Veganism Discussion

Discuss anything interesting but not remotely Countdown-related here.

Moderator: Jon O'Neill

Marc Meakin
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 6242
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Veganism Discussion

Post by Marc Meakin »

As requested, I have started a dedicated thread.
I spent 2 years as a vegetarian and for the most part I was ok with it.
I did eat quite a few vegan ready meals which were tasty but because they were processed as they were mainly meat substitute based meals.
I found that i wasn't losing any weight.
There are a few vegans and vegetarians on this forum so there is lots to discuss.
Although if eating meat was banned tomorrow I could easily be a vegetarian but I cannot live without cheese or eggs and vegan cheese is rank
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
Fiona T
Kiloposter
Posts: 1447
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Fiona T »

Well Callum's arguments certainly give food for thought.

I don't have a moral objection to eating animals, and I'd tried to avoid thinking about the welfare concerns. But Callum is right - there is a huge amount of animal suffering, and I suspect diary and eggs are among the worst. So I guess veganism is the correct choice if your aim is to not contribute to animal cruelty.

At the moment it's definitely in the 'too hard' pile, but I will make a conscious effort to reduce my animal product consumption. For example for a lazy dinner I'll chuck in an oven chicken grill - I don't 'enjoy' that food - it's functional - so could equally be a quorn grill. I eat poached eggs on toast most days for lunch, so will try find a regular alternative I enjoy as much. Small changes. :)
Christy Cooper
Rookie
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 8:43 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Christy Cooper »

Don't know if I'd like to meat one- Geddit? Meat? Tee hee.
User avatar
Mark Deeks
Fanatic
Posts: 2443
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Mark Deeks »

My own personal view - me me meeeeeeeee - is one of avoidance. I really like animals, and I also eat both them and their products. Could I kill and eat an animal with my own hands if I had to to survive? Yes. But I don't have to, so I don't. And I can live with that.

It's a hypocrisy, maybe, but if it is, I feel it's one that it's hard to take too much accountability for. The human body is designed to eat animals and their products - we don't have to, of course, but we're built to do it, and we certainly did used to have to - while seemingly the human brain has evolved to be empathetic and love animals. If both of those things are the product of evolution, then surely both cannot be neither wrong nor my fault. And so if there is a conflict built into my programming, fair enough, but I'm not going to struggle with it too much. I have plenty enough to overthink as it is.

I am trying to eat less meat, partly because I am worried about pancreatic cancer, partly because the quality of vegan products has hugely improved (apart from this attempt at a meatloaf I had the other day which was absolutely horrible, had to throw it in the garden), and partly because it's often going for about 75% off in my local supermarket because the people of Norfolk are not very boojy. But I cannot see a time when I don't do it at all, and nor at this time do I want there to be one. And a life without milk is unfathomable.

[EDIT: I realise paragraph two does not address the nature of the meat and dairy industries, which seems to be the main moral concern of veganism. This, again, is avoidance. I do know the gist of the problems. And I bury my head in the sand, essentially for the same reasons as above.]
Last edited by Mark Deeks on Sun Feb 13, 2022 9:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark
User avatar
Ben Wilson
Legend
Posts: 4539
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:05 pm
Location: North Hykeham

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Ben Wilson »

Mark Deeks wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 8:06 amI am trying to eat less meat
Forgot to ask, did you finish the cathedral burger at the Fox & Hounds?
User avatar
Mark Deeks
Fanatic
Posts: 2443
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Mark Deeks »

Nah, did about two thirds. But I see what you've done here.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Mark Deeks wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 8:06 am ... which was absolutely horrible, had to throw it in the garden...
:D
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Elliott Mellor
Devotee
Posts: 924
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2016 12:42 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Elliott Mellor »

I did find Callum's arguments to be quite intriguing, and have definitely made an effort to reduce my meat intake (well, in terms of foodstuffs). There are reasons that deter me from completely losing animal products, however:

1) Convenience - If a friend is having a barbeque with a few mates, I don't want to have to either eat nothing or insist that they make me a whole different food, using a different work surface.

2) A number of my favourite products are not vegan - The jar of Nutella that I've got beside me at the moment isn't vegan, my favourite pasta dish isn't vegan, my favourite pie isn't vegan. Sure, they aren't things that I couldn't technically survive without, but I also don't want to ditch them.

3) Being vegan doesn't really make you "moral" and non-vegan "unmoral". It's simply one moralistic choice in a whole pond of them. You simply can't cut out all "morally wrong" choices from your life, and I don't really see why I should make this one the priority. Your clothes might be made by someone in horrible conditions in a factory, the equipment for the sport you play might be made by a child who is forced into the trade, the order you just made from Amazon is helping subsidise a company that is at the forefront of worker exploitation. Everybody would do well to cut down on (or even cut out) some fields, but nobody can really cut all of them out and this is simply one of those that I allow in my repertoire for convenience. I don't feel guilty doing so, since you can't feel guilty for every moral wrong that you knowingly or unknowingly partake in or else you'd never sleep. I do, however, try and limit my intake (in the same way that I try and limit my support of large companies, but accept that sometimes it's simply impractical) and I think as long as everyone is making some reasonable effort to avoid contributing too much to issues, we shouldn't feel very guilty for the times that we end up doing so.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Just a response to some of your points Ell; I'm not going to attempt to proselytise or counter-argue on this thread as I think I did enough of that on the animal abuse thread, and when we're discussing the facets of veganism other than the ethics of animal cruelty I think there's less need for the urgency to persuade people but still a lot of interesting stuff to talk about! If at any point in this thread I read a bit too preachy then either you're misinterpreting my tone or I have slipped up and you should sharply remind me to get down off my soapbox already :)
Elliott Mellor wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:28 pm 1) Convenience - If a friend is having a barbeque with a few mates, I don't want to have to either eat nothing or insist that they make me a whole different food, using a different work surface.
I don't view the "different work surface" thing as particularly important. Since I have ditched animal products I have attended a few BBQs and as it happens there has always been a spare BBQ available (a friend of mine once got a bit overeager for a camping trip and bought far too many of those disposable BBQs that take about 50 minutes to stop smoking and then a further 5 minutes to go cold, and now he brings a couple to every BBQ just to try and get rid of them, so there's normally one spare) so I have used that for my veggie burgers and bangers. But if there was no spare BBQ available I would probably just use the communal BBQ, although I might try to wait until it wasn't populated with other people's chunks of animal flesh and give the grill a quick rinse before whacking my cauliflower hash browns on the barbie.

