Poll: Why do you (not) eat meat?

rutger5000

New member
Oct 19, 2010
1,052
0
0
Blablahb said:
rutger5000 said:
You won't make me believe that a newborn chick can grow to a 2 kilo chicken in just a few weeks without massive ammounts of hormones. Sure those are eventually broken down by your digestive system, but so are every drug and most poisons. Breaking down stuff is what your digestive system does, doesn't mean it isn't unlhealthy. Besides that, there are still the antibiotics, feeding cattle antibiotics is a danger for public health.
So like I said, such use of hormones is banned, and what occurs naturally is normal. You also have growth hormones in your body. What have you been reading on chickens that you think they grow full size in weeks? Whatever it was it's nonsense.

Antibiotics in meat is actually a good thing, in principle. The problem with those comes from them being overused preventively, and thus breeding resistent bacteria. Then again, cook or bake it and nothing happens.

Furthermore, humans overuse antibiotics heavily in many countries. The US is pretty paranoid about it, and places like China have even crazier abuse of antibiotics. If there's going to be a supervirus, it'll be hatched anyway. And untill it does and you catch it, you're much better off with a healthy diet that includes meat.
Dunno where I read about the chickens, I can't fact check everything I hear, I might be wrong, but I'll stick by it. You're argument about coocking the meat is invallid. When consumers get their hands on meat it's generally still uncoocked (sure most of them will coock it before
they eat), then the bacteria can easily spread.
As a final remark I would like to add that I feel a lot healthier ever since I stopped eating meat.
 

legend forge

New member
Mar 26, 2010
109
0
0
I eat meat because it is what we as humans are biologically required to do, and it's damn tasty because of that. Vegetable protein is very different from meat protein. True vegetarians have to work so hard getting the nutrients they need, and I hate most of the foods I would have to eat. I love meat, and my diet leads to some issues that I frequently must address, but that isn't the fault of meat it is just me being short sighted.

My rule is I can eat any animal I am prepared to kill myself. Yes that means nothing cute. No cows aren't cute.

That said I disagree with any death that doesn't serve a purpose. People who hunt for trophies aggravate me, unless they eat the animal in question. Eating is just something we need to do, and I can respect hunting your own food rather then buying it.
 

The_Lost_King

New member
Oct 7, 2011
1,506
0
0
Cause I hate fruit and veggies. And bacon, and steak, and ribs, and cheese burgers taste DELICIOUS. Once I got a vegetarian so mad she threw a dictionary at me, good times.
 

Oly J

New member
Nov 9, 2009
1,259
0
0
I eat meat because...

I'm not a big fan of most vegetables,

meat tastes good...seriously it freakin' rocks

and I take my part in the food chain quite seriously, it's not as if I killed the animal, it's already dead, my not eating it isn't going to bring it back...having said that, if I wouldn't be prepared to kill said animal I probably wouldn't eat it, meaning no rabbits, or basically cute things, or snakes, basically stick to the basic chickens cows and pigs for me,
 

dvd_72

New member
Jun 7, 2010
581
0
0
I think it would be apropriate to quote a friend of mine in this.

"I love animals. Beef. Chicken. Pork. Lamb..."

I love animals, I respect life, and I also eat meat. Many extreme vegetarians who hate us carnivores would try to point out the hypocrisy in that, but there's an internal justification for it I just can't put into words. Maybe it's just habit, or me ignoring the hypocrisy, but I like to think there's a wordless reasoning to it.

Also I really really love meat. bloody and rare, often even raw if it doesn't make you sick.
 

Ledan

New member
Apr 15, 2009
798
0
0
Biology.
My body needs resources, and the easiest way for me to obtain those resources is to eat other animals. They are tasty, because my body is encouraging me to eat it.
I suppose i could survive off of artificial supplements plus fruits and vegetables, but this feels more natural to me (/slight sarcasm).
Nature is gross, messy, and without any morals. If cultured meat (vat grown) comes around and is tasty, ill switch.
 

SilentCom

New member
Mar 14, 2011
2,417
0
0
I like meat because it tastes good and is a good source of protein. I will try to avoid certain kinds of meat sometimes if they're too fatty or greasy. Greasy meat will sometimes make my stomach upset.
 

