Yikes !!!! 😮

This is Beautiful!!! Thank you !!! I will definitely consider this! Appreciate you taking the time to put this together for me

​@@Goldenrulephilosophy I 'm happy if it's help :)

I agree 100% as far as doing more for those that are marginalized. He was a kind hearted man. Energies in that dialogue were scaled as per the touchiness of the subject ( which I would say is normal when tackling truths ) .

100%!!!! Imagine if his books were integrated into all school curriculums!

@@Goldenrulephilosophy This would be a whole different world then... unfortunately the schools are nothing more than indoctrination camps that teach the opposite of "freedom" and compassion for all animals. They even dissect baby pigs in Science class now.

🥰😍

« If you teach a child not to hurt spiders what chances do you have to see him hurting black people ? » (you) Exellent one, I write this one in my quotes book :)

Still better than you😂😂 A moron eating menstrual waste of little birds paying for interspecies breastfeeding yapping about a vegan?! Get a reality check, better yet a life

@ im eating twice as much meat today to offset your veganism

@user-fu7eh2mk5n go on.....until you can cuz veganism is the future its not abt if its abt when Your gross meat is unsustainable n infeasible

KZbin recently refracted/flipped the LiVE imaging so everything is spelt backwards when you look at it…. Kind of annoying, but the list reads legitimately

@Goldenrulephilosophy i haven't seen that with anyone but you.

Morally, to even get nourishment from any living thing including plants, its life had to be fulfilling. Thats why gmos are so soulless. And thats why only animals killed later on, after being able to run around and be well groomed for years, will taste good. You only get truly nourished by goodness. Anything tortured is bound to curse you upon consumption, even if that curse is just your health being lowered or getting cancer. This is why we don't eat diseased or tortured meat. It's just evil and will make you sick.

In this case he is just pointing out the long chemical composition of animal flesh to refute the argument people frequently make that plant based meats are unhealthy due to the fact that they're composed of multiple ingredients as opposed to just "1 ingredient animal flesh", which is a misleading argument. If you were in fact basing what is healthy on the number of ingredients, you should also scrutinize animal flesh for how much chemicals are actually contained within them, both natural & unnatural chemicals. It's not just "1 thing". When you break it down it had a lot of other stuff within it.

But more importantly, you're actually partly right as the reason that argument fails to demonstrate that something is unhealthy is the same reason the initial argument about plant based meats' ingredient list is flawed. This was simply using those people's own argument against them as a reductio of sorts, but there are better arguments. I'm glad you acknowledge this for a basis of sound reasoning. The number of ingredients in something doesn't determine its healthfulness, especially when those ingredients could be healthy, whether or not they're natural (a related argument people use is appeal to nature fallacy, that something is bad or unhealthy if it's unnatural, or good or healthy of it's natural, which isn't always the case). And, even more importantly, mechanistic speculation about individual ingredients aside, what really matters and more reliably tells us about the healthfulness of a food, product, activity, treatment or intervention of some kind is the actual health outcomes of people consuming those products in studies, with all other relevant factors being controlled for (ceteris paribus, all else being equal), compared to those who don't, or who consume something else instead. Anecdotes such as the ones you provided don't control for these factors and are misleading for that reason, as tempting as it may be to rely upon them. Also, they are of course n=1 or very small sample groups, so not very reproducible or high quality evidence or necessarily accurate assessments, and also often don't take into account the long term effects of things and are focused purely on the short term.

Case in point, the fact you are a hardcore lifter & play an intense sport could be redeeming factors for your health, as well as any other number of aspects about your lifestyle that may be healthy despite the consumption of animal products. You also may not be at the age of having consumed these products for decades to the point where you would be at risk of diseases manifesting partly as a result of them; it usually happens later in life to middle-to-old-age people when it does. But it's also possible, with or without those redeeming health factors, that you could be perfectly healthy for your whole life even though you consume animal products; many people are, and many aren't. (That's why studies are important to work out what's happening and narrow down the likely effects of variables). There are people who smoke cigarettes their whole life and remain healthy, and others who don't. What a risk factor confers is exactly that, an increased risk of a negative outcome; it's not a guarantee. I'm sure you're aware the logic of the argument you made or implied is essentially the same as saying "cigarettes aren't unhealthy because me and my buddy consume them and we are healthy and do sports". The argument that animal product (not limited to their flesh) is unhealthy to consume doesn't mean that you will be immediately unhealthy if you consume them, if anything it would be talking about long term effects later in life of consuming a lot of them, but even then it's only referring to an increased risk of negative health outcomes (though also, there are some almost guaranteed health downsides that would be detectable in health biomarkers such as increased cholesterol (and especially LDL/"bad" cholesterol) levels, and potentially arterial calcification. In addition, it's possible that it has a negative effect on digestion & gut microbiome, & lower energy levels, but these need to be better studied).

I care about animal abuse. But i also don't. Because just about all mammalian carnivores kill other animals for fun, and nature doesn't care. Found this from a quick Google search. I respect your choice of changing to a plant based diet. I don't respect you trying to force veganism on us.

Well for starters, I would definitively not say those things lol…. I’m more interested in viewing things from the animal outlook..

@Homelessvegan Yeah, but my point still stands. But cows would die unwillingly anyways if we didn't exist, because we aren't the only carnivores in existence.

Awesome!!!! Such an amazing man!

"These are not the foods you are looking for" - Ben Kenobi

@@Goldenrulephilosophy :D