I also once got a 'TLC' (Tastes Like Chicken) sandwich from Subway and the guy making the sandwiches asked me if I would like him to change his gloves (you know those disposable latex gloves they wear when handling food) presumably becaused he'd just been handling some meat with those gloves while making a previous customer's sandwich. I thought that was very good of him to ask but said it was okay and not to bother because he seemed like he was under a bit of pressure in the dinnertime rush and didn't really want to have to fanny about changing gloves. They looked pretty clean to me, not covered in grease or anything, and I suspect they were made from that really bad single-use plastic that would end up in a landfill for milennia or, worse, in the sea, so I figured the fewer pairs of gloves he burns through the better.

Obviously it's good to bear in mind that some people ordering any product specifically designated as 'free from' something might not only want but need things like cooking surfaces or gloves to be changed/cleaned as they might not be vegan, they might just have an allergy or a religious taboo against any amount of a certain product passing their lips. But from my perspective if I plonk my beetroot burger down on the same BBQ grill that recently cooked a pork sausage I haven't caused an animal to suffer. And while the thought of a slither of pig fat latching itself to my plant patty and then entering my body does make me feel a bit squeamish (call me weird but imbibing the liquids of deceased animals gives me the heebie jeebies), I don't have a meat allergy and I don't subscribe to a porcinophobic religious doctrine (unless you could ascribe that label to veganism :)) so I'll be reet.

That being said, I certainly get the convenience thing. I actually think it's the second biggest reason (after simple oblivious ignorance) that most people don't consider ditching animal products. Personally I first came to the philosophical realisation that going vegan was a moral imperative in July 2015. I didn't actually do it until January 2020. So for four and a half years I was actively going against my principles every day. The main reason for the timing of the change was that I moved into my own place in July 2019, so had got used to being in complete control of my meals and not having to provide meals for others either. When I lived at home I either cooked for other people as well as myself, or was cooked for. In hindsight I probably should have volunteered to cook more often, and at least made sure that those meals that I cooked didn't contain animal problems, but I allowed my cognitive dissonance to flourish for the sake of convenience.
Elliott Mellor wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:28 pm 2) A number of my favourite products are not vegan - The jar of Nutella that I've got beside me at the moment isn't vegan, my favourite pasta dish isn't vegan, my favourite pie isn't vegan. Sure, they aren't things that I couldn't technically survive without, but I also don't want to ditch them.
Fair enough, although it's worth looking to see if there are vegan alternatives available for pre-prepared foods that you like or any ingredient subsitutes you can make to the recipe of a meal you cook yourself; you may be surprised not only by how many they are but by how similar to the 'real' thing they are! You can certainly get a whole range of vegan chocolate spreads to replace your Nutella, and there are all manner of pasta dishes and pies you can make or buy without paying for any animals to suffer or die. Again this links with the convenience thing though as it depends how much control you have over buying and preparing your meals. If you mostly buy pre-processed foods then you are at the whim of the manufacturers, and some of them put token amounts of animal products in recipes that really don't require them, but as Mark alluded to there are more vegan options available nowadays and will likely continue to be more in the near future. I had a 'pork pie' today for the first time in over two years! Sainsburys (I know: posh, right?) appear to have recently released a 'Plant Pioneers No Pork Pie' (for anyone interested: it was a bit dry as there was no jelly but the pastry and the protein filling were very nice).

Personally the first thing I did when gaining total control over what food and ingredients I bought and cooked I went to using mostly wholefoods and cooking everything myself, so I had a lot of control over what ingredients went into my dishes. And I've been interested for a while now in nutrition, all my meals are based around their nutritional profile and balance of proteins, carbs, fats, etc. so it was easy for me to identify what swaps I could make to my existing recipes once I decided to ditch animal products.
Elliott Mellor wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:28 pm 3) Being vegan doesn't really make you "moral" and non-vegan "unmoral". It's simply one moralistic choice in a whole pond of them. You simply can't cut out all "morally wrong" choices from your life, and I don't really see why I should make this one the priority. Your clothes might be made by someone in horrible conditions in a factory, the equipment for the sport you play might be made by a child who is forced into the trade, the order you just made from Amazon is helping subsidise a company that is at the forefront of worker exploitation. Everybody would do well to cut down on (or even cut out) some fields, but nobody can really cut all of them out and this is simply one of those that I allow in my repertoire for convenience. I don't feel guilty doing so, since you can't feel guilty for every moral wrong that you knowingly or unknowingly partake in or else you'd never sleep. I do, however, try and limit my intake (in the same way that I try and limit my support of large companies, but accept that sometimes it's simply impractical) and I think as long as everyone is making some reasonable effort to avoid contributing too much to issues, we shouldn't feel very guilty for the times that we end up doing so.
I'd agree insofar as I already stated in the Kurt Zouma thread that the scale of the suffering experienced as a result of a behaviour is not necessarily proportionate to the malevolence behind the behaviour, so just because buying and consuming animal products directly causes extreme suffering in sentient beings that doesn't mean that anyone who does so is "unmoral". I do think however that we shouldn't slip into whataboutism because, as much was those other things you mentioned are bad, I really believe the way we treat animals today is perhaps the #1 cultural norm that we will look back on in future generations and be appalled by, much like we now look back on things like slavery, women not being allowed to vote, homosexuality being illegal, etc. (and yes I'm aware that sadly there are many parts of the world where those things are still happening, and unfortunately I think it will be the same with the move to end systematised animal cruelty: some parts of the world will likely lag generations behind). It was actually this idea that first broke through my philosophical smokescreen with regards to what my animal-consuming habits meant morally, when I heard it on a podcast (after some digging I've found the relevant clip from this podcast here) with two philosophers who asked each other what things are we all doing now that in 100 years will we consider barbarous.

Your focus on reduction rather than complete abstinence is very practical though and I think that is the way forward. Again I already said this on the previous thread but I personally am tempted by the absolutism of a stringent set of personal ethics, but I understand that the less philosophically-inclined may find such a hardcore approach too restrictive.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Food for thought for any folks interested in this thread: some reasons for veganism are quite widely discussed. Ethics is probably still the main reason for it, and we have discussed that extensively on this forum both in this thread and the Kurt Zouma one. Environment is fastly catching up though and as I think Matt said on the previous thread, soon that might be the main thing people talk about in relation to animal farming. And there's lots of debate about on personal health and how many animal products are very unhealthy while a wholefoods plant-based diet is widely regard to be amongst the most healthy.

But one thing I think largely goes undiscussed other than in dedicated vegan circles is the public health benefits of ending (or indeed heavily reducing) animal agriculture. Intensive animal farming, particularly of poultry, is a HUGE pandemic risk. It's frankly dumb luck that we haven't had at least a category 3 or 4 avian flu pandemic in the past few decades. I would have thought this would become a much bigger talking point in light of the pandemic we have recently experienced.

