Archive for the ‘Veganism’ Category

Vegan Vignette: B12 Though…

September 21, 2020

When I first went vegan, I was concerned that I may not be getting enough vitamin B12, the only nutrient that cannot be obtained from consuming plants. It was one of the topics I wrote about in But is it Healthy?

Photo by Anna Shvets on Pexels.com

B12 can taken as a supplement (e.g. tablet, mouth spray) or by eating foods fortified with the vitamin, such as plant-based milks (e.g. some soy milks) or other foods (e.g. some brands of vegan meat substitutes). I currently use B12 fortified soy milk daily as my regular source.

Although only required in very small amounts, B12 deficiencies can lead to anaemia and nervous system damage.

I have annual blood tests that have shown my levels of this and other required nutrients to be well within the normal range.

There’s good information online about B12. You can read more in What every vegan should know about B12 or Zeuschner et al, (2013), Vitamin B12 and vegetarian diets, The Medical Journal of Australia.

The Church and The Vaccine

September 19, 2020

We no longer have any need of a god to explain what is no longer mysterious. What believers will do now that their faith is optional and private … is a matter for them. We should not care. As long as they make no further attempt to inculcate religion by any form of coercion.

Christopher Hitchens, God is Not Great

Photo by cottonbro on Pexels.com

Spoiler alert: I am not sympathetic to religion as a source of ethics here.

In mid-2020, concern was expressed by archbishops of Sydney Catholic, Anglican and Greek Orthodox churches regarding the use of cell lines in vaccine development that originated with a human female embryo that was aborted in 1973.

Free speech is important, but given that vaccine development is hard and that many (perhaps 95%) vaccines fail in the late stages of human trials, it really matters whether this is a reasonable ethical concern.

Granted, the conversation has been more nuanced than media headlines have often suggested, as can be noted by listening to the ABC’s Religion and Ethics Report podcast.

But to what extent does this nuance translate to “the flock”?

We would do well to recall that the flock has in the past been told that the use of condoms was a sin. The Catholic Church’s stance may have moderated a little on this matter, but just think of the calamity that this one, misguided teaching has unleashed, especially upon African adherents to the faith, when AIDS was still a death sentence, compounded by poverty and unchecked population growth.

For this alone, the Catholic Church should be universally reviled, once again having proven its irrelevance to modern life and at the same time, how dangerous it still can be.

We should also remember that a mere few hundred years ago, it was much much more dangerous, when we were collectively more dim-witted and willing to cede more power to it.

That must never again be allowed happen.

Rejecting a perfectly good vaccine candidate is a kick in the guts for the work being done by the Oxford University team and others worldwide.

Suppose it is the most effective vaccine, or less likely but not impossible, the only one that works?

If it appears that I have unduly focussed on the Catholic Church, that’s only because it makes such an easy target. Other denominations do not have a squeaky clean history either.

It’s important to understand that all ways of knowing are not equal, especially in this context.

Science and reason, not faith, are required when thinking about the fitness of a vaccine and its development process.

None of this is to say that ethical concerns don’t matter here. Of course they do. But ethics must be based upon well-thought out principles and a focus upon consequences, not ill-conceived, brittle rules, and certainly never by thinking that tradition dictates truth.

A comment by Nobel laureate and immunologist Peter Doherty in this ABC News article sums it up for me:

If [Archbishop Fisher] finds that objectionable it’s his perfect right to say so and it’s our perfect right to take absolutely no notice of him.

source: ABC News

And, it’s not as if there are no other concerns…

For example, what about animal testing in vaccine development, including for COVID-19?

As someone who thinks that no-one, human or non-human, should be used as a means to an end, it would be an understatement to say that I am ambivalent about testing vaccine candidates on animals.

But, I’ve written about such dilemmas elsewhere; there is a spectrum of concern here…

I still wear boots with suede strips that I owned before going vegan. Suede is soft skin torn from the underside of some poor dead animal. I can’t help that animal now, but every time I wear those boots, I am reminded of my error…

…and, not wishing to add insult to injury, I choose not to discard them while they are still useful, perhaps somewhat akin to the way some of our ancestors are thought to have paid their respects to the animals they killed and consumed. Needless to say, my clothing purchasing decisions now incorporate vegan principles.

In a similar way, perhaps the religious objectors to the use of a decades-old cell line could chill out, just a little, and take a similar approach.

The cell line from the embryo that was aborted 47 years ago has led to great good (an unintentional means to an end), for which we should be thankful. It is unlikely to have suffered in any meaningful way.

If only the same could be said for the animals we routinely kill en masse, because we are collectively failing to tip the balance towards a plant-based diet.

Update on Victorian Bird Flu

August 29, 2020
Source: ABC News

Further to my last post, on Aug 29 this ABC report said that:

Tens of thousands of chickens and an untold number of emus will be euthanased as Victoria battles multiple bird flu outbreaks.

As of this week, infected birds – including emus, turkeys and chickens – have been found in six poultry farms. Agriculture Victoria says three different strains of the virus have been detected, meaning that the outbreaks are not all connected.

