Being natural yet more is generally better even for our health. Some might say eating meat is natural for us, I have heard such talk, but our physiology says something else. We do not have claws and teeth for it, we would not just catch animals and eat them. Cooking is not as natural. Predators in nature do not cook. Veganism is the only right choice. There is the healthiest way possible with being vegan, with enough whole foods. Any animal agriculture and industry using the animals involve suffering of animals and the slaughter of them. We should not think there is more reason to not be vegan. The best we can do is learn from our mistakes and make our choices besides what is routine more carefully with our observation, any can make such a commitment as I make that anyone who I eat with, which is now very rare for me, will know I am vegan and what that means, that I would not knowingly eat anything with animal products.

  • jol@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    13·
    3 months ago

    Appeal to nature is not a solid argument for- nor against veganism. Cooking unlocks vastly more calories. This is all very much anti-science and not welcome here.

    • FredVegrox@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      3·
      3 months ago

      The China Study, besides many more studies, Forks Over Knives, https://www.forksoverknives.com/, there was nothing in my communication against cooking, it was pointing out we and any people are not natural predators, which do not need cooking. Uncooked vegetables and fruits are available to us, any meat that would be desired is necessarily cooked, unlike what natural predators would eat. I made my point, with studies backing up what is healthiest.

            • streetfestival@lemmy.caEnglish
              1·
              3 months ago

              Damn dude, you raise an impressive “please block me, your Lemmy experience will only be enhanced” argument.

              due to food shortages and much more limited food variety

              That is “CLEARLY explained why the study is bogus”? Get real. You revealed you don’t even know who’s behind the study. So, you demonstrate little evidence of providing valid insight and not ignorant, poorly-informed speculation. And you’re rude.

              May we enjoy our separate Lemmy experiences henceforth