[Closed] Macca on vegetarianism

So, triumphant omnivores "catching us out" because we wear leather shoes or drink milk are probably missing the point. I don't eat my shoes.

I don't care either way, but...you don't eat your shoes, but, by your argument, you wouldn't mind walking round with turds on your feet?

Shall we go, ahem, squirrelling next weekend tazzy? 💡

Shall we go, ahem, squirrelling next weekend tazzy?

it's a date darling, I'll show you where to bury your nuts for winter

walking round with turds on your feet, now that's not very attractive or becoming of a wholesome Stwer.

I'm not fussed either way about what people eat. I don't eat meat because it grosses me out and I don't like the taste.

It does annoy me when because I'm vegetarian people start spouting rubbish like saying about how much extra space we'd need to grow grain if everyone was veggie, or how many more animals would get killed by farming all that grain. When it is pretty obvious to even the most dumb assed of people that animals also eat grain, so to eat animals requires far more grain or vegetables to be grown than to eat a vegetarian diet.

I don't think there's a moral point to be made either way - we all pick an arbitrary point at which we stop eating things, unless we're cannibals. But there is certainly a very clear environmental argument if you like that sort of thing.

I quite like to nibble nuts before burying them tazzy. Especially if they're coated in that milky morning dew.

it's a date darling, I'll show you where to bury your nuts for winter

3D.

by your argument, you wouldn't mind walking round with turds on your feet?

Slippers?

Or some other form of turdy footwear?

It does annoy me when because I'm vegetarian people start spouting rubbish like saying about how much extra space we'd need to grow grain if everyone was veggie, or how many more animals would get killed by farming all that grain. When it is pretty obvious to even the most dumb assed of people that animals also eat grain, so to eat animals requires far more grain or vegetables to be grown than to eat a vegetarian diet.

We-ell, how can I put this. Obviousness and dumb-assedness aside, that's not quite right I'm afraid. Purely from a land perspective, it's more efficient to let animals eat crops and then eat animals. If the whole world was vegetarian, we wouldn't have the farmland to feed everybody.

Grass, anyone?

zokes your right we seem to have weight well under control with out current diet. Good point well made

Yes, and that's clearly caused by people eating meat, as opposed to just eating too much whilst not exercising enough. 🙄

Excellent post Cougar, I can never be arsed arguing with meat eaters about my dietary choices, I may print that and have it as a handout!

The one meat eater bingo one you missed out was, 'eeew, you're vegetarian, what [i]DO[/i] you eat then?'

Wasn't there a scientific report recently showing that the earth is loosing top soil and top soil nutrients at an alarming rate to the point that without significant chemical and human input the worlds crop growing capacity is going to be massively reduced? Looks like people arw back on the menu and it'll help with the over population issue as well.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/agriculture/farming/6828878/Britain-facing-food-crisis-as-worlds-soil-vanishes-in-60-years.html

The biggest threat to food security, however, is still that we're crap at the logistical side of getting it to where it's needed, rather than not being able to grow enough of it

I've never known tazzy not to secure meat in the most suitable spot. No logistics problems at his sausage parties.

No logistics problems at his sausage parties.

ahhhhh DD, those days of wiener action are well past.

I'm far more interested in some form of cattle based haberdashery these days.

[img] [/img]

Soooooooo.

That was how you spent your Sunday night then ?.
😯

Yes, I've read it all. In response to the OP. Is eating meat becoming unfashionable then ?.

Anyway, I'm not entirely sure, but I suspect most of you are Human...
Furthermore, I'm not sure you can change that, you know, give it back or something.

Humans evolved to become a top level predator and ultimately to achieve dominion over the Earth. On a diet of Plants and Animals. Thats just how it is. Eating calorie and nutrient dense food such as meat allowed us to develop larger brains*
Today you can still find examples of people living almost exclusively on meat as they have done for a very long time and folk who survive with very little meat in their diet.

This demonstrates the flexibility that has evolved in the Human body, in order to give us the best chances of survival. In accordance with our surroundings and the foods sources available therein.

However, its widely accepted that an [i]optimal[/i] diet for Humans, requires meat. Like it also doesn't require smoking.

