Is it wrong to be an Omnivore?

[vegan_mekey]

Do you think we would be able to survive as a vegan without the commodities we possess in this advanced era?

I think in general it is hard to survive without the fortified commodities of this advanced era. Look at cow milk, it has added vitamin D & A or "iodinized" salt, for instance. I'm unsure what is your definition of "commodities." I eat beans brown rice and vegetables mostly, although not all my produce is locally obtained. I'm not too keen on frankenfoods

[btbam]

I think in general it is hard to survive without the fortified commodities of this advanced era. Look at cow milk, it has added vitamin D & A or "iodinized" salt, for instance. I'm unsure what is your definition of "commodities." I eat beans brown rice and vegetables mostly, although not all my produce is locally obtained. I'm not too keen on frankenfoods

I think sufi was referencing the deficiencies that vegans tend to have like B12 or iron or protein etc. I believe the point sufi is trying to make is that without the modern era and the advances which allow a vegan to supplement their diet, it would not be possible. So the vegan is a product of the modern era and technological advances.

[vegan_mekey]

I think sufi was referencing the deficiencies that vegans tend to have like B12 or iron or protein etc. I believe the point sufi is trying to make is that without the modern era and the advances which allow a vegan to supplement their diet, it would not be possible. So the vegan is a product of the modern era and technological advances.

There are a plethora of natural non-heme iron sources. In fact in 7+ years I've never taken an iron supplement and I routinely have labwork done (perk of working in a hospital) and never had an issue. Vegan Diets do not equal anemia, but I'll-planned diets (omni/veg) can lead to anemia.

Protein is abundant in plant sources, there is no reason why any vegan would have low protein intake. The standard American diet provides more protein than needed, causing the liver to deaminate the excess protein Therefore processing it into carbohydrate. Just because vegan diets don't provide excessive protein that you are visually accustomed to, it doesn't mean they are not adequate.

Omnivores require b12 supplementation. The body becomes less efficient at producing intrinsic factor (which binds to b12 for its absorption in the ileum) as one gets older. Therefore dietary sources are not efficient for someone 45/50+ years old, and instead they need to supplement. Moreover increased homocysteine levels (by-product of b12 deficiency) are linked to dementia for all diets that don't supplement. Therefore everyone will need to supplement b12 both omnivores and vegans.

In summation, low iron and protein are attributed to poor diets NOT vegan diets. Low vitamin b12 is a concern for EVERYBODY and will require supplementation. I hope this answers your question.

[btbam]

There are a plethora of natural non-heme iron sources. In fact in 7+ years I've never taken an iron supplement and I routinely have labwork done (perk of working in a hospital) and never had an issue. Vegan Diets do not equal anemia, but I'll-planned diets (omni/veg) can lead to anemia.

Protein is abundant in plant sources, there is no reason why any vegan would have low protein intake. The standard American diet provides more protein than needed, causing the liver to deaminate the excess protein Therefore processing it into carbohydrate. Just because vegan diets don't provide excessive protein that you are visually accustomed to, it doesn't mean they are not adequate.

Omnivores require b12 supplementation. The body becomes less efficient at producing intrinsic factor (which binds to b12 for its absorption in the ileum) as one gets older. Therefore dietary sources are not efficient for someone 45/50+ years old, and instead they need to supplement. Moreover increased homocysteine levels (by-product of b12 deficiency) are linked to dementia for all diets that don't supplement. Therefore everyone will need to supplement b12 both omnivores and vegans.

In summation, low iron and protein are attributed to poor diets NOT vegan diets. Low vitamin b12 is a concern for EVERYBODY and will require supplementation. I hope this answers your question.

I can't speak for Sufi on this, but i still have one question i wish you could address. Could the vegan lifestyle exist outside of the modern era. I don't think so. Just because you state yourself that it requires supplementation, things which have not existed until recently.

[vegan_mekey]

I can't speak for Sufi on this, but i still have one question i wish you could address. Could the vegan lifestyle exist outside of the modern era. I don't think so. Just because you state yourself that it requires supplementation, things which have not existed until recently.

Yes. The only area of supplementation that is required (if following a well rounded diet) is b12. Historically, before the hygiene craze/scare of the 20th century where everything became aseptic and sanitized, it would not be uncommon for an individual to eat plants right from the soil which would include remnants of soil bacteria containing B12. Likewise, B12 would be obtained from unsanitized lake water. While this is not the most preferable, we have to remember that until recently even omnivore diets were inadequate, hence the supplementation/fortification of folate, calcium, vitamin D and iodine, just to name a few. Therefore the healthy vegan diet is no further a construct of current times than that of a healthy omnivore diet. This is because both types of diets require supplementation that has only been available as of recent.

