To ask why people are so against giving up meat?

[NewCracker]

Just that really, why are people so against giving up meat?
Without a doubt we know it's better for the environment, we know it's better for our health, we know it's better for animal welfare and it's actually quite expensive. But still as soon as you mention to the greater public about cutting their meat consumption, they get defensive and almost offended.
Would you ever consider giving it up, if you do consume it now? If not, why not?
I'm expecting some hate, this is MN after all, but I am genuinely just curious. Not trying to rattle feathers.

Cognitive dissonance. They'll give every excuse under the sun to assuage their own lack of ethics, while somehow believing any kind of slaughter is ethical.

People are also scared of change and like to stick to what they know. They can think going vegan is daunting. It can be initially when you get your head around nutritional needs but once you have a plan in place it becomes easier.

Because we don’t all want to be dictated to by wealthy people like bill gates telling us what is and what isn’t good for us.

Veganism and all the highly processed (expensive) junk vegan food made people like him richer by telling us we had to be vegan…

it’s a globalist agenda.

we know it's better for our health

no we know less meat is better, but no meat is worse for our health

So are people agreeing on this point yet? Or still some debate

Some of the poorest people on earth are almost vegan. It's not a rich people's fad.

Who told you OP that “it’s better for the environment”?

Well obviously @SunnyEgg I don't agree that no meat is worse for my health:)

we know it's better for our health

No, "we" don't. It's a very nutritionally dense, unprocessed food that we are evolved to eat.

I get that. But they’re not vegans who are consuming highly processed and super expensive foods are they?

Red meat is listed as a carcinogen by the WHO just as smoking is.
This is not a fact.

“Red meat was classified as Group 2A, probably carcinogenic to humans. What does this mean exactly?
In the case of red meat, the classification is based on limited evidence from epidemiological studies showing positive associations between eating red meat and developing colorectal cancer as well as strong mechanistic evidence.
Limited evidence means that a positive association has been observed between exposure to the agent and cancer but that other explanations for the observations (technically termed chance, bias, or confounding) could not be ruled out.”

Processed meat was classified as Group 1, carcinogenic to humans. What does this mean?
This category is used when there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in humans. In other words, there is convincing evidence that the agent causes cancer. The evaluation is usually based on epidemiological studies showing the development of cancer in exposed humans.
In the case of processed meat, this classification is based on sufficient evidence from epidemiological studies that eating processed meat causes colorectal cancer.

Processed meat was classified as carcinogenic to humans(Group 1). Tobacco smoking and asbestos are also both classified as carcinogenic to humans(Group 1). Does it mean that consumption of processed meat is as carcinogenic as tobacco smoking and asbestos?
No, processed meat has been classified in the same category as causes of cancer such as tobacco smoking and asbestos (IARC Group 1, carcinogenic to humans), but this does NOT mean that they are all equally dangerous. The IARC classifications describe the strength of the scientific evidence about an agent being a cause of cancer, rather than assessing the level of risk.

Some of the poorest people on earth are almost vegan. It's not a rich people's fad

Go to one of those regions. I guarantee you you'll be a head taller than everyone around you.

I don't drive, so I could ask the question, why don't people give up their cars? That's probably much better for the environment, obesity, air quality etc. But I'm not going to, because I'm not a self righteous twat.

So I guess this thread nly extends to the food you eat but not the clothes you wear, the home you live in, the electronics and power you are using to access MN, or the carbon every post you send produces.

Pretty much everything you own has ment the death and suffering along the way of innocent creatures people and flora bit of an hypocrite aren't you.

I don’t care how ‘nice’ something tastes I wouldn’t kill an animal just to have a nice tasting meal. Utterly bizarre that people think this is okay

Vast amounts of animals are killed in the production of crops.

I'm not really sure why people are so bothered about other people's choices?

People get defensive be ause they're sick of having others Tey to dictate to them and they're probably pissed off with hearing about it

@BMW6 2. I don't want cows, lambs, pigs or chickens to become extinct

Possibly peak Karen.

Im 54, I get mistaken for 35-40….

like i say, my vitiligo is now reduced to small sections of my hand, as opposed to being almost completely white when it hit me in my late twenties.

Look up Michaela Peterson, and her experiences with arthritis and how Carnivore has helped her.

My family tree has an extreme history with arthritis and cancer, by my age my mum required bi-weekly visits to hospital for her deteriorated spine, she didn’t make it to her 60’s due to cancer. I have one finger knuckle which is bad…. Had my routine C checks which I pay for privately in recent months, 100% all clear.

I think Covid taught us, not everything that’s ‘official’ is without agenda.

However this is a current Who statement in the case of red meat,

“the classification is based on limited evidence from epidemiological studies showing positive associations between eating red meat and developing colorectal cancer as well as strong mechanistic evidence.
Limited evidence means that a positive association has been observed between exposure to the agent and cancer but that other explanations for the observations (technically termed chance, bias, or confounding) could not be ruled out.”

source:
https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/cancer-carcinogenicity-of-the-consumption-of-red-meat-and-processed-meat

So, hardly conclusive.

ps. I don’t eat any processed meats, and I’m very fussy which red meats too. I won’t eat anything mechanically removed, eg. Nuggets. I’ve seen what goes in the stuff, and it’s barely meat in some cases.

I’m a life long vegetarian BUT I wouldn’t give up tea or spinach so don’t understand why you expect people to give up meat. It isn’t your choice whether you agree with it or not.

I don't agree that it is better for your health. Also, if you look at the environmental impact, in my opinion meat is a scapegoat. Other things such as transport are much more damaging but we continue to drive everywhere. Also with the meat, if we used traditional farming methods there wouldn't be an environmental impact as the cycle works wonderfully well.

The energy, land, water and food to sustain the life of an animal should not be counted as if an animal were an avocado because you cannot swap animals for avocados without collapsing the environment. It’s a calculation based on a false premise

We would destroy the environment if we replaced farm animals with billions more avocados or wheat or soy plantations. The environment depends on a certain population of livestock to keep ecosystems working and in balance. And there isn’t the land to keep all the animals as pets and then grow plants to replace the food they provide.

@JudgeAnderson yes, I am at 5'7, but I am from one of those regions, which is why I did not grow up eating meat. I don't think stunting is due to not eating meat; I think it is due to not eating enough.

Are you the OP? I didn't think you could name change on a thread anymore.

I see you've given answers to the questions you can defend yourself on but have ignored my questions about other changes you could make to protect the environment. I didn't suggest you needed to be an eco warrior but you bought up the environmental benefits of giving up meat in your OP, I was seeking to understand if that was a serious concern for you or just something you thought you could use to guilt trip other people with.

Beat me to it. :)

Because the alternative is not a complete diet, supplements have very low absorption rates, and most "plant based" alternatives are ultra processed food which are proved to be the source of the explosion of health issues that we face

Having said that most people would benefit from each less animal products, partuxarly processes ones, and more vegtables and legumes

I am salivating at the image pp have conjured up of perfectly cooked steak. Misses point.