And one aspect of the environmental impact of animal agriculture I think a lot of people don't pick up on is how much land it takes up. Ending animal farming would free up huge amounts of land, which would really help with the population crisis that I think Fiona has mentioned previously on the Kurt Zouma thread.

If any of you have any thoughts on the relation between animal agriculture and public health risk or land use I'd be really interested to hear it as I think these are two topics that are underdiscussed.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Elliott Mellor
Devotee
Posts: 924
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2016 12:42 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Elliott Mellor »

Callum Todd wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 6:11 pm Just a response to some of your points Ell; I'm not going to attempt to proselytise or counter-argue on this thread as I think I did enough of that on the animal abuse thread, and when we're discussing the facets of veganism other than the ethics of animal cruelty I think there's less need for the urgency to persuade people but still a lot of interesting stuff to talk about! If at any point in this thread I read a bit too preachy then either you're misinterpreting my tone or I have slipped up and you should sharply remind me to get down off my soapbox already :)

Elliott Mellor wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:28 pm 3) Being vegan doesn't really make you "moral" and non-vegan "unmoral". It's simply one moralistic choice in a whole pond of them. You simply can't cut out all "morally wrong" choices from your life, and I don't really see why I should make this one the priority. Your clothes might be made by someone in horrible conditions in a factory, the equipment for the sport you play might be made by a child who is forced into the trade, the order you just made from Amazon is helping subsidise a company that is at the forefront of worker exploitation. Everybody would do well to cut down on (or even cut out) some fields, but nobody can really cut all of them out and this is simply one of those that I allow in my repertoire for convenience. I don't feel guilty doing so, since you can't feel guilty for every moral wrong that you knowingly or unknowingly partake in or else you'd never sleep. I do, however, try and limit my intake (in the same way that I try and limit my support of large companies, but accept that sometimes it's simply impractical) and I think as long as everyone is making some reasonable effort to avoid contributing too much to issues, we shouldn't feel very guilty for the times that we end up doing so.
I'd agree insofar as I already stated in the Kurt Zouma thread that the scale of the suffering experienced as a result of a behaviour is not necessarily proportionate to the malevolence behind the behaviour, so just because buying and consuming animal products directly causes extreme suffering in sentient beings that doesn't mean that anyone who does so is "unmoral". I do think however that we shouldn't slip into whataboutism because, as much was those other things you mentioned are bad, I really believe the way we treat animals today is perhaps the #1 cultural norm that we will look back on in future generations and be appalled by, much like we now look back on things like slavery, women not being allowed to vote, homosexuality being illegal, etc. (and yes I'm aware that sadly there are many parts of the world where those things are still happening, and unfortunately I think it will be the same with the move to end systematised animal cruelty: some parts of the world will likely lag generations behind). It was actually this idea that first broke through my philosophical smokescreen with regards to what my animal-consuming habits meant morally, when I heard it on a podcast (after some digging I've found the relevant clip from this podcast here) with two philosophers who asked each other what things are we all doing now that in 100 years will we consider barbarous.

Your focus on reduction rather than complete abstinence is very practical though and I think that is the way forward. Again I already said this on the previous thread but I personally am tempted by the absolutism of a stringent set of personal ethics, but I understand that the less philosophically-inclined may find such a hardcore approach too restrictive.
I respect you taking the time to respond to my points. However I don't think I'd brand it "whataboutism" when there's a very pertinent point being made. This isn't me saying "what about this, or this, or this?" when confronted with the issue of animal farming and trying to deflect focus from it, it's me trying to make a point that an awful lot of things we utilise in day to day life cause suffering in some form or another, and my personal philosophy is minimisation over a broader spectrum since it's literally impossible to cut every evil out, so I go for the balance of "if I can try and minimise the sum total, I don't need to get obsessive about cutting out any specific aspect". I certainly do make an effort to apply this as well - I don't eat meat very frequently at all (it's definitely not a very small percentage of my diet, but it's not a significant one either).

I do actually respect you sticking to your philosophy, and I think I will try and make more a few more substitutes to my diet in light of this. There may well come a point when animal farming becomes extinct, and you could certainly claim that as a societal victory, but we can't really close our eyes to the fact that it would presently be a significant inconvenience that we aren't necessarily prepared to just accept on a social or economic scale.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Fair enough Ell. Just to clarify my use of the word "whataboutism": that wasn't intended as a pejorative. The specific part of your post I was addressing was this:
Elliott Mellor wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:28 pm ...I don't really see why I should make this one the priority.
and the specific part of my post that was in reply to that was:
Callum Todd wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 6:11 pm I really believe the way we treat animals today is perhaps the #1 cultural norm that we will look back on in future generations and be appalled by...
So by "slip into whataboutism" I meant bring up other, different injustices in the world and put them on an equal footing with animal cruelty in agriculture. I believe the problem of animal agriculture warrants extra consideration compared to the other problems we face, whereas I don't think you do. I appreciate this part of the debate comes down to how much value we assign to different principles, which any two people will always struggle to be perfectly aligned on as it's such a arbitrary, subjective measure. For me the reason that animal cruelty in agriculture is #1 is the way it is all-consuming from the perspective of the suffering party (the animals in this case). Every second of their existence - from birth to slaughter - is defined by the cruelty that is done to them. Even the very bodies they are born into are predetermined to be a source of excruciation by the selective breeding we do to farm animals in order to make them more profitable despite the illness and pain it causes them. I do think this puts it in the league of slavery in terms of things we will look back on in the future and dismay that our ancestors perpetuated such horrific practices.

That's my reasoning anyway, but I think it's always going to be a difficult one to debate which of the world's ills is greatest because there's no universal objective scale of bad so at some point we're comparing apples to oranges and it'll probably end up just coming down to personal sensitivities.

As for this last bit:
Elliott Mellor wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 7:21 pm There may well come a point when animal farming becomes extinct, and you could certainly claim that as a societal victory, but we can't really close our eyes to the fact that it would presently be a significant inconvenience that we aren't necessarily prepared to just accept on a social or economic scale.
Obviously the end of animal agriculture will (if it happens) be gradual and won't just happen overnight so I think it's something we will become more prepared for over time. Similar to how we will transition to all-electric cars eventually and it will work just fine but if you just snapped your fingers now and erased all fossil-fuel road vehicles from existence (like some sort of automotive Thanos) then we'd be screwed as we don't have to infrastructure set up to support everyone driving electric cars. It's an interesting thought experiment - if hypothetically you could just snap your fingers and end animal agriculture in an instant, would you? Personally I suppose I'd have to say I would, it'd just be too good a chance to miss and would prevent an unquantifiable amount of suffering but boy it would create one hell of a logistical clusterfuck. So yeah, I think that by the time this societal victory happens (if it happens) then it won't be so inconvenient as we will have got there gradually.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Although, as said, I'm not vegan, I do agree with Callum's comments about other bad things not really being that relevant. There are many injustices in the world, sure, but some we have more power over then others, or there's a clearer path to the more "moral" option. So while I might agonise over whether this toothpaste causes more suffering for third world workers than that toothpaste (or whatever), that doesn't mean I can't make a simple decision to cut out animal products entirely separately from that.

