Good Reason

It's okay to be wrong. It's not okay to stay wrong.

Category: vegetarianism (page 1 of 2)

Mac people, PC people

Forget “dog” v “cat” people, “left” v “right”, or “tops” v “bottoms”. The real split in personality is “PC person” v “Mac Person”. Hunch.com (via Mashable) gathered a lot of random data about people, and saw how it correlated with their sense of “Mac” or “PC” identification.

A few details are striking.

First off, the prestige of the Mac is evident by the fact that 25% of respondents self-identified as “Mac people”, even though Mac market share is around 10% (When’d that happen?). Either a lot of people are fibbing, or they’re using both, and like Mac better.

Also noticeable:

Mac people are 50% more likely than PC people to say they frequently throw parties.
PC people are 38% more likely than Mac people to say they have a stronger aptitude for mathematical concepts.
Mac people are 95% more likely to prefer indie films.

And most interestingly for me:

Mac people are 80% more likely than PC people to be vegetarian.

Cutting edge cultural trail-blazers, or insufferable hipster trendoids? We report, you decide.

Vegetarians disqualified for adoption?

Tentatively re-entering the world of the blog with this news item.

Vegetarian couple barred from adopting in Greece

A VEGETARIAN couple on the Greek island of Crete has been barred from adopting a child because of doubts about their diet, a local social welfare official said today.

The decision was taken because the would-be adoptive parents, who have gone to court to overturn it, eat no meat or fish and officials feared this regimen would be applied to the child as well.

I’m used to people wondering if I’m getting enough protein. (I am.) But do they think that a vegetarian diet is borderline abusive or something? I haven’t encountered this level of cluelessness in my travels.

But then they got an expert. Surely he’ll tell the authorities not to worry.

“It’s unreasonable not to be given the child for being vegetarian,” said Antonis Kafatos, a pediatrician and nutrition researcher.

A child needs to eat fish, seafood and dairy products among other things, without meat being essential. But if the family has no intention of imposing its diet habits on the child, I don’t see where the problem is,” he said.

I give up. I guess I can cross Greece off my list of ‘places I can get a decent vegetarian meal’. They’ll just look at me and wonder what I mean.

On second thought, I should just send Oldest Son over to Greece. He’s 16, vegetarian, and muscly. He’ll beat some sense into them.

Weekday vegetarians

A quick TED talk by Graham Hill, founder of Treehugger.com. He has an innovative solution for people who want to go veg, but maybe aren’t ready to make the jump.

Text, for the non-video-watchers.

I realised that what I was being pitched was a binary solution. It was either: you’re a meat eater, or you’re a vegetarian. And I guess I just wasn’t quite ready. Imagine your last hamburger.

So my common sense, my good intentions were in conflict with my tastebuds. And I’d commit to doing it “later”. And not surprisingly, later never came. Sound familiar?

So I wondered: might there be a third solution? I thought about it, and I came up with one, and I’ve been doing it for the last year, and it’s great. It’s called Weekday Veg.

The name says it all. Nothing with a face, Monday to Friday. On the weekend, your choice. Simple!

Sounds like a good idea.

You know, I’ve been doing this for years, but with punching people. On weekdays, I refrain from punching people. Nothing with a face. Or in the face. On the weekends, my choice. (I confess I do go a bit nuts on the weekend.)

I’ve always known that it’s better for people’s faces and gonads if I didn’t punch anyone at all. I always told myself I’d stop leaving random strangers languishing in a pool of blood or leaving a trail of broken noses — ‘later’. But I figure: being a weekday non-puncher is something I can do. Surely cutting down on the pummeling is better than nothing.

Hey, where’d he go?

The world is a confusing place sometimes.

There are times when the news throws up some story just ambiguous enough that I don’t know what to think. Here are my current sources of mental torsion.

