pizza doesn't become better for you by taking the pepperoni off and replacing the processed animal cheese with processed soy cheese. and, all those processed soy meats are really just another type of fast food.
the reality is that 95% of the vegan food you get in the store is really absolute petrochemical trash. in fact, here's a hint: if it advertises itself as vegan, it's almost certainly trash.
you can't avoid the absorption issues either, but ymmv on it. that is, you might not notice it. but, there's a reason vegans tend to wake up one day, eat a steak and claim that they're all of a sudden ten times more energetic - you do notice the absorption issues when you reverse the diet.
the moral issues are...what do you do with a billion cows if not kill them? and, then why not eat them? i mean, i'm not denying the moral quandary, here. but, the existence of mass agriculture is an infinite loop that you can't escape from.
climate change is a better argument, but it leads to the conclusion that we need to reduce consumption rather than eliminate it. and, that's what your doctor will tell you, too. you want a little meat in your diet. you just don't want to eat twice the daily requirement three times a day.
that said, the soy milk is actually better fortified than real milk. that's a good idea.
Dorna Moss
+jessica Animal agriculture is definitely NOT an "infinite loop that we can't escape from." Look up "supply" and "demand." The idea is, if more people went vegan, the demand for meat would go down and as a result, fewer cows, chickens, and pigs would be bred for meat consumption (i.e., the "supply" would also go down, once demand does). Just consider cigarettes: consumers purchase far fewer cigarettes today than they did in the early 1900s, and as a result, far fewer cigarettes are produced. In terms of having billions of animals "on the loose" if everyone went vegan, the truth is, "everyone going vegan" will not happen overnight, so this isn't a realistic concern. In terms of climate change, I agree that collectively, we do need to "reduce consumption," and reducing/eliminating animal products is an excellent way to do this. A vegan diet uses 600 galons less water per day, per person, and cuts your greenhouse gas emissions in half. Not only that, but the amount of grain fed to farm animals today is enough to feed the world twice over. And finally, in terms of diet, more and more studies are coming out every day touting the health benefits of a plant-based diet. For example, see the China Study by Dr. T. Colin Campbell, and check out some of Dr. Michael Greger's stuff.
jessica
+dorna moss so, you're suggesting a slow, managed genocide, then.
if you kill a billion cows tomorrow, you've killed a billion cows. how many do you want to kill? 100 billion?
Dorna Moss
"Over 56 billion farmed animals are killed every year by humans. More than 3,000 animals die every second in slaughterhouses around the world." - Quick Google Search.
If we refrain from consuming animal products, there will be fewer animals "mated" to make our food, and ultimately, fewer animals will be killed. It wouldn't be a "slow, managed genocide" because by definition, a genocide implies deliberate killing. "Deliberate killing" is exactly what happens in slaughterhouses around the world, so it would be far more accurate to call the current "status quo" of animal consumption a "genocide." I'm not trying to argue with you -- you seem like a bright young person who is smart enough to ask questions. I'm just stating facts that I (and many others) have uncovered after having done extensive research. If you want to learn more, watch Earthlings, Cowspiracy, Forks over Knives, check out some of Dr. Michael Greger's stuff, and read the China Study.
jessica
+Dorna Moss i appreciate your recommendations, but i think i'll have to pass on them.
what's currently happening with cows is not a genocide, but more of a system of slavery. i mean, that's what farming is; or, perhaps one could suggest that slavery is a type of farming, the point being that they're virtually equivalent - and different than a genocide. the slave master wants to ensure future generations, not eliminate them.
it's actually an important point that a lot of people miss in a wide array of contexts - for example, when they compare south africa to palestine. south africa was slavery; farming. palestine is genocide.
what you're suggesting is genocide instead of slavery. and, what i'm suggesting to you is that the total loss in life would actually be lesser if we killed them all at once.
and, so it is an inescapable loop. and, it is. for we cannot grant the cows their freedom. that's beyond the limits of liberalism.
Dorna Moss
I really liked your analogies. Whether it's slavery or genocide, what we're doing to the animals is wrong. You seem like a smart kid. Consider looking into the documentaries I mentioned, especially Cowspiracy (it's free on Netflix). It clearly shows how animal agriculture is destroying this planet.