By the way, once upon a time when I stood for parliament I came up with some things that could be legislated for, even if they might seem a bit unrealistic. I obviously didn't consider simply banning meat products remotely realistic at all so I didn't go for that. But I suggested things like bans for meat/animal products in things that weren't primarily animal products. So no more gelatine in sweets, for example. And also legal definitions for vegan/vegetarian with clear labelling required for all food products (well, there's no reason why it should just cover food). And also by upping the standards required for animal welfare, it should naturally have the effect of raising prices, so making the vegan alternative more appealing.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 9:10 pm By the way, once upon a time when I stood for parliament I came up with some things that could be legislated for, even if they might seem a bit unrealistic. I obviously didn't consider simply banning meat products remotely realistic at all so I didn't go for that. But I suggested things like bans for meat/animal products in things that weren't primarily animal products. So no more gelatine in sweets, for example. And also legal definitions for vegan/vegetarian with clear labelling required for all food products (well, there's no reason why it should just cover food). And also by upping the standards required for animal welfare, it should naturally have the effect of raising prices, so making the vegan alternative more appealing.
Stand again Gev and I'll vote for you! You will have to move to Morley & Outwood though...

As for potential legal regulations that would have the effect of reducing animal product production/consumption, I've seen a "meat tax'' suggested many places, based either on associated cost to public healthcare or on relative carbon emissions. This would work similar to the taxes on other unhealthy products like sugar, tobacco, and alcohol. I think depending on how it was calculated things like cheese (if included) and red meat could have anywhere from a 30% to 80% levy on them. CBA doing the digging to find the exact numbers right now but maybe I'll remember later and come back and edit this post.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Tom S
Kiloposter
Posts: 1273
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Tom S »

Talking about Veganism- Latvia has just selected their Eurovision song for this year, which is possibly the first about veganism. Well worth a listen (with headphones plugged in if you're not on your own when listening to it...)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bno10845GT8
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Tom S wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 10:14 pm Talking about Veganism- Latvia has just selected their Eurovision song for this year, which is possibly the first about veganism. Well worth a listen (with headphones plugged in if you're not on your own when listening to it...)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bno10845GT8
Have to admit the first line took me by surprise but after that the song is fun :D
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Fiona T
Kiloposter
Posts: 1447
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Fiona T »

Callum Todd wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 6:19 pm If any of you have any thoughts on the relation between animal agriculture and public health risk or land use I'd be really interested to hear it as I think these are two topics that are underdiscussed.
Josh posted a link to a video a while back that I watched and made some compelling environmental points

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnrtRaM28cY


FWIW Callum, was discussing your points re deliberate/incidental cruelty with three friends after a walk on Friday, so you've definitely got us thinking/talking about it!
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Fiona T wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 10:05 am Josh posted a link to a video a while back that I watched and made some compelling environmental points
Nice, think I saw this one when it was posted but I shall rewatch. That's Ed Winters again, he's one of the loudest voices globally in the whole veganosphere or whatever you want to call it. He published a book recently that I think is a really good handbook/introductory guide to a lot of the reasons for veganism that I think nearly everyone (included those who are already vegan!) could learn a lot from. You can find the book here or you're welcome to borrow my copy if you're interested in reading it.

As I said in the Kurt Zouma video when I posted about Ed's video on that topic, I think he can sometimes get bogged down in the vegan versus non-vegan spats and talk too much about how vegans are perceived rather than staying on topic and just talking about the suffering of the animals, which in his defence I think is understandable given how much of his life he has spent having debates around veganism, and I do occasionally catch him making strawman arguments, but overall I think he's very much a force for good by spreading the message of animal cruelty in agriculture to a worldwide audience.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Fiona T wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 10:05 am FWIW Callum, was discussing your points re deliberate/incidental cruelty with three friends after a walk on Friday, so you've definitely got us thinking/talking about it!
Nice! That was my only intention really when starting the conversation here. To raise people's awareness of animal suffering in agriculture, while they appeared to be focussed on animal suffering through abuse because of the Kurt Zouma story. I've found there are definitely some folks who use this forum that are open-minded and interested in philosophical and ethical issues so glad my efforts haven't fallen entirely on deaf ears :) I hope any journey of discovery you go on around this topic leads to increased fulfillment and contentment for you and any friends you share it with, despite whatever nastiness you may unearth along the way.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Mark James
Kiloposter
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 3:21 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Mark James »

I had a conversation with my mates in the pub about it too. Probably too drunk to have a proper discussion but anyway the consensus seemed to be that we should reduce suffering as much as possible but killing is still OK because at least the animal is now dead and can't suffer. I recognise it's probably cognitive dissonance as justification but I've seen the argument extended to humans as well. I think it's fair enough to say we should strive to reduce human suffering while recognising we are never going to eliminate death. If humans didn't farm animals to be eaten the vast majority of the animals wouldn't have been born in the first place. If we are going to bring them in to the world the best we should do is treat them well until their death. If the argument is it's cruel to bring them into the world in the first place, should we extend that to humans as well and should vegans be anti-natalist too?
User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7822
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Matt Morrison »

Callum Todd wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 6:11 pmanimal problems
Assuming this was meant to be "animal products", it's one of my favourite malapropisms for a while.
Callum Todd wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 6:11 pm'Plant Pioneers No Pork Pie' (for anyone interested: it was a bit dry as there was no jelly but the pastry and the protein filling were very nice).
Co-op ones are far better, the best faux meat ones we've tried. The Higgidy ones - which are not fake meat but lentil-based so only really comparable by shape and pastry - are also really nice.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Tom S wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 10:14 pm Talking about Veganism- Latvia has just selected their Eurovision song for this year, which is possibly the first about veganism. Well worth a listen (with headphones plugged in if you're not on your own when listening to it...)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bno10845GT8
Shame it's such a terrible song.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Mark James wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 12:34 pm I had a conversation with my mates in the pub about it too. Probably too drunk to have a proper discussion but anyway the consensus seemed to be that we should reduce suffering as much as possible but killing is still OK because at least the animal is now dead and can't suffer. I recognise it's probably cognitive dissonance as justification but I've seen the argument extended to humans as well. I think it's fair enough to say we should strive to reduce human suffering while recognising we are never going to eliminate death. If humans didn't farm animals to be eaten the vast majority of the animals wouldn't have been born in the first place. If we are going to bring them in to the world the best we should do is treat them well until their death. If the argument is it's cruel to bring them into the world in the first place, should we extend that to humans as well and should vegans be anti-natalist too?
Great that you're having the conversation! There is definitely an interesting debate to be had on the cruelty of breeding these animals in the first place.

