{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
10/5/2014 7:12:21 PM
18
I'm pretty sure there was a vegan couple that put their baby on a vegan diet and it killed their baby. So ya, I'd rather eat a cheeseburger than kill babies.
English
-
If you're referring to the French couple in 08, this was attributed to the mother's deficiency in vitamin A and B12 -- both of which can be readily obtained through a proper vegan diet. She simply wasn't watching her nutrition, and that is crucial in pregnancy whether you eat meat or not. [url=http://www.theveganrd.com/2011/10/an-essential-resource-for-pregnant-vegans.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=emailutm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheVeganDietitian+%28The+Vegan+Dietitian%29]There are many excellent sources for pregnant vegan women[/url]
-
If you're balancing that precariously on a knife edge, it's too dangerous.
-
You aren't on a knife edge though. You run equal risks if you don't watch your nutrition for any pregnancy. Bear in mind these points to help make things clearer: - this was an isolated incident that occurred 8 years ago -- there are many cases of babies dying due to malnutrition that [i]aren't[/i] vegan, but you don't hear about them. The fact that this incident made headlines shows just how uncommon it is. - [url=http://www.veganhealth.org/articles/realveganchildren]There are countless healthy vegan children, raised with proper care and attention.[/url]
-
A vegan diet is unsafe period for babies. They need proper nutrition and substitutes don't cut it. Why even risk the SMALLEST chance of harming your baby because you THINK vegan is better for everyone. That baby depends on it's parents and shouldn't be affected by the parents self-righteous decisions. It's hardly an "isolated" incident. Here's one from Atlanta. [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/21/opinion/21planck.html?_r=0]link[/url] There is also multiple cases where owners who have killed their dogs, which is a CARNIVORE, by putting them in a vegan diet. Also, don't even pretend to know anything about animal rights and animal suffering if you don't know who Peter Singer is.
-
Edited by Pendulate: 10/6/2014 6:06:18 AMExcept I don't simply "think vegan is better". I know, due to irrefutable nutritional science, that a vegan diet is just as safe and sustainable as one with animal products. I did provide a link which you seem to have missed. Your second isolated case does not prove anything. Here's a better source to make things clear: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs178/en/ Key points from the article: " 6.3 million children under the age of five died in 2013. More than half of these early child deaths are due to conditions that could be prevented or treated with access to simple, affordable interventions. Leading causes of death in under-five children are preterm birth complications, pneumonia, birth asphyxia, diarrhoea and malaria. [b]About 45% of all child deaths are linked to malnutrition.[/b]" You should now be able to see that when something makes the headlines, it is [i]not[/i] a common occurrence. We are not carnivores, so your argument about dogs isn't relevant. We have the physiology of an omnivore and can therefore survive perfectly healthily without animal products. I am certainly familiar with Peter Singer and actually have a podcast with him I was planning on listening to later.
-
Look, I got nothing against vegans and thank god you know who Peter Singer is, (personally I don't like the guy). My biggest problem is their elitist attitude hiding behind their "irrefutable" evidence and their ignorance because you have to know what you are doing or you are going to hurt yourself or kill you baby. Why risk that? Just give the kid a normal life and let him/her choose if they want to be a vegan when they grow up. Babies that rely on substitute's to breast feeding have a weakened immune system. They need their mother's antibodies and nutrition to be a strong baby. My example of the dogs was just another way that self-righteous and ignorant vegans actually cause more harm than good. I wasn't saying anything about humans being omnivores or whatever, but please, dismiss whatever evidence you deem necessary.
-
Edited by Pendulate: 10/6/2014 2:11:49 PMThey don't rely on a substitute for breastfeeding. That was my point -- if the mother consumes the proper nutrients, the pregnancy and infancy stages will be no different. I apologize if I came off as elitist, but I assure you there's a difference between arrogance and confidence. It's worth noting that I used to eat meat too, and I wasn't about to give it up easily. Making the change required some seriously convincing evidence and challenging of my beliefs. Consequently, if there are any good, rational reasons to consume meat I will approach them with an equally open mind. Problem is, I haven't heard any. Vegans certainly do not cause more harm than good, and again I don't think taking isolated incidents like that and making blanket statements is honest. Vegans are generally against the pet industries because they breed animals as commodities and treat them as novelties (puppy mills are patently unethical). If a vegan has a pet, there's a good chance they rescued it or bought it before becoming vegan. That being said, there are many sources out there for having healthy pets on a vegan diet -- this is obviously more difficult than with humans, but with careful attention, still maintainable I think. Especially since there is an entire industry for vegan pet foods.
-
I was under the impression they use substitutes for breast feeding, for that I apologize. Though that being said I don't think I'm going run into a doctor that recommends a vegan diet for a baby over a normal diet if I'm not a vegan. My point is people need to take responsibility. Wether it was an isolated incident or not, those vegan parents killed their babies by putting them on a vegan diet. I'm not saying there isn't healthy baby vegans, I'm saying there is more of a risk especially if they don't know what they are doing. As for the morality aspect of veganism, I could care less about cows, chickens and pigs. Doesn't mean I don't think equal consideration is appropriate. I'm going to eat meat, but I'd prefer that it wasn't caged and wallowing in it's own feces.
-
Edited by Pendulate: 10/7/2014 12:30:20 AMOf course they're responsible. Keep in mind that a vegan pregnancy isn't necessarily difficult, but there are relatively few dieticians who actually know anything about it. Which is why I linked a world-renowned one who does. If you don't care about the ethical side I'm not going to press you. But you should know that supporting something while at the same time saying "You know, I don't like what they're doing and it should be better...", isn't good enough. It's an insincere attempt to feel comfortable with your actions. But thanks for the discussion.
-
[quote]But you should know that supporting something while at the same time saying "You know, I don't like what they're doing and it should be better...", isn't good enough. It's an insincere attempt to feel comfortable with your actions.[/quote] I don't know what this is about but sure. Good talking though.
-
You said that you'd prefer if animals weren't caged and wallowing in their feces. I'm just saying it's intellectually insincere to say that yet still go and buy those animal products. Sorry, but I don't like to leave discussions on a misunderstanding.
-
Oh, I was referring to animal "equal consideration" not equal rights. There is a difference. Where as equal consideration is the extent of my morality towards animals.
-
But you don't think animals should be caged?
-
If they don't have to. Doesn't mean I'm going to stop eating them. A lot of big corporate farming has already moved to cage free animals.
-
Well, they don't have to. They only are because people give the corporations their money anyway. There's no incentive to change it.
-
I blame the woman.
-
The parents were uneducated, no doubt. Taken from a news article: "The couple did not follow the doctor's advice to take the baby to hospital when they went for her nine-month checkup and found she was suffering from bronchitis and was losing weight," he said. Instead they treated her with cabbage poultices, mustard and camphor and washed her with earth and clay instead of giving her baths, the court heard." I wouldn't call it negligence, but needless to say any parents with these beliefs are cause for alarm.
-
I call that natural selection.