[Sufi]

But what you're talking about is that both Omnivores and Vegans requiring (though it's recommended for Omnivores, it's not a requirement) a supplement after the age of 50. Not before for Omnivores.

Vegans have to take the supplement at any age. Omnivores are just at a risk after 50, though it's not necessary like it is for the Vegans.

What are your thoughts on that?

[vegan_mekey]

But what you're talking about is that both Omnivores and Vegans requiring (though it's recommended for Omnivores, it's not a requirement) a supplement after the age of 50. Not before for Omnivores.

Vegans have to take the supplement at any age. Omnivores are just at a risk after 50, though it's not necessary like it is for the Vegans.

What are your thoughts on that?

Omnivores need (requirement) to supplement too; vitamin D and Iodine just to name a few.

What are your thoughts on that?

[Sufi]

Omnivores need (requirement) to supplement too; vitamin D and Iodine just to name a few.

What are your thoughts on that?

That doesn't prove that we need those supplements.

I've had natural milk half of my life without additives. I don't think there's a need for it when you can get it from fish, egg, liver beef, cheese...but generally from fish (about 90% of your daily recommendation).

As for Iodine, you can get that from dairy products and seafood.

Because they're added to our food products, doesn't mean that we need them to survive, it seems more like as if they're doing it for people that aren't eating healthy and this would be an aided way to battle these deficiencies.

There are plenty of ways to acquire them without the need of supplements.

[vegan_mekey]

That doesn't prove that we need those supplements.

I've had natural milk half of my life without additives. I don't think there's a need for it when you can get it from fish, egg, liver beef, cheese...but generally from fish (about 90% of your daily recommendation). .

Are you referring to vitamin D? The RDA for Vitamin D is 600 IU (International Units)

3 ounces of Liver (Beef) has 41 IU
1 ounce of swiss cheese has 6 IU
1 (Large) egg has has 41 IU

Unless you eat salmon or swordfish everyday (~440 IU) I don't see how you are going to get all 600 IU.
Furthermore, it is only some saltwater fish that actually have vitamin D. (i.e. you would need to eat 12 ounces of Tuna daily to get your requirement.

Nice try though.

As for Iodine, you can get that from dairy products and seafood.

Dairy products were only substantial source of iodine due to iodophors, a mixture of iodine and surfactant that is used in the sterilization process. Essentially, these chemicals were used in the cleaning and sanitization of milking equipment and would leach into the milk itself (Yummy, chemical cleaner contamination!). So basically dairy IS NOT a natural source of iodine and is, in fact, considered a supplement.

Because they're added to our food products, doesn't mean that we need them to survive, it seems more like as if they're doing it for people that aren't eating healthy and this would be an aided way to battle these deficiencies.

Good point, children with vitamin D deficiency will develop rickets (characterized by seizures, growth retardation and failure of the bone to mineralize) but they are still technically alive, err.. surviving. And babies born with cretinism (a syndrome characterized by mental deficiency, Spastic Diplegia, deaf mutism and shortened stature) due to low maternal iodine intake are also still... umm... surviving too.

-------------

So until recent if you lived on the coast or in the middle latititudes then you may likely be fine. But for all those living mainland and/or in northern latitudes ran the risk of significant health implications. So perhaps the comparison of vitamin B12 Supplementation for vegans, being a product of current times, is not all too different than the supplementation of Iodine and Vitamin D for all diets .

[Sufi]

Are you referring to vitamin D? The RDA for Vitamin D is 600 IU (International Units)

3 ounces of Liver (Beef) has 41 IU
1 ounce of swiss cheese has 6 IU
1 (Large) egg has has 41 IU

Unless you eat salmon or swordfish everyday (~440 IU) I don't see how you are going to get all 600 IU.
Furthermore, it is only some saltwater fish that actually have vitamin D. (i.e. you would need to eat 12 ounces of Tuna daily to get your requirement.

Nice try though.

1) It's not 600 IU for everyone. There are varying degrees but the new general consensus is 200 to 600 for young adults, and 400 to 600 for older adults. And this is not taking sun into account so it would be much less than that in reality for people that are healthy individuals (meaning, they go outside, do things outside, not confined in one place)

2) You don't need to take supplements or even eat as much as long as you are taking about 5-30 minutes of sun every day. Now, I know that the western population is out less and less as we go forward but generally you will fulfill your daily requirement just by being out in the sun.