For me the thing that settles this argument in favour of the notion that the very breeding of these animals is cruel in itself is the selective breeding. Livestock are selectively bred for 'desirable' traits. There's plenty of literature about this, much of it listed on government websites, and while most of it will pay lip service to animal welfare and the idea of 'health defects' being selected against, the bottom line is that livestock breeders select for profitability, not welfare. Of course this means that any health defects that will reduce the productivity of a farm animal, for example by causing death in infancy before they are fully grown or by preventing hens from being able to make eggs, will be selected against. It seems this is enough for farmers and governments to claim they are looking out for animal welfare by 'selecting against health defects' but really the motivation is profitability. We know this because there are plenty of health defects caused by traits that have been selected for.

In animals raised for 'meat', many are bred to reach full size much quicker than they otherwise would so that they can be slaughtered and sold quicker, or reach a far greater size than they naturally would so that there is more flesh for them to sell as meat. This causes all manner of health defects including organ failure and immunodeficiency, which obviously increases the suffering of the animals themselves as they get sick in intensive farms, and creates a huge pandemic risk for us as well.

Dairy cows are selectively bred to produce a far greater quantity of milk than they naturally would. This puts great strain on their body, as if they didn't have enough problems already having been artificially inseminated and then having their calf abducted. It's quite common for dairy farmers to boast of the enhanced milk production capability of dairy cows as if it's some great achievement. This website is a fairly disturbing example. It asks what other "desirable outcomes" there are of selective breeding, conveniently excluding the undesirable welfare outcomes. It also mentions the utility of selecting for the sex of a calf before birth without mentioning what happens to male calves born of dairy cows (take a guess). They say it all with "All these factors have a decisive influence on the milk quantity and quality, and that’s why farmers appeal to genetics to ensure that their cattle can perform to the highest capacity." That's all it's about: heightening the production capacity of "the amazing milk-yielding machine" as they call cows. Not welfare.

And egg-laying hens are bred to produce more eggs than they naturally would, which diverts crucial calcium reserves need to maintain their own bodies towards forming eggshells. This inevitably leads to increased rates of osteoporosis and fractures. See here for more details.

The anti-natalist question in humans is an interesting philosophical debate but I don't think it's really related to veganism or the debate of antinatalism in farm animals. Not until we routinely start selectively breeding humans for organ failure, immune failure, osteoporosis, and more, then mutilate them upon birth, house them in despicable conditions, then slaughter them and eat their flesh. Maybe then it would be the same argument.
Last edited by Callum Todd on Sun Feb 13, 2022 3:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Fiona T
Kiloposter
Posts: 1447
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Fiona T »

Matt Morrison wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 12:41 pm
Callum Todd wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 6:11 pm'Plant Pioneers No Pork Pie' (for anyone interested: it was a bit dry as there was no jelly but the pastry and the protein filling were very nice).
Co-op ones are far better, the best faux meat ones we've tried. The Higgidy ones - which are not fake meat but lentil-based so only really comparable by shape and pastry - are also really nice.
One of the problems I saw shared by a vegan friend on fb, is that wider awareness of these issues and the effort by many to reduce their consumption means that supermarkets are now mass producing vegan ranges putting smaller vegan firms out of business. In the hierarchy of veganism I guess a firm that does no harm to animals and is founded on vegan ethics > firm that produces a McPlant alongside their BigMac (jumping on the bandwagon perhaps?). It's a tough argument - people are more likely to eat vegan products if they're easily available and affordable - so if the aim is reducing animal suffering, then the easy availability is a good thing. To some extent a the true vegan businesses are a victim of the success of getting their message out.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Matt Morrison wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 12:41 pm
Callum Todd wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 6:11 pmanimal problems
Assuming this was meant to be "animal products", it's one of my favourite malapropisms for a while.
Callum Todd wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 6:11 pm'Plant Pioneers No Pork Pie' (for anyone interested: it was a bit dry as there was no jelly but the pastry and the protein filling were very nice).
Co-op ones are far better, the best faux meat ones we've tried. The Higgidy ones - which are not fake meat but lentil-based so only really comparable by shape and pastry - are also really nice.
Ha! It was meant to be animal products. No way I'm correcting that; it's too good to erase :D

And I shall try the Higgidy pork pies! According to their website they're sold at Sainsburys, Waitrose, and Ocado, so next time I find myself in a fancy supermarket I'll treat myself. I don't normally eat stuff like that as I try to stick mostly to wholefoods but I'll allow myself the occasional treat and I like to experiment with the new products so my purchase might incentivise the producer to keep making more plant-based products. Also if it's good I can recommend it to people as I did above and hopefully meat-eaters might try out some more subsitutes if they hear about good ones. I actually ate two of the four mini 'pork pies' in the pack and left the other two on a plate in the fridge at my mum's house, knowing my brother would eat them when he got back from the football. I plan to ask him what he thought of them before revealing they didn't actually contain any pig :)
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Fiona T wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 1:34 pm One of the problems I saw shared by a vegan friend on fb, is that wider awareness of these issues and the effort by many to reduce their consumption means that supermarkets are now mass producing vegan ranges putting smaller vegan firms out of business. In the hierarchy of veganism I guess a firm that does no harm to animals and is founded on vegan ethics > firm that produces a McPlant alongside their BigMac (jumping on the bandwagon perhaps?). It's a tough argument - people are more likely to eat vegan products if they're easily available and affordable - so if the aim is reducing animal suffering, then the easy availability is a good thing. To some extent a the true vegan businesses are a victim of the success of getting their message out.
This is a really interesting question. I struggle with it because I feel the most likely path to the answer runs through economics, which I'm very ignorant of. I suppose when we consider ultimately the goal is to reduce animal agriculture as much as possible, that will necessarily mean the big firms such as supermarkets like Sainsburys and fast food chains like McDonalds getting on board, and unfortunately they'll probably still be on top of the pile even when the day comes that they sell no animal products (if it does). This also ties in neatly with some of the interesting points Ell raised earlier about supporting smaller companies.

Certainly I try to support the smaller companies as much as I can but when a big chain does a new product I like to try it just because, as I said in my previous post in this thread, I like to think my purchasing of it will convince them to keep making it and as Marc, Mark, and others have already pointed out already: having more vegan products available makes more people likely to try and make substitutions to the animal-problem (I'm going to embrace this term now) foods they usually eat.

