Comments kevcon has made

Glovetrotter check out these ahem 'meat'-heads

Mac Danzig-ultimate fighter
http://www.mensfitness.com/fitness/288

Kenneth G. Willams - natural bodybuilder
http://veganmusclepower.org/

Pat Reeves - powerlifter
www.veganbodybuilding.org/

and many more at

http://www.veganbodybuilding.com/

with apologies to Mr. T...
I pity the fool who thinks they need to eat poisoned dead flesh to build muscle and be strong and fit.

Real men have compassion for animals and care about the environment.

peas!On U.N. climate chief urges eating less meat to combat climate change posted 1 year, 2 months ago 13 Responses

pointed canine teeth or pointed carnivore head?

since this 'debate' is now citing cartoons like SouthPark (loved the peta send-up as much as their 'smug' episode on prius drivers not mention their slam on gore etc etc etc b-t-w)
here's a bizarro animating the point re: humans as carnivore v. herbivore:

http://www.beansandgreens.net/index.php?/archives/111-Are ...
On Animal-rights group makes the stupid claim that enviros must be vegetarians posted 2 years, 2 months ago 208 Responses

Connect the Dinner Plate to Climate Change

"Environmentalists" certainly don't need animal advocates' ad campaigns to point our their hypocrisy nor their lack of vision and strategies for a building a more sustainable and just future , they do fine on their own ;-)

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/29/business/media/29adco.h ...

Advertising:  

Trying to Connect the Dinner Plate to Climate Change
By CLAUDIA H. DEUTSCH .29Aug07.New York Times

EVER since "An Inconvenient Truth," Al Gore has been the darling of environmentalists, but that movie hardly endeared him to the animal rights folks. According to them, the most inconvenient truth of all is that raising animals for meat contributes more to global warming than all the sport utility vehicles combined.

The biggest animal rights groups do not always overlap in their missions, but now they have coalesced around a message that eating meat is worse for the environment than driving. They and smaller groups have started advertising campaigns that try to equate vegetarianism with curbing greenhouse gases.

Some backlash against this position is inevitable, the groups acknowledge, but they do have scientific ammunition. In late November, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization issued a report stating that the livestock business generates more greenhouse gas emissions than all forms of transportation combined.

When that report came out, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and other groups expected their environmental counterparts to immediately hop on the "Go Veggie!" bandwagon, but that did not happen. "Environmentalists are still pointing their fingers at Hummers and S.U.V.'s when they should be pointing at the dinner plate," said Matt A. Prescott, manager of vegan campaigns for PETA.

So the animal rights groups are mobilizing on their own. PETA is outfitting a Hummer with a driver in a chicken suit and a vinyl banner proclaiming meat as the top cause of global warming. It will send the vehicle to the start of the climate forum the White House is sponsoring in Washington on Sept. 27, "and to headquarters of environmental groups, if they don't start shaping up," Mr. Prescott warned.

He said that PETA had written to more than 700 environmental groups, asking them to promote vegetarianism, and that it would soon distribute leaflets that highlight the impact of eating meat on global warming.

"You just cannot be a meat-eating environmentalist," said Mr. Prescott, whose group also plans to send billboard-toting trucks to the Colorado Convention Center in Denver when Mr. Gore lectures there on Oct. 2. The billboards will feature a cartoon image of Mr. Gore eating a drumstick next to the tagline: "Too Chicken to Go Vegetarian? Meat Is the No. 1 Cause of Global Warming."

*

The Humane Society of the United States has taken up the issue as well, running ads in environmental magazines that show a car key and a fork. "Which one of these contributes more to global warming?" the ads ask. They answer the question with "It's not the one that starts a car," and go on to cite the United Nations report as proof.

On its Web page and in its literature, the Humane Society has also been highlighting other scientific studies -- notably, one that recently came out of the University of Chicago -- that, in essence, show that "switching to a plant-based diet does more to curb global warming than switching from an S.U.V. to a Camry," said Paul Shapiro, senior director of the factory farming campaign for the Humane Society.