3) It seems to me that unless a product is fortified, the easiest way to naturally obtain Vitamin D is through meat and sun.

Dairy products were only substantial source of iodine due to iodophors, a mixture of iodine and surfactant that is used in the sterilization process. Essentially, these chemicals were used in the cleaning and sanitization of milking equipment and would leach into the milk itself (Yummy, chemical cleaner contamination!). So basically dairy IS NOT a natural source of iodine and is, in fact, considered a supplement.

Fair enough.

FOOD	APPROXIMATE MICROGRAMS (MCG) PER SERVING	PERCENT DV*
Seaweed, whole or sheet, 1 g	16 to 2,984	11% to 1,989%
Cod, baked, 3 ounces	99	66%
Yogurt, plain, low-fat, 1 cup	75	50%
Milk, reduced fat, 1 cup	56	37%
Fish sticks, 3 ounces	54	36%
Bread, white, enriched, 2 slices	45	30%
Fruit cocktail in heavy syrup, canned, 1/2 cup	42	28%
Shrimp, 3 ounces	35	23%
Ice cream, chocolate, 1/2 cup	30	20%
Macaroni, enriched, boiled, 1 cup	27	18%
Egg, 1 large	24	16%
Tuna, canned in oil, drained, 3 ounces	17	11%
Corn, cream style, canned, 1/2 cup	14	9%
Prunes, dried, 5 prunes	13	9%
Cheese, cheddar, 1 ounce	12	8%
Lima beans, mature, boiled, 1/2 cup	8	5%
Apple juice, 1 cup	7	5%
Green peas, frozen, boiled, 1/2 cup	3	2%
Banana, 1 medium	3	2%

http://davidgrotto.wordpress.com/201...ces-of-iodine/

I've put the products in bold that we normally would consume on a daily basis.

Point I'm trying to make is that while there are fortified products, they are generally because people don't know what they're eating, how much they need to eat it and how to keep themselves healthy. It's not that you can't do it without these fortifications.

Whereas you couldn't possibly get B12 as a supplement during times when we didn't have the means and advancements that we do now. You can't naturally be a vegan but you can naturally be an omnivore.

Good point, children with vitamin D deficiency will develop rickets (characterized by seizures, growth retardation and failure of the bone to mineralize) but they are still technically alive, err.. surviving. And babies born with cretinism (a syndrome characterized by mental deficiency, Spastic Diplegia, deaf mutism and shortened stature) due to low maternal iodine intake are also still... umm... surviving too.

-------------

So until recent if you lived on the coast or in the middle latititudes then you may likely be fine. But for all those living mainland and/or in northern latitudes ran the risk of significant health implications. So perhaps the comparison of vitamin B12 Supplementation for vegans, being a product of current times, is not all too different than the supplementation of Iodine and Vitamin D for all diets .

Again, I'm not saying that it's a bad thing to supplement for those that don't know how to live (or raise children) in a healthy way...I'm saying that it's not that difficulty to obtain these supplements naturally, it just happens so that most people don't have the knowledge to do it on their own.

It's irrelevant to our discussion.

So far, what I've come to realize is that we couldn't possibly be vegans without deficiency (given that you are following the correct methods) before advancements were made.

[danmarcus]

The way I see it is this; a lion eats a gazelle and doesn't sin. Why would it be wrong for us to eat what gives us nutrients? As sure as a lion eats a gazelle and does no wrong, a lion would eat you and would do no wrong either. I'm not trying to say one should, I'm trying to make a clear point between eating good and bad things.

[vegan_mekey]

1) It's not 600 IU for everyone. There are varying degrees but the new general consensus is 200 to 600 for young adults, and 400 to 600 for older adults.

RECOMMENDED DIETARY ALLOWANCE
0-12 months - 400 IU
1 - 70 years - 600 IU
70+ years - 800 IU

Unless you consider the advice of Dr. Michael Holick (Ph.D, M.D.), one of the most preeminent Vitamin D specialists, who advocates intakes of at least 2000 IU daily.

And this is not taking sun into account so it would be much less than that in reality for people that are healthy individuals (meaning, they go outside, do things outside, not confined in one place)

2) You don't need to take supplements or even eat as much as long as you are taking about 5-30 minutes of sun every day. Now, I know that the western population is out less and less as we go forward but generally you will fulfill your daily requirement just by being out in the sun.