Switzerland’s War on Architecture

You know what? Minarets are annoying. About as annoying as church bells. First off, minarets tend to have either a muezzin or loudspeakers, either of which is noisy (though the Swiss minarets are supposed to be the quiet kind). Also, if we allow minarets today, we’ll have a caliphate tomorrow, and then falls Europe, or something like that.

But I can’t get behind the Swiss ban on minarets. As long as zoning and noise ordinances are obeyed, I think people should be allowed to be as big of idiots as they want, including practicing their religion and building buildings. Yes, churches are stupid, but if they’re not free to get their religious groove on, I’m not free to get my anti-religious groove on.

No, I’m not going soft on Islam. I still think Islam is currently the worst religion in the world, though other religions could easily pass Islam up. I mean, think of what you could accomplish if you had two million people working together. You might be able to stop the murder and violence against women that your religion engenders. Instead, they just do stupid shit like this.

Two Million Muslims to Stone Devil at Hajj

Two million Muslims are headed to Muzdalifa, Saudi Arabia, to cast stones at the devil in the most dangerous part of the annual hajj pilgrimage, Reuters reported.

Once the Muslim pilgrims get there, they will collect pebbles to throw at walls of the Jamarat Bridge to symbolize the rejection of the devil’s temptations.

Friggin’ jerks.

But towers aren’t where the fight is. We should be fighting to stop the formation of parallel justice systems based on what religion you are. We need to fight laws intended to punish criticism of religion. The minarets are only scary for people who are easily scared.

Meat in a vat

I already blogged about this when it was an idea, but now it seems they’ve gone and done it.

SCIENTISTS have grown meat in the laboratory for the first time. Experts in Holland used cells from a live pig to replicate growth in a petri dish.

The advent of so-called “in-vitro” or cultured meat could reduce the billions of tons of greenhouse gases emitted each year by farm animals — if people are willing to eat it.

Would I eat meat if no one has to die to make it? Is the image of muscle growing by itself in a vat of fluid too offputting? Why won’t the scientists try eating it? Will it taste like chicken? This is confusing on many levels.

Australian Liberal party changes drivers

They’ve dumped their leader Whatsisname. You know, the one who wanted to work to prevent climate change. Now they’ve guaranteed their irrelevance for the next ten years. This would normally be good, but I have nagging fears. What happens if the Liberal party does manage to sink climate change legislation and the Australian public isn’t pissed off at them?

Hot Mormon Muffins!

You’ve seen young Mormon hunks in the Men on a Mission calendar, but you’ve also thought, “What about the ladies? Will there be a cheesecake calendar full of sister missionaries?” Sadly for you, a calendar of sexy sisters was just a little too hot. They’ve decided to send up an image that’s equally ripe for satire, Mormon motherhood. It’s messing with my head because I’m imagining ladies from the old ward in Cheney, in vintage poses. With doilies.

Ta to Snowqueen.

Vegetarians get fewer cancers, mostly.

New study:

A vegetarian diet may help to protect against cancer, a UK study suggests.

Analysis of data from 52,700 men and women shows that those who did not eat meat had significantly fewer cancers overall than those who did.

But surprisingly, the researchers also found a higher rate of colorectal cancer – a disease linked with eating red meat – among the vegetarians.

Oh, that. That’s because we’re eating teh Fake Meat, hom nom nom nom.

You’re set up to eat meat, but maybe best not.

A couple of articles on meat got my attention today.

I once read a book by the Hare Krishna people in which they claimed that people were naturally herbivores. Manifestly untrue. A look at our intestinal bacteria shows that humans have the kind of digestive colonies typical of omnivores.

Dr. Ley and Dr. Gordon scanned the gut microbes in the feces of people and 59 other species of mammal, including meat eaters, plant eaters and omnivores. Each of the three groups has a distinctive set of bacteria, they report Friday in Science, with the gut flora of people grouping with other omnivores.

Read the rest if you want to know more about the bacteria in your inner elbow.

