• WoahWoah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    Save you a click: Walz doesn’t practice vegetarianism like the author and the other 5% of the population of the US that does, so he’s secretly evil.

    • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Not OP, but that’s not exactly accurate. The article itself is much less dramatic than the headline. The article acknowledges how trump’s policies would absolutely be worse

      Mainly talks about implicit support of factory farming in campaign stops and the like. But also notes that it’s not limited to Walz and far worse on the Republican side

      Kind of wish they just ran with a different headline on this

      • Clent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        40
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        This statement is why no one likes vegans. You’re demanding that someone adhere to your believe system. It doesn’t matter how well you can argue your rationale, the demand itself is the reason.

        It’s the same level of insufferableness as Christian Warriors.

        • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          1 month ago

          Not OP, but setting aside animal rights for a moment, the rational given here is effectively an argument against all social movements

          Saying that one should not ever push or nuge someone towards what you think is right regardless of how well argued or how much of a point that you have

          • Clent@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            23
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            My point is that they aren’t pushing or nudging, they are making a demand

            • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              12
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Do most/many social movements not do the all three at the same time? For instance, demanding that voting rights acts should be passed while simultaneously trying to nudge people and politicians to support it

              • Clent@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                12
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 month ago

                Veganism isn’t a social movement. It’s a culture movement closer to religion than anything. It has special dietary and lifestyle dogma that one must adhere to in order to be a member of the group.

                It merely attempts to leverage existing social movements to push its much larger agenda, as any religion does.

                • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  9
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  I think that’s misunderstanding the goals of those who advocate for it. Animal rights is the movement. Veganism is advocated as a means to achieve that end by stopping the support of the harm within animal agriculture & factory farming

              • GBU_28@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 month ago

                Voting rights =/= dietary choices.

                One thing is others imposing a lack of autonomy on others (not allowing certain people to vote)

                The other thing is a personal choice that no one is stopping you from making.

        • Sunshine @lemmy.caOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          31
          ·
          1 month ago

          Eating a vegan diet could be the “single biggest way” to reduce your environmental impact on earth, a new study suggests.

          Researchers at the University of Oxford found that cutting meat and dairy products from your diet could reduce an individual’s carbon footprint from food by up to 73 per cent.

          Source

          It is the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that appropriately planned vegetarian, including vegan, diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. These diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, adolescence, older adulthood, and for athletes. Plant-based diets are more environmentally sustainable than diets rich in animal products because they use fewer natural resources and are associated with much less environmental damage. Vegetarians and vegans are at reduced risk of certain health conditions, including ischemic heart disease, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, certain types of cancer, and obesity. Low intake of saturated fat and high intakes of vegetables, fruits, whole grains, legumes, soy products, nuts, and seeds (all rich in fiber and phytochemicals) are characteristics of vegetarian and vegan diets that produce lower total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and better serum glucose control. These factors contribute to reduction of chronic disease. Vegans need reliable sources of vitamin B-12, such as fortified foods or supplements.

          Source 2

          The production of animal-based foods is associated with higher greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than plant-based foods. The objective of this study was to estimate the difference in dietary GHG emissions between self-selected meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans in the UK. Subjects were participants in the EPIC-Oxford cohort study. The diets of 2,041 vegans, 15,751 vegetarians, 8,123 fish-eaters and 29,589 meat-eaters aged 20–79 were assessed using a validated food frequency questionnaire. Comparable GHG emissions parameters were developed for the underlying food codes using a dataset of GHG emissions for 94 food commodities in the UK, with a weighting for the global warming potential of each component gas. The average GHG emissions associated with a standard 2,000 kcal diet were estimated for all subjects. ANOVA was used to estimate average dietary GHG emissions by diet group adjusted for sex and age. The age-and-sex-adjusted mean (95 % confidence interval) GHG emissions in kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalents per day (kgCO2e/day) were 7.19 (7.16, 7.22) for high meat-eaters ( > = 100 g/d), 5.63 (5.61, 5.65) for medium meat-eaters (50-99 g/d), 4.67 (4.65, 4.70) for low meat-eaters ( < 50 g/d), 3.91 (3.88, 3.94) for fish-eaters, 3.81 (3.79, 3.83) for vegetarians and 2.89 (2.83, 2.94) for vegans. In conclusion, dietary GHG emissions in self-selected meat-eaters are approximately twice as high as those in vegans. It is likely that reductions in meat consumption would lead to reductions in dietary GHG emissions.

          Source 3

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            your third claim is going to take some reading for me, but I would bet dollars to donuts that I’m going to find out that they’re counting greenhouse gas emissions from the feed that is given to animals, which makes sense if you don’t think about it too long. but most of what we need to feed to animals is actually agricultural waste product, so by feeding it to animals, we are conserving, not producing.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            your first claim is actually just fluff. The actual research paper does not make that same claim.

            your second claim is literally expired. The academy of nutrition and dietetics does not currently have a position about vegetarian or vegan diets.

          • GBU_28@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Obviously the biggest way to reduce impact is to not exist, and certainly not reproduce.

            Mind, I’m not pointing that phrase at you, I’m speaking about any human.

          • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            I like how when someone basically says “Don’t be the vegan at the party”, you double down with the thing that most pushes buttons.

            It’s good at removing doubt.

      • MrVilliam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Really grasping for reasons to not like him, huh? I wonder why you aren’t broadcasting that Donald Trump needs to go vegan 🤔

          • GBU_28@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            Thanks for posting why, I think it’s good to see the reason in the comments, not just the log

            • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              That’s why I do it.

              On reddit all you’d see is a bunch of “Removed” and go “What the hell happened here?”

              • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                Tbh it’d be nice if Lemmy actually put the reason given in place of the comment instead of just “removed”. That way you wouldn’t even need to respond, just properly articulate the why in the removal itself.

    • Maven (famous)@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 month ago

      In Minnesota the Democrats and the Farmers party are literally the same party.

      The Democrats, the farmers, and the labor parties all merged a while ago into the Democratic-Farmer-Labor party…

      Of course he’s friendly with farmers… He’s part of the Farmers party…

  • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Next up: “The ugly reality behind Tim Walz’s classic car.”

    The article: It’s old an inefficient and runs on fossil fuels and that means he wants to kill the planet. But the Republicans are worse.