Whoops you missed a critical aspect of location (alluded to in previous post).

Source: Harvard Health

Except during summer months, individuals located above the 37th parallel at a critical risk for vitamin D deficiency.

http://www.health.harvard.edu/newswe...-vitamin-d.htm

P.S. This article from Harvard Health advocates 1000 IU of vitamin D DAILY.

3) It seems to me that unless a product is fortified, the easiest way to naturally obtain Vitamin D is through meat (UNLIKELY SEE PREVIOUS POST) and sun (UNLIKELY FOR MOST AMERICANS/EUROPEANS) .

Pretty hard to obtain the daily 600-1000 IU (Harvard) or the 2000+ IU recommended by Dr. Holick, Ph.D, MD, when a majority of all americans/europeans cannot obtain any vitamin D from the Sun most months of the year. Especially when we find that most dietary vitamin D sources have minimal amounts (see previous post).
HENCE,

So far, what I've come to realize is that we couldn't possibly be OMNIVORES without deficiency (given that you are following the correct methods) before advancements were made.

The way I see it is this; a lion eats a gazelle and doesn't sin. Why would it be wrong for us to eat what gives us nutrients? As sure as a lion eats a gazelle and does no wrong, a lion would eat you and would do no wrong either. I'm not trying to say one should, I'm trying to make a clear point between eating good and bad things.

To clarify your point you need to mention that lions intentionally breed gazelles to eat, forcing them to live a short and horrific life inside a small cage in which they are unable to carry out their basic life functions. Then after a miserable period of time, they slaughter these gazelles whom never had a fair chance to live their natural lives. AND this is the reason why it's a good comparative to base our actions off.

P.S. I like your questioning of why would it be wrong to eat what gives us nutrients. I imagine that's why it's okay (not wrong) to eat humans, because, well, we can obtain nutrients from them.

[RaY_210]

To clarify your point you need to mention that lions intentionally breed gazelles to eat, forcing them to live a short and horrific life inside a small cage in which they are unable to carry out their basic life functions. Then after a miserable period of time, they slaughter these gazelles whom never had a fair chance to live their natural lives. AND this is the reason why it's a good comparative to base our actions off.

P.S. I like your questioning of why would it be wrong to eat what gives us nutrients. I imagine that's why it's okay (not wrong) to eat humans, because, well, we can obtain nutrients from them.

So then theoretically (or hypothetically?), you would not be opposed to hunting, but for food and not sport?

[davin_g]

My opinion to answer the question. No. I don't go around torturing animals or pets but I will eat what I like. Animals in the wild don't ask their prey how they would like to die...they do it brutally. I don't care if we just slit the animals throat it is much more pleasant way to die than being slowly eaten alive. There are better methods of butchering and raising animals and I am all for them but to for one person to tell another they are wrong for their beliefs gets on my nerves. I am all for those who want to be vegan and those that want to eat only cheese puffs. I just feel both sides should be respectful of each other and that is what being civilized is about.

[Sufi]

RECOMMENDED DIETARY ALLOWANCE
0-12 months - 400 IU
1 - 70 years - 600 IU
70+ years - 800 IU

Unless you consider the advice of Dr. Michael Holick (Ph.D, M.D.), one of the most preeminent Vitamin D specialists, who advocates intakes of at least 2000 IU daily.




Whoops you missed a critical aspect of location (alluded to in previous post).

Source: Harvard Health

Except during summer months, individuals located above the 37th parallel at a critical risk for vitamin D deficiency.

http://www.health.harvard.edu/newswe...-vitamin-d.htm

P.S. This article from Harvard Health advocates 1000 IU of vitamin D DAILY.






Pretty hard to obtain the daily 600-1000 IU (Harvard) or the 2000+ IU recommended by Dr. Holick, Ph.D, MD, when a majority of all americans/europeans cannot obtain any vitamin D from the Sun most months of the year. Especially when we find that most dietary vitamin D sources have minimal amounts (see previous post).
HENCE,

Right which is beside the point I'm trying to make.

While it may be hard to obtain it under certain circumstances. We have everything we need in our environment to fulfill the needs of our body to stay healthy.

It's another thing that people decide to live in places that may or may not be safe for them to live in. The point was that you can obtain everything you need, from nature.

You can't do that as a vegan. Not to mention, intake of vitamins through pills is now turning out to be dangerous, in recent studies.

Watch Andrew Zimmern's Bizzare Foods and then tell me how it's possible for most people around the world to live as a vegan.

