humane and conscious eating

indesertum · Jun 11, 2011

this might turn out to be the dumbest thread i made besides the louis vuitton one, but this has been weighing on my thoughts. a friend sent me this youtube video
IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later. I AGREE

TIP: to embed Youtube clips, put only the encoded part of the Youtube URL, e.g. eBGIQ7ZuuiU between the tags. and it got me thinking about food again. the most education i've got on this issue is what i've read from omnivore's dilemma, watching future of food on hulu and food, inc on netflix, and reading the lobster article that was posted which i can't find. i live off of a wegmans nearby and I for some reason had trusted that the animals and farmers were treated ok. i've been finding out more and more that the wegmans brand stuff isnt that much different from any other store. in all the premade food they sell there's a lot of stuff in there. for example my friend left ithaca and left me some prepackaged chicken breasts marinaded in a lemon garlic sauce from wegmans. there's so much stuff in here. like i dont understand why you need thickeners like xantham gum or food coloring or soybean oil in a simple marinade. I strongly disagree that industrialization or food chemicals and additives are unhealthy as there's little proof that they are. However the addition of such products simply means to me that the product is of lower quality. you can just simply google wegmans animal cruelty or the like and find stuff like http://www.wegmanscruelty.com/ however i do think maybe the advantage of wegmans is that while they sell the usual ****** store stuff, they also have great quality produce like grass fed beef, free range chickens, etc. there's even a section for jamon iberico, wagyu bone in ribeye steaks, dry aged prime ribeye steaks, wild caught salmon etc also i personally feel that you can eat farmed seafood without guilt over animal suffering as lobsters and fish and the like simply do not have the cerebral cortex to process computations about pain. in other words they have no metaphysical understanding of pain (ie when they feel pain they dont think "hey this is painful"). if you put a lobster in boiling water it tries to get out because its opoid receptors are telling its brain that its' body is getting destroyed which results in behavior that tries to escape it, but it doesnt suffer because it cant understand pain. whether or not farmed seafood is environmentally conscious is a different matter anyways this is all a moot point for me as the fact is that I simply can't afford the higher quality and more humane produce whether at wegmans or the farmer's market. I need protein to live and being a student to get the amount of food I need on the budget I have I simply can't afford to pay 10 dollars for 2 free range chicken breasts. for the same amount i could get 8 breasts of chickens that had their beaks cut off, grown in cramped spaces, clubbed to death, etc. the most i can do is buy locally grown eggs from free range chickens. i've participated in a CSA before, but unfortunately it only happens in the summer and it's still pretty expensive. also on the issue of organic branding. organic really has nothing to do with humane treatment or environmentally conscious. it just specifies what fertilizers a farmer can use. so i personally think it's a huge scam and purposefully avoid things that say organic. i also feel that they are not of any appreciable higher quality. what do you guys do? do you just buy whatever and not think about it? if you can afford it what kind of produce do you buy? do you produce without thinking where it came from? if you're conscious about it do you buy simply anything that's labelled organic or do you actually go to a farmer's market and buy from a trusted vendor where you've seen how they produce their produce? if you know a lot more about the issue could you please point me to documentaries that you trust or some books that you appreciated?

GQgeek · Jun 11, 2011

scarphe · Jun 11, 2011

calling the dolphin lover...

kwilkinson · Jun 11, 2011

I tried to find the pics of the watermelon cake and the Garden Party Cake (Fall Edition) but all I got were pics of frogs frozen in ice cubes. That's all I have to add.

NorCal · Jun 11, 2011

also on the issue of organic branding. organic really has nothing to do with humane treatment or environmentally conscious. it just specifies what fertilizers a farmer can use. so i personally think it's a huge scam and purposefully avoid things that say organic. i also feel that they are not of any appreciable higher quality.

While I agree that the organic brand has grown to the point that it is somewhat diluted, the above is not particularly accurate. Which fertilizers a farmer uses has a meaningful environmental effect. Organic food also does not use the same pesticides, antibiotics, or hormones as inorganic all of which can have negative environmental and health effects.

That said, the industrial organic farms have many of their own problems and many feel the term has lost the meaning it once had.
I would not avoid all organic, but rather just use some common sense.

Oh, and if you can't taste the difference, try harder.

xander_horst · Jun 11, 2011

Wow, could only get through about 1 and a half minutes of that video. I have some similar concerns, so I've been eating less meat by replacing it some of my meals, like garbanzo beans instead of tuna fish into mock-tuna salad sandwiches. Wish I could pull the plug completely, but find it difficult.

