From: natashavita@earthlink.net
Date: Wed Jun 13 2001 - 12:26:09 MDT
A vegetarian and a vegan are two separate concepts. Those who are vegans are very strict about all animal products. Most vegetarians do consume dairy. Alternatively, some meat eating individuals do not consume any dairy products. Dairy products are dangerous for lactose intolerance and make those who have lactose intolerance very ill. Others simply stay away from a dairy products because of mucus problems and/or allergies.
Eating a full blown-out diet of meat is known to be unhealthy. Anyone who sees it otherwise either has a leg up on the health/medical industry or is fooling him/herself. It has a lot of fat in it. It also can cause digestive problems.
Many people need some sort of meat in their diets, as evidenced by having tried a vegetarian diet and gotten ill. Others have enjoyed vegetarian or even Vegas diets for decades with no problems.
The central issue is each person's individual body and each individual person's point of view concerning eating red meat, poultry or even fish.
Decide for yourself what you need to keep active and healthy. If it disturbs you to eat dead animals, don't do it. I eat plenty of fish becaue for my needs it is the best alternative for eating meat. Otherwise, eat read meat in moderation, get plenty of veggies and, especially broccoli, and take designer vitamins and exercise. All other issues pro or con vegetarian view stumble down to personal ethics.
Natasha
-----------------
From: Barbara Lamar altamiratexas@earthlink.net
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 10:48:44 -0500
To: extropians@extropy.org
Subject: RE: vegetarianism and transhumanism
I wrote:
<this reason alone it seems dishonest to me for a person to claim they're
vegan because they don't believe in killing animals. >
Paul wrote:
< Why am I being dishonest? I do everything possible to _reduce_ the number
of animal deaths, but I would be the first to admit that any human has a
massive impact on the natural ecosystem. (That's why some extreme vegans go
to such extreme lengths as only wearing T-shirts that are made from non-GM
cotton etc.) >
I shouldn't have used the word dishonest, since it implies deliberately
lying or distorting the truth. The point I was clumisly trying to make is
that, at least with presently available technology, it's impossible for a
human to live without killing animals. To claim that one is not responsible
for animal deaths because one doesn't directly consume animal products or
use products tested on animals is false.
One can certainly honestly say that one is attempting to minimize their
impact on the natural ecosystem. Too often, though, I see people driving
their cars long distances to attend Save the Earth types of rallies,
purchasing agricultural products that have been produced at great cost to
the natural ecosystem [including trucking ag produce thousands of miles],
flushing their shit [along with toxic cleaning products, drain cleaner and
who knows what else] into rivers and other sources of drinking water.
I think it's a mistake to equate abstaining from the consumption of animals
products with conserving the natural ecosystem. To see this, one has only to
look at some of the ecological damage caused by excessive populations of
deer when their natural nonhuman predators are banished and human hunting is
outlawed. And of course there's agriculture, which, of all human activities,
is probably the most destructive.
I remember being disturbed by what I was taught in church when I was a kid.
If one consistently practiced what was taught there, one would soon be dead.
I feel the same way about the stuff preached by vegans.
Barbara
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Mail2Web - Check your email from the web at
http://www.mail2web.com/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:08:07 MST