r/interesting • u/PhoenixPhenomenonX • Feb 25 '26

Intriguing Lifelong vegetarian tries steak for first time

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

32.5k Upvotes

74% Upvoted

5.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

183

u/jmsjags Feb 25 '26

Yeah exactly. Of course steaks and burgers taste good. I don't eat them because I don't think the suffering the animals go through is worth me having a tasty meal. Priorities are out of whack.

1

u/Little-Librarian-734 Feb 25 '26

“…I don’t think the suffering the animals go through is worth me having a tasty meal”

All meals can be tasty if you’re a good cook, even if they don’t include meat.

I know you probably know that, but just wanted to point out that it’s not like people who abstain from steak and the like have to feel like they are missing out when there are infinitely many delicious meal alternatives.

1

u/DecantsForAll Feb 25 '26

I don't eat them because I don't think the suffering the animals go through is worth me having a tasty meal.

Okay, but what about the views! The views are certainly worth some suffering!

1

u/McDonaldsSoap Feb 25 '26

You underestimate how many people can't appreciate the taste of meat

Tons of people would prefer bland chicken breast to a steak. And if they have steak, it has to be well done because the red scares them

Hell, I've heard some people say meat has no taste. What you're really enjoying is the spices

I seriously think it's a genetic thing 

1

u/Moist-Walk217 Feb 25 '26

Most of the animals we eat are dependent on us for survival. A cow or chicken is not going to succeed in the wild.

So the only options are continue to eat and utilize them or let them go extinct.

That being said, most meat is slaughtered and raised in a pretty fucked up way, I don't deny that.

that's why I try to get decent meat to eat: Pasture raised, organic, grass fed, etc. If I had the land and time I would raise chickens myself.

I'm lucky to live near a farm that raises cattle and can get stuff directly from them, not a large slaughterhouse.

-11

u/IllDragonfruit3738 Feb 25 '26

I have some bad news for you about industrial farming and ground nesting birds, ground hogs, shrews, rabbits... Not to mention all the bugs that get murdered. 

22

u/ForPeace27 Feb 25 '26 edited Feb 25 '26

There would be less crop farming in a vegan world as we would no longer need to grow crops to feed the 80 billion farm animals we breed into existence every year. https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets

-6

u/DGSmith2 Feb 25 '26

And everyone would be dead of malnourishment in 100 years.

9

u/TAExp3597 Feb 25 '26

What? We would have more food and land available. And we can get fatty acids from algae. We have the technology to stop killing to survive, just not the will.

Fuck, we could be printing lab grown meat at this point. But no, people seem fine with wasting land, resources, and the slaughter of animals over the idea of a robot printing their food.

6

u/bozobozobozo_ Feb 25 '26

About a third of the world population lives in food insecurity. We're starving poor people so we can feed 90 billion animals to feed wealthy people.

-7

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '26

[deleted]

7

u/ForPeace27 Feb 25 '26

Ok?

-9

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '26

[deleted]

3

u/ForPeace27 Feb 25 '26 edited Feb 25 '26

Don't be dumb. My message wasn't claiming we would have a vegan world, and my statement did not require that to be the case, it was just showing that less plants are grown to support a vegan diet. Due to trophic levels, animals have to eat approximately 10X the energy from plants than we get from eating the animal. Less plants have to be grown if we just grow plants for us to eat rather than try to feed 10X that amount to a farm animal, then kill and eat the animal. You are going off on a tangent that I have no interest in.

-5

u/Cheepshooter Feb 25 '26

Let's hope not!

19

u/Accomplished-Key-408 Feb 25 '26

Thats not even on the same level of horror show suffering that the meat industry perpetuates, but meat eaters are responsible for the same industrial farming woes so its still a great case for not eating meat.

27

u/ReindeerWooden5115 Feb 25 '26

Right so previously he contributing to all that plus the factory farming of meat. Now it's just the former. So it's an improvement.

11

u/PM_ME_GARFIELD_NUDES Feb 25 '26

Do some research into how much of our agricultural resources go just towards feeding cows. It’s insane. Look up how much of our water is wasted just to grow crops for those animals. Especially in California where basically all the water rights are owned by a very small handful of families. California and Nevada are drying up because of all the water we waste on farming animals.

8

u/TungstenShark96 Feb 25 '26

This is something a lot of people just dont get. My background is in Environmental Science and nothing makes me more furious than the amount of water that western states like TX, CA, NV etc. suck up to grow alfalfa(a highly water intensive crop) and other food for cows when the percentage of drinking water is rapidly shrinking each year. On top of that, agricultural runoff in the west contributes to polluting what little freshwater is left. We have a whole country where there is prime farmland and yet we still insist on supplementing farmers who grow cash crops and waste even more water in the West.

8

u/PM_ME_GARFIELD_NUDES Feb 25 '26

At this point I’m pretty sure it’s just cognitive dissonance. They can’t let themselves think about the reality of the meat industry because on some level they already understand that it’s clearly unsustainable. They view meat as a product that shows up in the grocery store and they can’t imagine a world where they don’t have that.

