The “what about plants” argument is such a thoroughly debunked joke argument that it’s amazing anyone would continue to make it. Eating animals and their secretions requires harming significantly more plants than eating the plants directly because animals need to be fed too, and animals as food is by far the least efficient and most environmentally destructive way to have a food system.

Context matters. In the ancient world starvation was a constant threat, so a source of concentrated calories like honey could in some cases be a matter of life and death despite the dangers of getting that honey. In industrial society we have in many cases the opposite problem - the majority of the top causes of death are lifestyle diseases which ultimately come down to overconsumption and sedentary lifestyles. Too much dietary fat, especially too much saturated fats, too much sugar, too much refined foods, too much concentrated calories, too much easily consumed liquid calories.

By contrast vegans by far have the easiest time maintaining balanced bodyweight levels.

If you all could learn to let go of your prejudice you might learn to recognize that doing the right things for animal’s rights is also some of the best things you could do for yourself. These “vegans” you hate so much are just trying to get you to stop self-harming.

Animal ethics isn’t just about whether other animals are being harmed or killed, it’s also about being against exploitation. They might not be able to think in quite the same way that we do, but it’s still clear that they have their own wills and lives of their own that they want to live. It’s worth asking ourselves if we really want a society that’s willing to exploit and turn other thinking beings into commodities, even the ones whose thinking appears to be so much more rudimentary than our own.

It’s easy to dismiss them because they’re “just bugs”, but presently bugs of all species are facing radical population declines with all the ecological instability - maybe even looming collapse - that brings. Maybe we collectively might be more willing to protect bug populations and do more to protect our environments if more of us stopped to analyze our anti-bug bias and considered that they have a natural right to life like we do. The planet does not exist solely for us.

Also, honey is essentially a refined sugar that’s no better healthwise than table sugar. Date sugar/powder is a sweetener made of whole fruit and is a much better choice. Plus, it’s just weird to want to eat the vomit of other species anyway.

It would be more accurate to say it’s like requiring you to make the source code for ZSNES available if you were distributing copies of ZSNES.

What, where do you get that? Any publicly conveyed copies of gpl-licensed software must make their source code available, and be published under the same license. This is true regardless of modifications.

Came in to say this. Linux on ARM is getting so close to daily driver ready.

Mint is literally a slightly modified Ubuntu.

The sheer amount of changes that occur on a plant-based diet are too numerous for me to be able to pinpoint any specific thing. It wouldn’t surprise me if I do get more vitamin a these days, as well as quite a few other important micronutrients that I may or may not have been low on.

And that’s not even getting into the vast topic of phytonutrients.

Or just use flatpak or Appimage.

Is the Snap backend available and open-source? If not, then it’s antithetical to software freedom because Canonical is trying to close their users into a walled garden in the ways that Apple and Google are with their app stores.

There are plenty of software packaging systems that work just as well or better than Snap, and promote software freedom (Flatpak, Appimage, or even just traditional package managers). By using and promoting Snap over these, you are working against the growth of digital rights.

It’s impossible to have a fully free system?

https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html

But more to your point, it’s a false dichotomy. Even before the latest changes to the Debian install media, for years it was maybe unintuitive but still easy enough to just choose the “nonfree” install iso. That one would automatically include all the proprietary bits that are necessary for a fully functional Linux system.

But now those nonfree parts are in the Debian install by default, so there really is just nothing that you get from Ubuntu that can’t just as easily work in Debian - especially since everyone is moving toward flatpaks, and appimages anyway.

This.

But you’re also promoting Ubuntu’s continued use, when Snaps are just one example of Canonical being antithetical to free software values. Mint is all the benefits of Ubuntu without that garbage, so why not that?

Snap should be reason enough that everyone should abandon Ubuntu, especially when Mint is right there. The last thing we need is to make Linux more like Android+Google Play.

When something needs to be said, it needs to be said.

Sorry, but this is dangerous misinformation that you’re spreading. Refined carbohydrates are harmful and can contribute to the various forms of metabolic syndrome. However one thing being bad doesn’t automatically make something good, and there is still no single factor in heart disease that’s more causally linked than saturated fats. To demonize sugar and say fats don’t play the most significant role is about equivalent with being a climate change denier.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OkqWdY5_2-8

They’re somewhat more on the frontier of nutritional science, but no other interventions out there have had as promising of results as Esselstyn’s and Ornish’s lifestyle medicine practices - both of which call for reductions or even eliminations of cooking oil that is considered radical by most people’s standards. But their results speak for themselves.

https://www.dresselstyn.com/site/

https://ornish.com/

One of the things that’s too often overlooked is that subtractions might do more to help than additions. If you’re taking a host of vitamins, herbal remedies, and strange supplements and still feeling like shit, it’s likely because all the medicine in the world won’t heal if you’re still taking poison.

Not to be that person, but I am fully convinced that eating animal products plays a decisive role in depression and other mood disorders. Not only is there science pointing in that direction, but it matches my own personal experience as well as what every other plant-based person I’ve known has experienced as well. Before the switch I was so far in a constant background noise of depression that I was ambivalent about whether I wanted to live or not.

I’ve tried a lot of things, with only ever small or temporary results at best. Going plant-based, within weeks of staying consistent with it, marked the first time in my life when I actually began to actively want to live (even in spite of our capitalist hellscape). That desire to live has endured since then to the point that it’s tempting to say I might be cured of depression.

https://nutritionfacts.org/video/anti-inflammatory-diet-for-depression/

https://nutritionfacts.org/video/how-to-boost-brain-bdnf-levels-for-depression-treatment/

Two main problems I have with cast iron - the care that they take is too much effort, and their constant risk of rusting if they’re not coated in oil at all times is just too much bullshit to deal with for a kitchen tool. The other issue is that I try as best as I can to do oil-free cooking, and cast iron is antithetical to that.

A baking sheet with parchment paper, in a toaster oven, is significantly more convenient.

In western civilization everything is low risk until we’ve come too far to avert calamity. Before the 2008 financial crisis, every institution that played a role would have you believe everything was great, right up until everything was falling apart.

With global warming we always had, and still struggle against entirely too many people, and lying institutional vested interests, downplaying or disbelieving how serious of a global catastrophe climate change is forming into.

The only reason h5n1 is “low risk” at the current time is because it’s not yet a human-to-human calamity that is already too far underway to put a stop to. We all saw how badly we all collectively handled covid.

We are now at mammal to mammal transmission, and humans are also mammals. The only actual difference between low risk, and full on pandemic, at this point, is patient zero.

You should really go back to the article and read the whole thing, as well as others that are linked to in it. Because in this one the WHO describes it as an enormous concern, because it is.

https://www.sciencealert.com/who-warns-growing-spread-of-bird-flu-to-humans-is-enormous-concern

Right, the difference in immune benefit is so crystal clear for everyone who makes the switch, not even considering the other myriad benefits like heart health, diabetes reversal/mitigation, weight loss, and mental health benefits.