Vegan/Plant based.

I do wonder how many sheep, cows, pigs poultry etc would survive a wholesale move to veganism, and how vegans would feel about the wholesale slaughter that would entail. Nobody is going to keep and maintain a herd of 100 cows as pets or 'companion animals'.

What would happen after the initial wholesale slaughter or extermination of all animal species used for food because that’s what it means. What would all those carcasses, skins etc. be used for?
How would they be disposed of? Burning pollutes the atmosphere and if you’ve ever been near a site where carcasses on farms infected with foot and mouth are dealt with, you wouldn’t be in a hurry to see/smell that again.

Maybe some enterprising people would make money by keeping a few animals in various locations or safari farms so people could further pollute the planet by driving miles to view those rare breeds. Some of the money raised by that method might go to keeping the animals in comfort until they’ve outlived their usefulness.

NotSpaghetti

...and what is it to do with being vegan?

Nothing other than vegans claiming they are better people, which they are not, they are exploiting the planet just like the rest of us. If they believe the record health benefits, great carry on, nothing as been proven.

Dont try to tell the rest if us how much better you are.

Actually, I think most of the responses on here were measured and thoughtful.

Sorry that was a reply to night owl not anyone else

I don’t think I was rude or dismissive.

I think I was raising, in a considered way, questions and facts that need thought.

On the other hand I find your comment about the questions I’ve raised “There are points I could refute - but I won’t bother.” the ultimate in rude and dismissive.

I’d be really happy to enter into a discussion and even be persuaded if the if the arguments are factual and unbiased.

Really your comment is no way to persuade someone to change their mind.

...and what is it to do with being vegan?

This is just dismissive David49

I'm sorry but my experience of people surviving on benefits is as varied as those without.
The people giving up their own life to support another's. People volunteering and supporting their community, people working several jobs but still not managing, people with disabilities who are not "scrounging" and often have other things to offer.
These are as well as those people just doing nothing.

I hate the way that people are dammed so easily and readily. The world is not all black and white you know.

And there are many wealthy and employed people who are really thoughtless irresponsible people.
The poor don't have a monopoly on bad behavior you know.

NotSpaghetti

^if you have no money and live on benefits you are exploiting those that pay taxes^

Plenty of people are contributing in other ways.
Often more than the benefits.

Yea, yea ,yea, so why are the areas of high unemployment the worse behaved, unkempt areas in any city, they have nothing else to do, why not clean the place up, and parent children properly

There are points in your list that I could refute Lathyrus but I won’t bother. Leather - one of the most polluting processes there is - is an easy one.

But all I see on here is the predictable responses when anyone raises veganism or associated thread titles. All kinds of arguments and accusations against vegans/ veganism and some quite rude responses to shut people down. I’m afraid the OP won’t have gained what she was asking for, sadly.

I have to query the ‘do least harm” stance.

I can see that it appears that way in the short term. An animal is not killed to supply a human need.

But in the long term the alternative use of artificial means to sustain our lives is outside the natural circle of life and is doing much more harm.

I’ve already mentioned the harm that chemical fertilisers are doing to the seas and land and their eco systems. That is affecting animals, it’s just that we’re not immediately faced with their deaths. They happen subtly and secretly.

Rosie mentioned leather. I see labels that say ‘vegan leather” -that’s actually plastic, mostly from oil. Leather would rot and return to the natural cycle. Plastic never will.

Much is made of the benefit to the planet if a plant based diet but I believe this is another short term answer to what is fundamentally a human problem- a planet with enough food for humans taking precedence over long term damage that will affect other species.

In Nature life feeds on life. It is “cruel” from a human point of view but It is a cycle that sustains itself. Even predominantly vegetarian societies depend upon the use and presence of animals to sustain fertility.

I’m inclined to think that the kindness to animals that the OP emphasised is just another human focused idea, a need to feel good.
Isn’t the ability to do violence to our own feelings for the greater good one of the higher moral developments?

The biggest problem with people who push vegan diets is that they fail to recognise that a vegan diet is harmful to children without supplements. One child actually died as a result of his parents stupidity. He was being home educated so 'off the radar'.

if you have no money and live on benefits you are exploiting those that pay taxes

Plenty of people are contributing in other ways.
Often more than the benefits.

The fact is that we do own animals for our own need's, entertainment, food, companionship and work. Independant we are animals ourselves and we exploit each other mercilessly.

Thats the way it is, some try to claim moral superiority but you can only do that if you have exploited others so that you don't depend on them?. Nobody in the UK is innocent , if you have no money and live on benefits you are exploiting those that pay taxes

I have unlimited admiration for any 83 year old who still cycles everywhere in all weathers with heavy groceries. Especially those that do this on busy London roads. Add in veganism and absolutely no use of any animal products and wow 'mind blown'! I'm not fully convinced that all those man made chemical alternatives to leather, wool etc are really 100% good for the planet but hey what do I know?

I do wonder how many sheep, cows, pigs poultry etc would survive a wholesale move to veganism, and how vegans would feel about the wholesale slaughter that would entail. Nobody is going to keep and maintain a herd of 100 cows as pets or 'companion animals'.

And Monica , just to be clear 'ou do not consider that your veganism puts you on a high moral ground compared with other lesser mortals who are not vegans.'

I'm not saying that I occupy any higher moral ground, that may be in the eye of the beholder. For some reason, meat eaters struggle to accept that some simply aren't like them, they like to bring it up and argue and then they don't like being given the reason!