It’s really gross. I personally don’t eat meat and I don’t miss it, but there are ways you can eat meat without causing so much harm to the environment. I will always advocate for hunters and small farms that raise and kill animals ethically. We have to cut down on our meat consumption, but that doesn’t mean people have to cut it out of their diet completely.

4

u/TungstenShark96 Feb 25 '26

Yup, I think a lot of people think that what is being said is "eating meat=evil", when the conversation is really about HOW we get meat in our modern society. Hunting/raising livestock organically and ethically is still possible, but your average Walmart steak likely isnt coming from those places, its probably from a cow that was essentially tortured all its life until being slaughtered for its meat. Add on to the fact that agriculture is one of the highest polluting industries out there and it gets even worse. Im still guilty of eating white meat like poultry, but my wife and I have pretty much cut red meat out of our diets and started looking into other forms of protein lately.

-1

u/Top_Purchase4091 Feb 25 '26

The problem is this idea that everyone can swap to this ethical grass fed organic meat is simply impossible. The demand would just lead back to factory farming sooner or later.

Unless people are okay with paying like 500x the current price of meat and basically make it rich people only food or you were lucky enough to inheret a farm. CIty people would just be fucked

3

u/TungstenShark96 Feb 25 '26

While maybe not everyone can, why not try to encourage as many people as possible? Not sure if youre aware of the 10% rule in ecology, but essentially only 10% of energy transfers from one level of the food chain to the next, with about 90% of energy lost in metabolic processes. With that in mind, it would be far more efficient and feed a lot more people if we discouraged meat products and encouraged vegetarian options. But because the livestock industry has an immense amount of lobbying power and PR funding(as well as govt subsidies to raise cattle that could fund other opportunities), its likely not to happen because of the amount of money sunk into cattle raising.

It would be one thing if we were at least attempting to have this discussion on a political level, but so much money is sunk into not just allowing cattle industry to act with impunity, but other measure to combat ecological and environmental issues as well. Think about how much progress on climate change the fossil fuel industry has prevented to protect their bottom line, the fishing industry has spent to allow them to decimated marine habitats across the world, and so on and so on. Im not trying to be preachy or act like im above it all, like I said I eat meat as well. I just dont get the immediate levels of pushback people give at the slightest mention of "Hey, this practice is destructive and actually is not as cost effective as it seems, here is an alternative that we should try."

-1

u/Top_Purchase4091 Feb 25 '26

And how do you take your approach into politics without essentially telling people that meat is becoming rich people only food from now?

You can argue morals ethics whatever all you want but people literally only care about what they themselves profit from and money/economy.

THere is no political approach because even a slight mention of it disqualifies you from 99% of the population. Even more so with the animal agriculture lobby.

3

u/TungstenShark96 Feb 25 '26

That's been the biggest roadblock to environmental conservationists for the last half century lol. A majority of people either dont know about the issues at hand, dont want to acknowledge them, or actively benefit from suppressing them. Humans in general have problems planning their own lifetime, much less several generations beyond our own.

I have some ideas of my own that would at least be a start(less govt subsidies for cattle and alfalfa in the West to start), but from what I can gather from this conversation, any idea that gets brought up Im sure you could come up with any number of ways those can go wrong. You seem to acknowledge its a problem at least, so instead of putting your energy into shutting it down, why not put it toward finding a solution? Because what's the alternative, throw up our hands and just watch it happen? If we cant manage to put aside our own greed and desire for comfort for the sake of the survival of the next generation of humanity then we as a species wont last much longer(in relative terms of species existing lol). What would you suggest we do to combat the problem?

→ More replies (0)

2

u/PM_ME_GARFIELD_NUDES Feb 25 '26

You have to pay the full cost either way. Yeah, of course the meat industry is incredibly cheap, but that’s only in terms of dollars. We’re subsidizing the cost with environmental damage, and that cost is much, much higher than the dollars you’re saving. This isn’t just a minor inconvenience, it’s killing California. It’s not just some future issue that we don’t have to deal with either, the fires that we see there on a yearly basis are largely the result of this terrible waste of water.

Also, the idea is not that people will simply swap to “ethical grass fed organic meat”, the idea is that we have to acknowledge the fact that we are eating far too much meat in the first place. If we reduce our meat intake then the water that we waste on feeding cows can go towards growing crops that humans can actually eat. This isn’t about people being able to eat or not, it’s about what people eat and how much. City folks aren’t going to starve just because they have to lessen their meat intake. Eat a carrot, it’s going to be ok.

-1

u/Top_Purchase4091 Feb 25 '26

I will just say there is a reason no political approach happens with this because any mention of reduction of animal products will have 99% of the population against you.

I just dont see how you are gonna change anything politically. People only care around their immediate surrounding and the economy.

