Ethical implications of food?

Options
2»

Replies

  • UponThisRock
    UponThisRock Posts: 4,522 Member
    Options
    -pesticides kill insects

    -insects and small rodents are killed during mechanized farming

    -you have to kill a plant to eat it
  • grapenutSF
    grapenutSF Posts: 648 Member
    Options
    Reading Peter Singer definitely stimulated some interesting thought for me. You may have already read his books but if not, I recommend. And of course there's Michael Pollan for a different perspective.
  • Sydney0710
    Sydney0710 Posts: 61 Member
    Options
    I'm already a vegan, so I know enough about animal agriculture. What I'm wondering is what are the ethical implications of vegan foods? Does the production of my food entail some injustice I'm not aware of? What is the impact of the production of food packaging etc on people and the environment?


    If you think attempting to eat compassionately is BS or that modern agriculture is ethical, don't bother responding. Enough people voice that opinion in my non-virtual life and I'm not here to hear it reiterated.

    Thanks!



    You are asking a question of ethics, but don't want to hear all sides, this sounds more like you are looking for people to agree with you to me.
    Eat how you like, as long as you eat. I do not judge.


    Exactly!
  • MissCheese
    MissCheese Posts: 195 Member
    Options
    I'm all for ethical food production, be it vegetables, grains or meat.

    Vast quantities of pesticides (herbicides & insecticides) are used to produce grains and vegetables which have a negative impact on our environmeny, just look at soy and corn production as examples.

    Organic food production methods reduce the amount of pesticides used but even then they are not eliminated.

    The only way to live ethically is to produce and grown your own food.
  • Kymmy81
    Kymmy81 Posts: 168 Member
    Options
    Reading Peter Singer definitely stimulated some interesting thought for me. You may have already read his books but if not, I recommend. And of course there's Michael Pollan for a different perspective.

    I definitely second the Singer suggestion.
  • caramkoala
    caramkoala Posts: 303 Member
    Options
    awww man!

    I have an awesome picture for this thread and I can't work out how to post it short of starting a flckr or photobucket account. If someone else wants to do it for me, it's here:

    http://hunter-gatherer.com/blog/there-no-such-thing-vegan
  • caramkoala
    caramkoala Posts: 303 Member
    Options
    No-Such-Thing-As-A-Vegan.jpg
  • Marll
    Marll Posts: 904 Member
    Options
    The ethics of veganism are a fantasy. You're not killing less animals by being vegan as the ignorned animals, the smaller nearly invisible kind (mice, rats, rabbits, etc.) are killed by taking away fields and plowing them under after each harvest.

    Estimates show that if all 120,000,000 acres of cropland in the continental United States were used for a vegan diet then approximately 500 million animals would die each year. But if half of the cropland were converted to ruminant pastureland, by contrast, then it is estimated that only 900,000 animals would die each year.

    But it's ok, nobody saw those animals anyway right? I mean a mouse is certainly not the same thing as a cow, killing bigger animals certainly has to be worse than killing smaller ones.
  • KerriFriendi
    KerriFriendi Posts: 2
    Options
    -you have to kill a plant to eat it

    Not even close. Just about all fruit and vegetables are eaten without killing the plant. Yes, roots like carrot/potato will kill the plant, but leaves can be eaten (lettuce) without killing the plant if you have your own garden.
  • TexNut
    TexNut Posts: 53
    Options
    Shannon/peacemongernc:

    The idea of 'bio-availability' also encompasses what we all know: that everything is made of energy; and that energy is neither created nor destroyed. Whole, raw foods impart more energy to our bodies than do cooked, processed foods.

    Check out Kirlian photography of plants (there are tons of sites, but here's one w/some cool pictures: http://www.energymedc.com/kirlian photography.htm). If you watch the video there, take note of the "phantom effect" they discuss (just before the 9-minute mark) when leaves are photographed after having a portion of the leaf removed.

    Populations that grow/raise their food are obviously healthier than those eating the 'Standard American Diet'. I believe that part of this is due to the connection they share with their food sources. (Energy spent tending/nurturing plants and livestock is "invested" in that organism and is "withdrawn" when eaten later.) Of course, they are typically very active populations (as farming and raising animals is no easy task!); which coupled with their lack of processed foods (harmful packaging, hormones, etc that we are all trying to avoid) also keeps them in better health.

Categories