Its your choice, buttercup.
😉

*applies to a varying degree here.

Eating calorie and nutrient dense food such as meat allowed us to develop larger brains*

Its seems that the amount of meat consumed and intelligence is not a factor in nature or else tigers or lions or polar bears would be top of the chain. Its a myth but a commonly held one. Being bipedal and freeing our hands for tools was more important though it largely just eduicated guessing

its widely accepted that an optimal diet for Humans, requires meat

As for optimal - you can eat a bad diet whether meat or meat free so knowing this one fact alone will not be helpful/informative on deciding how good a diet the person has.

Humans evolved to become a top level predator and ultimately to achieve dominion over the Earth. On a diet of Plants and Animals. Thats just how it is.

A diet mostly of plants. We certainly didn't evolve to need the vast quantites of meat we typically consume in prosperous countries.

Is eating meat becoming unfashionable then ?.

It is if it's a steak in a Leicster square Berni Inn/Garfunkles on your once a year wide-eyed trip south to 'that London'
It isn't if it's pulled pork and slaw or big-m sliders in a soho pop-up

Its seems that the amount of meat consumed and intelligence is not a factor in nature or else tigers or lions or polar bears would be top of the chain.

If that's your logic then you're adding weight to Solo's theory 🙂

Bit daft to make comparisons about inteligence across species!

Not read the thread beyond the first page, but Solo's point about evolution is also kind of silly. We evolved to be very flexible, that's why we (and other omnivores) are successful. So whilst we can eat meat, we can still survive when we don't. Although I'm not sure how well we'd do in the wild without hunting.

In response to the question 'why do we have meat with every meal' - because it's yummy, satisfying and nutritious perhaps?

When it is pretty obvious to even the most dumb assed of people that animals also eat grain

Really? All of them?

This is an interesting point actually, that I've not seen dealt with properly. We have all heard the stat about meat taking seven times more grain than if you just ate the grain in the first place, but there's a few problems with that:

1) They are always talking about the US where the vast majority of beef is intensively farmed grain-fed beef. What about lambs roaming the Welsh hills or grass-fed beef? Some articles grudgingly admit that that 'might be better'. Also the one paper I saw that mentioned different kids of meat said that chicken was far less grain intensive per kg of meat.

2) You can't just replace someone's portion of meat with one of grain, they'd end up protein deficient. You'd have to compare growing grain with growing legumes and whatnot, and keeping animals for dairy and eggs too.

Those aren't rebuttals btw, if anyone has any better studies than the ones I found, please re-post. I'm genuinely interested.

Paul McCartney is just about the most annoying person alive today. Anyone listening to him is surely an eegit?

I like meat, I like vegetarian food. I also think that Paul McCartney should perhaps use his vast fortune to attempt to fly a hot air balloon into the center of the sun.

However, its widely accepted that an optimal diet for Humans, requires meat.

You know, I've noticed something on STW.

Whenever someone states "it is widely accepted that..." or variations on that theme such as "everyone knows" or "it's obvious to anyone with half a brain", it's pretty much always followed with a random 'fact' the poster has just pulled out of their arse with no evidence whatsoever to back it up.

Bit daft to make comparisons about inteligence across species!

Must be cooked meat that does it JY.

Here we go, same ole, same old.

I can't help but wonder about some folk when they honestly think I'd write a post, containing just made-up stuff. Please don't judge me by your standards. Making stuff up might be for some. I don't waste my time with it. Thanks.

[i]A diet mostly of plants. We certainly didn't evolve to need the vast quantites of meat we typically consume in prosperous countries.[/i]
Please don't put words into my mouth. I'm not saying anyone should eat [b][i]vast quanities of meat[/b][/i]
Have you heard of the inuit ?. Not many plants available to them for ages past. This hasn't stopped them hunting very big fish and subsisting mostly on, err, meat and fat !.