The society, Mr. Shapiro said, is not only concerned with what happens to domesticated animals, but also with preventing the carnage that global warming could cause to polar bears, seals and other wildlife. "Our mission is to protect animals, and global warming has become an animal welfare issue," he said.

Even tiny pro-veggie operations are starting to squeeze dollars out of their shoestring budgets to advertise the eating meat/global warming connection. Vegan Outreach, a 14-year-old group in Tucson with just three full-time workers and a $5 million annual budget, is spending about $800 this month to run ads and links to its Web page on about 10 blogs. And, it will give more prominence to the global warming aspect of vegetarianism in the next batch of leaflets it orders.

"We know that vegetarian organizations have sometimes made exaggerated health and environmental claims, but that U.N. report is an impartial, unimpeachable source of statements we can quote," said Matt Ball, executive director of Vegan Outreach.

Like Mr. Prescott, Mr. Ball is incensed that high-profile people like Al Gore -- or environmental groups with deeper pockets than his -- have not stepped up to the plate.

"Al Gore calls global warming an existential risk to humanity, yet it hasn't prompted him to change his diet or even mention vegetarianism," he complained. "And I guess the environmentalists recognize that it's a lot easier to ask people to put in a fluorescent light bulb than to learn to cook with tofu."

*

Advertising specialists warn that this new attention to global warming may attract enemies as well as converts.

"Using global warming as a tactic for advancing the cause of vegetarianism feels a bit opportunistic," said Hank Stewart, senior copywriter at Green Team Advertising, which specializes in environmentally themed ads.

He also questions the logistics. "You want to get the message as close to the meat-purchasing moment as possible," he said, "but can you imagine a supermarket allowing 'Attention, Planet-Destroying Carnivores' on the in-store radio?"

Environmental groups, meanwhile, readily concede that mobilizing against meat eaters is not their highest priority.

"We try to be strategic about doing the things where each unit of effort has the most impact," said Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club. Mr. Pope notes that his group has stopped short of castigating people for driving S.U.V.'s or building overly large homes, too.

"We'll encourage companies to make more efficient S.U.V.'s, and we'll encourage consumers to buy them," he said, "but we do not find lecturing people about personal consumption choices to be effective."

Environmental Defense is also "in agreement on the value of eating less meat," said Melanie Janin, director of marketing communications. But, she added, her group would rather spend its time and money influencing public policy -- specifically, getting Congress to regulate greenhouse gases.

Mr. Gore declined to make himself available for comment. Chris Song, his deputy press secretary, simply noted that a suggestion to "modify your diet to include less meat" appears on Page 317 of Mr. Gore's book version of "An Inconvenient Truth."

He did not address Mr. Gore's personal food choices.

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company On Animal-rights group makes the stupid claim that enviros must be vegetarians posted 2 years, 2 months ago 208 Responses

ham fisted denial math footprint match

see the UN study cited in the orginal post
many other reports with better calculations than you cite are searchable on the web, one example:

http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~gidon/papers/nutri/nutri3.pdf...

Diet, Energy and Global Warming
Gidon Eshel1 and Pamela Martin
Dept. of the Geophysical Sciences
The Univ. of Chicago
5734 S. Ellis Ave.
Chicago, IL 60637
Submitted to Earth Interactions, May 2005

Abstract
We compare the energy consumption of animal- and plant-based diets, and, more
broadly, the range of energetic planetary footprints spanned by reasonable dietary
choices. We demonstrate that the greenhouse gas emissions of various diets varies by
as much as the difference between owning an average sedan versus a Sport Utility
Vehicle under typical driving conditions. We conclude with a brief review of the safety
of plant-based diets, and find no reasons for concern.
(end of cite.)

You are to be commended for the actions you have taken, such as prius driving and bike riding and for even contemplating the consequences of your actions in regard to global warming and the environment. We all surely contribute to this and my biggest "footprint" is the several airplane trips that I take.

