XPost: soc.culture.indian, alt.fan.jai-maharaj, alt.religion.hindu   
   XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian   
      
   On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 08:09:02 -0700, Goo wrote:   
      
   >On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 12:54:16 -0700, dh@. wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 21:05:23 +0100, Seum  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>dh@. wrote:   
   >>>> On Tue, 06 Sep 2011 19:43:40 +0100, Seum  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> I haven't eaten meat or fish since 1972 and recently I find that I am   
   >>>>> lacking some substitute for DHA. This can be made from fish and it is   
   >>>>> not expensive, but making it from vegetables has a cost that is   
   >>>>> ridiculously high.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Is there any alternative?   
   >>>>   
   >>>>     Would there be any in grass raised beef? Then you would be helping   
   yourself,   
   >>>> contributing to decent lives for livestock, and contributing to something   
   that   
   >>>> works well for wildlife too. And at the same time contributing to less   
   wildlife   
   >>>> deaths than you probably would by eating most grain products, and surely   
   less   
   >>>> than by eating rice products. Or grass raised sheep or goat if you don't   
   want to   
   >>>> eat beef...   
   >>>   
   >>>You must be kidding.   
   >>   
   >>    What I pointed out is true, though some people might find such facts   
   amusing   
   >>somehow.   
   >>   
   >>>Livestock is polluting our atmosphere and poisoning   
   >>>our streams and rivers. What we need is faaaaaar less livestock.   
   >>   
   >>    Plowing and harrowing, treating with chemicals and harvesting etc large   
   >>areas of grain fields is much harder on the environment than cattle are by   
   >>eating grass. How can you be unaware of that?   
   >   
   >It isn't necessary to do any of that   
      
       It's done whether it's necessary or not Goob.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)