Ask HN: Ethics of a carnivore diet?
I hear a lot of people here talk about the ethics of meat consumption and I tend to agree that it would be better to produce less emissions. However I have also heard people who had autoimmune issues get much better from trying a carnivore diet. I have some such issues that make me want to try this but I also want to consider the impact this will have on others. If I am eating meat to maybe solve a medical problem then maybe that is less bad than somebody who eats it just because it tastes good, but on the other hand the lifetime impact of somebody eating essentially all meat is significant for carbon. Thoughts?
Btw I hope that in the long term lab grown meat will make this less of a problem.
37 comments
[ 8.4 ms ] story [ 232 ms ] threadhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYLWy3hkH2Y
This has been excellent for my own health. I'm working my way through a grass fed cow I bought from a local rancher. It's quite pleasant work. In a year and a half of carnivory I've lost 75 excess pounds, all of my diabetes symptoms, and several inflammatory complaints.
The carbon footprint of eating meat is a thing, but I don't know... doesn't have the ring of importance.
If you think you can treat an autoimmune disorder by eating a lot of meat, then why not try it? Just bear in mind that it is in other ways harmful to your health compared to vegetarianism [citation needed].
In my opinion you can not eat yourself healthy and you have way to little impact to be of any concern to this planet.
You can definitely eat yourself sick, so be careful.
Nutritionally, it's been shown again and again that plant based diets are healthier than meat eating diets. And not just that, but there is actual science to back this up. Compare the science for plant based diets (https://www.reddit.com/r/vegan/wiki/veganscience/) to the basically non-existent studies regarding human carnivore diets.
I'd highly recommend having a start here for some general resources: https://www.reddit.com/r/vegan/wiki/index/
It's better for yourself, the planet, and the animals to be open to going down this route. Don't buy into the weird unscientific propoganda from the carnivore club, look at the research, and question why you're concerned about the ethics of meat eating to begin with and maybe explore that to the fullest extent.
FWIW most people don't agree with you on the ethics of killing animals for food. I prefer to minimize suffering where necessary but do not see a problem if that is what a sentient being needs to live. As I said in my post though I hope lab grown meat soon makes killing any animals for food unnecessary.
This is contingent on your specific version of ethics, which not everyone (I'd argue most people) shares. Otherwise, barring those who have only meat to survive such as in the arctic, everyone would be vegan.
That being said, I'd be wary of an all-meat diet, OP should carefully evaluate whether they're getting all their nutrients from only meat, and not develop other issues like rhabdomyolysis.
Ethics aside, you can do compensatory actions in another area. Tree planting, habitat rehabilitation, eschew car ownership and take the bus/bike/walk, invest in renewables, donate to or volunteer at environmental charities, volunteer etc. To be effective, I guess link your meat consumption to your compensation. Eg: every 1kg of steak donate $2, or 10kg plant a tree, or whatever ...
You also aren't obliged to eat meat all the time. Why not just twice a week?
Disclaimer: lives on a farm in AU, eat our own meat, lives in an eco house, off grid, with an ambitious tree planting program. AMA if you want.
* "Planting a tree" implies a mature tree in 20 years time. Actually, it means someone dug a hole and put a seedling in it, that may well die in 3 months time if not cared for or planted in a place where it will survive.
* Some carbon capture are basically tree plantations, which after n years, will cease to be carbon storage and suddenly become newspulp and then landfill.
* Tree plantations are not habitat or an ecosystem - they are monocultures where very little else lives or grows.
Do your research is all I can offer here.
I'd say just keep your meat consumption low and also donate $100 to tree planting every now and then.
I and many other people believe it's true, with quite a lot of reason and evidence of all kinds, not just "This is what's always been done." Your just saying "That is false" seems merely a less polite version of "I don't agree", i.e. "You are wrong." Hopefully exchanges on HN can do better than that.
Practically all humans on earth agree with me and have done for several hundred thousand years.
Your argument stems from a constructed stance of moral purity; akin to religious pleas to embrace poverty and self flagellation.
If you really want to see change politicians need to do the work, not you.
If you also care about animal suffering, some foods have much more impact than others, see e.g. https://thinkbynumbers.org/utilitarianism/direct-suffering-c...
For all others: Please go ahead and downvote this comment. You're not a lion hunting prey for food. You're just a guy buying a dead animal at a store.
As for your original question, I became a vegetarian 5 years ago and it's only had a positive impact on my health.
Some have more love for animals and just hate the cruelty of mass farming, but become ethical hunters sometimes.
My personal choices are a drop in the ocean compared to what collective action can do. Convincing voters and elected officials to enact strict and equitable legislation feels like the most impactful thing we can do. (In addition to lobbying, I also like to read and comment on HN)
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/healthy-weight/...
Have you tried the Mediterranean diet?
The most ethical diet that includes meat, in my opinion, is eating mostly plants and then hunting your own meat. Most people also don’t need nearly as much meat as they think they do. 1-2 servings per week could be sufficient - which could be easily covered by fishing or hunting a few times per year and then freezing.
Ethics: the best I can say is "that's cultural", and often personal. We're all doing whatever we want, and sometimes our values align enough to get along for a long time. I ate a lot of meat for about a year (or so; I didn't keep a log) and then stopped for a couple reasons, including environmental impact. I grew up on a farm, I've butchered animals and eaten them, I've hunted, and I see every living creature as an individual person worthy of respect. And still I kill them. If we were more honest about this when we go to war I think we'd be better off, rather than all the othering and dehumanizing that is so effective.[1]
My internet-stranger advice would be to practice going without food for longer and longer (it took me about two months to go past the ~48 hours when autophagy starts; I paced myself so I could keep an even keel at work (parenting/homemaking)), and then break your fast with an amazing meal, starting with foods high in fiber (something about how the food progresses through the intestines, and absorbing nutrients, and not spiking insulin), and including whatever you want (I only want high-quality, healthy food for these meals, maybe ending with more carbohydrates at the end). Meat seems like a reasonable inclusion if eating fewer meals. Fasting and feasting is different than calorie restriction; the former I find empowering and self-respecting, the latter I found torturous.
In any case, I hope you figure it out, and good luck!
References: [0] Life in the Fasting Lane, by Jason Fung, Eve Mayer, and Megan Ramos
[1] On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society, by Dave Grossman