Ledan

New member
Apr 15, 2009
798
0
0
RoBi3.0 said:
Animal populations are artificially enlarged right now because humans are raising them for food. Animal populations natural regulate themselves and typically grow no bigger then the area they live can support. There are some exception such as an animal being introduce to an area for another part of the world and therefore having no natural predator to control the population, but that only ever occurs because of human involvement.

There have been cases where animals are introduced to new regions without human involvment. Cant remember exactly which places or animals.... except for when humans first came to Australia and devoured the largest mammals there..... but i know there are other cases!
 

RoBi3.0

New member
Mar 29, 2009
709
0
0
Ledan said:
RoBi3.0 said:
Animal populations are artificially enlarged right now because humans are raising them for food. Animal populations natural regulate themselves and typically grow no bigger then the area they live can support. There are some exception such as an animal being introduce to an area for another part of the world and therefore having no natural predator to control the population, but that only ever occurs because of human involvement.

There have been cases where animals are introduced to new regions without human involvment. Cant remember exactly which places or animals.... except for when humans first came to Australia and devoured the largest mammals there..... but i know there are other cases!
I hope you realize that there is a difference between animal migration and Instances like the Snakehead fish that now Infests a large part of the north east united states. With natural migrations predators follow the pray thus populations remain in check. In the case of the snakehead fish Asian imager ant imported the speices into the U.S. as food. Then for whatever reason they were let lose into the enviroment. Since they were moved to an area in a relatively short time their natural predators did not follow and now they wreak havoc where ever they go. Most annoying thing about this particular fish is once it destroy whatever pond or land locked ecosystem it happens to be living in it just struts out of the pond and WALKS of to find another body of water to fuck up, making it really hard to deal with.

That is what is was referring to, since I am not a zoologist I suppose sometime in earths long history a speices could have migrated to an area and not have been followed by its predator therefor wreaking similar havoc, but that would be very rare. So grats on finding the two words in my post that may not be completely accurate.

In the interest of expanding my own knowledge some links to the cases you mentioned or more info so I could look it up myself would be welcomed. :)
 

Ledan

New member
Apr 15, 2009
798
0
0
RoBi3.0 said:
Ledan said:
RoBi3.0 said:
Animal populations are artificially enlarged right now because humans are raising them for food. Animal populations natural regulate themselves and typically grow no bigger then the area they live can support. There are some exception such as an animal being introduce to an area for another part of the world and therefore having no natural predator to control the population, but that only ever occurs because of human involvement.

There have been cases where animals are introduced to new regions without human involvment. Cant remember exactly which places or animals.... except for when humans first came to Australia and devoured the largest mammals there..... but i know there are other cases!
I hope you realize that there is a difference between animal migration and Instances like the Snakehead fish that now Infests a large part of the north east united states. With natural migrations predators follow the pray thus populations remain in check. In the case of the snakehead fish Asian imager ant imported the speices into the U.S. as food. Then for whatever reason they were let lose into the enviroment. Since they were moved to an area in a relatively short time their natural predators did not follow and now they wreak havoc where ever they go. Most annoying thing about this particular fish is once it destroy whatever pond or land locked ecosystem it happens to be living in it just struts out of the pond and WALKS of to find another body of water to fuck up, making it really hard to deal with.

That is what is was referring to, since I am not a zoologist I suppose sometime in earths long history a speices could have migrated to an area and not have been followed by its predator therefor wreaking similar havoc, but that would be very rare. So grats on finding the two words in my post that may not be completely accurate.

In the interest of expanding my own knowledge some links to the cases you mentioned or more info so I could look it up myself would be welcomed. :)
I wasn't thinking of natural migration, but of instances when animals have by chance come to a new envrionment. I would do some research and provide some links for you, but it already the middle of then night here.... I'm pretty sure I came by this information while studying biology.
Some animals (think it was a snake) have been carried to isolated areas by tides and driftwood. I think the specific example was snakes coming to an island.

