Bloosum supports killing of innocent animals for food - PhillyBlog

KENfmt · #1 (**permalink**) 06-26-2007, 06:10 PM

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/972951/posts

Vegan diet results in death of more animals than one based on beef, lamb, and dairy according to the Least Harm Principle

Quote:

Animals of the field are killed by several factors, including:
1. Tractors and farm implements run over them.
2. Plows and cultivators destroy underground burrows and kill animals.
3. Removal of the crops (harvest) removes ground cover allowing animals on the surface to be killed by predators.
4. Application of pesticides. So, every time the tractor goes through the field to plow, disc, cultivate, apply fertilizer and/or pesticide, harvest, etc., animals are killed. And, intensive agriculture such as corn and soybeans (products central to a vegan diet) kills far more animals of the field than would extensive agriculture like forage production, particularly if the forage was harvested by ruminant animals instead of machines. So perhaps fewer animals would be killed by producing beef, lamb, and dairy products for humans to eat instead of the vegan diet envisioned by Regan.

jizay · #2 (**permalink**) 06-26-2007, 06:13 PM

Oh wow. Ever see the movie Scanners?

Marianne · #3 (**permalink**) 06-26-2007, 06:14 PM

The only problem with that theory is that it leaves out all of the animals killed raising food to feed livestock. I contacted the author of that study years ago and he never responded. Wonder why....

KENfmt · #4 (**permalink**) 06-26-2007, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marianne

The only problem with that theory is that it leaves out all of the animals killed raising food to feed livestock. I contacted the author of that study years ago and he never responded. Wonder why....

You apparently didn't read it. That is specifically addressed and a calculation is made taking that into consideration.

Marianne · #5 (**permalink**) 06-26-2007, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KENfmt

You apparently didn't read it. That is specifically addressed and a calculation is made taking that into consideration.

The only reference I see is to "forage based" animals. Is he assuming that the animals raised for food will be able to live on a diet of grass?

garofalofan · #6 (**permalink**) 06-26-2007, 06:29 PM

only a meat eater would come up with a thread like this. are you trying to tell me it is a safer bet for animals to be slaughtered for human consumption than to be kept alive for their beauty? this is ludicrious. anything to get people to eat more beef, pork and chicken huh? oh, did I forget to mention mutton. what a crock.

bloosum · #7 (**permalink**) 06-26-2007, 06:31 PM

Please learn about Food Pets Die For: Shocking Facts About Pet Food

http://drjackie.freeservers.com/arti...ven_a_dog.html
www.pcoc.net/dog-food.htm
KENfmt, if these links are not enough to expose unhealthy pet food, I have many more links for people to check to learn truth about commercial pet food people are feeding to their companion animals.

KENfmt · #8 (**permalink**) 06-26-2007, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marianne

The only reference I see is to "forage based" animals. Is he assuming that the animals raised for food will be able to live on a diet of grass?

Yes, he proposes a forage production system for raising ruminant products and concludes that a sum total of less animals would be killed as a result.

Regardless if you agree with that or not, if you eat vegetables that you buy from a farm, you are supporting the death of animals. Only by growing and harvesting by hand your own food, without the use of pesticides or insecticides, harvesting equipment, predators to control pests, flooding (used in rice production), or any other number of farming techniques that cause harm to animals, they you are killing animals for the production of your food. If you don't take these measures, then it is hypocritical to condemn anyone else's diet because you aren't doing all you can to limit the death of animals for the benefit of your food consumption.

KENfmt · #9 (**permalink**) 06-26-2007, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by garofalofan

only a meat eater would come up with a thread like this. are you trying to tell me it is a safer bet for animals to be slaughtered for human consumption than to be kept alive for their beauty? this is ludicrious. anything to get people to eat more beef, pork and chicken huh? oh, did I forget to mention mutton. what a crock.

Did you read it? Do you know what the Least Harm Principle is? It's the theory of Regan, the father of veganism. It states that humans must, unfortunately, cause the death of animals to survive, but should choose the methods which cause the least deaths, the Least Harm. The link I gave shows that a diet based on foraging ruminant animals causes the death of LESS animals, than the harvesting of food required for a vegan diet.

If you really care about killing less animals, then you'll stop your evil vegan ways.

REPENT REPENT

KENfmt · #10 (**permalink**) 06-26-2007, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bloosum

Please learn about Food Pets Die For: Shocking Facts About Pet Food

http://drjackie.freeservers.com/arti...ven_a_dog.html
www.pcoc.net/dog-food.htm
KENfmt, if these links are not enough to expose unhealthy pet food, I have many more links for people to check to learn truth about commercial pet food people are feeding to their companion animals.

This has nothing to do with pet food. Try reading and comprehending what I posted before posting a bunch of your propaganda.

You support the death of innocent animals by eating farm produced vegetables and grains. You do not take all possible measures to prevent the death of innocent animals for your food production.