[i]Solo's point about evolution is also kind of silly[/i]
Very disappointed with that Molgrips. You refuse to accept the observations of experts in their field (not me), wrt evolution because it doesn't suit your lifestyle. I'd call that silly, but then I won't cos I don't want to come down to your level. Sorry.
Your post is also a reading a post, 'Fail'. Here.
[b]You:[/b]
[i]We evolved to be very flexible, that's why we (and other omnivores) are successful.[/i]

[b]Me:[/b]
[i]This demonstrates the flexibility that has evolved in the Human body, in order to give us the best chances of survival. In accordance with our surroundings and the foods sources available therein.[/i]

So, ^^^ you're repeating what I posted, that we are flexible, adaptable to whatever food source may be available, within reason.
Oh, and, no !, don't eat the sand, you don't know where its been !.

[i]I'm genuinely interested[/i]
Not going to get too far though, calling people [i]silly[/i]

So, I'm out. Have fun, kids.
😉

Ah so meat only makes certain species clever but not others

We're not really suggesting meat is in fact a magic potion that will turn any old animal into the world's dominant species. That would be really stupid, wouldn't it? At the risk of being offensive, for someone who was so keen on the scientific method on the religion thread you aren't really doing it justice.

What we (and many anthropologists) are saying is that as humans were evolving dietary factors allowed evolution stimulated by OTHER factors to progress rapidly and successfully.

According to Alice Roberts (iirc) current thinking is that it was the high availability of omega fatty acids from shellfish and sea food that allowed the species to evolve a big brain.

So it seems unlikely we'd have evolved such high intelligence without eating lots of meat and animal products in our evolutionary history.

And in any case, it would seem to me that meat eating animals do tend to be a bit more intelligent and advanced than vegetarians. Herbivores spend most of their time wandering around eating grass and leaves. Meat eaters (omnis and carnis) have to be more intelligent to trap the herbivores, and they tend not to have to do it all the time which means they can spend their time lounging around in the sun, relaxing, arguing with each other, playing, learning to hunt, learning to use tools and evolving into sentient beings.

However this is a moot point, since now that we ARE evolved and can farm the stuff we need to live on, do we still need to eat meat? The answer is no.

Very disappointed with that Molgrips. You refuse to accept the observations of experts in their field (not me), wrt evolution because it doesn't suit your lifestyle.

Wot?

And I did see your previous post after I posted. I did warn you I hadn't read the whole thread.

Please don't judge me by your standards

You refuse to accept the observations of experts in their field (not me),

To be fair it not amongst the worst ones

I'd call that silly, but then I won't cos I don't want to come down to your level. Sorry.

Moral High Ground Fail.

There weren't anywhere near enough emoticons in Solo's posts. Have another burger (hand minced Tesco's finest Fillet de Cheval) mate.

alex222 - Member

Paul McCartney is just about the most annoying person alive today. Anyone listening to him is surely an eegit?

I like meat, I like vegetarian food. I also think that Paul McCartney should perhaps use his vast fortune to attempt to fly a hot air balloon into the center of the sun.

I would just like to applaud Alex's sentiments there 😀

Thanks; I'm glad someone noticed.

Making stuff up might be for some. I don't waste my time with it. Thanks.

Cite your sources then, back up what you're saying.

At the risk of being offensive, for someone who was so keen on the scientific method on the religion thread you aren't really doing it justice.

What we (and many anthropologists) are saying is that as humans were evolving dietary factors allowed evolution stimulated by OTHER factors to progress rapidly and successfully.

According to Alice Roberts (iirc) current thinking is that it was the high availability of omega fatty acids from shellfish and sea food that allowed the species to evolve a big brain.

So it seems unlikely we'd have evolved such high intelligence without eating lots of meat and animal products in our evolutionary history.

Meat eaters (omnis and carnis) have to be more intelligent to trap the herbivores,

and they tend not to have to do it all the time which means they can spend their time lounging around in the sun, relaxing, arguing with each other, playing, learning to hunt, learning to use tools and evolving into sentient beings.

cougar liked your long post especially the bit about letting others do the "wet processes". For me if you can't face watching or being involved with the slaughter process you should not be eating meat.