[$Greatness$]

Hell nah it ain't wrong! Anyone who turns down a good steak and potato is un-American and a Commy. BAM!

[vegan_mekey]

Right which is beside the point I'm trying to make.

While it may be hard to obtain it under certain circumstances. We have everything we need in our environment to fulfill the needs of our body to stay healthy... ...The point was that you can obtain everything you need, from nature.

Yeah you're right, well, unless you live above the 37th parallel or are over the age of 50 when your parietal gastric cells stop producing sufficient quantities of intrinsic factor increasing the possibility of hyperhomocysteinemia.

It's another thing that people decide to live in places that may or may not be safe for them to live in.

LOL @ 6+ Billion people only living between the 37th parallels.

You can't do that as a vegan. Not to mention, intake of vitamins through pills is now turning out to be dangerous, in recent studies.

LOL @ Cholecalciferol "turning out to be dangerous"

Watch Andrew Zimmern's Bizzare Foods and then tell me how it's possible for most people around the world to live as a vegan.

LOL @ Reality TV being the source of your personal justification.

[Sufi]

Yeah you're right, well, unless you live above the 37th parallel or are over the age of 50 when your parietal gastric cells stop producing sufficient quantities of intrinsic factor increasing the possibility of hyperhomocysteinemia.

Yes, and I'm not disagreeing with that. I'm talking about the fact that one lifestyle requires supplements regardless of where you live and one may not...of course depending on where you live.

Point is that one lifestyle could not have been possible without the advancement of science.

LOL @ 6+ Billion people only living between the 37th parallels.

I'm not understanding your point here. Most of the population around the world live below the 37th parallel which is supposedly safer. The rest that live above it may or may not realize the risks...that doesn't change the fact that they could be living in a better part of the world.

None of this has anything to do with the point I'm trying to make.

LOL @ Cholecalciferol "turning out to be dangerous"

Actually I never said anything about Vitamin D...I meant in general and I looked more into it and apparently these studies are debunked.

LOL @ Reality TV being the source of your personal justification.

How does that change anything? The only other thing would be to fly over to these different countries and see it with your own eyes.

Most of the population around the world relies on meat (as well as vegetables, butter, yogurt etc.) as a primary source of nutrition. If you watch how they live, you will realize that they can't just cut out meat (in some cases, fish) from their culture or they will have harsher conditions, which will likely cause many of them to perish.

Being a vegan is another matter, we're talking about just being vegetarians. Some of these cultures rely completely on fishing, if they don't, they don't get to eat. Ironically we're back to the issue of where these people live, not everyone will have resources to have a certain lifestyle and naturally meat is available in every part of the world. It makes sense.

[vegan_mekey]

Yes, and I'm not disagreeing with that. I'm talking about the fact that one lifestyle requires supplements regardless of where you live and one may not...of course depending on where you live.

Point is that one lifestyle could not have been possible without the advancement of science.

You must have missed the aspect of hyperhomocysteinemia related to decreases in intrinsic factor which bind to B12 in the stomach. Low serum B12 (folate) and high homocysteine are key factors in the proliferation of Dementia disorders. It doesn't matter where you live or what diet you have. This is due to the age-related decreased secrtions of the parietal cells.

Again, any diet above the 37th parallel will require supplementation of Vitamin D.

IN OTHER WORDS, Any healthy lifestyle could not have been possible without the advancement of science. Your point is bunk, veganism is no different than any other diet in it's requirement of supplementation for healthy living.

I'm not understanding your point here. Most of the population around the world live below the 37th parallel which is supposedly safer. The rest that live above it may or may not realize the risks...that doesn't change the fact that they could be living in a better part of the world.

It be may tough to fit 6 billion people in these more restrictive area (to therefore avoid the necessary supplementation of vitamin D, as to unsuccessfully try an negate the point above).

Actually I never said anything about Vitamin D...I meant in general and I looked more into it and apparently these studies are debunked.

(earlier post) Not to mention, intake of vitamins through pills is now turning out to be dangerous, in recent studies.

How does that change anything? The only other thing would be to fly over to these different countries and see it with your own eyes.

Most of the population around the world relies on meat (as well as vegetables, butter, yogurt etc.) as a primary source of nutrition. If you watch how they live, you will realize that they can't just cut out meat (in some cases, fish) from their culture or they will have harsher conditions, which will likely cause many of them to perish.