For example, I always try to buy The Tofoo Co. tofu. That's actually the reason I was in Sainsbury's yesterday: I needed a few items (including tofu) and the only other shop I was passing was Asda, which doesn't sell The Tofoo Co. tofu, so I deliberately went to Sainsbury's instead specifically for that reason. But when I found their tofu I saw Sainsbury's had recently just launched their own brand of organic tofu so I bought a pack of that as well as my usual Tofoo Co. stuff. I also try to shop at small independent eco shops when possible but the only ones near me are in the city centre so I only get stuff from there when I'm in Leeds anyway, as it sort of defeats the point of shopping at an eco shop if I especially make an extended journey to go there.

I think big brands like supermarkets and McDonalds doing vegan stuff might really help spread awareness though and get more people to try a vegan alternative who wouldn't otherwise have done so. I remember hearing that the Greggs vegan sausage roll was remarkably successful on this front.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Adam Latchford
Rookie
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2021 7:50 am

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Adam Latchford »

Really is amazing how far vegan products have come in recent years. I remember trying some in 2012 and being appalled. The Linda Mccartney duck is genuinely nicer than any duck i've ever had. I dont see myself going vegan anytime soon but having these options has certainly brought my consumption as a whole down quite a lot.
Marc Meakin
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 6242
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Marc Meakin »

Matt Morrison wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 12:41 pm
Callum Todd wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 6:11 pmanimal problems
Assuming this was meant to be "animal products", it's one of my favourite malapropisms for a while.
Callum Todd wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 6:11 pm'Plant Pioneers No Pork Pie' (for anyone interested: it was a bit dry as there was no jelly but the pastry and the protein filling were very nice).
Co-op ones are far better, the best faux meat ones we've tried. The Higgidy ones - which are not fake meat but lentil-based so only really comparable by shape and pastry - are also really nice.
Best by far is Richmond and we still eat them.
Linda McCartney and Cauldron are good too especially their Cumberland sausages
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
Marc Meakin
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 6242
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Marc Meakin »

Adam Latchford wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 3:19 pm Really is amazing how far vegan products have come in recent years. I remember trying some in 2012 and being appalled. The Linda Mccartney duck is genuinely nicer than any duck i've ever had. I dont see myself going vegan anytime soon but having these options has certainly brought my consumption as a whole down quite a lot.
Linda McCartney pulled pork is amazing too
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3956
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Ian Volante »

Marc Meakin wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 3:34 pm
Matt Morrison wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 12:41 pm
Callum Todd wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 6:11 pmanimal problems
Assuming this was meant to be "animal products", it's one of my favourite malapropisms for a while.
Callum Todd wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 6:11 pm'Plant Pioneers No Pork Pie' (for anyone interested: it was a bit dry as there was no jelly but the pastry and the protein filling were very nice).
Co-op ones are far better, the best faux meat ones we've tried. The Higgidy ones - which are not fake meat but lentil-based so only really comparable by shape and pastry - are also really nice.
Best by far is Richmond and we still eat them.
Linda McCartney and Cauldron are good too especially their Cumberland sausages
Yep, Richmond's quality moved us on from Quorn's equivalent. Cauldron aren't too bad, don't much like the McCartney ones.
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles
Fiona T
Kiloposter
Posts: 1447
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Fiona T »

Dairy farming on panorama now...
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Fiona T wrote: Mon Feb 14, 2022 7:37 pm Dairy farming on panorama now...
Thanks, watched this today. My concern with things like Panorama is that they do tend to fuel the idea that the bad things are happening only in a select few places, such as the Welsh farm secretly filmed for this one. So was good to see the acknowledgement that many cruel practices are commonplace or even ubiquitous in the dairy industry. It was disappointing that they really seemed to frame it as an issue merely of price, as if the only options were cheap milk or expensive milk, and didn't put forward the third option of no milk. That's a real shame as that message juxtaposed with the point towards the end that ultimately this all comes down to consumer choice would have been really powerful to dispel the common excuse given for continuing animal problem consumption habits: 'people will always drink milk/we can't change this'.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Matt Morrison wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 12:41 pm The Higgidy ['pork' pies] - which are not fake meat but lentil-based so only really comparable by shape and pastry - are also really nice.
Picked some of these up at the weekend; they were great! Much prefer them to fake meat type stuff.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Christy Cooper
Rookie
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 8:43 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Christy Cooper »

I don't know- vegan food to me seems flavourless- vegan chicken in particular just tastes like rubber. And also the vegan sausage roll (which I tried amongst all the bizarre outrage about it) tasted like popcorn dipped in paint. I'll stick to my meats and cheeses thank you.
Josh Hurst
Enthusiast
Posts: 327
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:59 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Josh Hurst »

Christy Cooper wrote: Fri Feb 25, 2022 9:52 am I don't know- vegan food to me seems flavourless- vegan chicken in particular just tastes like rubber. And also the vegan sausage roll (which I tried amongst all the bizarre outrage about it) tasted like popcorn dipped in paint. I'll stick to my meats and cheeses thank you.
Vegan food encompasses much more than mock-meats. I'd go out on a limb here and say that "vegan food" probably accounts for the majority of calories in most people's diets, without them even thinking about it.

It's not a case of "meats and cheeses" vs "vegan food".

I will grant you that some of the mock-meat type stuff is fairly bad. In my experience I have just kept trying all the options until I've found stuff that is not bad, or in some cases genuinely tasty! If you are willing to experiment a bit then you will find satisfying alternatives to meat and/or cheese - if finding alternatives/replacements is the way you'd want to go about it.

Happy to have people pm me (preferably on FB) if they are genuinely curious about how they can give this a crack. Would rather talk one on one than "Spam" everybody on here (as a vegan I do not condone Spam).
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Josh Hurst wrote: Fri Feb 25, 2022 10:33 am Would rather talk one on one than "Spam" everybody on here (as a vegan I do not condone Spam).
:D

Yeah I've also heard people say they dislike "vegan food" and been a bit baffled by the phrase. Mock meat products are good for appealing to a certain market but if people think they couldn't get enjoyment out of a plant-based diet just because they don't like mock meat products I think they just need to be a bit adventurous and try new foods rather than ones that have been made to look and feel like ones they are used to.

Until a few years ago I'd never really bothered with things like butternut squash, kidney beans, black beans, lentils, chickpeas, etc. but one you try them they're really nice. Some people love aubergine too but while I quite like the flavour the texture is not really for me.

