• This bill, if it passes, applies to much more than just what the just the title says here

    The bill would also threaten other farmed animal welfare laws, like California’s and New York City’s prohibitions on the sale of foie gras, a product made by force-feeding ducks and geese.

    […]

    The bill is written so broadly that it could threaten some 1,000 other state and local laws and regulations that govern agriculture, from timber to beef to crops, according to Kelley McGill, a regulatory policy fellow at Harvard Law School’s Animal Law and Policy Program

    •  abraxas   ( @abraxas@lemmy.ml ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      Most of the comments I’m seeing downvoted are about pushing towards veganism with factually incorrect reasoning or statements.

      Nobody is saying they want animals to be treated worse than they already are when they downvote “veganism is better for the environment because false reason here”, and especially not when they downvote the people getting rude to them.

      I have yet to see one downvoted comment that is simply saying they oppose Republicans on this disgusting political ploy of theirs. Totally different things, my man (or woman).

    • Just not an option for most people, and not an appealing option for even more than that.

      You don’t even need to go vegan to have a positive impact.

      Personally, I’ve been buying a lot more meat alternatives from Impossible, Beyond, Gardein, et al. Had to cut out red meat for heart health, but those alternatives quickly grew on me. The environmental and animal welfare benefits are just a bonus.

        • The extra insulin I would have to take as a T1 diabetic to cover a carb-heavy diet would quickly outweigh any financial savings eating beans and rice would.

          There are dozens of us out there who have restrictive diets that, while veg* diets are technically possible, are not easy, financially sound, or realistic. I try to stick to a primarily vegetarian diet, but I also recognize that protein is an outsized portion of my diet compared to most people. To accomplish that, animal products are important to me. Cheese, eggs, and even the occasional meat product are going to be things I eat, and not feel bad about.

          • You know, fair. In a humane world we’d find a way to support people like you, but right now I guess there are probably some people who really must feed on corpses to survive. I still say this is a red herring, because bloodmouths use you as a cover for their own unjustified blood letting.

        • Technically, yes, and in a survival situation, sure. But when you can get whatever you want at a grocery store / restaurant, it’s a much bigger hurdle for people to make that change. Realistically, people are going to eat what they like.

          I’d have never even bothered with the plant-based “meats” had the doctor not told me, flat out, “Unless you change your diet, you are going to die”. Literally took those words before I was able to force myself to change my eating habits.

          Pushing cold-turkey veganism isn’t really helping the cause here. Yes, that would be ideal, but it’s letting perfect be the enemy of good.

      • If by “not an option” you are referring to cost, it turns out that it actually is usually cheaper to eat plant-based diets overall, and real-world spending data agrees with that

        It found that in high-income countries:

        • Vegan diets were the most affordable and reduced food costs by up to one third.

        • Vegetarian diets were a close second.

        • Flexitarian diets with low amounts of meat and dairy reduced costs by 14%.

        • By contrast, pescatarian diets increased costs by up to 2%.

        https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-11-11-sustainable-eating-cheaper-and-healthier-oxford-study

        Compared to meat eaters, results show that “true” vegetarians [in the US] do indeed report lower food expenditures

        https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800915301488?via%3Dihub

        • Not the cost, the easy risk of malnutrition and requirement of supplements for B12, iron, D, iodine and omega-3…

          The majority of vegans also have difficulty getting all of their protein/amino acids. I actually use a vegan protein powder due to lactose intolerance that solves this issue, but it’s an extra cost not everyone can cover.

          Not to mention the elevated risk of Diabetes due to the high carbohydrate diet most vegans have.

          Or… You can just eat a chicken breast and solve all of these issues.

          • 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

            https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27886704/

            • It’s not that it’s not possible, it’s that it’s so easy for the layperson to fuck up. Both those claims about low diabetes risks and being able to supplement missing micronutrients are true alone, but mix them together and you get a risky balance that needs careful tracking.

              You’re basically required to eat a cup of cashews a day and put nutritional yeast in at least one meal. If you deviate from this you’re going to be at risk of malnutrition.

