Owner Defends Decision To Feed Cat Vegan-Only Diet

[Dys]

Quick, someone get that man a dose of vaccine so he gets the autism. It's the only way to make the nanospiderbots control his mind and make him feed that cat properly.

[Enfilade]

Lol @ the people here who think humans and other animals actually need to eat meat in order to survive.

[Ragedaug]

As much fun as we can poke at the dude making his cat go vegan, most kibble that people feed their cats isn't much better. A lot of cereal and animals by products deemed not fit for human consumption. feet/beaks, etc. Not to mention cat's teeth aren't designed to chew kibble.

Cats, when left to their own devices will eat the entire animal they catch. bird, mouse, fish, etc. They eat the skin, the bones, the internal organs, the raw meat, etc. It's not a big mystery to find out why, when instead of feeding a cat what they would choose to eat and replicating all the nutrients a cat receives from eating the entire animal, they are instead feed primarily grain and corn, which they can't digest well, that they get fat, lazy, and apathetic.

[Morgaith]

Lol @ the people here who think humans and other animals actually need to eat meat in order to survive.

If you need supplements to survive due to your diet then yes you actually "need meat in order to survive"

[Ragedaug]

Lol @ the people here who think humans and other animals actually need to eat meat in order to survive.

I can survive without air too (for a little while). So maybe you should define the duration of time you think it's OK to survive eating a suboptimal or plain bad diet, and what kind of quality of life you can expect while you are just 'surviving'.


I tried your vegan diet with my pet blue whale. He says the seaweed keeps getting stuck in his baleen. he keeps asking when he can go back to the plankton, but I told him you said vegan was best.

[luc54]

Actually, no. The world going vegan would make things far worse. The energy to produce vegetables is larger, and it takes more resources. Not only that, but humans cannot live on a vegan diet without some supplements. Mainly for B12. The entire world simply couldn't do it. It only works for the few who do it now a days because they are few and far between.

- - - Updated - - -


What positive impact do you think they would actually have on the planet exactly? Veganism has become a driving force in the illegal deforestation activities in Mexico thanks to their fruits being so lucrative to export for vegans. And don't say something like "if cattle were gone, we could use that land instead". No, we can't since most land that cattle is raised on is no good for crop growing. Thus, why the cattle are there to begin with.



Actually, no.When you look at some of the biggest vegetables, like Celery, Eggplant and cucumbers, they actually take more energy and leave a bigger carbon footprint when compared to chicken or pork. Direct link is https://link.springer.com/article/10...669-015-9577-y

Suggesting that because some vegetables, which are made out of mostly water, produce more greenhouse gases per calorie means that vegetarian diets as whole are worse is dumb.

Now it does make specific vegetables look bad per energy unit, but that's only because their energy density is low. No one is going to eat diet of only broccoli, tomatoes and cucumber. It would take around 8 kg or 17 pounds of broccoli to feed adult male for a day. No one's going to eat that much in a day. Instead you would eat diet with plenty of carbs such as potatoes or rice which are better than any meat by product. Even with some vegetables looking bad they are still by far better than the worst offenders which are the red meat products.

[kail]

Lol @ the people here who think humans and other animals actually need to eat meat in order to survive.

Some obvious bait here.

[Deleted]

Hmm nice, can i convert my tarantula to vegan? It would be cheaper.

[Donald Hellscream]

Lol what a whackjob.

[yetgdhfgh]

Cats are fucking carnivores they are built to be the perfect hunter killer.

I wonder if the owner cares when the cat goes outside to kill its own food and then brings it back to him? (If he lets it outside)

[Gaidax]

Honestly this is why I can't stand Vegans and other similar fucks. Do this shit to yourself all you like, but don't force othera too. In this case it's basically animal cruelty.

[Deleted]

Time to label this as animal abuse, because that's effectively what it is.

[Gavll]

This is basically animal cruelty

[Deleted]

Suggesting that because some vegetables, which are made out of mostly water, produce more greenhouse gases per calorie means that vegetarian diets as whole are worse is dumb.

Now it does make specific vegetables look bad per energy unit, but that's only because their energy density is low. No one is going to eat diet of only broccoli, tomatoes and cucumber. It would take around 8 kg or 17 pounds of broccoli to feed adult male for a day. No one's going to eat that much in a day. Instead you would eat diet with plenty of carbs such as potatoes or rice which are better than any meat by product. Even with some vegetables looking bad they are still by far better than the worst offenders which are the red meat products.

The best thing is avocado, praised by all vegans, and then you look up that it requires 320 liters of waters for just one avocado.

- - - Updated - - -

Lol @ the people here who think humans and other animals actually need to eat meat in order to survive.

Too bad that there's 1000000 science researches into this that agree that you need red meat, poultry, fish at least once per week.