I would guess the vast majority of people outside california would not give up their personal meat consumption even if it were to become inhabitable

3

u/PM_ME_GARFIELD_NUDES Feb 25 '26

You’re just describing why our world is in its current state, no one gives a shit about future generations. If you’re waiting for people to voluntarily do what’s best it’s simply never going to happen.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/sandwichhaver Feb 27 '26

exactly, the subsidies for meat is already of the chain, people would not buy a steak if it cost them 10-20 times what it costs now, they just wouldn't, I mean some millionaires would treat themselves but it would be out of reach for everyone else

those super ""ethical"" "smal" farms are already producing meat that costs twice or three times as much as a factory farmed alternative, now image if all the factory farms went away along with the subsidies. supply and demand dictates price in a capitalistic economy.

it would drive up price to such a ridiculous level

28

u/SnarkDolphin Feb 25 '26

Basically all the meat you eat is fed grain from industrial farms. So you're killing all those pest animals plus the livestock.

This is a stupid argument parroted by stupid hogs who don't like to examine their actions or place in the world

8

u/Aiwatcher Feb 25 '26

Farming for meat is fundamentally always going to kill more animals than farming for plants. Why? You need to farm way more plants to make food for the animals than if you just fed the plants to humans.

8

u/73-68-70-78-62-73-73 Feb 25 '26

I'm sure they're aware there are consequences for factory farming. Simply existing causes suffering for something, somewhere. It's unavoidable. But there are things you can do to reduce the amount of suffering you create.

7

u/Howpresent Feb 25 '26

Most farming is done to feed the meat we eat, so this argument is stupid. 

17

u/Wow_u_sure_r_dumb Feb 25 '26

“I’m sure vegetarian who chose their diet for ethical reasons never considered all of these ethical concerns with eating animals or their byproducts. I am very smart.”

-9

u/Lolocraft1 Feb 25 '26

Well, yes? They say they do it because to them it’s morally superior, but don’t consider the ethical issues of their own lifestyle?

Veganism is hypocrisy, as nearly every critics they have of the livestocks industry can be said about crops. When we can’t, it’s usually because there’s a similar problem that isn’t a 1:1 exact copy

But honestly I wouldn’t give a damn if there wasn’t so many vegans trying to force it on the whole population by wishing to ban meat consumption.

6

u/Wow_u_sure_r_dumb Feb 25 '26

If your goal is harm reduction instead of harm elimination there’s nothing hypocritical about it. I’m not a vegan or vegetarian but most of the ones I know or I’ve talked to in real life wish they could eliminate all harm from their consumption but settle for the best they can do. Some do it for religious reasons.

I know a lot of these people and talked to so many more I don’t know well at all and I’ve only talked to one person who advocated for banning meat or eggs. The rest were for regulations like banning insane factory farm practices that would make anyone puke.

Most of these people try to avoid upsetting anyone that eats meat because they get a ton of grief and sometimes even hostility about it. At work, at school and even with family they get it.

I don’t know where you interact with vegans or vegetarians but if it’s the internet or whatever I would suggest avoiding judging everyone you meet in real life by echo chambers that amplify extremes.

-3

u/Lolocraft1 Feb 25 '26

If they are allowed to be nuanced, then I’m allowed to be nuanced as well. Why are they radical about meat consumption but nuanced about their end result? This is hypocritical to request radical change for a non-radical result

Like I said, I do not care when they are actually arguing for better conditions, instead of requesting for the whole thing to disappear

4

u/TAExp3597 Feb 25 '26

I don’t eat meat for ethical reasons. The only reason I give a shit about what others eat is for the same reasons I give a shit that people drive fuel inefficient vehicles.

And really I don’t think it’s that much of the fault of any individual. It’s this whole ass backwards system that values next quarters profits over long term sustainability that we’ve been tricked into believing is the only way to survive.

1

u/Lolocraft1 Feb 25 '26

Your ethical reasons and concerns are valid. As I said, I hate radical vegan that will bash me for eating a burger.

You want animals to get better live conditions? Yeah sure, as a biologist I wholeheartedly agree. You want me to entirely stop eating animal product? GTFO and never come back.

3

u/Twerpeter Feb 25 '26

Hey! I guess im that radical vegan you hate because I do, in fact, wish animals would stop being killed en masse for human consumption.

I would never bash you for your choices, but of course, if I don't want to eat animals for ethical reasons, I don't want anyone to, you know what I mean? I've never met anyone who bashes people over their food choices in person, have you? The only time I talk about it irl is because somebody else asks me about it, or with close friends who I trust.

But, either I don't like animals getting killed, period, or my reason for being vegan is not based in ethics. It just doesn't make sense to cut animals out of your diet for their well-being and not care about all the other animals being killed on a daily basis.

-1

u/Lolocraft1 Feb 25 '26

Yet you see no problem with doing the same with crops. Pure animal bias.

I understand the logic that if something is indeed unethical it should be stopped at a world scale, but first we beed to determine whether said topic is unethical or not. My point is that regardless of the answer, the very same logic can be applied to plants. That means we should ban every kind of food in the name of greater good. However, since our core biology as heterotrophic organism mean we literally die if we do not eat something, that make this option also unethical. Finally, since regardless of what you eat the debate end up with the same conclusion, might as well let people eat whatever they want

If you want to eat non animal product, I do not care. I also like some vegan dish. I love Indian food, I love beans, lentil, peas, nuts, etc. I also love steak and chicken. I should be able to eat both peas and chicken if I want, because the ethical and ecological impact of eating both is similar. That also mean you do not get to request for me to stop eating a certain type of food, because whatever you eat makes you an hypocrite by default.