However, with all due respect, I do find many of my fellow "environmentalists" too in denial about the enivronmental impacts of their animal flesh taste sensation addictions (not to mention the health implications) to limit or cease their taste gratification behavior and often many carinvorous greens deem it too inconsequential to matter in curbing global climate change.

The reality seems to suggest otherwise.

The denial of "environmentalists" on this matter of the animal flesh trade's enormous enviro. impacts in the face of mounting evidence is akin to W's and the corporate petro-chem/pharma/ag. polluters denials and misrepresentation about the existance and scope of impact of global warming.

Why not do as much as we all can, ride bikes and drive prius and eat a predominately plant-based diet to limit our carbon and greenhouse gas footprints?
On Why the vegetarian critique of meat-eating should make meat-eaters squirm posted 2 years, 10 months ago 103 Responses

lost in translation

missing 3rd paragraph:
It was also posted on AlterNet

http://ww.alternet.org/story/47007/

and their comment/rants number over 400 covering similar and even more hyperbolic rhetoric as posted here,

sorryOn Why the vegetarian critique of meat-eating should make meat-eaters squirm posted 2 years, 10 months ago 103 Responses

Engaging Omnivores on the Heat of their Meat

Tom you are to be commended for your post and everyone who has contributed should be commended for weighing in with their views.  

Food choice is a challenging issue as there is obviously a great deal of sensitivity to such personal issues as eating, health, and long-held cultural assumptions and religious perspectives of the human/animal relationship and a very strong inclination/reluctance to change views and behaviors not to mention the great many barriers to informing one's self and making informed food choices and to understanding our modern food systems' health and environmental impacts, such as the price supports and corporate control of government agricultural policies and school lunch programs, etc. and commercial brainwashing and psychological manipulation in our schools and on TV by the corporate medical establishment and corporate agribusiness who spend big $ to perpetuate the status quo of unhealthy food and chemical pharmceuticals to address the cancer and disease from over-meat consumption and petro-chemical and GMO laden plant foods and processed 'food.'

As I've evolved my own understanding of these relationships it is often challenging to share information and challenge well-meaning but misinformed individuals as evidenced in this and similar discussions about eating animal flesh and their secretions and the impacts of their mass production on our land, water, air quality and their underestimated impacts on global climate change, as each of us are on our own evolution of understanding about these matters.

This is particularly challenging when one works  in the context of non-profits focused on promoting human and planetary well-being and justice such as I do. The cognitive dissonance of the denial of the impacts from our individual and societal food choices on our environment does prove exasperating at times. I have to remind myself to respect other's views and not get to a place of resentment, mental anguish or rage and to an extent I've come to realize that we can only really ever change ourselves and can't expect a radical or immediate transformation of views and behaviors in others who are on their own paths of discovery and growth or of passive acceptance and stagnation.  

In the end we can only be empowered and healthy through our own decisions and behaviors and perhaps to serve as an example of other possibilities and potentials to others and to cajole with information and fun and encouragement rather than dictate with negativity.

To the 'environmentalists' who rage against perceived vegan intollerence and an apparent overzealousness in promoting their views; when you feel this way or seek to cast stones at them because it makes you feel uncomfortable about your choices and the role your food choices are playing in diminishing the quality of life and our environemnt, instead of attacking these 'straw men' you may want to consider how those who aren't as 'enlightened' as you are say about carbon emissions, for example, when you rant about travel choice and seek to enforce a 'no car' rule or other such behavioral choice/lifestyle changes that you percieve as having value in protecting our environment, but which irritate their cultural norm, religous view and/or their ignorance of the 'facts' willful or as genuine as their ignorance may be.

And actually in this example of carbon emission and global warming if you only ever walk or ride a bike but still consume industrially produced animal flesh you are only part of the way to making any meaningful contribution to reducing your impact on global climate change. (See UN and numerous other reports on the climate impacts of meat eating.)

