Well, your graph could just as easily support my position as it could go against it.
I see a line that could be higher if not for the personal choice of a collective of vegans, vegetarians, and generally healthier people.
You see proof vegans aren’t making a difference. Where’s your proof that the line is unaffected by vegans? Do you have anything else that proves being vegan is an effort in futility?
Do you have anything else that proves being vegan is an effort in futility?
i’ve never said that. i think if you want to avoid animal products, then doing so is its own reward. but if you want to decrease animal slaughter, it’s ineffective.
i suggest that you go where animals are being slaughtered and stop it.
Reducing animal suffering is the goal. And putting myself in prison wouldnt help anything. Also I doubt american prisons would give me a vegan diet anyways.
The goal is similar to cigarettes. Regulation came about once the general public became aware of the health risks for even non smokers.
Right now its not as well known by the general public how unhealthy diets that are heavy in meat can be.
By being vegan, and making it more normal for those I interact with, it shows broadens what people know about it.
I’m personally banking that americans are so selfish they will reduce meat consumption purely for health/cosmetic reasons alone, like to avoid heart disease or to lose weight.
i didn’t say you should be in prison. i suggested a way you could actually stop animal slaughter.
edit:
i believe in your creativity and resourcefulness, and i think you can come up with a way that effectively and directly reduces slaughter without landing in prison. perhaps if you looked up your local animal liberation front, you would find some allies to help in your endeavor.
Maybe I shouldnt assume. I thought you meant to go to a factory farm and rescue animals. If theres a way to do that without legal risk Im game. Is that what you meant?
I thought you meant to go to a factory farm and rescue animals.
i did, but don’t get fucking caught! or make sure you have the resources not to land in jail, whether that’s a rich dad and a good lawyer or the support of the local populace, or whatever.
i think your goal is laudable. it’s not personally motivating for me, but it clearly is for you, and i hope you make some real progress on it in your life. if i told you that using lemmy reduced factory farming, i doubt you’d think that’s true since there is no evidence of it. the main piece of evidence we have about animal agriculture is that it basically always increases. so no method, that i know of, is effective at shrinking it, but you could achieve some actual tangible results if you adopt other tactics.
How many would have to be vegan before youll admit it would affect the supply of meat? 75%? 90%? Is there just a crossover point for you or you think if noone ate meat that graph would still go up?
Its pretty minor. The real gains are countries setting their national policy around diets that are half or more plant based. That sends a clear message about what role meat should have in a healthy diet, and will affect the most people.
i am not an expert on global agricultural markets, but my suspicion is drought, followed by a global (human) pandemic, but i don’t know if those actually caused it even if you could prove they (both) happened. you can also see a significant drop in the 90s correlating with mad cow disease. there it’s easy to say “we destroyed a bunch of cattle instead of slaughtering them” but that’s not exactly reducing suffering. i seem to recall similar stories during the pandemic.
i highly doubt we could draw a causal link between buying beans and either of those dips, though.
Well, one plan involves convincing western politicians and the companies that pay for them, to self regulate. The other involves personal choice.
So I guess I chose the easy one.
Also vegans do participate in animal activism of course. They just won’t argue for better ways to slaughter animals.
but if it’s ineffective, then it is no better.
Well, your graph could just as easily support my position as it could go against it.
I see a line that could be higher if not for the personal choice of a collective of vegans, vegetarians, and generally healthier people.
You see proof vegans aren’t making a difference. Where’s your proof that the line is unaffected by vegans? Do you have anything else that proves being vegan is an effort in futility?
i’ve never said that. i think if you want to avoid animal products, then doing so is its own reward. but if you want to decrease animal slaughter, it’s ineffective.
i suggest that you go where animals are being slaughtered and stop it.
Reducing animal suffering is the goal. And putting myself in prison wouldnt help anything. Also I doubt american prisons would give me a vegan diet anyways.
The goal is similar to cigarettes. Regulation came about once the general public became aware of the health risks for even non smokers.
Right now its not as well known by the general public how unhealthy diets that are heavy in meat can be.
By being vegan, and making it more normal for those I interact with, it shows broadens what people know about it.
I’m personally banking that americans are so selfish they will reduce meat consumption purely for health/cosmetic reasons alone, like to avoid heart disease or to lose weight.
i didn’t say you should be in prison. i suggested a way you could actually stop animal slaughter.
edit:
i believe in your creativity and resourcefulness, and i think you can come up with a way that effectively and directly reduces slaughter without landing in prison. perhaps if you looked up your local animal liberation front, you would find some allies to help in your endeavor.
Maybe I shouldnt assume. I thought you meant to go to a factory farm and rescue animals. If theres a way to do that without legal risk Im game. Is that what you meant?
i did, but don’t get fucking caught! or make sure you have the resources not to land in jail, whether that’s a rich dad and a good lawyer or the support of the local populace, or whatever.
i think your goal is laudable. it’s not personally motivating for me, but it clearly is for you, and i hope you make some real progress on it in your life. if i told you that using lemmy reduced factory farming, i doubt you’d think that’s true since there is no evidence of it. the main piece of evidence we have about animal agriculture is that it basically always increases. so no method, that i know of, is effective at shrinking it, but you could achieve some actual tangible results if you adopt other tactics.
I wonder what new laws and penalties would get passed if people started essentially raiding factory farms en masse.
I will give you credit for making me consider a third option here, although it seems to have a scaling issue too.
you can’t prove a counterfactual. but it is a fact that vegans exist, and the chart continues to rise.
How many would have to be vegan before youll admit it would affect the supply of meat? 75%? 90%? Is there just a crossover point for you or you think if noone ate meat that graph would still go up?
i honestly don’t know. i do know vegans exist, and i suspect there are more now than ever, but the line still goes up.
Its pretty minor. The real gains are countries setting their national policy around diets that are half or more plant based. That sends a clear message about what role meat should have in a healthy diet, and will affect the most people.
You could call that regulation I suppose.
Edit: https://www.norden.org/en/news/less-meat-more-plant-based-here-are-nordic-nutrition-recommendations-2023
i have no reason to believe that the production of meat will decrease due to the nordic dietary guidelines. keep me posted, though.
In those areas it likely will. I doubt it will take the line down on your graph either though.
Who knows what the tipping point is. Maybe China publishes a guideline similar to that and it does change things enough to show it on the graph.
no, it’ can’t. this is an unscientific claim.
It’s a graph. It doesnt interpret itself. It doesnt really do anything on its own.
it can only support your position if you could prove your counterfactual, which you cannot.
Well, if you look at the graphs last three points, it goes up from the first to the second much higher than it does from the second to the third.
Should I just assume there was a production problem that caused the reduction?
What’s caused that very minor decrease in the rate?
i am not an expert on global agricultural markets, but my suspicion is drought, followed by a global (human) pandemic, but i don’t know if those actually caused it even if you could prove they (both) happened. you can also see a significant drop in the 90s correlating with mad cow disease. there it’s easy to say “we destroyed a bunch of cattle instead of slaughtering them” but that’s not exactly reducing suffering. i seem to recall similar stories during the pandemic.
i highly doubt we could draw a causal link between buying beans and either of those dips, though.
They were after the pandemic, theres a big dropoff during covid but I didnt want to use it because obviously the causes weren’t regulation or vegans.
I was mainly pointing out that its possible for the rate of increase to decrease, although I understand I can’t prove its from a change in demand.
If there isnt proof for any of the solutions we’ve talked about why shouldn’t I just do all of them?