You also wrote this later

"Purely from a land perspective, it's more efficient to let animals eat crops and then eat animals. If the whole world was vegetarian, we wouldn't have the farmland to feed everybody"

Have you any source for that?

it is obvious eating meat alone does not make a human or any other species clever

Yes, and it's so bloody obvious there's no point in saying it really

I would not say this and I dont think the evidince supports it
... Other primates shared our diet but remained dumb.

Ok well this is a valid point. But again I'm not saying eating meat MADE us clever, it ALLOWED us to evolve to be clever. And it's not just my theory.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120420105539.htm
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/lives-the-brain/201001/was-seafood-brain-food-in-human-evolution

Without a non meat eating control of the same population its fairly meaningless.

Well maybe there's a reason for that. Perhaps herbivores diet is so poor that they don't have the spare capacity to evolve? I dunno, but here's my off the cuff list of intelligent/ creatures - feel free to add:

Chimps: omni
Gorlias: herbi (but apparently lots of insects and rarely meat, so they have the ability)
Orang-Utans: not sure
Dolphins: fish
Whales: fish/seafood
Bears: omni
Racoons: omni
Crows: omni
Pigs: omni
Dogs: carni
Cats: carni
Otters: fish
Elephants: herbi
Octopi: fish/seafood

Lots of meat in that list, and the top three (people, chimps, dolphins) are all meat eaters.

"Purely from a land perspective, it's more efficient to let animals eat crops and then eat animals. If the whole world was vegetarian, we wouldn't have the farmland to feed everybody"

I think that's wrong actually, but it might depend on how you feed your meat. There's plenty of land in the UK that's not suitable for crops but IS suitable for rearing meat. Dunno about the rest of the world.

It stinks of passive aggressiveness in here.

Tee Hee.

Yes, and it's so bloody obvious there's no point in saying it really

you would think wouldn't you but i have also had to point out size of brain does not equal intelligence.

I'm not saying eating meat MADE us clever, it ALLOWED us to evolve to be clever. And it's not just my theory

All the "brightest" will be top predators so therefor ethey will all eat meat but agian i dont think it is causal - your time to chill argument for example

McCartney came over as a [s]gentleman[/s]hobby farmer. It's handy to have a big pot of money to support your wool producing pets, a luxury that upland sheep farmers don't have. If they don't sell the meat they go bust and the habitat becomes degraded/non-productive which our small island can ill afford.

I apologise for going back on-topic.

Is the bar still open Captain or have you called time?

You also wrote this later

"Purely from a land perspective, it's more efficient to let animals eat crops and then eat animals. If the whole world was vegetarian, we wouldn't have the farmland to feed everybody"

Have you any source for that?

Hoist by my own petard. That's a very good question.

Not one that I can readily quote, I'm afraid. I read it in Wired a while back, they ran a story hypothesizing what would happen if the world went veggie. One of the conclusions they drew was that we (globally) didn't have the suitable arable land to grow enough food to sustain the population directly.

I suppose it's entirely likely that they were wrong, and equally likely that I'm not remembering it accurately; but I'd trust Wired's articles over, say, Hello magazine.

Tee Hee.

Random Fact of the day: that's Peter Davison, under all that make-up.

i have also had to point out size of brain does not equal intelligence

No, you haven't.

All the "brightest" will be top predators so therefor ethey will all eat meat but agian i dont think it is causal

Nor do I, but that's not what I'm saying.

I'll go with the mainstream scientific opinion, rather than your lack of being convinced, if that's all the same to you.

However as I said, even if we did evolve eating meat, doens't mean we still need to now. I am not anti-veggie.

One of the conclusions they drew was that we (globally) didn't have the suitable arable land to grow enough food to sustain the population directly.

This is an interesting topic. I've now seen it being argued both ways.

How much land, labour and energy would be required to grow enough legumes to feed everyone? One or two men in the UK can manage a herd of a couple of hundred cows, can they? Is it possible to grow enough beans to replace that much meat with the same labour force? I'd imagine beans are a fairly resource intensive crop?

Not one that I can readily quote, I'm afraid. I read it in Wired a while back, they ran a story hypothesizing what would happen if the world went veggie. One of the conclusions they drew was that we (globally) didn't have the suitable arable land to grow enough food to sustain the population directly.