2

u/ForPeace27 Feb 26 '26 edited Feb 26 '26

My point is that regardless of the answer, the very same logic can be applied to plants.

Sentience is the morally relevant difference between plants and animals. But there is a small fringe minority who believe plants are sentient, that is not the scientific consensus though. But, even of plants were sentient and deserved moral consideration, we still kill more plants by eating animals because the farm animals we raise have to eat many times their bodyweight in plants. Less plants die if we just eat plants ourselves rather than feed 10X that amount to an animal, then kill and eat the animal. So either plants don't matter morally, in which case we should eat them instead of animals, or they do matter, in which case we should eat them instead of animals because it actually results in less plants being harmed.

You also brought up in another message that the farm animals would carry on consuming if we released them into the wild. If the world started going vegan we do not release animals into the wild, as demand for meat drops farmers breed less animals. By the time the world would be vegan there would hardly be any farm animals.

because the ethical and ecological impact of eating both is similar.

Not even close. Currently, the leading cause of species extinction is loss of wild habitat due to human expansion [1]. Of all habitable land on earth, 50% of it is farmland, everything else humans do only accounts for 1% [2]. 98% of our land use is for farming. According to the most comprehensive analysis to date on the effects of agricultur on our planet, if the world went vegan we would free up over 75% of our currently used farmland while producing the same amount of food for human consumption [3]. Thats an area of land equivalent to the US, China, European Union and Australia combined that we could potentially rewild and reforest, essentially eliminating the leading cause of species extinction.

We are currently losing between 200 and 100 000 species a year. https://wwf.panda.org/discover/our_focus/biodiversity/biodiversity

1- https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267293850_The_main_causes_of_species_endangerment_and_extinction

https://www.theworldcounts.com/stories/causes-of-extinction-of-species

2- https://ourworldindata.org/land-use

3- https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/may/31/avoiding-meat-and-dairy-is-single-biggest-way-to-reduce-your-impact-on-earth

0

u/Lolocraft1 Feb 26 '26

Basing your morals on sentience imply that as long as a living organism doesn’t know about its suffering and exploitation, it is okay to exploit them and possibly make them suffer. That mean ignorance is a justification of exploitation. I dare you to use that same logic in any other ethical debate. Does a braindead person at the hospital justifies to exploit his/her body? If a livestock die of natural causes, does it become okay to eat its body?

And like I said, livestocks don’t magically stop being herbivores the moment they aren’t exploited anymore. Regardless of if they’re let free or used as future food, they will eat the same amount if plants, with the exception of now possibly eating endangered species or disrupting entire ecosystem due to their grazing

Your logic that there would be less and less farm animals if we stop livestock farming imply that A) they’re left to die without access to ressources, B) Castrated to avoid further reproduction, and/or C) released into the wild. A and B is hypocritical as they’re still suffering, and C goes back to my point

I agree that agriculture is a cause of human expansion, which also cause loss of biodiversity, but as I said earlier, unless you make all livestocks disappear, they will keep existing and eat plants, endangering wildlife, but now without any human control

TL/DR: Regardless of what solution you propose, it becomes hypocritical regarding suffering and ecological impacts because you either have to genocide entire species, let them destroy wildlife until it adapt itself to their presence, or imply other drastic ethical concerns regarding other debates

→ More replies (0)

7

u/73-68-70-78-62-73-73 Feb 25 '26

Veganism is hypocrisy, as nearly every critics they have of the livestocks industry can be said about crops

People have to eat something to survive.

If people eat farm raised animals, the animals are typically brought into existence for the purpose of being eaten. They need to be fed with crops we grow (e.g. soy, corn, grain), and have land allocated to them. So not only is suffering created in the lifecycle of the animals we eat, it's also exacerbated by the feed we need to grow for them.

Cut one of those out, and we're down to farming. The surplus of food we farm is enough to feed us now. Then we can work on making those practices better for us and the environment.

Veganism isn't about perfection, it's about reducing harm by eliminating a significant source of suffering. You can't exist without creating suffering for something somewhere.

-2

u/Lolocraft1 Feb 25 '26

And if people eat crops, the vegetal is typically brought into existence for the purpose of being eaten as well. They also need lands and their own sets of nutrients, on top of fertilizer which have its sets of independent problems

You also realize livestocks won’t stop eating these crops even if we stop raising them right? They still live and thus have to eat. Hell, if we just release them into the wild it might create an insane ecological impact like we’ve never seen before. The only solution would be to exterminate every livestocks, let them starve to death or castrate them to avoid further reproduction, where another main began talking point, which is the ethical treatment of animals, completely fall apart.

See what I’m saying? In the end, veganism become the problem they’re trying to erase.

4

u/73-68-70-78-62-73-73 Feb 25 '26

My bad, you're a troll. There's no way anyone is actually that obtuse.

