The synthetic meat is here: steak in Vitro!

[Obamot]

In view of human nature, this is sadly true.

Still well seen! ;)

[Janic]

hamed hello

1- it is not the progress of the technique that changes anything to the problem of malnutrition, they tend to make it worse, even in the countries of the north.

obviously. Technology was supposed to lighten the burden on humans. In fact, it either made him dependent on this technique or else it (on an agricultural level) only served to eliminate small producers and increase yields as much as possible and reduce the intrinsic nutritional value of the food. .

2- the production of artificial meat would be based on the massive use of energy and chemical substances in place of photosynthesis.

probably by replacing a one-eyed one with a blind one ... or the other way around! already meat production is a huge waste of energy.

3- if the animals found their account there, it would however be a new economic violence which would reinforce the heteronomy of the populations, from now on incapable of assuming their meat diet (whatever the feeling that one carries on the value or the opportunity of such a source of food, it is indeed an attack on basic rights, in line with GMOs and other jokes).

The animals would not find their account there since that would mean, in any case, their disappearance in more or less short term and the heteronomy already exists from the inside. The only thing that would gain from it is the relationship to human cruelty and its indifference to the fate of the other.

[Obamot]

3- if the animals found their account there, [...]

The animals would not find their account there since that would mean, in any case, their disappearance in the more or less short term.

There would be a need to tune the violins ... You seem to say that animals find their account better in the current situation, because man, by practicing breeding, keeps the species on which he feeds!

Janic for breeding in order to come to the aid of the animals: I can't believe it!

and heteronomy already exists from within.

And yes, but would it take a lot for them to return to the “wild” state !? It's not my feeling.

The only thing that would gain from it is the relationship to human cruelty and its indifference to the fate of the other.

If predatory animals feed on other animals, then are they cruel? Hmmm ...

Cruelty
"Cruelty is the pleasure we experience in seeing a living being suffer or in inflicting this suffering on him"

Cruelty, for example, would be to practice hunting "for sadistic contentment»To kill exclusively. Yes, that man is quite capable of it! But that's not the case when the ranchers drive their animals to the slaughterhouse, I imagine (they always say it makes them sorry and they seem to come back bleak.)

In the minds of many people today, eating meat is a way to survive (and it's not just a question of philosophical or ethical concept ... I think a mother who feeds her children with meat or fish, because she has no other choice - or rightly assumes that if she didn't her kids might suffer from nutritional deficiencies - also has an ethical dimension ...)

PS: we are still waiting for a good thread well done - without bias and without dogmatism or guilt - which would describe the way to us to eat properly without meat products and without risk ... (instead of controversial debates where we always rehashes the same bickering )

[Ahmed]

Yes, Obamot, I reacted the same way as you to the words of Janic on the "species protection" aspect of breeding!

You write:

But that's not the case when the ranchers drive their animals to the slaughterhouse, I imagine (they always say it makes them sorry and they seem to come back bleak.)

Objectively, that does not change the fate of the animals; moreover, it's not just the slaughterhouse that poses a problem: the farming conditions are far from all bucolic!
Regarding a vegetarian diet without deficiencies, there is the very interesting track of sprouted seeds ...

@ Janic: your sentence seems obscure to me:

... and heteronomy already exists from within.

[Janic]

Janic wrote:
Quote:
3- if the animals found their account there, [...]

The animals would not find their account there since that would mean, in any case, their disappearance in the more or less short term.

There would be a need to tune the violins ... You seem to say that animals find their account better in the current situation, because man, by practicing breeding, keeps the species on which he feeds!

Janic for breeding in order to come to the aid of the animals: I can't believe it!

What I mean is that farm animals are only in such large numbers because they are eaten by humans. Assuming (a utopia) that humans no longer consume them, their number would decrease drastically either by killing them or by preventing their reproduction since there is no question of releasing them in the wild. So these animals would not find their account either. So I'm not for factory farming, and for company breeding I don't believe in either.

Janic wrote:
and heteronomy already exists from within.

And yes, but would it take a lot for them to return to the “wild” state !?