Got the feeling I read it [url= http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727691.200-veggieworld-why-eating-greens-wont-save-the-planet.html ]here[/url], registration required.

Basically, you can support the greatest number of people by reducing meat consumption but not completely eliminating it - mainly because animals likes goats and pigs can live on land that is useless for arable farming.

even if we did evolve eating meat, doens't mean we still need to now.

I meant to say that in my monologue a couple of pages back. It's where I was going with "just because we can do something doesn't mean we should" but I sidetracked myself.

The whole 'evolution' argument is bunk. Are we seriously suggesting that because something probably have had an influence on our evolution a few hundred thousand years ago, that's reason enough to do it today? (I wonder if we ate each other back then too?)

If you want to eat meat because you like it, great. But don't kid yourself that it's somehow mandatory due to some sort of legacy evolutionary obligation.

Got the feeling I read it [in New Scientist], registration required.

You know, that could be the article I'm thinking of. It was my OH's magazine and she bought both Wired and New Scientist from time to time.

EDIT - [url= http://veganbodybuilding.userboard.net/t350-veggieworld-why-eating-greens-won-t-save-the-planet-new-scientist-article ]bingo[/url]. Transcript of the NS article.

Two good points well made.

I also read just now on a site on bean cultivation that beans won't tolerate standing water. Seems possible that we in the UK would have had a terrible bean harvest this year, then.

But food reliability is another issue. A short drought or other weather event that could wipe out a crop might not damage livestock...? Once that crop is flattened by a hurricane say, it's gone for the rest of the year.

I could be (in fact, I might actually be) a veggie-wot-eats-fish; except when it becomes even the *slightest* bit difficult. That might sound useless but probably leads to being a VWEF about 99% of the time. It falls down when one can't bring oneself to care if a yummy desert uses the wrong sort of gelatine, or if one goes to a restaurant and doesn't want nut roast. Or goes to a dinner party and doesn't want nut roast.

Can't be bothered reading the labels of everything and if I'm going out I want yummy nom noms, so what if I don't usually eat meat? I don't usually have three courses and a bottle of wine either. This is a treat.

And although the ideological veggies (wot eat fish) would say that doesn't count, it's 99% of the way there, with 0% of the hassle.

Sorry. Back by special request, but not for arguing.

[i]If you want to eat meat because you like it, great. [b]But don't kid yourself that it's somehow mandatory due to some sort of legacy evolutionary obligation.[/b][/i]

I'm just disappointed that folk post stuff like this.

Ever heard of Essenitial Amino Acids ?.
Here is your starter for 10.
😐

[url] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_amino_acid [/url]

I could be (in fact, I might actually be) a veggie-wot-eats-fish; except when it becomes even the *slightest* bit difficult.

Ah! You're a pesky-tarian.

Ever heard of Essenitial Amino Acids ?.

Of course I have. Do you have a point to go with that, or are you just randomly quoting things?

Sorry. Back by special request, but not for arguing.

Here is your starter for 10.

Maybe others wouldn't argue, if you were not quite so rude and patronising.

Solo, is this thread about vegetarianism or veganism?

I'll go with the mainstream scientific opinion, rather than your lack of being convinced, if that's all the same to you.

So your position is that humans would have evolved the same intelligence without eating meat, yes?

Incidentally, the Macca show is on Radio 4 now.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01q7gvn

Basically, you can support the greatest number of people by reducing meat consumption but not completely eliminating it - mainly because animals likes goats and pigs can live on land that is useless for arable farming

Are you sure about that? I can just about see it for hill sheep, but even then they tend to be brought indoors for winter.

Growing food to feed animals for slaughter is inherently lossy - the laws of thermodynamics tell us that.

Growing food to feed animals for slaughter [s]is[/s] [b]has an [/b]inherently [b]high number of [/b][s]lossy[/s] [b]losses[/b] - the laws of thermodynamics tell us that.

Excellent work - poor grammar followed by citing 'the laws of thermo dynamics'.