So, since it seems we’re geared for meat and veg, is it time to dig in? Grab a horn and start chewing? Not so fast. Thanks in part to that meat-eating, evolution has given us brains with consciousness and cognition, so we’re now able to surmount raw evolutionary concerns. We can make predictions and plans about the future. And I see a whole heap of ethical and environmental issues around meat, with consequences I’d rather avoid. This article runs off a laundry list of environmental troubles for countries gearing up for greater meat production.

The consequences of China’s new carnivorism have been enormous. Thanks in part to the meatier diet, the number of people suffering physical stunting has fallen from three in 10 in 1980 to half as many today. But because meat is so calorie-dense, rising consumption is contributing to an obesity epidemic that afflicts 100 million Chinese. The production process has itself brought a slew of complications. Rivers of sewage from China’s new “concentrated animal feeding operations,” or CAFOs, overwhelm local treatment facilities. Public health experts are increasingly worried about avian flu, whose epicenter is Asian poultry. And because factory-raised livestock need so much feed—it takes 4.5 kilograms of feed to make a kilogram of poultry meat and 20 kilograms of feed to make a kilogram of beef—China’s yen for meat is jacking up grain prices globally. In fact, because Chinese farmland is already so scarce, and because decades of industrialized agricultural have unleashed huge ecological problems (from chemical runoff to groundwater depletion), China has turned increasingly to imported feed—effectively pushing the “external” costs of its meat revolution onto farms in the United States, Argentina, and elsewhere.

Not a pretty picture. So I like the idea of being one person who takes the pressure off the system. 

Plant rights

Wesley J. Smith at the Weekly Standard has written an article lambasting the Swiss for their supposed stand on “plant rights”.

Smith is a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, that gang of lying clowns who are attempting to take advantage of the uncertainty of science so they can wedge Intelligent Design into schools. I hope you’ll forgive me for spoiling that surprise, but it’ll make the author’s point of view so much clearer if you know that at first, instead of having to wait until the end of the article like I did, when they unveil the author’s identity and you realise you could have put the whole thing in the bin to start. Then again, it is the Weekly Standard.

As a vegetarian, I suppose I feel the same about plants’ rights as meat-eaters do about animal rights. I eat plants because I have to eat something, and I have no problem with doing so because they don’t have feelings, despite what you’ve heard about their psychic powers. Having feelings requires having a brain, and there’s nothing in a plant that corresponds to that kind of structure. On the other hand, I try not to waste plants or treat them mean because I used to read “The Lorax” like every other kid, and someone’s gotta speak for the trees, man. Plus I like to eat plants, and I want to make sure there’s enough of them around for later.

Smith’s discussion of the legally binding nature of ‘plant rights’ is (surprise) misleading. I’ve read the committee report that he mocks as ludicrous. It’s kind of interesting, less of a policy statement than a report on a group discussion. The committee differed widely on what constitutes a good reason to destroy or use plants, and the report explains this up front. It discusses the various views of panel members, but about the only solid conclusion they came to was that plants shouldn’t be arbitrarily destroyed for no rational reason. Which, you know, seems kind of hard to disagree with unless you’re an unreconstructed Dominionist, like Smith seems to be.

Here’s Smith’s take:

What is clear, however, is that Switzerland’s enshrining of “plant dignity” is a symptom of a cultural disease that has infected Western civilization, causing us to lose the ability to think critically and distinguish serious from frivolous ethical concerns. It also reflects the triumph of a radical anthropomorphism that views elements of the natural world as morally equivalent to people.

Isn’t it weird that it’s okay to anthropomorphise nature into a god-being that cares for us, but it’s not okay to anthropomorphise a plant? And if you’ve never seen them anthropomorphise a fetus, well, you’re missing out.

Why is this happening? Our accelerating rejection of the Judeo-Christian world view, which upholds the unique dignity and moral worth of human beings, is driving us crazy. Once we knocked our species off its pedestal, it was only logical that we would come to see fauna and flora as entitled to rights.