Food is of obvious vital importance to human health and well-being, and the over consumption of animal products is at the nexus of current and future concerns involving:

1. human health issues (cancer, heart attacks, childhood obesity, diseases from bio-accumulated toxins in the environment and from the naturally occurring and added hormones and chemicals in industrial meat. etc),
   
2. environmental (soil erosion/loss, water contamination, air pollution, over fishing, species diversity loss,  global warming, role of key species in environmental vitality etc.),
   
3. animal welfare (animal kindred-ness, individual right to life of not just species but individual animals; our role in the pain, suffering and killing of fellow beings, etc.) and
   
4. spiritual (karma, ahimsa, non-violence, well-being, bodily incorporation of pain and suffering, disease and death, vampirism - eating of flesh and blood manifests in the bloodlust quest for more flesh and blood inherent in violence against others, such as hunting, domestic violence, war.).

Here's to all who are at least aware enough, interested enough and concerned enough to even engage in the conversation about best approaches for personal, organizational and societal transformation necessary for our and the planet's health and well-being.

Good luck to all of us.

Here are a couple articles that I came upon recently that relate to these matters of diet, human health and the environmental impacts (in this example of global climate change) of the human animals' mass consumption of other animals.

STUDY OF THE WEEK:
HUMAN GUINEA PIGS EAT APE DIET
In a British experiment filmed for television, nine volunteers agreed to set-up camp in a zoo and eat an ape's diet for 12 days. The goal of the experiment was to create a visual documentary of the types of reactions that would take place from giving up standard processed foods in favor of a diet eaten for hundreds of millions of years by our ancestors. The diet included 2,300 calories of fruits, vegetables, nuts and honey each day. Fish oil was introduced part way through the experiment to reflect a hunter-gatherer's diet. Once getting over withdrawal symptoms from caffeine and excitotoxins in their standard diets, the volunteers reported increased energy levels. Experiment volunteers all lost weight and substantially decreased cholesterol and blood pressure levels.

Learn more: http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_3847.cfm...

TIP OF THE WEEK:
THE MEAT YOU EAT IS CRANKING UP THE HEAT

The United Nations has sent tremors through the livestock industry with a new report that states, "The livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global." The report shows that livestock production accounts for more greenhouse gases than automobiles. For every calorie of meat consumed, at least ten calories of fossil fuels were required to produce that meat. Animal agriculture takes up 70% of all agricultural land, and 30% of the total land surface of the planet. Today, 70% of "slash-and-burned" Amazon rainforest is used for pastureland, and feed crops cover much of the remainder. The ultimate ramifications of the report suggest that the average American can do more to reduce global warming emissions by adjusting their meat eating habits than by switching to driving the most fuel efficient car currently on the market. Negative environmental impacts can be greatly reduced by reducing (or eliminating) meat consumption and buying locally grown and sustainably produced meats, dairy and animal products.

Learn more: http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_3853.cfm...

and since Michael Pollan's essay was cited and his writings discussed in this thread you may also be interested in:

Engaging with the Omnivore
The Satya Interview with Michael Pollan
http://www.satyamag.com/sept06/pollan.html

Pollan: "Where I have the utmost respect for vegans and vegetarians is, unlike most of us, they give a lot of thought to the implications of their eating decisions. That's the big step, to pay attention and play out the ramifications of what happens when you eat this and not that. If you come out at a slightly different place--willing to eat a certain kind of meat under certain circumstances, or no meat or no animal products at all--that matters less to me than the fact you've undergone that exercise. If more people were conscious about their eating decisions, many problems would end. I feel a lot of solidarity with vegetarians because they've taken the biggest step, which is to start thinking."
On Why the vegetarian critique of meat-eating should make meat-eaters squirm posted 2 years, 10 months ago 103 Responses

seal and dolphin "hunts"

I think even most hunters wouldn't call clubbing and pick axing baby seals to death and driving dolphins into the shallows and slitting their troats to bleed out as 'hunting' but rather more acurately 'slaughter', 'kills' or even the term poo poo'd by the anthro-centric 'evironmentalists' in recent posts: 'murder'.