Using these wholefoods as 'meat substitutes' rather than the textured plant proteins that are meant to look and taste like meat, works much better in my opinion. Hence why I much preferred the Higgidy lentil 'pork pies' to the Plant Pioneer pea protein ones. I've also fallen head over heels for tofu. That stuff is ace, and it's so versatile!

Was impressed when a friend of mine recently said he and his girlfriend were wanting to cut down on meat and asked for some meat substitute suggestions. I thought he meant fauxmeats so suggested Linda McCartney but he said he meant more like what to use in a risotto (butternut squash all the way) or a 'shepherd's pie' (kidney beans, black beans, and mushrooms). This approach to plant-based eating is much more appealing in my opinion.

But the faux meat stuff is great for marketing and might open the door for a lot of people to start swapping out meat in their diet, so that's great too.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Gavin Chipper »

I'd be interested to know how obsessive you are about determining whether a food is vegan. For example, if something says that it's suitable for vegetarians and also doesn't have milk, eggs or honey, then as far as I'm concerned it's basically vegan. But I know someone who would reject stuff that doesn't explicitly say it's vegan on the basis that some of the random ingredients might still be animal-derived. Like the lactic acid could be from milk.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Fri Feb 25, 2022 2:55 pm I'd be interested to know how obsessive you are about determining whether a food is vegan. For example, if something says that it's suitable for vegetarians and also doesn't have milk, eggs or honey, then as far as I'm concerned it's basically vegan. But I know someone who would reject stuff that doesn't explicitly say it's vegan on the basis that some of the random ingredients might still be animal-derived. Like the lactic acid could be from milk.
I apply your same rule of no meat, no dairy, no eggs, no honey on the ingredients to assume it's okay. I rarely go further than that as I haven't memorised a list of suspect E numbers. I would have thought that if the lactic acid used as an ingredient was derived from milk it should say something like '(from milk)' on the ingredients list as that might be an allergen. I have seen this with whey as an ingredient before.

I did decline an offer of a sweet the other day though because it contained pectin and I couldn't remember what that was. Turns out it's just made from crushed fruits and it's a plant-based alternative to gelatin so would have been fine actually.

I'm also not too bothered by the labels 'may contain (e.g.) milk' as that pretty much always means that it was just made next to, or stored with, products that contain milk and not that milk was an ingredient.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Marc Meakin
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 6242
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Marc Meakin »

Would you eat a plant based burger if it was cooked on a griddle that usually cooks meat?.
My daughter is a vegetarian but adopts the what ' I don't know won't hurt me' approach
She ofren buys ramen but quite often the stock is meat or fish.
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Marc Meakin wrote: Sat Feb 26, 2022 10:52 am Would you eat a plant based burger if it was cooked on a griddle that usually cooks meat?.
Yes. If I had the choice I'd rather it be cooked on a griddle that doesn't cook meat but if I didn't have that choice I'd just eat the plant burger.

Veganism is about reducing the suffering of animals, not necessarily a squeamishness about animal products (although in my experience that squeamishness can develop over time as you stop seeing meat as food). By buying the plant burger rather than the meat burger, you're not directly funding the suffering of the animals thay would be reared and killed for the meat that was cooked on the same griddle beforehand, and as a consumer you are giving food producers incentive to produce more plant-based food products, which will eventually lead to a reduction in animal suffering.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Callum Todd wrote: Fri Feb 25, 2022 5:29 pm I apply your same rule of no meat, no dairy, no eggs, no honey on the ingredients to assume it's okay. I rarely go further than that as I haven't memorised a list of suspect E numbers. I would have thought that if the lactic acid used as an ingredient was derived from milk it should say something like '(from milk)' on the ingredients list as that might be an allergen. I have seen this with whey as an ingredient before.

I did decline an offer of a sweet the other day though because it contained pectin and I couldn't remember what that was. Turns out it's just made from crushed fruits and it's a plant-based alternative to gelatin so would have been fine actually.
I always remember that E120 is cochineal (from insects). But also I'm often suspicious of stuff that doesn't at least say it's vegetarian so while I wouldn't check all the E numbers, I'd check whether it said it was vegetarian.

I'm surprised you wouldn't have known what pectin was. It's also a shame they haven't invented the internet and smartphones yet for you to check!
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 6:20 pm I always remember that E120 is cochineal (from insects). But also I'm often suspicious of stuff that doesn't at least say it's vegetarian so while I wouldn't check all the E numbers, I'd check whether it said it was vegetarian.
Yeah by no meat I meant check if it says suitable for vegetarians. If it says that and no honey, dairy, or eggs in the ingredients I assume it's okay.
Gavin Chipper wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 6:20 pm I'm surprised you wouldn't have known what pectin was. It's also a shame they haven't invented the internet and smartphones yet for you to check!
I did vaguely know what pectin is but at the time I had a bit of a brainfart moment when put on the spot and started doubting myself. They havent invented what yet? I don't understand what you mean by "internet" or "smartphones". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oa_hiLXLbTc
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Fiona T
Kiloposter
Posts: 1447
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Fiona T »

Tried the plant based 'chicken' in my subway on Saturday - I'd go as far as to say it was more chickeny and tasty than the normal flavourless roast chicken you get.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Saw a new Quorn product in Co-op the other day: Peri Peri Strips.

I don't normally go in for this sort of thing but they looked a bit different to anything else I've tried and as I've said above I like to support new products like this so I picked up a pack. Just cooked them and chucked them in a grain bowl. They were quite nice, although I'll still mostly stick to tofu in future. The pack said they were spicy with zesty lemon but I found them quite mild and definitely got more of a lime than lemon taste!
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

A story about Oxfordshire County Council making the menu at any of their organised events plant-based and ensuring plant-based options on school menus has reached the news lately, largely because Jeremy Clarkson has joined the protests against the decision.

Any thoughts on this? Mine are probably predictable, but I would be interested in having my biases checked.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Sam Cappleman-Lynes
Enthusiast
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 11:30 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Sam Cappleman-Lynes »

It seems like most of the opposition is to the idea that the council will only serve plant-based food at its own events, rather than the school menus thing which almost anyone ought to realise is a good idea in a country where 20% of school-aged children are either already vegan or would like to become vegan in the near future.