It's not my feeling. It would be utopian to believe that farm animals could return to the wild in our industrialized world.

Janic wrote:
The only thing that would gain from it is the relationship to human cruelty and its indifference to the fate of the other.

If predatory animals feed on other animals, then are they cruel? Hmmm ...

Animals do not pride themselves on humanism!
There is cruelty when the act of death finds no real justification, because if animals obey their instinct for survival, humans obey a culture detached from its instinct, that's what makes the difference.

Wikipedia wrote:
Cruelty
"Cruelty is the pleasure we experience in seeing a living being suffer or in inflicting this suffering on him"

Look at eartlingh, (and the others) there is cruelty and / or indifference!

Cruelty, for example, would be to practice hunting "for the sadistic contentment" of killing exclusively. Yes, that man is quite capable of it! But that's not the case when the ranchers drive their animals to the slaughterhouse, I imagine (they always say it makes them sorry and they seem to come back bleak.)

the hunt has just opened, failing to kill farm animals released just in front of their noses, they talk about breathing in the middle of nature. It is not even a question of a "regulation" following the disappearance of natural predators, (which man has slaughtered) but of killing ... for fun.
I live in a breeding environment, the cattle come to graze my hedge. Believe me or not, the herders do not feel any emotion when they load the cattle trucks. For them it is a potential income, calculating it at the price of the kilo. Recently (in the news) a chicken farmer mourned the fate of the thousands of chickens that died in the heatwave and it exuded sincerity (especially when you know the conditions of their breeding), while a few days later these same animals go to the slaughterhouse. We must trigger compassion for the breeder in the viewer installed in front of the chicken on his plate

In the minds of many people today, eating meat is a way to survive (and it's not just a question of philosophical or ethical concept ... I think a mother who feeds her children with meat or fish, because she has no other choice - or rightly assumes that if she didn't her kids might suffer from nutritional deficiencies - also has an ethical dimension ...)

We must stop with this kind of argument in direct line of the CIV with its discourse on deficiencies. On the other hand, indeed, his conditioning does not offer him much choice, it is partly true, but no one offers him another solution either.

PS: we are still waiting for a good thread well done - without bias and without dogmatism or guilt - which would describe the way to us to eat properly without meat products and without risk ... (instead of controversial debates where we keeps repeating the same bickering.

Not difficult, the internet gives many sites on the subject, you just have to consult them, consult the forums, studies like the Campbell report or that of the AAD, etc ... if I provide a site, I will be criticized for directing towards a dogmatic site, of bias, etc ... (obviously since the VG sites are ... VG !) If you want information on a special mechanic, it is better to contact the specialized mechanics.
With the web, it's easy to have a large sample on the subject. Afterwards, we can see!

[Obamot]

Ok, since I agree with the rest of you, and I even find you nice!

But once again, let's not put everyone in the same basket (I'm talking about breeders) ... Some have joined the line without knowing too much ... I am not defending them for all that, I can understand some of them. ... They had a small farm and wanted to try it out. Then like many people, they do not realize all the implications better until later! Much later and sometimes too late if they are in debt. Many then are caught - if I may say so - in their own trap ... They discover the laws of supply and demand, and those who raised poultry quickly find themselves the pigeons (contracts with the large distributors, that they must repay after it has made advances to them, and contracts are renegotiated downward: always ...).

If the breeder can sometimes count on a lawyer ... Animals cannot: for them, the game is over.

PS: we are still waiting for a good thread well done - without bias and without dogmatism or guilt - which would describe the way to us to eat properly without meat products and without risk ... (instead of controversial debates where we keeps repeating the same bickering.

Not difficult, the internet gives many sites on the subject, you just have to consult them, consult the forums, studies like the Campbell report or that of the AAD, etc ... if I provide a site, I will be criticized for directing towards a dogmatic site, of bias, etc ... (obviously since the VG sites are ... VG !) If you want information on a special mechanic, it is better to contact the specialized mechanics.
With the web, it's easy to have a large sample on the subject. Afterwards, we can see!