If you wish to further concern yourself, read Eating Animals by Jonathan Safran Foer. Then rejuvenate by watching these pigs take it eeeaaasy:

indesertum · Jun 11, 2011

i was expecting mostly responses like this, but i'm glad some people actually responded

While I agree that the organic brand has grown to the point that it is somewhat diluted, the above is not particularly accurate. Which fertilizers a farmer uses has a meaningful environmental effect. Organic food also does not use the same pesticides, antibiotics, or hormones as inorganic all of which can have negative environmental and health effects. That said, the industrial organic farms have many of their own problems and many feel the term has lost the meaning it once had. I would not avoid all organic, but rather just use some common sense. Oh, and if you can't taste the difference, try harder.
from what i understand in most peer reviewed studies that tested the taste difference between organic and conventional did not find a huge difference. i do recall a study about organic apples being more tastier. why should i have to try harder to taste the difference? if it's better quality shouldnt it be clearly different? imo the usda organic label is like a selvedge line. not a good indicator of quality. like there is gap or uniqlo selvedge. and then there's 45rpm selvedge. i just dont think agricultural practices are not as black and white as an organic label might suggest. like this article with its inflammatory title suggests. this sentiment that the herbicides and pesticides on hormones used on produce being extremely hazardous for humans is utter bullshit. yes they are harmful, but not in the doses that people consume on the daily. again imo what it does speak to is the quality of the produce what i really wish is for some kind of farming standards like they have in europe for wines (and other goods) where amount of yields, etc. are specified. or the grading for wagyu in japan. i'm not anti organic. but i do feel that there should be standards such that people can choose to eat far better than organic. foods like this and this

Wow, could only get through about 1 and a half minutes of that video. I have some similar concerns, so I've been eating less meat by replacing it some of my meals, like garbanzo beans instead of tuna fish into mock-tuna salad sandwiches. Wish I could pull the plug completely, but find it difficult. If you wish to further concern yourself, read Eating Animals by Jonathan Safran Foer. Then rejuvenate by watching these pigs take it eeeaaasy:
i'm not a vegetarian by any means nor wish to do so. i have no qualms about killing or eating an animal so i can fill my belly, but i feel that practices regularly used by CAFOs and factory farms are super short sighted and leaves a bad taste in my mouth. anyways thanks for the links and the. recommendation this is a random interjection but I feel like food and gas in the US is way too cheap, so cheap that there will be long term problems. I feel that part of the problem of cheap food is corn subsidies. --- I just realized most of my statements are very sporadic and not very well organized. my apologies but i am curious. what kind of produce do you guys buy?

indesertum · Jun 11, 2011

lol

IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later. I AGREE

TIP: to embed Youtube clips, put only the encoded part of the Youtube URL, e.g. eBGIQ7ZuuiU between the tags.

GreenFrog · Jun 11, 2011

i watched that entire video and it was sickening.

ugh.

that being said, i could never go vegan.

b1os · Jun 11, 2011

from what i understand in most peer reviewed studies that tested the taste difference between organic and conventional did not find a huge difference. i do recall a study about organic apples being more tastier. why should i have to try harder to taste the difference? if it's better quality shouldnt it be clearly different?
And guess what kind of people are mostly used in these studies. People that don't know what an artichoke, an aubergine, fennel is. People that actually think joghurt with strawberry flavouring (made of mold on wood shavings.. or maybe even petroleum) tastes more authentic than normal joghurt with normal strawberries. I really don't care about such studies made for people who don't have their own minds - or sense of taste. I prefer organic food, but I wouldn't say that all non-organic food tastes bad. It can obviously taste pretty much the same. It can also taste like crap. As can organic food. To come to the point - no form of mass planting - neither conventionel nor organic - is good. It is harmful to the environment. And statements like these

