Some people even support the industries fight for animal cruelty, climate change and new zoonosis
As long as people give money to the animal industry no government on earth will do shit
We ded
Most likely outcome (high confidence)
still letting this here: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aba7357
No, I am against the prohibition of common terms, I advocate for a stricter declaration of ingredients. “Milk” alone could be milk from any mammal, cow, goat, human. Steak could be a cut from any animal, that is why a the animal it is from is declared. Oat milk is called milk since centuries but now the industry fears competition and is publishing propaganda and pays lobbyism for restrictive laws.
Right, but ‘steak’ does mean a little more than that. It also would indicate a particular kind of cut of meat, which would generally indicate minimal connective tissue, tenderness, location, etc.
So as long as it has “steak” written on it you just care that is any animal with those properties?
Would you like ‘meat-free’ labels allowed on foods that had absolutely no muscle-tissue content, but did contain animal organ, bone, and fat content?
I want a strong indicator that a product contains any animal products. There are already many labels for plant based products but none are required by any law.
I am in strong favor a big prominent “contains animal products” label. It would make live so much easier.
Do you buy “steak” as in a generic description for something from any animal, or do you buy bison, camel, goat or horse steak? I have only seen plant based steaks or schnitzel where it has it in the name. “Plant based product” or “product based on soy/pea”
Another way to protect the rainforest is to stop supporting the main driver of deforestation, the animal industry. https://ourworldindata.org/what-are-drivers-deforestation
reduce our reliance on farm-grown vegetables
this is the kind of stuff that screams shitpost :) you do you.
If there is some event that puts us all back to pre industrial times it will work.
A plant based diet would feed with the amount we grow 10 billion right now. How many would a forage and hunting society sustain? To give you a idea of the proportions: https://xkcd.com/1338/
Maybe you would more of a impact on others if you decide to stop support the killing. I do shitpost sometimes, it be like that. But I also try to inform others. The point is not that you will change the world alone, but maybe convince others. If avoiding unnecessary deaths is your aspiration you can be a example to others.
Ok, so you only eat the not farmed grocery shop fish and besides that you live vegan from the farmed grocery vegetables?
So you are all the way vegan but jump from time to time in a lake and grab some fish? Is this how you imagine the world will progress?
Right, but you got to acknowledge that dogs and cats are a far more available in cities. Just because you have the privilege of easy to kill fish you can not blame others for killing wild dogs and cats. Cats kill so much birds, it is much better for the environment to kill them instead of fish.
Or dog, to stay on topic. https://www.elwooddogmeat.com/meet-the-dogs
A purely fish based diet is not the answer. It destroys the hole ecosystem.
A purely vegan diet is not the answer.
Elaborate please?
land clearing and deforestation, which release carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitrous oxide (N2O); production and use of fertilizers and other agrichemicals, which emit CO2, N2O, and methane (CH4); enteric fermentation during the production of ruminants (cows, sheep, and goats), which emits CH4; p
Why do you only highlight some items? Everything could be reduced by 3/4 with a plant based diet. No change will result in +2°C. Once it hits +4°C there is no more animal agriculture.
Your nature argument is flawed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy You can’t justify your behavior with wild animals.
Alright, abolish animal farming then. All wild animals in the world would last less than 2 months. We don’t have to kill others.
I too eat in the dark.