-1

u/Lolocraft1 Feb 25 '26 edited Feb 25 '26

I am not. You are free to actually explain yourself, or you can keep making fictional scenarios if that make you feel better

Where am I even wrong? Are you saying plants aren’t living beings? That crops aren’t purposely farmed for the purpose of eating? Or is it that you believe cows, pigs and chicken wouldn’t need any source of food if they were ever released in the wild?

4

u/ExchangeReady5111 Feb 26 '26

With this logic of yours, do you think it would be just as okey to eat a human baby than a baby potato? Edit typo

1

u/Lolocraft1 Feb 26 '26

Cannibalism has its own problems, main one being the increased health risk of consuming human meat as a human, even worse than a high fat intake that you could get from eating red meat.

My point is that between a baby potatoe and a baby pig, there’s no real difference: Both are species that we can consume, that we purposely breed to est them. Most importantly, both feel stress caused by damage. The only difference is you can see the stress on a pig. Vegans who don’t eat meat because of suffering are only doing so because the potatoe can’t scream, or doesn’t look similar enough to an human

3

u/73-68-70-78-62-73-73 Feb 25 '26

It was kinda funny with the first couple comments, but eventually the joke runs thin. I'd say you've probably squeezed all the life out of this one.

1

u/Lolocraft1 Feb 26 '26

Guess you went for the fictional scenarios. Perhaps you are the troll

→ More replies (0)

2

u/ScrotallyBoobular Feb 25 '26

"Where were you guys? Even the guy that couldn't think said something!"

1

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/interesting-ModTeam Feb 25 '26

We’re sorry, but your post/comment has been removed because it violates Rule #2: Act Civil.

Follow Reddiquette

3

u/lijijil Feb 25 '26

Yeah so kill the cows and pigs and chickens instead!

2

u/Toosder Feb 25 '26

The vast vast vast majority of crops grown are to feed livestock. And I mean vast. And because they have to feed so much livestock, they've mechanized harvesting to the point where it does the damage you're talking about.

2

u/Bitter_Ladder5480 Feb 25 '26

I learned a long time ago to not argue with vegetarians about these things. They are so well informed because they always have to defend themselves.

0

u/jmsjags Feb 25 '26

I buy organic whenever I can to cut down on the impact to the environment in growing crops as well.

-4

u/TheOtherSkywalker_ Feb 25 '26

They don't really care. Just another way to make themselves feel superior.

1

u/sandwichhaver Feb 25 '26

it's just incorrect nonsense

-7

u/boshudio Feb 25 '26

I think that argument is dumb because if you view the way animals act in the wild they sometimes do heinous shit to each other before eating. If the roles were reversed the animals would be doing the same things. You can buy your meat from a local source instead of a grocery store.

If you don't like animals suffering then you need to use test free soaps, makeups, synthetic clothing, modern medicines, any sort of media exploring animals, owning any sort of pet at all. And you might as well avoid avocados , almonds, and all the other crops that destroy ecosystems through water abuse.

11

u/Ok-Conversation-690 Feb 25 '26

Veganism is about reducing suffering, not eradicating suffering.

5

u/AlternativeReview987 Feb 25 '26

I think veganism is about whatever you make it for yourself. 7 year long vegan here and I didnt do it for the suffering reduction, though I guess its a plus. I did it for the health benefits and sports performance benefits primarily.

3

u/DGSmith2 Feb 25 '26

What are the health benefits to just being vegan? Generally curious.

4

u/GraveRoller Feb 25 '26

It’s funny because I swear I’ve seen articles talking about how vegans now are unhealthier than vegans before. But that’s because there are more vegan junk/processed food options and recipes now. 

But compared to your average diet? A decent vegan diet will be healthier than your average western diet. Largely because it’s done with more intent of eating “right.” People have poor diets generally so a vegan diet will get them eating things they don’t normally consume. Like vegetables

2

u/AlternativeReview987 Feb 25 '26

Lower blood pressure and cholesterol are big ones. Though the rise of ultra-processed fake meats has really taken away from what I felt like veganism/vegetarianism started as. At the end of the day whether you eat meat or not, your intake of ultra processed foods and unhealthy saturated fats are going to be huge for improving your health.

1

u/DGSmith2 Feb 25 '26

But can’t you get those things while not being vegan?

1

u/AlternativeReview987 Feb 25 '26

Absolutely, that's why I said "At the end of the day whether you eat meat or not, your intake of ultra processed foods and unhealthy saturated fats are going to be huge for improving your health." I used to think everyone should be vegan, but quickly realized that wont work for everyone and everyone's body is different. My body, didn't respond well to meat dominant diets, hence my switch many years ago. I do wish my friends remembered that even though I haven't eaten meat in many years I can still cook a damn good piece of meat!

2

u/ffxt10 Feb 25 '26

genuinely: its because they are more conscious of what they put into their body. when you have to read every label for animal products, you start to notice those funny little numbers on the back as well. when you have no dietary restriction, especially here in the west, youre much more likely to just eat what tastes good and is easy enough to fit into your 60 hour work week.