this sentiment that the herbicides and pesticides on hormones used on produce being extremely hazardous for humans is utter bullshit. yes they are harmful, but not in the doses that people consume on the daily. again imo what it does speak to is the quality of the produce
are ridiculous. If you use many pesticides on your vegetables it is bad for the environment. If you prophylactically use antibiotics on all your cattle it is bad. Not only that it pollutes the environment, it helps creating multiresistant bacterias. (Actually trying to sterilize beef with ammoniac does no good, too..) And besides these major points, the most important point you try to deny is that these pesticides, herbicides and antibiotics do ******* harm us. Pesticides act as hormons (people today come into puberty years before pople did a century ago... coincidence? maybe.), antibiotics, as said, create bacterias like MRSA. This is no fun and just because of mass farming. You should know whether you like to use good food to keep your body running or not so good food. Just compare it with your, say, car. How much do you pay for your engine oil? How much for your olive oil? Now that the WHO officially states that cell phones might lead to brain tumours, guess what pesticides do in your body... The general problem is that the demand grows and there are not only good farmers that produce organic food. Person X, a non-organic farmer, smells the chance to make lots of money. He now produces organic food (at the edge of the directives) and makes use of many methods that are not good. These people just want profit. That's what you don't like about organic food. You think they rip you off with bad products. We in the EU have special organisations that have much stricter directives on how to grow food. E.g. Bioland, Naturland or Demeter (has one of the highest standards). If you buy their food you can be sure that they do not or minimally harm the environment, only use fungicides as the last choice - not as often as those profit oriented organic farmers do [yes, here in the EU there are fungicides allowed, e.g. copper which is not good for the environment either... (but it will be forbidden in 2016..)] and so on.

I simply can't afford to pay 10 dollars for 2 free range chicken breasts
Well, then simply just eat once or twice chicken breasts a week and not every day. Ask your grand parents whether they suffered when they didn't get to eat meat every day. Think about it. This was a ******* animal. A whole chicken that either got raised in a few weeks without ever seeing daylight or a chicken that got raised in some months breathing fresh air, seeing daylight. Now don't tell me chicken can't appreciate that.

if you put a lobster in boiling water it tries to get out because its opoid receptors are telling its brain that its' body is getting destroyed which results in behavior that tries to escape it, but it doesnt suffer because it cant understand pain.
Now, if someone puts you into boiling water, you want to get out. You might scream like hell, whether the lobster uses his kind of communication, I don't know. So what's the difference? You try to get out, the lobster tries to get out. How do you know whether the lobster suffers? Just because some researchers state they did examinate the lobsters brainwaves and it shows no signs of suffering? How can we say that if we don't even know what causes Alzheimer? I do not demand everyone to be vegetarian, I simply want you to worship what you eat. This is not some kind of plastic. Think about it. PS:

I strongly disagree that industrialization or food chemicals and additives are unhealthy as there's little proof that they are.
You are kidding, right? Food colourings cause ADHD of young people. Flavour enhancers make fat. Enzymes make sick. Sweeterners make fat and sick...

voxsartoria · Jun 11, 2011

foodguy · Jun 11, 2011

from what i understand in most peer reviewed studies that tested the taste difference between organic and conventional did not find a huge difference. i do recall a study about organic apples being more tastier.
why should i have to try harder to taste the difference? if it's better quality shouldnt it be clearly different?
imo the usda organic label is like a selvedge line. not a good indicator of quality. like there is gap or uniqlo selvedge. and then there's 45rpm selvedge.
i just dont think agricultural practices are not as black and white as an organic label might suggest. like this article with its inflammatory title suggests.
this sentiment that the herbicides and pesticides on hormones used on produce being extremely hazardous for humans is utter bullshit. yes they are harmful, but not in the doses that people consume on the daily. again imo what it does speak to is the quality of the produce
one you you kids will have to explain to an old guy what a "selvedge line" is ... is it like a maginot line? or closer to a mason-dixon line?
But yeah, pretty much what he said.

indesertum · Jun 12, 2011

^it's edge line of a fabric that has been self finished instead of chainstitched around to prevent unraveling. its indicative of loom quality, but not necessarily fabric quality looking back at my comments they were pretty inflammatory and i prolly do deserve this kind of reply. i'll try to be more courteous in my replies

And guess what kind of people are mostly used in these studies. People that don't know what an artichoke, an aubergine, fennel is. People that actually think joghurt with strawberry flavouring (made of mold on wood shavings.. or maybe even petroleum) tastes more authentic than normal joghurt with normal strawberries. I really don't care about such studies made for people who don't have their own minds - or sense of taste. I prefer organic food, but I wouldn't say that all non-organic food tastes bad. It can obviously taste pretty much the same. It can also taste like crap. As can organic food.
if organic produce is indeed much better tasting it would make sense that anybody who tastes it can tell the difference right? what's the use of a better tasting produce if only a small subset of people can taste the difference? or if you have to train to taste the difference? a good product should clearly taste better. at some point you have to wonder if you simply think it tastes better because of an organic label.