But no, no ... we won't accuse you of anything at all. In any case not me as long as it remains within the framework described as good "netiquette".

Why immediately have an a priori, I don't have any. On the other hand, if we start to mix up all the subjects ... Society, economy, culture, religion, dogmas etc ... It will create a thick and hardly understandable content and go in all directions. On the other hand, if we stick to the subject as it is, there is really no problem, right !? And I'm not against addressing ethical issues, of course! I say that but everyone is free to post what they want, eh ...;)

As for links on sites, you must not need this with your 500 books and a considerable number of reviews on the subject ...

The offer is sincere! VG comments in a dedicated thread will not be provocative Amha ...

[Janic]

obamot hello

But no, no ... we won't accuse you of anything at all. In any case not me as long as it remains within the described framework of good "netiquette".

Why immediately have an a priori, I don't have any. On the other hand, if we start to mix up all the subjects ... Society, economy, culture, religion, dogmas etc ... It will create a thick and hardly understandable content and go in all directions. On the other hand, if we stick to the subject as it is, there is really no problem, right !? And I'm not against addressing ethical issues, of course! I say that but everyone is free to post what they want, eh ...;)
As for links on sites, you must not need this with your 500 books and a considerable number of reviews on the subject ...

The offer is sincere! VG comments in a dedicated thread will not be provocative Amha ...

a) My 500 books date from the time before the internet so useless on this subject.
b) there are AVF-type associations in France with their own forum which only represent one aspect of vegetarianism, but it gives an idea.
There is also a European association that I have never visited: so?
c) there are also the forums searchable, (like vegeweb which continues to tolerate me!) more or less varied on the subjects, more or less open (I am already persona non gratta on two of them) like what I am annoying everywhere I go.
d) The tendency is rather atheistic rationalism (with a few believers here and there) materialism and the famous scientists and ethics eaten up with all the sauces and a tad navelists. And the hobby of most of these sites is veganism (which I do not entirely share, I am rather part of the old school focused mainly on health!)
d) their words are their sole responsibility!
PS: in my opinion, the most interesting part remains the presentations where each one expresses the reasons which made change of outlook and eating behavior otherwise the other interventions lose much of their meaning.

[Obamot]

When I want to go on a forum VG, I dare, dare ...!

What would be interesting would be YOUR opinion, rather.

Don't make you pray friend.

PS: in my opinion, the most interesting part remains the presentations where each one expresses the reasons which made change of outlook and eating behavior otherwise the other interventions lose much of their meaning.

[Edit:] Good idea! You just have to start with that!

[Janic]

When I want to go on a forum VG, I dare, dare ...!

What would be interesting would be YOUR opinion, rather.


Don't make you pray friend.

It's already done, just reread everything
An opinion is not very representative, there are multiple VGR / VGL schools where everyone does their own fishing for information, even if there are some common main lines (like omnivorism by the way!)

Good idea! You just have to start with that!

this is what I had previously proposed.

[Obamot]

An opinion is not very representative,

There are several opinions of VG and quasi VG on this forum. So nobody would be on their own, if that's your concern ...!

It's beating around the bush!

What would be interesting would be YOUR opinion, rather.

It's already done, just reread everything

It seems to me that there has not been a single time, where there has been a calm debate on this subject. Without the fuss and without a dogmatic approach. Not one ... While many agree on guidelines and points of convergence! So it's a shame, isn't it?

You had started a thread and I had already encouraged you, but in the end there had been nothing concrete, tangible, practical, no preamble, no plan, no priority ...

I understand that by your attitude, you want the process to be "individual", which is very commendable and correct. But when the process already exists and there is "a demand", in this case it is necessary to respond to it .... OR then you are trying to protect yourself, somewhere or something ... (but j 'really don't know.)

On the other hand, I do not understand that we can defend the pre-square of VG tooth and nail, and that when it is proposed to make a dedicated constructive thread, we discover resignation.

Good idea! You just have to start with that!

this is what I had previously proposed.

At the right time ... So what to do next? ;)