Vegans and Vegetarians don't live long, their life expectancy is around 5 years less than the average but healthy meat eater.

That also doesn't even include reduced cerebral capacity/performance due to not having the fats/cholesterol the brain requires to function (ie animal fats are the best form of brain food and there's not a plant in the world that can substitute for it).

[Noradin]

As a "biologist" you'd know that you have to stuff things into animals, to generate meat. Where do you think that stuff comes from? Hint: a calorie of meat takes >10 the ressources a calorie of vegetable takes.

The result (meat) also takes less calorines to digest.

[CatchingFire]

Just another militant vegan giving meat eaters even more reason to look upon them with distaste.

[Zantos]

Suggesting that because some vegetables, which are made out of mostly water, produce more greenhouse gases per calorie means that vegetarian diets as whole are worse is dumb.

Now it does make specific vegetables look bad per energy unit, but that's only because their energy density is low. No one is going to eat diet of only broccoli, tomatoes and cucumber. It would take around 8 kg or 17 pounds of broccoli to feed adult male for a day. No one's going to eat that much in a day. Instead you would eat diet with plenty of carbs such as potatoes or rice which are better than any meat by product. Even with some vegetables looking bad they are still by far better than the worst offenders which are the red meat products.

First, using an incomplete graph is far worse then what I stated. I only listed a Few vegetables. If you read my article, you would see further down where it addressed what you stated. In three scenarios. Here they are:

In the first scenario, the impact of food production on the environment could be lessened if people simply ate less of what they already do. Shifting from a high-calorie diet to a reduced calorie diet led to a 9 per cent decrease in energy use, water footprint and emissions.

The second scenario involved maintaining calorie intake, but adjusting foods to incorporate more fruits, vegetables, dairy and seafood. That diet would see an increase of 43 per cent in energy, 16 per cent in water footprint and emission rise by 11 per cent.

The third scenario involved reducing calories and shifting current food mix to USDA recommended food patterns, which support healthy weight. This diet includes reducing calories and increasing foods such as vegetables, fruits, wholegrains, low-fat and fat-free dairy products and a variety of seafood. This diet scenario also involved reducing the intake of red meat, sugars, fats and oils.

That resulted in 38 per cent increase in energy, 10 per cent in water footprint and 6 per cent in gas emissions.

The only one where we saw a decrease is when people just ate less food all together. In short, again, vegan diets cost More then our regular diets. In either scenario where more vegetables were consumed, the energy cost rose.

Please, at least read my article before posting a random graph that doesn't even include the few example vegetables I listed.

- - - Updated - - -

Lol @ the people here who think humans and other animals actually need to eat meat in order to survive.

Vitamin B12. That is why we need meat to survive. This is why most vegans end up malnourished. They don't do the proper research to know what they are doing.

[Enfilade]

Vitamin B12. That is why we need meat to survive. This is why most vegans end up malnourished. They don't do the proper research to know what they are doing.

So there's these things called multivitamins...

[luc54]

First, using an incomplete graph is far worse then what I stated. I only listed a Few vegetables. If you read my article, you would see further down where it addressed what you stated. In three scenarios. Here they are:



The only one where we saw a decrease is when people just ate less food all together. In short, again, vegan diets cost More then our regular diets. In either scenario where more vegetables were consumed, the energy cost rose.

Please, at least read my article before posting a random graph that doesn't even include the few example vegetables I listed.

- - - Updated - - -



Vitamin B12. That is why we need meat to survive. This is why most vegans end up malnourished. They don't do the proper research to know what they are doing.

I was on a mobile so doing anything was pretty much limited so I just checked some newspaper articles. Unfortunately the article you linked is behind paywall as are many others that I found, but there was this free one which may also explain why vegetables might be ranked so badly:
https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/101/1/184/4564263
Particulary this graph is very relevant to the case:


It's tiny but with zooming function it should still be readable. The other studies didn't break down their formation of green house gasses per phases of the food. Vegetables understandably need to be fresh and thus need to be transported in certain conditions and kept cold in order to preserve them better so they have by far the larget portion of energy needed for those phases. So you would be right that overall in terms of GHGs vegetables are worse than meat products. In terms of the agriculture impact itself meat is still the worst offender as shown by the blue part of the bars as they do require lot of area and then some more area to produce soy to actually feed them as in case is with the cattle down in South America.

[KainneAbsolute]

Its animal cruelty. The cat is an animal and not a person.

A nutritionist friend tries to be vega. He confessed he has extreme discipline with his food and multivitamins sometimes arent enough. He always say that been vegan is not for anyone to try.

About the GH emissions...some livestock needs to eat vegetables and the animals excrements are the main source of emissions of many countries...so i really doubt that vegetarion diet cause more emissions.