal than others?

No, that is a ridiculous premise.
That sounds like a quote from animal farm.

Then what applies to the cat also applies to us.

Does it?
I dont understand your reasoning. 
Please explain your statement.