I've been vegetarian most of my adult life, my husband and three daughters the same and we are largely vegan, we also cycle and we had a family joke the other day, that the worst thing in the UK is to be a vegan cyclist. Heaven forbid!!

Nightowl says it clearly ' It is not about an abhorrence of dead animals. It is a philosophy which believes animals are not ours to own, use or exploit for any purpose whatsoever. It is about ‘doing least harm’ whilst recognising that it is impossible to prevent all harm to other living beings.

It's not about avoiding death either, yes of course, living and consuming involve death. Once upon a time, a hunter would give thanks to the victim for giving up its life, this is a form of respect. Not respecting other species leads to poor welfare and sometimes cruelty. A long time ago, I remember reading of an RSPCA study which mentioned a link between abused children and their later abuse of animals. Men who are violent and abuse their family, often have a history of abusing animals earlier in their lives and pets are abused or used as objects to control their wives.

Some may think it is a long step from not eating meat to being concerned about domestic violence but humans seem unable to live without violence, not all but it is rarely absent from society. Abstaining from violence is part of every religion, Buddhism has it as a central tenet. It's good to be self aware and aware of the choices one makes in life.

Every glass of milk is something which nature intended to feed a calf and somewhere there is a calf that has been immediately killed at birth or removed from its mother so that we can drink milk. Knowing that and deciding that there is a moral point beyond which one will not step is simply part of life's journey.

Norah You are always the exception to my irritation with many vegans. You have made your decisions for good reasons, and I respect that, and do not consider that I have any right to ask you to justify your decision.

You do not proselytise or preach and you do not consider that your veganism puts you on a high moral ground compared with other lesser mortals who are not vegans. It is those like the OP and others like her who do consider they operate on a higher moral ground that irritate me and lead me to challenge the chop logic they use to justify their stance.

M0nica

Why have none of the vegans responded to my comments on the suffering of animals in the wild and the comparison with the best recommended animal rearing practices.

Did one vegan actually argue, in effect that it didn't matter if an animal had slow horrible death in the wild as it would have had a life spent in the wild. A horrible death is a horrible death, however you look at it. How many animals actually die peacibly in their beds? Other than those looked after by humans, of course.

I am happy to respect anyone's dietary choices and the principles that guide them, until they decide to claim they are morally superior and come out fighting, at which point I will analyse their arguments and apply the normal rules of logic to them.

I am afraid that emotional arguments that treat animals like cuddly toys, cut no ice with me.

Perhaps because not everyone is Vegan because of animal suffering. Animal suffering, though horrible, does not effect our choice to be Vegan.

I am not morally superior, our health is our reason.

Why have none of the vegans responded to my comments on the suffering of animals in the wild and the comparison with the best recommended animal rearing practices.

Did one vegan actually argue, in effect that it didn't matter if an animal had slow horrible death in the wild as it would have had a life spent in the wild. A horrible death is a horrible death, however you look at it. How many animals actually die peacibly in their beds? Other than those looked after by humans, of course.

I am happy to respect anyone's dietary choices and the principles that guide them, until they decide to claim they are morally superior and come out fighting, at which point I will analyse their arguments and apply the normal rules of logic to them.

I am afraid that emotional arguments that treat animals like cuddly toys, cut no ice with me.

Not aimed at anyone in particular, eat whatever diet you want but don't think you are a better person being a veggie or vegan, because if you live in the UK your lifestyle is massively exploitive. Our generation - the elderly exploit the environment most of all just using the NHS is massively polluting when you considers all the workers contributing to care.

Fertilizers

I have travelled a lot in the poorest countries, nothing is wasted droppings are used as fuel, yes, cow pats are dried and you cook your supper using them.
Artificial fertilizers are used to increase yield, assuming the government is competent enough to distribute them - many aren't. The price of basic food is usually government controlled, the grower has no incentive to buy fertilizer beyond local needs.

It's very difficult at present with the Gulf War fertilizer is very expensive governments just don't have the money to buy enough so shortage and high prices is widespread.
Rural areas are better off they can subsist using what organic waste they have to compost and provide some fertility, without artificial fertilizers they can't produce a surplus. So they just barter for the essentials they can't grow. If you are old without family to help you rely on your garden to produce the food you eat, when you can't do that --.

Thats a good point David49
There is no guarantee that those making money out of growing, producing or selling “vegan” goods actually support veganism themselves.

Wow. Artificial fertiliser involves using natural gas, a fossil fuel.
Also nitrate pollution from artificial fertiliser is one the greatest hazards to biodiversity and nitrate poisoning affects the health of human too.

It also mines potash from the seabed affecting the natural valance of marine life.

I always believed animal fertiliser was a better option but I had no idea how much damage our reliance on manufactured fertiliser was doing.

Like I said, I accept it’s uncomfortable information.

Your post led me to pose the question “Do poorer countries rely on animal manure for crop fertility?”

The answer is yes, they rely heavily on manuring with animal dung and use very little artificial fertiliser because of cost.

Another difficult aspect of eliminating animals to consider.

Was that to me?

I didn’t think I was virtue signalling just pondering on a very interesting programme and the questions it raised in my head.

I accept that questioning makes people uncomfortable.

The planet would be a much better place with less Humans exploiting it, an even better place with no humans at all.
Thats not going to happen so accept that we exterminate or exploit plants insects and animals so the we can live and if you think you don't personally, those that provide the goods and services you use certainly do.

Virtue signaling may make you feel good but have a thought for those in the poorest countries, where if they dont grow their own food they don't eat, a very large number of those eat very little meat because they have no money at all to buy it.