You knew it was going to be teh Athiests, didn’t you? Well, that’s pretty interesting. Let’s take a look at that Christianity and how it ‘upholds the unique dignity and moral worth of human beings’ (courtesy of the Brick Testament):

Slavery: okley-dokley.

Women: keep ’em quiet.

Humans: debased sinners.

Well, I feel special now.

What Smith is saying is what all conservatives from Archie Bunker onward have been saying: everyone used to know their place. People were at the top of the ladder, we ate animals and cut down all the trees we wanted, everyone was happy, and no problems ever came up. Until the ’60s, when hippies created all those environmental problems out of sheer faith, because believing things makes them come true and ignoring things makes them disappear, by the grace of dog. And so Smith tries to contrast New Age woo against good ol’ Abrahamic religion, not realising that both are different manifestations of the same problem: the human tendency to embrace unreason. 

One rational perspective would be this: Even though plants do not show evidence of consciousness, it would still be morally (the report does not say legally) wrong to destroy them arbitrarily. Humans are one species among many, and we have a great capacity for help or harm. Plants have a certain right to exist, as do humans. The way we manage plants (indeed, how we manage everything) needs to be considered wisely and rationally, and with a view to minimising our impact on nature.

All of which is implied by the Swiss report, but you wouldn’t know it by the way Smith pulls the most controversial minority opinions out of the text. A creationist quote-mining? Now there’s a real surprise.

Fake meat

What’s for dinner?

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals is offering a million-dollar prize for the “first person to come up with a method to produce commercially viable quantities of in vitro meat at competitive prices by 2012.”

You’ll have to excuse me, but the idea of giant containers of artificial animal tissue makes me just a mite queasy.

What’s wrong with soy? If it’s not meaty enough for you, you’re doing it wrong. Tonight I had some delicious fake chicken in black bean sauce, with rice and stir-fried vegetables. It was sali-very good. I know of a couple of places in Perth to get the stuff, but I usually go to Sri Melaka on James St in Northbridge.

Just don’t read this description on how it’s made. Doesn’t sound like they’re describing anything I’ve eaten.

Soy protein usually arrives at a food manufacturer in the form of a dry powder. Soy protein is coiled and globular, while real meat proteins are fibrous, so the challenge is to change the soy’s molecular structure. The food manufacturer exposes the soy protein to heat or acid or a solvent, and then runs it through an extruder to reshape it. “When you denature the molecules, they open up and become more fibrous,” says Barry Swanson, a professor of food science and nutrition at Washington State University and a fellow at the Institute of Food Technologists. “Then you hold them together with a gel, such as carrageenan or xanthan gum, something that will hold a little bit of water, and what you get is something that vaguely resembles a piece of meat.”

Oh, that’s a ringing endorsement. I’ll have to invite him over for stir-fry, and show him how it’s done.

Amateur Turkish butcher seeks thumb

People say to me, “I couldn’t be vegetarian. I love my meat.” (Ironic, the ‘my’.) And if I’m feeling snarky, I say, “Fine. Kill it yourself.”

That would be a courageous approach, wouldn’t it? Do the butchering yourself instead of paying someone at an abattoir to put the meat into lovely blood-free pink packages in the clean grocery store.

This news story gives us an idea of what might happen if everyone did.

In Turkey, at least 1,179 people – dubbed “amateur butchers” by the Turkish media – were treated at hospitals across the country, most suffering cuts to their hands and legs.

Four people were severely injured when they were crushed under the weight of large animals that fell on top of them, it was reported. Another person was hurt when a crane, used to lift an animal, tumbled onto him.

Three people suffered heart attacks and died while trying to restrain animals, private CNN-Turk television reported.

Stories like this leave me with the impression that we’re not really supposed to be eating meat. Doesn’t it seem like a lot of unnecessary effort? You could just have vegetables and Hamulation, and maybe some nice dinner rolls. They’re easy to prepare, and they don’t fight back.

And it’s doubly a shame because Turkish bread is among the nicest.

Older posts

© 2024 Good Reason

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