XPost: soc.culture.indian, alt.fan.jai-maharaj, alt.religion.hindu   
   XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian   
      
   On Thu, 22 Sep 2011 20:16:28 -0700, Goo wrote:   
      
   >On Thu, 22 Sep 2011 14:43:48 -0700, dh@. wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 08:42:50 -0700, Goo wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:37:38 -0700, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>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.   
   >>>   
   >>>It isn't necessary to do it   
   >>   
   >>    But you can't tell veg*ns where they can get tofu and soy milk etc that   
   was   
   >>produced without plowing etc Goo, so soy products which involve it are the   
   only   
   >>choice. The same is true for rice products also Goob.   
   >   
   >You're presenting a false choice.  The choice is *NOT* between   
   >environmentally destructive vegetable farming or environmentally benign   
   >grass fed beef.   
      
       LOL!!! I mean: it is when it's between environmentally destructive   
   vegetable   
   farming or environmentally benign grass fed beef, Goob.   
      
   >What percentage of beef produced in the US is strictly grass-fed, Fuckwit?   
      
       It doesn't matter about the price of bananas in China, Goo.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)