WHY?!!?!?!?

[Lovely Goat]

Mehmsy, I think you must've known a seriously raving veggie to feel so strongly about it.

Do you feel frustrated when people make stupid choices in life like, say, getting massively drunk and throwing up? Smoking? Taking drugs? Wasting money? Being hugely fat and eating goodness knows how many chips/crisps/biscuits/etc? If so, then, well, you're perfectly entitled to feel however you like about anything you think is "silly". Although perhaps not good for your stress levels. If not - well, what's so irking about vegetarianism?

Oh, and what is the silly reason for which you think most veggies are veggie?

[Lovely Goat]

On the point of vegetarian nutrition, particularly thinking of beeny's post:

firstly, I'm aware there are a small number of medical conditions that mean an individual person needs to eat meat to be healthy;

secondly, if someone becomes a vegetarian and simply cuts out meat, they'll be a bit unhealthy. If they substitute meat with dairy products, they're likely to be fairly unhealthy.

I'm not in a position of detailed knowledge to make an argument defending every single necessary nutrient. However, it seems to me that scientists/nutritionists who support vegetarianism say that a veggie diet provides a human with everything we need, while pro-meaty scientists/nutritionists say that various things are lacking. I don't feel I can take anything definitive from that.

What I do know is, no doctor seems to even think of caring that I'm veggie. I never take supplements, and I'm very far from the "sick, pale and anaemic" figure (if somewhat humourously) described. Vegetarianism not a balanced diet? Well, I do it properly, with lentils and pulses (chick peas, kidney beans etc), and when doctors have cause to question me about my diet, they only seem pleased, amd tell me it is, actually, admirably balanced.

I suspect that a veggie who lived on chips, cheese, pizza and the like would be comparably unhealthy to a non-veggie on a similar diet, but with burgers.

On a different note, can someone enlighten me as to why some people (not really on this thread, at least yet) seem to take it as a huge personal insult that a person is vegetarian, or that vegetarianism even exists? I can't imagine I've ever offended anyone - I'm careful not to, as I have no proof I'm right, only my own feelings (no, let's not get into proof and belief on this thread too!). It's happened that someone I've only just met seems to have taken great exception to my vegetarianism: for example, in a restaurant, which had a veggie option that was perfectly fine for me, thank you, so there was absolutely no reason for it to cause any inconvenience to anyone. Person got in a strop simply because I ordered veggie food. Please explain?

I do understand about folk getting annoyed if someone's making judgements about what they're eating. But that works both ways! And really, I have to say I think I've met more rabid "vegetarianism is the pits" types than rabid "eating meat is the most appalling thing" types. Although I'm very willing to believe that the difference in perception may be because I am the target of the first, while meat-eaters are the target of the second.

[Lovely Goat]

Sorry, posting yet again. Back to Mehmsy's points -

I don't see why my choosing not to eat meat makes a blind bit of difference to starvation anywhere. People wasting food make me cross for that reason - to me, it's just not right, wasting it, when other people somewhere don't have enough! But if I don't have the food, then where's the problem? In our plentiful society, everyone makes choices about what they do or don't want to eat, often according to taste, which would be impossible for people who didn't have enough. Why is not eating meat worse than, say, not eating pasta?

I'm also aware that different lifestyles (I mean radically different) do things in different ways, and that in some ways of life or environments it would perhaps be completely unworkable not to eat meat or meat products. But I live in this way of life, here. If eating meat happened to be the right thing to do for a nomadic herdsman in Africa (or some such), it doesn't necessarily follow that it's right for me, here.

About crops, animals and energy usage - I don't know enough about this to blithely say that one is better than the other. However, I think Mehmsy overlooked the point that was trying to be made: that it would take more crops to feed animals to then feed to humans than it would to feed crops to humans directly. I've definitely seen that in a number of places, and to a non-scientist it makes sense: the cows use up some of the food they eat on moving and keeping warm. Anyone got anything that's more definitive on the matter?

[maenad]

Quoting Lovely Goat from 15:27, 18th May 2007
And really, I have to say I think I've met more rabid "vegetarianism is the pits" types than rabid "eating meat is the most appalling thing" types. Although I'm very willing to believe that the difference in perception may be because I am the target of the first, while meat-eaters are the target of the second.

I think they bounce off each other. Some vegetarians are obnoxious, so certain meat-eaters develop a vehement reaction to compensate. As for people who take huge offence to unobtrusive vegetarians ... I dunno why they're that bothered. I don't really care .

The only people I've met who seemed to "take offence" at my vegetarianism were the Romanian family I lived with for a bit last year, although they were wonderful and went out of their way to make us suitable meals (with constant lectures about the importance of protein in our diet ). The problem was we were asked every day if we would like to try something because, 'It's good, honest!'. I was always worried that they thought we wouldn't eat *their* meat, and it was a constant struggle to make them see that we just didn't eat *any* meat. That was down to cultural differences though, as they don't really do vegetarianism in Romania.

[hr]

Tommy can you hear me?