In the various recent posts by Grist 'environmentalist'/hunting enthusiasts it seems to me that these folks have more in common with the government enforcers and slaughter industry flesh purveyours than environmental or animal protection/welfare/rights activists and organizations.

Both the annual Canadian seal pup slaughter and Japanese dolphin drive slaughters prompt a convergence of enviro and AR advocates as Jason and others have urged in these various blog posting and threads of recent weeks.

It saddens me that the majority of Grist blog posters who consider themselves to be environmentalists side with those harming the enviroment and killing wildlife than aligning with the movement/philosophy they claim to be affiliated with.

to wit:

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/sep2006/2006-09-21-03.asp

Conservationists, Scientists Outraged by Japanese Dolphin Hunt

WASHINGTON, DC, September 21, 2006 (ENS) - Conservationists, scientists and zoo and aquarium professionals have renewed efforts to stop Japan's annual dolphin hunt, which began this month and is expected to kill more than 20,000 dolphins and porpoises. The Japanese government says the "drive hunts" are necessary because the animals compete with local fishermen for limited supplies of fish, but critics argue the practice is unnecessary and inhumane.

see also:

Tajii dolphin:
http://www.earthisland.org/saveTaijiDolphins/

http://www.seashepherd.org/taiji/
Each year from October through March, in small towns across Japan, thousands of dolphins and small whales are confined and brutally killed. These slaughters take place in fishing towns including Taiji, Iki, Ito, Futo and Izu. During those months, Japanese fishermen herd whole families and pods of dolphins, porpoises and small whales into shallow bays and mercilessly hack them to death. Most of these small cetaceans are sold as meat in restaurants and stores, while some are destined for a life in captivity.

In addition to the small cetaceans being massacred on the beaches, Japan kills approximately 100,000 more marine mammals

and

seal info:
http://www.seashepherd.org/seals/
Canada's commercial seal "hunt" is the largest mass slaughter of marine mammals in the world.
    *  The slaughter of seals is incredibly cruel (a post mortem survey has shown that 42% of these babies are skinned alive)
    * It is a threat to the survival of the species
    * It is a threat to the survival of cod
    * It is a slaughter done mainly for unessential, vanity, and luxury items, and therefore, is unnecessary
    * It is unethical to slaughter newborn seal pups (About 95% of the seals to be slaughtered are babies less than four weeks old) On If environmentalism doesn't include animal welfare, why not? posted 3 years, 2 months ago 65 Responses

No body gets hurt

Satya Magazine is a great publication that is working at the nexus of environmental, animal, vegetarian and spirtual matters that this thread has been egaged with. In their August issue they dispel many of the myths discussed here about veganism:
http://www.satyamag.com/aug06/index.html

and if your particular myth belief is about high-performance athletes having to eat flesh and blood or drink lactates (or take steriods for that matter) and that vegans are wimps,
here are a few of my friends you may want to know about:

http://www.idausa.org/worldgovegandays.html
http://www.veganmusclepower.com/
http://www.idausa.org/worldgovegandays.html

and some of you may know of the great Olympic champion Carl Lewis:
http://earthsave.org/lifestyle/carllewis.htm

a group active specifically in promoting the performance enhancement of veg and organics to athletes is:http://www.organicathlete.org

Members of OrganicAthlete's Pro-Activist Team are elite and professional athletes from many different sports who live and support a vegan diet and lifestyle.  They're using their collective voice to champion the benefits of a healthy plant-based diet for athletes of all ages and abilities.

if your sports tend toward the Xtreme,
http://www.petakids.com/feat/xtremeVeg/index.html

other vegan athlete links:
http://www.veganathlete.com/

As Kenneth G. Williams, a natural body-building champion, vegan, environmentalist, animal activist and all around surperb human being says:
Go Vegan ... and No body gets hurt!

thanks to everyone for contributing to this thread and thanks to Grist for affording the forum to this vitally important conversation.On No environmentalism is complete without consideration of animal welfare posted 3 years, 2 months ago 64 Responses