this i most definitely agree with. from what i understand the gold standard of farming is extensive, not intensive farming, with great biodiversity, crop rotations, and other practices that result in low nutrient leeching.

statements like these make me think you clearly read the news. what you dont read are the studies the news media reports on. the who study you talk about isnt even due to be out yet until later this year. so how do you know what kind of recommendation the who actually gives? what is might? how many ppl out of how many ppl get cancer from cell phone usage on how many minutes of usage? you have no idea. it could be that 1 person out 100 million ppl gets brain cancer on an average of 5 hours of cell phone usage a day and a person would be able to claim that cell phone usage is correlated with brain tumors the vast majority of these toxicity tests of pesticides, etc. are done on non humans because guess what? it's illegal to subject people to pesticides to see what kind of harm it does on them. guess what else? non humans aren't humans. they have different metabolic pathways than humans. the best you can hope for is that whatever protein, genetic interaction you are studying has a homolog in humans and extrapolate and that last step in most cases turns out not to be true. even worse most consumers never come in contact with these pesticides in the amount that it causes harm. the EPA makes sure that the upper limit of consumption is far more conservative than it needs to be. for example recommended meat cooking temperatures from the USDA are set at a far more conservative value than needs to be simply because it's their ass on the line if ppl start getting sick from potential bacteria in foods. in addition to make a statement like pesticides are harmful to humans is like saying scientists found a cure for cancer. there's so many pesticides out there you'd have to be able to point out which pesticides are harmful, just like there's so many cancers with different mechanisms out there you'd have to point out which cancers this is a cure for.

i do wish the us had similar sets of standards. i do like the proactive stance the EU takes on potentially dangerous chemicals. in the EU the standard seems to be guilty until proven innocent, whereas in the US the stance is innocent until clearly proven guilty. there has to be some kind of balance in the middle. on one hand the chemicals that are debated might actually turn out to be harmful the in the amounts consumed. on the other hand you might be preventing farmers from using a cost effective method that might even save their livelihood simply because rats dont respond well to it.

you're telling me to starve simply because the chicken i otherwise might eat was raised uncomfortably? i need protein to retain muscle. chicken meat is the cheapest meat i can get besides tuna and it tastes better.

i am not a lobster. what happens to a lobster in a pot of boiling water is not the same thing as what happens to a human in a pot of boiling water. i dont think you read my post. let me try and simplify it for you. pain is different from suffering. pain is when opiod molecules hit opiod receptors because decomposition of cells secrete certain molecules (some that are directly opiods and some that indirectly actiate opiods). these receptors transmit signals to the brain to indicate pain and the brain then causes corrective behavior. suffering is a metaphysical step. it's consciousness about pain. it's computations of pain signals, not the pain signals themselves. in humans this step happens in the cerebral cortex. lobsters do not have a cerbral cortex. thus they do not suffer because they do not know what pain is. pain is simply a sensation to them that they have to avoid. wtf does this have to do with alzheimer?

but see the question is what does it mean to worship what you eat? eat everything on your plate? lick your plate? reuse the fat drippings to cook more food? reuse the shells to make stock? if i dont do any one of these things am i no longer worshiping what i eat?

none of these are true. especially the food coloring and adhd. at the most you can state food colorings may be correlated with adhd in a small number of young people. correlated not cause. cite me a study and i will walk you through it.

b1os · Jun 12, 2011

a good product should clearly taste better.
Firstly, taste is subjective.
Secondly, good - in the organic case - does not refer to the taste itself but to the healthiness and the way it grew. As I said, I won't say that non-organic products taste worse. There are tons of small farmers that hardly use pesticides but getting the organic label is too complicated for them. Also, the vegetables you grow in your garden ain't organic, too. There are a lot of bad tasting organic veggies on the market, e.g. paprika that tastes like mold. But if you think about the way the product you are inserting in your body to keep your system running got produced, you might have a different feeling about what you eat. (for example most apple trees get ethephon - pretty sure it does not harm anyone and is completely neutral to the human body... - sprayed on so the blossoms get thinned out... normally you do that by hand...)

the who study you talk about isnt even due to be out yet until later this year. so how do you know what kind of recommendation the who actually gives? what is might? how many ppl out of how many ppl get cancer from cell phone usage on how many minutes of usage? you have no idea. it could be that 1 person out 100 million ppl gets brain cancer on an average of 5 hours of cell phone usage a day and a person would be able to claim that cell phone usage is correlated with brain tumors
Do you really think the WHO would warn if there are no major indicators? You know that the telecommunication industry is one - if not - the biggest in the world? Get what I mean?

in the EU the standard seems to be guilty until proven innocent, whereas in the US the stance is innocent until clearly proven guilty.
You don't really think it is, do you? Just one small hint: lobbying

you're telling me to starve simply because the chicken i otherwise might eat was raised uncomfortably?

i need protein to retain muscle. chicken meat is the cheapest meat i can get besides tuna and it tastes better.
How could I tell you to?