Excellent work - poor grammar followed by citing 'the laws of thermo dynamics'.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/lossy

Excellent work. Criticise a post for using a word in common usage and listed in the dictionary, then incorrectly change "thermodynamics" to "thermo dynamics".

If you wish to engage in pedantry rather than debate the issue, do at least try to be better at it.

I stand corrected.

I can just about see it for hill sheep, but even then they tend to be brought indoors for winter.

Do they? I thought they brought them down low, but IANAF. Still seeing loads of sheep outside in the snow, anyway. And even with low lying pasture it's not necessarily good land for crops, as I sugested up there.

Do they? I thought they brought them down low, but IANAF. Still seeing loads of sheep outside in the snow, anyway. And even with low lying pasture it's not necessarily good land for crops, as I sugested up there.

Some sheep certainly are supplemented with feed in winter and kept in barns, but I don't know the percentage. I recall a study suggesting that NZ lamb had a lower environmental impact than ours because the carbon cost of providing feed (NZ lamb being exclusively pasture-fed) is more than the cost of shipping the meat over here.

Wow, no moral argument?

If we accept that animals have rights, then killing and eating them is morally wrong. the animal's 'right to life' trumps ( in a south Gloucester tractor stylee) the humans trivial* right to eat meat

* trivial in the sense that the animals right is a greater right.

Agriculture violates the right to life of the animals it grows in lots of ways, living naturally, free choice, life free from fear and pain, life without medical intervention, natural diet, normal life of its species, off the top of my head.

Having said all that, if you square all that in your own head, and are happy with your choices, feel free to stuff, nay gorge yourself with whatever takes your fancy, it's a moral slide rule.

Me? I eat eggs, and drink milk, don't eat meat.

Are you sure about that? I can just about see it for hill sheep, but even then they tend to be brought indoors for winter.

Er, I was actually thinking about the land round my wife's home village in rural Extremadura, bringing the animals indoors for winter isn't a major concern when the weather rarely dips below 5C.

Me? I eat eggs, and drink milk, don't eat meat.

Commercially produced eggs and milk both rely on the slaughter of animals...

Wow, no moral argument?

Tis a good question. Not sure I have an answer.

Animals would seem to have a right to life. But it's quite complex. When an owl kills a mouse to feed to its chicks, whose rights are being violated?

And agriculture is a double edged sword. The life of a prey animal in the wild is pretty tense I would imagine - you never know when you're going to get eaten. Life in an organic beef herd could be pretty easy by comparison.

Then there's the question of intelligence. Swat a fly? Sure. Eat a fish? Well they are pretty witless, aren't they? Are they? What about cows then? Are they intelligent enough to know wtf is going on when they go to slaughter? Is it any different to being chased all over the plains daily by lions? And what about pigs? They are much more intelligent after all.

How do you think the chickens feel when you steal their eggs every morning? I have no idea.

It's a moral minefield.

Animals do not have rights.

But we have a huge responsibility toward them.

Indeed, it's complex, and as humans tend to view the "rights" of different groups of animals differently, for instance the 8 animals we eat regularly are in one group, where eating them or farming them is possible, or allowable and then water mammals are in another along with large apex predators and the primates...all seen to have a given set of rights from humans, which exclude them from being eaten. All very random.

Still, all of us are free to choose where our moral compass points, so again, have that conversation with yourself, and if you're happy with the answer it throws up, then great, it you start questioning your choices to date, then there loads of info to help make a decision

It's a bit like the religion debate. I've a lot more respect for someone whose actions have been thought about.

If you've looked at what you eat and decided that yes, the slaughter of an animal is an acceptable price to pay for your dinner, and you're quite happy chowing down on dead flesh, then fair play to you. If you're squeamish about the whole process, perhaps you might want to reconsider what you're putting in your mouth.

Eating meat does seem to be somewhat arbitrary though. Or, maybe that's the wrong word; it's cultural. As others have said, we eat pig and cow, but not horse or dog. Why, what's the difference? Other countries will selectively eat a different set. Is eating pig but not horse a moral issue? I think in the UK we just only eat ugly animals.

So we eat the meats we eat because we always have? That's a terrific reason to do something.