Another point about your original post, though you probably know this already and im just being picky, animal populations are in a constant state of flux. Often this population is larger than what the environment can support, so the animals best adapted to the environment survive. The supportive cappacity of animals environments are also in a constant state of flux, but usually always right themselves. A limited example:
A natural drought will cause there to be less grass, supporting less rabbits, supporting less foxes. Next cycle there will be more grass, but also more rabbits since there are less foxes, so more foxes will breed, causing there to be less rabbits.... yadiyadi until the system rights itself before another sudden change or gradual change.
 

RoBi3.0

New member
Mar 29, 2009
709
0
0
Ledan said:
RoBi3.0 said:
Ledan said:
RoBi3.0 said:
Animal populations are artificially enlarged right now because humans are raising them for food. Animal populations natural regulate themselves and typically grow no bigger then the area they live can support. There are some exception such as an animal being introduce to an area for another part of the world and therefore having no natural predator to control the population, but that only ever occurs because of human involvement.

There have been cases where animals are introduced to new regions without human involvment. Cant remember exactly which places or animals.... except for when humans first came to Australia and devoured the largest mammals there..... but i know there are other cases!
I hope you realize that there is a difference between animal migration and Instances like the Snakehead fish that now Infests a large part of the north east united states. With natural migrations predators follow the pray thus populations remain in check. In the case of the snakehead fish Asian imager ant imported the speices into the U.S. as food. Then for whatever reason they were let lose into the enviroment. Since they were moved to an area in a relatively short time their natural predators did not follow and now they wreak havoc where ever they go. Most annoying thing about this particular fish is once it destroy whatever pond or land locked ecosystem it happens to be living in it just struts out of the pond and WALKS of to find another body of water to fuck up, making it really hard to deal with.

That is what is was referring to, since I am not a zoologist I suppose sometime in earths long history a speices could have migrated to an area and not have been followed by its predator therefor wreaking similar havoc, but that would be very rare. So grats on finding the two words in my post that may not be completely accurate.

In the interest of expanding my own knowledge some links to the cases you mentioned or more info so I could look it up myself would be welcomed. :)
I wasn't thinking of natural migration, but of instances when animals have by chance come to a new envrionment. I would do some research and provide some links for you, but it already the middle of then night here.... I'm pretty sure I came by this information while studying biology.
Some animals (think it was a snake) have been carried to isolated areas by tides and driftwood. I think the specific example was snakes coming to an island.

Another point about your original post, though you probably know this already and im just being picky, animal populations are in a constant state of flux. Often this population is larger than what the environment can support, so the animals best adapted to the environment survive. The supportive cappacity of animals environments are also in a constant state of flux, but usually always right themselves. A limited example:
A natural drought will cause there to be less grass, supporting less rabbits, supporting less foxes. Next cycle there will be more grass, but also more rabbits since there are less foxes, so more foxes will breed, causing there to be less rabbits.... yadiyadi until the system rights itself before another sudden change or gradual change.
Snakes and drift wood ineresting. I see what you mean now, and yes I am aware of population flux. I figured the concept was a little larger then I felt like explaning in a thread not exactly about biology. Lol

Thanks for the information I will be off to google when I get a chance.
 

Troublesome Lagomorph

The Deadliest Bunny
May 26, 2009
27,258
0
0
Nearly all my meals consist of meat, some kind of side thing (beans, veggies, etc) and rice. kinda hard to imagine a meal without one of those qualities.
Besides rice, of course. I've had many great meals with not a single grain of rice...
Sightless Wisdom said:
I eat meat because it's easier to have a balanced diet when including protein and iron from meats. Additionally they are delicious and provide many options for meals. That's all there is to it really.
Well, balls. Here its stated better than I could have done it.
It all boils down to options, options and options. If I have only veggies, fruits and grains, I'm left with nearly no options... which means I'd enjoy eating even less... which means I'll be perpetually without an appetite... And yes, I have gone long periods of time with no meat. Decided to not have a single piece of meat for a month or so a year or two ago and the tiny selection of bland food I was left with made me skip nearly every meal.
 

acturisme

New member
Jul 21, 2008
200
0
0
Plants make the world better.
Animals eat plants.
I eat animals.
You eat plants.
I'm eating the problem.
You are eating the SOLUTION.


:D