But please enlighten me on why you need proteins every day. Do you have a study for that? I'd be pretty interested in it.
Are you a bodybuilder? Professional, top level? Ah well, there already are vegan bodybuilders.. damn.

pain is different from suffering.
Do you suffer when your brain gets hurt or can't you suffer without suffering pain?

in humans this step happens in the cerebral cortex. lobsters do not have a cerbral cortex. thus they do not suffer [...] wtf does this have to do with alzheimer?
You ever been a lobster in an earlier life?

I just disgust an attitude like yours Ã la it does not know what pain is, yet it tries to avoid it.. but w/e, *******. Low level life instinct. Primitives! Don't even know they exist.

but see the question is what does it mean to worship what you eat?
By worshipping it I mean worship it! Thank the lobster you are eating, thank god or whomever.

none of these are true. especially the food coloring and adhd. at the most you can state food colorings may be correlated with adhd in a small number of young people. correlated not cause. cite me a study and i will walk you through it.
You are serious with this, aren't you? Dude, we in the EU now have to warn on packagings if certain food colourings are contained. And you want to tell me again that the EU would have done this without major arguments? Hell yeah, there's no lobby. You can google that for yourself.

Flavour enhancers make fat flavour ehnancers like glutamate manipulate our brains appetite regulation and therefore support getting fat. (and actually let crap taste good to many ppl)

Enzymes make sick you know how much additives - and enzymes - in the food production are used? For example there are enzymes of mold used to make your bread more fluffy - a really allergenic enzyme... 25% of the bakers in a study were allergic to it. (study of the Ruhr-University Bochum) And they have to handle it (aside from say 30 others additives) every day. Cheers!

Sweeterners make fat and sick Aspartams side decomposition products are toxic (and mutagenic). Also toxic for PTU-patients and excessive use might lead to PTU-symptoms.
By the way, you know stevia? It was ******* forbidden for 20 years here because some major concerns paid a few studies that showed excessive use makes rats sick (I ask myself who can eat that stuff in huge doses.. u're gonna get a sweet shock). Ever thought about giving rats huge doses of aspartame?...

Why they make fat? Some people say they quicken the appetite. Saccharine is used in the cattle farming... Obviously only to imitate the mother's milk sweetness.

Pennglock · Jun 12, 2011

My biggest beef with the organic/humane food movement is that the adherents refuse to acknowledge that there are serious negative trade-offs to their methods. They act as if it's the answer rather than a niche alternative that would produce some destructive effects if implemented on a huge scale.

The higher yields made possible by 'artificial' fertilizer and pesticides (vs manure and tilling methods,) and the density in which animals are raised on modern farms (vs free-range,) have saved an immense amount of wild land. Many crop yields per square foot have doubled over the last 50 years-- which amounts to a lot of land that doesnt have to be worked.

Where is the additional yield supposed to come from if we roll back this progress 50 years? A large chunk of the south american rainforest would have to go, in my estimation. Or the american prairies. You're shifting the burden of one species (chickens) onto another (gophers.)

What really makes me pull my hair out is the insistence on using manures instead of a fairly benign chemical process of pulling nitrogen out of the air. If this were implemented on any kind of scale, imagine how many more cattle we would have to raise (presumably free range!) Not to mention the environmental and dollar cost of transporting the manure across the world.

I think the entire movement is a hypothetical humanitarian and environmental disaster if implemented on a large scale, but I will entertain counter arguments. The problem is, no one Ive talked to in this city seems to acknowledge there are any tradeoffs!

humane and conscious eating

Stylish Dinosaur

Stylish Dinosaur

Distinguished Member

Having a Ball

Distinguished Member

Senior Member

Stylish Dinosaur

Stylish Dinosaur

Stylish Dinosaur

Distinguished Member

Goon member

Distinguished Member

Stylish Dinosaur

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

FEATURED PRODUCTS

Similar threads

Featured Sponsor

Definitely full canvas only

Half canvas is fine

Really don't care

Depends on fabric

Depends on price

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

FOLLOW STYLEFORUM ON: