Lets forget the debate about health or morality. @Bojack do you think our food consumption and the effects of it are sustainable? There will be no fish in the sea anymore in a couple of decades. We will turn every forest in the world into a corn field to make enough food for our animals we consume. Right now we are causing a mass extinction event that one day might surpass the magnitude of last one when the dinosaurs were wiped out 65 million years ago.
I’m not saying that we should stop eating meat. But we have to think about the future. We are currently destroying our world.
I’m not very strict, but I try to reduce carbs and base my diet on meat, cheese, eggs, vegetables. To get the sense of the proportions, when I order food or go to a canteen, they give me 4x as much rice/pasta as I need.
Well, What I’ve Learned talks about it and it makes sense to me. Processed food replaces natural/traditional ingredients with cheap alternatives and adds conservatives. He mentions vegetable oil as particularly bad (oil consumption is highly correlated with heart disease). Obesity is caused by excess carbohydrate consumption, and our unwillingness to fast, which develops insulin resistance. Eventually, we develop these huge fat reserves that we are not able to access.
For sure I don’t believe that obesity is caused by eating fat or animal meat. There are plenty obese vegans, including my uncle and his whole family. His wife is American and they all look like stereotypical Americans. Vegan diet does not equal healthy diet. And heart disease is not caused by consumption of cholesterol. The presence of cholesterol in blood is the symptom of inflammation.
I’m aware of the problem. I believe non-sustainable practices should be heavily taxed, because otherwise it’s no different than stealing. Thus, meat etc. should be expensive. But we should be careful how we set these regulations. For example, after western countries expressed their support for biofuels, poorer countries like Brazil went on to cut down forests to make room for farmland for biofuel production.
Sunflower Oil? Canola oil? It’s true they keep changing opinion.
Last time I’ve read about oils, Canola was toxic until it became “Canola” (it should be rapeseed oil), while Sunflower was always Ok.
Let’s talk about it. That’s probably more important than all the rest of issues. Can you imagine a group of foreigners coming to our foreset and “catch” all animals with a big nets, that they basically pull from helicopters? This is more or less what happens in the seas, which groups that just kills anything just to catch the important stuff. All in “international waters” …or less international waters…google it.
“International waters” should be also a term that need to disappear. It’s a no-mans-land (water actually) where everything is allowed.
There’s an interesting theory that it might be totally unrelated to diet but environmental, e.g. chemical/etc from the environment (and might be due to several causes, not necessarily just one): https://twitter.com/mold_time/status/1412827749828513800?s=08
I didn’t research further, but it’s an interesting theory (and there’s precedent, e.g. lead), I wonder if in 20y we’ll think how stupid we were for dumping X in our environment.
Thanks for this link! This is indeed an interesting read! I wasn’t aware of the many facts posted there. Like that lab animals are getting obese, or that carb/sugar consumption has been falling for decades, but obesity is still on the rise. Honestly, I wouldn’t say that over the course of my entire life I’ve been eating little carbs or sugar, or exercising a lot, yet my weight always stayed around 71-72 kg. I also have periods of eating more or less and it does not affect my weight. I’m so much puzzled by the people telling jokingly that they put up so much weight during christmas because of eating too much, doesn’t happen to me. But OK, sample of 1, quite irrelevant.
But yeah, being shown these arguments (hope they are true), it’s pretty evident that some industrial byproduct (maybe more than one) is causing obesity. It’s also fascinating that people who live in the mountains are somehow protected, due to the accumulation of byproducts along the watershed. I was instinctively in favor of the pesticide/agrarian initiatives. Clearly someone is saving money producing stuff and polluting the environment. I hope there is enough research focus on the topic, obesity is terrible for health & the proper functioning of the healthcare system.
Been there, then my wife got pregnant and we both gained 10kg but she lost it again after the birth… I didn‘t. Probably has to do with stress and/or age.
The claim in this documentary is bunkum, acknolwedged by the person who made it BBC fact check Seaspiracy
*"The claim originally comes from a 2006 study…However, the study’s lead author is doubtful about using its findings to come to conclusions today.
“The 2006 paper is now 15 years old and most of the data in it is almost 20 years old,” Prof Boris Worm, of Dalhousie University, told the BBC. “Since then, we have seen increasing efforts in many regions to rebuild depleted fish populations.”
… Other experts have taken issue with the original claims in the 2006 study.There was an “unrealistic extrapolation way beyond the bounds of available data”… “Overfishing is certainly a problem in many regions of the world, but in regions where fisheries management regulations are based on scientific evidence and properly enforced, most fish stocks are doing well,”
In Europe there are quotas for how much fish is allowed to be caught. Scientists monitor stocks and if they decrease the quotas are reduced. Perhaps it is different in developing countries. However a generalised prediction about “no fish left in the sea” doesn’t make sense.
I just wanted to point out that the statment Cortana made is not supported by this Netflix documentary. The statement from Cortana seems too generalised for me
That is a big allegation. Can you be more specific - source?
For transparency: I come from a community that relies on fishing so am sensitive to this topic
Then you should be able to confirm the shown problems in the documentary that these trawler net fishing companies “destroy” smaller communities that historically relied on fishing, no? Or is the fish supply/population for your community the same as it was 10 years ago?
Great mindset. If everyone would think like that, this planet would be uninhabitable by end of this century.
While population growth is a major contributor to the whole problem, you still have to look at the ecological footprint. Mine will be probably as big as those of 1000 Africans.
Interesting theory, but not sure how much is true there. The reality is much more complicated.
As an example the chart of sugar consumption is mainly sugar and not sweeteners that mainly have the same effect on the body.
Also if even decrease since 2000 they are extremely high in comparison to other decades.
I’ve been “playing” all my life with my weight. It is quite easy to lose and gain weight if you want
and know how to do it. But to stick with the change you need to stick the same weight for a year or to to get our body adjusted to the new baseline.
At the end it goes to what you eat and what you move. They go hand in hand.
These are some spectacular achievements of capitalism, that socialist SJWs just fail to notice. And yes, you’ve got a point that such enormous population & life quality growth will have a devastating effect on the environment. But does it mean we should not try to deal with the problem? The environmental push has to come from the rich countries, so that the poor countries can follow suit, once they reach our level of wealth.
By the way, the fight with overpopulation is a done deal. We will probably never reach 11 billion and the population will start shrinking after that point. Excluding Africa, this is already happening, even in Asia. Europe will soon be a land of old people.
Finally, I’d like to say that if something (air, water, trees, animals) belongs to everyone, it belongs to noone. Nobody cares for it, nobody takes responsibility to protect it. The tragedy of the commons. That’s why I think people should take more ownership over the environment and protect it from people who try to make an easy buck by exploiting it. @Patron you cannot agree even with that?
My point is: I don’t know what the politicians and other people hiding behind Greta Thunberg want to introduce. I’m just saying, for decades people have been exploiting the environment, without paying the FULL price of it. Me and you have to live with the consequences of the consumption of our grandparents and parents. The piles of trash and plastic in the oceans, air and water pollution, mass extinction of animal species really don’t bother you? I’m really pissed when I find piles of ads in my mailbox every week in a 1st World country. Why is it cost-effective to do that? Because they can cut trees, print leaflets and they’re not the ones who bear the cost of utilising them. Car owners pollute the air in cities and produce so much noise, all of that is unaccounted for. I am all for free-market solutions, but a free market where all costs are accounted for!
I see this really triggers you. Yeah, it sucks to be patronised by a bunch of hypocrites.
Well, wait a minute. Are you not a proponent of the free market? Are you not pissed when someone dumps trash on your lawn, pollutes your water, kills animals in your park without asking? Do you really think the World is still anybody’s to take, it only matters who first claims the dibs? I think we all have the same right to the clean air, clean water etc, and anybody who makes them dirty, should pay. Tell me I’m wrong.
I’ve already said this before, in Europe this problem is already solved. In Poland we already witness shrinking population. Poland will shrink from 38m now to 32m in 2050 and maybe 23m in 2100. But this kind of trend is not sustainable. Ever heard of rat park experiment? What if fertility rates don’t ever go back to 2.1? We will go extinct in a few generations.
If we keep up the trend, Europe will become an insignificant region with elderly population and the World will get dominated by Africans, who still have very high fertility rates. So with your proposal, you can be sure that European culture will die and our population will get replaced by hordes of migrants from Africa. Is this what we want? In the name of saving the environment, we will commit societal suicide?
And finally, I don’t believe social programs like child support have any positive effect on fertility. In Poland they introduced it recently and nothing changed, fertility rate is still 1.4. And it makes sense, Africa has no such programs and it has a crapton of kids.
If anything, I believe the pension system makes people LESS willing to have kids. If you’re old and some other kids will cover your retirement (or even better, it will be the state’s concern), then why should you have any kids? Social security replaces the need to have kids. Get rid of it, and maybe you could see growth in fertility (which you don’t want so much). So be careful what you wish for.
This reminds me of a quote I heard recently, that we’re more concerned about the environment and the future generations that we don’t even know if will come, than the people who are here and now. Not that I fully agree with that statement, but it’s food for thought.
You raise 2 questions 1) sustainabilty of fish stocks and 2) destruction of smaller communities
In fact North East Atlantic fish stocks are MUCH BETTER than they were 10 years ago. This is following severe cuts in quotas and heavy sacrifices made by fishermen from my community ~20 years ago. Based on a quick search, scientists now seem to evaluate the fishery as sustainable.
I have not watched this documentary but I have heard that in some parts of the world this happens. To me that doesn’t justify avoiding fish from other places. In the community I come from fishing boats are family owned so the above statement does not even remotely represent the situation.
Similar practises happen in farming: big companies buy up all the land and farm huge dairy herds to the detriment of local farmers. From your forum name I assume that doesn’t stop you eating swiss beef or cheese !
The easiest way to solve that is through economic forces. In capitalism, if something is free, then it’s worthless. That’s why you have to put a price on pollution, environmental degradation. I want to breathe clean air and drink fresh water and swim in clean lakes. For decades, people have been dumping trash into nature without paying for it. This includes car exhaust.
Of course it would be a problem. Anyone who has a decadent mindset and thinks keeping humanity alive and thriving is not important, will not have my support.
I’m sorry but you sound absurd. You don’t want some rich people to tell you to eat less meat, but you want to tell some Africans not to have kids? They are at a different point in history, it’s only natural for their birth rates to be higher. You cannot ask African nations to put same quotas on children like in western countries. Moreover, this is very illogical. You don’t want anybody to restrict your ability to exploit the nature, but you want to restrict others ability to reproduce?
By reading and partipating to this forum, you confirm you have read and agree with the disclaimer presented on http://www.mustachianpost.com/
En lisant et participant à ce forum, tu confirmes avoir lu et être d'accord avec l'avis de dégagement de responsabilité présenté sur http://www.mustachianpost.com/fr/
Durch das Lesen und die Teilnahme an diesem Forum bestätigst du, dass du den auf http://www.mustachianpost.com/de/ dargestellten Haftungsausschluss gelesen hast und damit einverstanden bist.