[Mehmsy]

Do you feel frustrated when people make stupid choices in life like, say, getting massively drunk and throwing up? Smoking? Taking drugs? Wasting money? Being hugely fat and eating goodness knows how many chips/crisps/biscuits/etc? If so, then, well, you're perfectly entitled to feel however you like about anything you think is "silly". Although perhaps not good for your stress levels. If not - well, what's so irking about vegetarianism?

Oh, and what is the silly reason for which you think most veggies are veggie?

As a matter of fact, I do. This is the main reason I'm not that keen on charities, but am more than happy to be a blood donor. I probably sound far more angry in these posts than I am in real life; I attribute that to the fact that this is the internet and my posts are usually my stream of conciousness.

As for the reason I think it's silly to be a vegetarian: mostly because it isn't a healthier option in most cases; because most vegetarians I've met do it for stupid reasons; because meat tastes good!

I don't see why my choosing not to eat meat makes a blind bit of difference to starvation anywhere. People wasting food make me cross for that reason - to me, it's just not right, wasting it, when other people somewhere don't have enough! But if I don't have the food, then where's the problem? In our plentiful society, everyone makes choices about what they do or don't want to eat, often according to taste, which would be impossible for people who didn't have enough. Why is not eating meat worse than, say, not eating pasta?

Vegetarianism is like turning a blind eye to the world's problems; in the sense that people are making the decision to have a less nutritious diet while there are people out there who need to live on less than £1 a day. It seems like shallow, pointless pedantry to me. Is there some kind of statement to be made? Also, a lack of pasta in your diet is not as bad as a lack of meat.

About crops, animals and energy usage - I don't know enough about this to blithely say that one is better than the other. However, I think Mehmsy overlooked the point that was trying to be made: that it would take more crops to feed animals to then feed to humans than it would to feed crops to humans directly. I've definitely seen that in a number of places, and to a non-scientist it makes sense: the cows use up some of the food they eat on moving and keeping warm. Anyone got anything that's more definitive on the matter?

Ah, as a matter of fact, it isn't certain that it would take more crops to feed animals than humans. The human stomach is better suited to digesting meat in comparison to vegetables. This means that you use more energy in digesting vegetables, and therefore, gain less nutrition from them. In fact, some vegetables like celery are so filled with water that it takes more energy to digest them than the energy they input into the body.

However, with meat, the situation is different: cows, whose stomachs are more suited to digesting vegetables (as they are omnivores) easily break down the nutrients contained in vegetables. When we eat that same meat, the proteins and other goodies are already in easy-to-break down little packages that let us derive the maximum amount of energy from them.

Whatever the case, I must say that I'm not a staunch anti-vegetarian, hate-filled crazyman. I just like to put the point across when I write things down and get carried away.

[hr]

http://standrews.facebook.com/profile.php?id=37106593

[Guest]

Quoting maenad from 00:25, 18th May 2007

It's never occured to me to chase a non-vegetarian around with an aubergine saying, 'Just try it! It's natural! You'll like it!'.

We're omnivores (as humans *should* be) and we don't just limit ourselves to meat. So many of us eat aubergines anyway

Ah, choice!![img]littleicons/yellowtounge.gif[/img]

[flarewearer]

Quoting trouble from 06:34, 16th May 2007

Your referencing there says it all. Wikipedia- written by morons for vegetarians.

Rofl. Couldn't have put it better. While I quite like Wikipedia as an exercise in communally pointless time-wasting and indulging my inner fetishes for things hewn from iron and powered by steam, I never tire of being amused by the "if I link to a Wikipedia article it makes my point more right and valid than others and makes me sound like I actually know something about a subject I really have very little comprehension of" attitude that is all to prevalent.

[hr]

[Fozzy Bear]

looks like mars bars wont be changing after all. It appears that enough people complained that they decided to change their mind about making their chocolate unsuitable for vegitarians.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6673549.stm

[Duffman]

Best. Publicity Stunt. Ever.

Getting the Veggies to give you loads of free publicity, ingenius!

[hr]

Don't dream too far,
Don't lose sight of who you are.

[David Bean]

What makes you think it was a publicity stunt? I'd be more inclined to believe it was a simple act of corporate incompetence, which are all too prevalent in business. Either way, this U-turn is a victory for common sense.

[hr]

Psalm 91:7

[flarewearer]

Quoting David Bean from 16:07, 20th May 2007
What makes you think it was a publicity stunt?

The conspiracy theories surrounding spearmint polos and orange polo holes

[hr]

[Cain]

Quoting flarewearer from 18:14, 20th May 2007

Quoting David Bean from 16:07, 20th May 2007
What makes you think it was a publicity stunt?

The conspiracy theories surrounding spearmint polos and orange polo holes

See also: Heinz Salad Cream, "New" Coke

[hr]

I hold an element of surprise

[David Bean]

I don't know anything about spearmint Polos (other than I used to eat them, and they were pretty good) or orange polo holes, but as far as the other two are concerned, New Coke WAS corporate incompetence, and Heinz salad cream at least made people buy the stuff. I've only been working in marketing for two weeks now, but it didn't take me that long to figure out that the best way to get people to buy your products probably isn't to make them think you're a bunch of idiots.

[hr]

Psalm 91:7