To be fair, it's the same reason we do most things.

We do them because it works.
If it didn't, we'd do something else.

Forced change doesn't often work, but leading by example often does.
Evolution in action, innit? 😀

I'm not squeamish.

So we eat the meats we eat because we always have?

I eat it at least because it's really delicious. Like, not just nice and tasty but it really seems to satisfy me in a way that I've never experienced with veggie food.

I think in the UK we just only eat ugly animals.

Apart from lamb and deer.

I do have much more of an issue with intensive agriculture than I do with eating meet. I was initially opposed to deer hunting like my Father in Law does, but then I thought that there is no less morally objectionable way to eat meat, so if I am prepared to eat farmed meat I should be prepared to shoot wild venison. I'm not sure I'd enjoy it though so perhaps I don't actually need to!

I eat it at least because it's really delicious

So why not eat horse? Or a nice juicy kittenburger?

Apart from lamb and deer.

Bugger. (-:

Unapologetic meat eater here, it has a certain density to it that veggie food doesn't, even things like jacket potatoes can't compare to a steak in my opinion.
There are juices that flow from meat that are divine and which veggie food just can't replicate.
More than happy to eat any meat, we are very closed minded in that respect in the UK.

frustrated that nobody has mentioned quinoa... a complete protein containing all 9 essential amino acids... I don't really see what meat has to offer over that?

I also though that everything had to use complementary proteins in order to achieve this be it meat or veggie

Ta for that, will check Quinoa out.

Would you have any objections to 'grown' meat btw?
Heard a lot about this a few years ago but nothing seems to have come of it as yet.

I am nota typical vegan though so some back history

i think eating meat is wrong as it is murder but it is the way of the world so hey ho
However I think farming meat is inherently cruel[ of course they suffer in ways a wild animal would not] so i gave up meat due to farming and then became vegan much later. Would have eaten fish as they were free but i dont like fish.

Would I eat death free meat. I am certain I would have when i started but after 30 meat free years i would be very surprised if i ate meat again however sourced.
I dont actually know what i would do now tbh as i know i can live without but by heck meat is tasty

i once got invited to an all vegan placenta party 😯

dear gods, Leave you lot alone for a day and it gets all serious and angst ridden. 😕

I listened to the Macca interview on R4 this afternoon. Mostly nothing new to me about the immense calorific value of food/crops lost to us when you use it feed a cow to then feed people, and Macca is a bit nauseating at points. 😆

I was pleasantly suprised at the notion that you can sustain such a population of farm animals on stuff that would never be consumed by humans, ie with no 'cost' to the potential humans fed by prioritising producing food lower down he triangle.

JY Quinoa is undoubtedly an excellent food source particularly for us veggies/vegans.
But until it is grown locally and in greater quanitities worldwide, it is not without its moral cost:
[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/16/vegans-stomach-unpalatable-truth-quinoa ]I read this in the Grauniad last week. [/url]

FWIW I am a strict vegetarian who also cooks meat for his children and friends.

FWIW I am a strict vegetarian who also cooks meat for his children and friends.

honestly, massive respect from me for that.

So your position is that humans would have evolved the same intelligence without eating meat, yes?

i think its literally an academic question as we cannot anser it

For example having language makes us intelligent as we can express ideas
Being bipedal increases blood flow to the brain making you clever and freeing up our hands for tools
Being social animals makes us interact and then lie and manipulate one another [ clever behaviour] or remember who we trust
how much each contributes to the whole NO ONE know but meat [imho]is probably the least important though or else all meat eating animals would be clever.

You can eat meat in my house if you bring your own plates and cutlery 😉
I have cooked meat for work but not for years and unlikely to do so again.
Put meat on the menu at my weddding - considered how many time i had moaned because there was nothing for me to eat that it was only fair that i gave them something to eat at mine.

So why not eat horse? Or a nice juicy kittenburger?

When its available I happily eat Horse meat, its lovely. (normally not in this country)

No idea what Kitten tastes like, and I would imagine it would be quite expensive. But if I was somewhere where it was available, I would probably give it a try. Like I do with most foods.