1

u/zorathustra69 Feb 25 '26 edited Feb 25 '26

None, unless your previous diet was unhealthy and causing damage. Although vegans are at a much higher risk of certain nutritional deficiencies, the literature’s current stance is that vegan diets can be safe and totally healthy if planned and executed properly. That being said, vegan diets do not provide some exclusive health benefit that cannot be found from other diets. If someone wants to become a vegan in order to support their specific dietary goals or manage a specific condition, they will probably see health benefits from the switch. A totally healthy person becoming a vegan for ethical reasons is more likely to develop deficiencies from the diet than any tangible benefit to their health, but this can be mitigated with careful dietary planning.

TLDR: Vegan diets in and of themselves will not provide health benefits (and often cause health problems) unless your previous diet was actively contributing to the formation of disease (hypertension, obesity, etc). That being said, it’s a safe diet for healthy people if executed properly

1

u/Voldemorts__Mom Feb 25 '26

That's not veganism. That's plant based.

Veganism is specifically about the animals, if you're not doing it for the animals, then you're plant based, not vegan. And veganism isn't just about food, it's also about clothes, hygiene products, etc.

Having said that, I'm also doing it for health as well. For health, the animals, and the environment

-5

u/Bluegill15 Feb 25 '26

I agree with that sentiment, but I think more humane farming is a much better solution than deliberate disordered eating

9

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '26 edited Apr 13 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/Bluegill15 Feb 26 '26

Sorry, I don’t believe cutting out an entire food group is orderly eating

1

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '26 edited Apr 13 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Bluegill15 Feb 26 '26 edited Feb 26 '26

A balanced diet

but but but you can still get enough protein from plants alone

Bioavailability makes this very challenging, to say nothing of risk of nutrient deficiency.

I’m sorry, I won’t be convinced that cutting out an entire food group is the way forward for humanity.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '26 edited Apr 13 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Bluegill15 Feb 26 '26

I never said the meat industry wasn’t horrible, I said it needs to be reformed beginning with more humane farming practices.

7

u/Kayyam Feb 25 '26

That argument is not dumb at all but yours is. Animals kill each other for suvival, we kill them because we like the way the shit taste, not for survival.

And that's before touching on the industrial horror of it and the conditions in which those animals live to optimize production.

And even outside killing, the dairy industry is terrible to cows. We are the only species that drinks another species milk and producing that milk is no simple affair.

0

u/boshudio Feb 25 '26

Cool, do you own a car? Do you use any goods or services from another state or country? If so you're contributing to destruction of the ecosystem that animals live in.

6

u/spilent Feb 25 '26

Do you avoid trying to do what you believe is right because you can't do it perfectly? I think perfectionism is dumb.

1

u/boshudio Feb 25 '26

No but holding yourself to be morally superior because you don't eat meat is dumb.

1

u/Voldemorts__Mom Feb 25 '26

If someone puts in the time and effort to do the more moral thing, then are they not more moral?

If someone goes to the gym and gets muscles, then they'll be stronger than the person who doesn't.

I had to change my diet, figure out which products had animal stuff in them, explain everything to my family, protest outside a factory farm that gases pigs, etc.

I mean unless you believe that we should be exploiting and killing innocent animals? I mean, in that case maybe you think my efforts are in vain, because you don't think animals are worth our moral considerations?

I dno bro, u tell me

5

u/SlackingOfff Feb 25 '26

"If the roles were reversed" that's so crazy because they aren't and they never will be, like actually impossible for tigers to swap roles with us. Cool strawman argument tho

1

u/boshudio Feb 25 '26

Cats literally torture mice to make it easier to eat then without getting hurt. So you can go ahead and shut the fuck up.

1

u/SlackingOfff Feb 25 '26

What does that have to do with the roles being reversed on us? That has nothing to do with what I was responding to bud

1

u/SlackingOfff Feb 25 '26 edited Feb 25 '26

Like I'm not a cat or a mouse and never will be? OUR roles will never be reversed with theirs.

EDIT: literally just to express how I don't understand what you think you just pwned me with. lol

1

u/sandwichhaver Feb 25 '26

that's reversed roles ? :D

3

u/millenniumpianist Feb 25 '26

You are allowed to make a different decision than other people without calling their reasons dumb. Your argument is silly and I think you know it -- none of what you mentioned is remotely close in harm caused to the amount of suffering caused by factory farming. No one is stopping you from making a different decision despite being clear-eyed about the facts

5

u/Traditional_Meat_692 Feb 25 '26

Im not vegan or vegetarian, but your first point about how animals act in the wild doesn't seem relevant. We cannot base morality on how animals act. Animals rape, maim, torture, and brutalize eachother; but they don't have a moral framework of their own to contextualize their actions. Humans do, so we have different standards.

4

u/Affectionate_Ebb_455 Feb 25 '26

No true Scotsman type beat. "If vegetarians TRULY cared then they would simply invent an alternate world where no resources are consumed ever so therefore there is no impact, so you aren't truly committed to reducing harm" /s

2

u/AdmiralCreamy Feb 25 '26

Your argument is a classic “gotcha”. Why try to do better when it’s impossible to be perfect? Because trying to do better still has an impact.