Being a vegan is another matter, we're talking about just being vegetarians. Some of these cultures rely completely on fishing, if they don't, they don't get to eat. Ironically we're back to the issue of where these people live, not everyone will have resources to have a certain lifestyle and naturally meat is available in every part of the world. It makes sense.

So again what's your non-selfish excuse/rationalization to perpetuate the suffering of over one hundred annuals per year? Last time it was reality TV.

[Sufi]

You must have missed the aspect of hyperhomocysteinemia related to decreases in intrinsic factor which bind to B12 in the stomach. Low serum B12 (folate) and high homocysteine are key factors in the proliferation of Dementia disorders. It doesn't matter where you live or what diet you have. This is due to the age-related decreased secrtions of the parietal cells.

Yes, I do understand that age has a huge factor in your potential to be completely healthy.

Side-tracking again.

Again, any diet above the 37th parallel will require supplementation of Vitamin D.

IN OTHER WORDS, Any healthy lifestyle could not have been possible without the advancement of science.

That's simply not true.

1) Vit D above 37th parallel is not a requirement.

2) It's a risk, not a definite.

3) Your rebuttals is only true when speaking about degradation of a human body.

Yes, I'm not saying that we should take out science from our life, I'm saying that nature already has everything available for us to live healthily, but in some cases we have restrictions that need to be overcome by medicine. All in all, if you are eating healthy, you should not need supplements (unless you're above the 37th parallel, which is a risk, not a definite).

In other words, supplements are not always a requirement...whereas supplements are a requirement when you're a vegan. It's simple and yet hard for you to understand.

Your point is bunk, veganism is no different than any other diet in it's requirement of supplementation for healthy living.

No.

It be may tough to fit 6 billion people in these more restrictive area (to therefore avoid the necessary supplementation of vitamin D, as to unsuccessfully try an negate the point above).

I don't think space is an issue, it's choice and well, most people don't care where they live and what risks there are.

Regardless of where this part of the sub-discussion goes, we're mainly speaking about requirements of supplements or lackthereof.

So again what's your non-selfish excuse/rationalization to perpetuate the suffering of over one hundred annuals per year? Last time it was reality TV.

I'm not getting this part, "over one hundred annuals per year".

[vegan_mekey]

Yes, I do understand that age has a huge factor in your potential to be completely healthy.

Side-tracking again.


That's simply not true.

1) Vit D above 37th parallel is not a requirement.

2) It's a risk, not a definite.

3) Your rebuttals is only true when speaking about degradation of a human body.

Yes, I'm not saying that we should take out science from our life, I'm saying that nature already has everything available for us to live healthily, but in some cases we have restrictions that need to be overcome by medicine. All in all, if you are eating healthy, you should not need supplements (unless you're above the 37th parallel, which is a risk, not a definite).

In other words, supplements are not always a requirement...whereas supplements are a requirement when you're a vegan. It's simple and yet hard for you to understand.

Please let me know which supplements are necessary to be vegan?

If you think B12, well you're wrong. Inadequate B12 in vegans is more strongly relative to recent top soil erosion of the last 50-60 years (alongside the hyper-sterilized and santitized society in which we now live).Prior to the last 50-60 years, consumption of biologically active B12 was obtained via soil. Therefore, your stance that veganism is inherently inpossible in nature is incorrect. In fact, "nature" provides all the required nutrients but once nature is removed from our foods or destroyed, it becomes more difficult. If you would like I can link you to many studies that confirm this.

So again what are the nutrients that vegans require supplementation?






_





So again what's your non-selfish excuse/rationalization to perpetuate the suffering of over one hundred animal per year? Last time it was reality TV.

[btbam]

Some of the posts are getting a wee bit out of hand here. I understand you advocate the vegan life style, but there is a fine line between advocacy and proselytizing. The vegan life style is a choice just like eating meat Is a choice. Do you think you can berate people into following your choice?

[UberZman]

Why in the world would it be wrong to be an omnivore?

[Super_Lilith]

Why in the world would it be wrong to be an omnivore?

Because we are killing an animal on purpose for our pleasure.

Meat eater by the way.

[vegan_mekey]

Some of the posts are getting a wee bit out of hand here. I understand you advocate the vegan life style, but there is a fine line between advocacy and proselytizing. The vegan life style is a choice just like eating meat Is a choice. Do you think you can berate people into following your choice?

First, I'm not pushing anything on anyone. I'm just deconstructing arguments being posted here, especially those without any merit. If you want to beat your wife, your kids or kill stray dogs and cats, then apparently that is your choice and one which no one should question you for, right?