And that is, I think, also a rather silly opposition. Especially the people who complain about it being (from the article) a "bullying diktat" or attack the decision in terms of removal of freedom. Nah. You have exactly as much choice about what to eat at council-catered meals as you did before - you either eat the provided food, or you don't. Bring your own if you like! The fact that, going forward, all of the provided food will be plant-based is an irrelevancy if you're phrasing the argument entirely in terms of freedom of choice.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Yeah, the choice thing is a non-event. You can't provide everything so there will always be limited choice. You wouldn't complain that there were no tomatoes specifically saying they were forcing you onto a tomato-free diet.
David Williams
Kiloposter
Posts: 1259
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:57 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by David Williams »

So you'd defend the right of a restaurant (or a council) not to offer any vegetarian option? This shouldn't be about veganism good, Jeremy Clarkson bad, case closed. Nothing to stop them changing their menus gradually and no-one notices, but the motivation seems to be to get into the history books as much as anything. I would think that in the average lifetime about 99.9% of the meals you get from your council is school dinners, so they are making a minuscule change while continuing to feed children with crap they won't serve to adults.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Gavin Chipper »

David Williams wrote: Thu Mar 17, 2022 8:12 pm So you'd defend the right of a restaurant (or a council) not to offer any vegetarian option?
Well I think the point is that a vegetarian or vegan can't (or at least won't) eat food that isn't in their category. Eating meat is just an extra thing that meat-eaters do. It's not compulsory for them and it doesn't need to be present in every meal, like tomatoes don't either.

A restaurant can do what they want but people won't go if it doesn't serve food they will eat. Councils are different. They should be providing food that people attending their events can eat.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Egg news.

No more "free range" eggs; the mask slips a little further. The article ends with a quote from a spokesperson either for the UK Government or for the British Retail Consortium (it's not clear which from the way the article is worded): "We are experiencing our largest ever outbreak of avian flu and housing measures remain in force to protect poultry and other birds from this highly infectious and unpleasant disease."

Bollocks. The "housing measures" are in force to protect humans from avian flu, by keeping the plague indoors and not letting it spread to wild species and escape containment. And the threat of avian flu arises in poultry farming because of the crowded indoor conditions. The best way to protect birds and humans from avian flu is to stop imprisoning birds.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Gavin Chipper »

If I moved out and was living in my own house I think it's likely that I could eat a vegan diet at home. I mean I could anyway, but it's kind of more convenient not to (even if that's a poor excuse). But I think eating out would be more of a problem. Lots of restaurants have quite poor vegan options and they're pretty much an afterthought. Vegan puddings/desserts/afters are often particularly bad/non-existent. But for me I think the main problem would be going out for a curry. I think onion bhajis are often made with egg and as discussed here the good breads tend not to be vegan. And with those options removed, it would become much less worth going in the first place.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

It's hit and miss with Indian places. Some of them use ghee or egg or yoghurt in nearly everything, and don't say so you have to be an awkward bastard and ask about 7 things before you finally find something you can order. Some have allergens really clearly marked on the menu tough, so you can tell if something had no milk or eggs (or animalflesh, obviously) it's probably fine.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Fiona T
Kiloposter
Posts: 1447
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Fiona T »

One of the problems is that vegan equivalents are so much more expensive

Decided to try the vegan mayo as the only non-vegan bit of my lunch is a squirt of mayo and I'm at the bottom of the bottle - 50p/100ml vs 37p/100ml for regular.

Is maize starch much more expensive than egg? :?

https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en-GB/s ... inz%20mayo

(Incidentally as a MaccyD's addict, I tried the McPlant - was pretty good - burger and sauces very tasty, but not convinced by the vegan cheese - but that might have been because it was a bit cold so hadn't melted onto the burger)
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Vegan cheeses are notoriously rubbish.
Fiona T
Kiloposter
Posts: 1447
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Fiona T »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2022 10:03 pm Vegan cheeses are notoriously rubbish.
Well google reckons they've got the vegan american plastic cheese slices right - but since MaccyD's changed to the assemble on demand model, the patties often aren't hot enough to melt the cheese - would be good to try one that was actually cooked to order. The one I tried was just a bit too rigid compared to the not properly melted normal burger cheese.

But I'd def eat it again if on offer - not sure it's a £3.39 burger when I can get a cheeseburger for 99p - think it's supposed to be their quarter pounder with cheese equivalent, but probs somewhere between the two.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Fiona T wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2022 9:22 pm Is maize starch much more expensive than egg? :?
I'm not sure, but since the invasion of Ukraine vegetable oils certainly are. Mayo normally contains plenty of veg oils too but the vegan mayo is nearly all veg oil instead of egg. Iirc mayo prices between vegan and non-vegan used to be fairly equivalent but not surprising that vegan mayo prices are rising faster than normal mayo since vegetable oil prices started skyrocketing a couple of months ago.

Same story with cheese, where vegan cheeses use vegetable oils (some cheap 'real' cheese has veg oil mixed in to make it cheaper but not as much). But dairy prices are currently skyrocketing also so expect to see real cheese prices shoot up towards oil-based 'cheese' prices soon too.

Also it's worth noting why eggs and dairy can be cheaper than plant-derived products such as vegetable oils (notwithstanding war in the countries that produce a huge amount of the world supply of such products). Intensive farming practises cut an awful lot of costs, so the cheaper mayos and cheeses likely contain eggs/dairy from hens/cows that suffered as bad as any animal does. And even then much of animal agriculture still isn't profitable, but is heavily subsidised.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Gavin Chipper »

What do you think of eggs from chickens that people keep themselves and look after well? Or getting them from someone who does that rather than a mass production farm?
Fiona T
Kiloposter
Posts: 1447
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Fiona T »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Sun May 01, 2022 4:40 pm What do you think of eggs from chickens that people keep themselves and look after well? Or getting them from someone who does that rather than a mass production farm?
I presume the "you" is Callum, but I'll chip in anyway :)

I've got a mate who takes in 'rescue chickens' - these are basically chickens that have succeeded in the "chicken run" escape plot. They often arrive with few feathers and in a sorry state, and she loves them, names them, dotes on them and mourns them when they finally die of natural causes.

She gets a few eggs a week from them which she enjoys, and it's difficult to see why she shouldn't enjoy them.

I have another friend who keeps chickens for eggs - again they live a pretty ideal life - but I suspect for his chickens to exist, male chicks have met an untimely end, so somewhat further down the chain of ethical.

My aunt kept two sheep - she spun and knitted from their wool and they were loved and looked after.

For me, it comes to scale - as soon as you're meeting mass demand, standards suffer. There's been a lot of stuff about the sustainable future diet, which includes a very small amount of animal products - as a non-veggie this strikes a chord with me, and I am (very much encouraged by these threads) making a real effort to reduce my own consumption.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Callum Todd »

Interesting story in the meat vs. faux-meat environmentalism space, with allusion to 'greenwashing'.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3956
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Veganism Discussion

Post by Ian Volante »

Callum Todd wrote: Thu Jun 09, 2022 9:45 am Interesting story in the meat vs. faux-meat environmentalism space, with allusion to 'greenwashing'.
There's a reasonable chance they're correct in their claims, but they're idiots in not having done the work and in using weasel words instead.
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles
Post Reply