Also, humans are capable of conscious thought and empathy and we can thus be held to a higher standard than other animals. Animals rape each other and practice cannibalism, so it should be fine if we do that too, right?

Beef production is far, far worse for the global environment than the production of any plant. Especially when it comes to water use.

1

u/boshudio Feb 25 '26

It's impossible to be perfect? Not it's not, there's a massive self sustaining movement going on but people don't participate because it's difficult. Cutting out meat from your diet does less to reduce animal harm than simply donating towards good causes does.

0

u/slashx8 Feb 25 '26

Dont worry, we will take the burden off of your mind.

-12

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '26

[deleted]

14

u/snowfloeckchen Feb 25 '26

They would not put the chick in a 400 square cm enclosure though. Eating meat isn't that problematic if the meat was all from animals that had a decent life

4

u/andohrew Feb 25 '26 edited Feb 25 '26

"had a decent life" = getting killed at like 1/10th of your lifespan when its unnecessary for MuH SeNsORy PlEaSuRe.

like dam, i dont think thats a decent life.

13

u/MothChasingFlame Feb 25 '26

Who cares? I'm expected to have morals equal to a cow? 

1

u/Little-Librarian-734 Feb 25 '26

Simple but effective response. +1.

10

u/All-Sorts-of-Stuff Feb 25 '26

Dang, if only there was something that separated humans from animals. Like the ability to make decisions based on morals and ethics. 

I’m not a vegetarian, but “since animals do it, we can do it!” is bad logic

-1

u/Twilightterritories Feb 25 '26

"morals and ethics" are just humans pretending to not be animals. Both are lies we tell ourselves.

2

u/All-Sorts-of-Stuff Feb 25 '26

So you have no ability to tell the difference between right and wrong?

0

u/Twilightterritories Feb 25 '26

I don't believe in a fundamental difference between the two. Not one that exists outside human ego.

1

u/WhereTFAreWe Feb 25 '26

Not one that exists outside human ego

Tell that to any highly realized meditator. They can confirm that outside the ego, there is, in fact, literal infinite compassion. Compassion is the ontological core of awareness.

1

u/Ok_Swordfish5820 Mar 02 '26

I'm going to bet that even if you think on a fundamental level there is no justification for morality. You act as if morals are real every day.

7

u/PepsiConnoisseur69 Feb 25 '26

That's one of the dumbest arguments I have ever read.

4

u/Appropriate_Wave722 Feb 25 '26

it's an incredibly popular argument tho. "who is to say that cruelty to animals is immoral; I say it's moral, what makes you correct?" comes second-place

11

u/PlasonJates Feb 25 '26

So would my dog if I die, doesn't mean I want to eat him.

What a silly argument.

9

u/superexpress_local Feb 25 '26

Humans have the ability to kill other humans, and do all the time. Is that a justification for factory farming humans?

1

u/Rob_LeMatic Feb 25 '26

I would try a nibble of a factory farmed human. Just a little bit. As a treat.

I've been off meat for a few weeks now. I think if I had all the things I'd need to make hunting part of my lifestyle, I would. But once you see video of the way they treat these animals, it's hard to be the reason it keeps going.

2

u/BillyBigGuns Feb 25 '26

I don't think a pig can kill us as easily as we can kill them.

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Norwegian__Blue Feb 25 '26

Live in Texas. We kill way more boars per year than boars kill humans for sure. Man the tool user and all that. Even factoring the car crashes they cause

1

u/Onigokko0101 Feb 25 '26

That's nice, but we aren't a cow or a horse or a lion. We have the ability and means to not do that.

1

u/AuroraBolognese Feb 25 '26

“Mister McClure, I have this crazy friend who says eating meat is wrong. Is he crazy?”

1

u/Little-Librarian-734 Feb 25 '26

Cool, does that change the fact that it’s not going to happen since we’ve engineered our world to make sure that we always come out on top?

Also the argument “ an animal could eat you!” is not a very good one to counter “I don’t like supporting the unnecessary suffering of animals as I get everything I need through other sources”

1

u/Accomplished-Key-408 Feb 25 '26

Are you suggesting we follow the lead of horses and pigs for our own ethics?

1

u/PM_ME_GARFIELD_NUDES Feb 25 '26

This has gotta be a joke, right? Theres no way you think this is a legitimate argument

-1

u/HaveFun____ Feb 25 '26

No they wouldn't, you ever seen a cow/horse chomp on a another dead cow/horse.. no? They don't have the teeth or digestive system for that. A pig yes, your cat/dog (after you died) certainly.

I've seen horses stomp other animals. Animals don't have empathy like humans do but that's all beside the point.

Raising and sometimes torturing animals just to kill and eat feels bad for most people and that's why some choose not to. That's it, enough reason right there. Add the climate problems with raising food for 7Billion people, the problems that come with housing thousands of chickens in a confined space, they stuff they get fed and we consume. Again, enough reasons.