              Otherwise you’re going to be opting for fortified foods like bread, rice, salt, cereal, etc. Which again have all good choices within them but if you deviate from the recommended track (wheat bread, bran cereal, etc) then without close tracking you’re most likely either eating too little risking malnutrition or you’re eating too many carbs to compensate and spiking your blood sugar

              Also there’s several concerns of using fortified foods as your main source of micronutrients. Mostly that fortified foods don’t fully replace the nutrition of whole foods, and the upper levels of these supplements aren’t well controlled leading to a risk of toxicity. Stand-alone supplements are a better alternative, but do have a cost associated with them.

              You can totally do vegan, and do it right, but you’re never going to recommend it to Debby down the street who packs her kids lunches every day without also recommending she starts her family on a multivitamin. It’s just not scalable to the whole population like that.

              https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27886704

              Vegans need reliable sources of vitamin B-12, such as fortified foods or supplements.

              https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21139125/

              Vegetarians exhibit a wide diversity of dietary practices, often described by what is omitted from their diet. When a vegetarian diet is appropriately planned and includes fortified foods, it can be nutritionally adequate for adults and children and can promote health and lower the risk of major chronic diseases. The nutrients of concern in the diet of vegetarians include vitamin B(12), vitamin D, ω-3 fatty acids, calcium, iron, and zinc. Although a vegetarian diet can meet current recommendations for all of these nutrients, the use of supplements and fortified foods provides a useful shield against deficiency. A vegetarian diet usually provides a low intake of saturated fat and cholesterol and a high intake of dietary fiber and many health-promoting phytochemicals. This is achieved by an increased consumption of fruits, vegetables, whole-grains, legumes, nuts, and various soy products. As a result of these factors, vegetarians typically have lower body mass index, serum total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, and blood pressure; reduced rates of death from ischemic heart disease; and decreased incidence of hypertension, stroke, type 2 diabetes, and certain cancers than do nonvegetarians.

              https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8066912/

              Despite the enormous benefits of food fortification strategies on nutritional status, some studies have identified opposite results in terms of no impact of food fortification programs and of guaranteeing safe upper limits. For example, a study conducted among Brazilian children under the age of six found no effect of iron-fortified flour on anemia prevalence. The study consisted of four population-based surveys conducted over a four-year period, and it measured dietary intake and hemoglobin levels. The findings showed an unexpected increase in anemia among children. Despite the average intake of fortified flour detected by the study amounting to 100 g per day, the poor diets quality of children with low bioavailability of iron compromised the benefits of fortified flour

              Also from your article:

              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.

              While the diet supports it, this is just as much a correlation. It does not account for the other lifestyle choices of vegans and vegetarians such as exercising more often than the typical person.

      • The way to get people on your side (and you know, actually help the animals) is to do pretty much the opposite of what you’re doing. Black-and-white thinking (“either you’re a vegan, or you’re a bloodmouth!”) is paradoxically going to drive people away from what you’re saying and cause more animals to be harmed.

  •  abraxas   ( @abraxas@lemmy.ml ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    8
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    They found an issue that profits them that undecideds will get behind, is why.

    Free Range laws are a complicated and touchy subject in a lot of Blue areas. Eggs more than doubled in price in my state in the last 6 months or so. I’m willing to pay for them because I think Free Range laws are humane, but I’m a couple towns over from a very depressed urban community that really feels the difference when eggs were one of the cheapest nutritional purchases they could buy.

    THERE, there’s been a lot of grumbling by traditionally blue voters about the Free Range laws. Unfortunately, for a lot of people, empathy ends when it affects their family.

    IMO, we needed subsidy or purchase-subsidy of some sort to counteract the cost of Free Range laws, and this might not have happened because it might not have been popular enough. Nonetheless, hopefully they shoot themsleves in the foot with this. They’re leaning on the same commerce clause that could eventually lead to a federal Free Range mandate.

  • It’s a very old story, states rights unless the states do something conservatives don’t like.

    An example was banning slavery. Conservatives didn’t like that, so they started a war over it. A war meant to deny the states the right to ban slavery.

    Now they want to ban states from bettering the world. I say now, but it’s actually always.