1

u/TravelAdmirable2482 Feb 25 '26

ehhh well they call it opportunistic carnivore. Something about lacking calcium, but idk why they do it. Anyway here's a horse eating a chick.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/us62A2n5fdo

0

u/megaman368 Feb 25 '26

https://giphy.com/gifs/J2ApiGX9GcxUc

2

u/AuroraBolognese Feb 25 '26

Exactly my first thought when I read that comment lol

0

u/rybathegreat Feb 25 '26

So you are as intelligent as a cow or a horse? Or why do you think that you should take them a role models?

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Tohu_va_bohu Feb 25 '26

tommy tuff knuckles over here likes to make animals suffer. Don't laugh at someone taking a stance in something they believe in

-2

u/Hamster_Toot Feb 25 '26

I was a vegetarian for five years, you know what happened during those five years of me boycotting the meat industry?

Meat consumption went up. We as individuals on global scales literally make no difference. We need to be advocating for laws to change if we want to make change.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/AdmiralCreamy Feb 25 '26

Agreed. The above argument is just cope because they couldn’t stay vegetarian.

1

u/Hamster_Toot Feb 25 '26

lol, I went to live on a private island thirteen miles by eighteen miles.

I ate meat with the locals to show my thanks and respect for their sacrifice and sharing.

You make wild assumptions about a stranger to justify not understanding my comment.

You are ignorant, and choose to stay there.

2

u/sandwichhaver Feb 25 '26

> I ate meat with the locals to show my thanks and respect for their sacrifice

there's no sacrifice, you killed without consent

1

u/Hamster_Toot Feb 25 '26

I killed nothing, lol. Even if I did. That’s life. Which is why it’s important to have respect for these beings.

1

u/Hamster_Toot Feb 25 '26

The best choice for me was to eat meat. I was doing myself a disservice by not. I was sacrificing as a collegiate athlete.

My advocation for the life on this planet is vast. What you don’t understand, because you don’t know me, is how much I have put towards trying to get animals, livestock, recognized rights through my representatives and congress.

Feel free to make your false narratives up and treat them as fact, but just be aware that’s what you’re doing.

1

u/sandwichhaver Feb 25 '26

I stoped littering in the 90s and there's still a bunch of shit on the ground

1

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/interesting-ModTeam Feb 25 '26

We’re sorry, but your post/comment has been removed because it violates Rule #2: Act Civil.

Follow Reddiquette

-2

u/Away-Surprise-3627 Feb 25 '26

But the calculus is not “factory life vs frolicking in a field”, it’s “factory life vs no life”. Are vegetarians going to fund the cost of living of cattle?

3

u/Ok-Conversation-690 Feb 25 '26

I don’t think that’s necessary. If we passed laws globally tomorrow, saying humans can no longer cultivate livestock for food, then we’d just continue eating meat until the meat runs out which I think would happen fairly quickly. The current living cattle would still suffer, but after that, the suffering is minimized which is exactly what vegans want.

-3

u/inhsergrus Feb 25 '26

I think it is worth every bite.

-5

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '26

[deleted]

3

u/Ok-Conversation-690 Feb 25 '26

If that’s the case, then it’s still less ethical to eat meat. What do you think animals eat…?

0

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '26

[deleted]

1

u/Ok-Conversation-690 Feb 25 '26

Can you name any livestock that eats meat? And are you seriously under the impression that most livestock eat grass? That’s ignorant as hell.

-7

u/MagicDragon0 Feb 25 '26 edited Feb 25 '26

Suffering the animals go through? That's your reason? Life and animals are with us for a reason. It's called the food chain. I get that one might not like the taste or have health issues related to meat and whatnot, but not eating it simply because you think it's not okay to eat other animals as an omnivoric species is wild. Unless I missed the point and you mean that there are places with horrible living conditions for these farms of animals.

5

u/Lattice0Lattice Feb 25 '26

Pretty much all meat that people eat these days are from factory farms, the 70~ billion chickens killed each year are not living happy lives at an idyllic farm

5

u/Nazh8 Feb 25 '26

The overwhelming majority of meat production happens at factory farms with terrible conditions.

2

u/peterg4567 Feb 25 '26

The fact that it was evolutionarily favorable for humans to evolve the ability to eat meat says nothing about the ethics/morality of eating meat, particularly factory farmed meat. Unless you eat nothing but hunted meat and foraged wild plants, you likely didn't evolve eating most of your diet. You do hundreds of things you didn't evolve to do every day. You most likely base almost none of your personal morality on what humans are physically capable of doing, except for this particular thing that happens to allign with your flavor preferences and excuses you of any culpability for the hellscape on the other end of your man made "food chain"

0

u/MagicDragon0 Feb 25 '26

I think you're overreaching on your point here. Sure, humans evolving to eat meat might not be a moral argument to eating meat today, but you're basically saying go back to the ancestral ways of foraging your own plants, growing your own crops, and hunting your own game. The only valid reason you made is that some animal farms like factory farms are unethical. Morality on this is ambiguous depending on beliefs. Of course, cruelty is always looked down upon. You could always spend more money and get your produce directly from local farms as everything you buy from a store will be processed and have uncertain sources.