Source: ABC News

The report goes on to say that 300,000 layer hens had already been “destroyed” and that another 40,000 will be “culled” soon. The company in question will lose one third of its flock. The financial losses are expected to be around $18 to $23 million in the 2020/2021 financial year.

I find it distasteful that the talk is always of economics and poor-bugger-me from the companies as opposed to the tragic loss of animal life, so casually disregarded and disposed of.

I mentioned the two free range chicken farm outbreaks and another on a turkey farm in my last post. This latest ABC News report says around 4,000 of the turkeys were culled, and that due to another outbreak (a different strain) on a farm with 8,000 emus, part of that farm would have to be “depopulated“.

The euphemisms are flying thick and fast…

In my last post I worried about this: If these events continue or even increase in frequency, I can’t help but wonder whether there will be calls to dismantle free range.

Well, the ABC report ends with this:

Especially with more flocks in free range setups outdoors — it’s a recipe for disaster.

If we keep letting [the farmed animals] out during this high risk time, it’ll keep spreading.

The only way is to lock up every bird.

Source: ABC News

#EndSpeciesism

Bird Flu in Victoria

August 19, 2020
source: ABC News

Victorians are going through a rough time with COVID-19 right now, moreso than anywhere else in Australia. You only have to watch the news for a short time on any given day.

Less well reported is the fact that in late July and early August 2020, around two weeks before I wrote this, two free range egg farms at Lethbridge Victoria, tested positive for bird flu, in particular, the highly pathogenic H7N7 strain of avian influenza.

The first farm was quarantined, hens were “destroyed”, and a buffer zone was established.

An ABC News article reported that this was was only the eighth outbreak of a highly pathogenic bird flu strain on an Australian poultry farm since 1976.

It also pointed out that 3 of these outbreaks have occurred in the last 8 years…

While H7N7 only rarely affects humans, those coming into direct contact with affected animals or their secretions, along with their close contacts, are at risk. At least for us, the effects are mild. Not so for the birds who contract it.

A veterinary epidemiology academic at Charles Sturt University, was quoted in the new report as saying:

Free-range production poses a higher risk because it is more likely that the virus can be introduced from wild waterfowl to domestic poultry in these types of properties when compared to conventional indoor poultry raising.

(Marta Hernandez-Jover)

The CDC currently lists H7N7 as a moderate pandemic risk.

The Australian Government’s National Pest & Disease Outbreaks website documented the H7N7 outbreak, and then a few days later, on August 10, reported a low pathogenic H5N2 avian influenza on a turkey farm, also at Lethbridge… Soon thereafter, a second turkey farm, this time in Victoria’s East Gippsland, also tested positive to H5N2.

But there are worse avian flu strains, some of which do have a serious impact upon the health of humans (e.g. H7N9), and it’s a dynamic scenario. There’s mutation, especially in the presence of large populations of animals, where evolutionary experiments can play out over short timescales…

If these events continue or even increase in frequency, I can’t help but wonder whether there will be calls to dismantle free range, in favour of barn laid or worse, a regress to caged systems; neither, a good outcome for the animals, but I can imagine it being “declared” necessary by authorities.

But this either/or of free range vs barn, would be to set up a false dichotomy.

To protect humans from the Russian Roulette of zoonotic pandemic disease risk that we are currently subjecting ourselves to, while at the same time, not subjecting untold numbers of birds to a life that is nasty, brutish and short (as Hobbes might say), there is another option…

This also applies to all the other intensive animal factory farming scenarios in which zoonotic diseases can mutate and thrive.

Yuck, that’s not meat!

May 24, 2020

A 2019 New Idea article complains that customers of some Australian supermarket chains have been “falling into the trap” of buying what they thought were meat products, only to find when they get home that they purchased plant-based products instead.

Photo by Polina Tankilevitch on Pexels.com

Many have been left infuriated by what has been called ‘misleading’ product packaging when it comes to vegan ‘meat’ products.

“Infuriated”?

Is that really appropriate an appropriate emotion here?

Ooh, it’s plants! Can’t possibly eat those!

Yuck, I bought these, I didn’t realise they were meat free, they have been sat in the freezer ever since”, said one disgruntled shopper.

Yuck? Did they consider trying the product?

…it’s not like the vegan meat is in its own section – at my local they’re mixed in amongst the proper meat. I keep buying it by accident, it’s driving me nuts. The other day I bought one that said meaty on it!

“Proper meat”?

Does the person quoted understand where “proper meat” actually comes from? Would they be willing to “process” it in order to have their meal?

And, until very recently, there was a distinctly separate meat section at major Australian supermarkets…

…where only those weird vegans went.

You know, the ones who just won’t shut the hell up about why everyone should go vegan?

So annoying…

This one I don’t understand: “I keep buying it by accident”?

Huh? How?

I accidentally bought these the other day thinking they were chicken, lol they do NOT taste like chicken, but the dogs seemed to enjoy them.

Wow. Lucky dog.

Sigh…

The items pictured in the article are clearly marked as Plant-Based, literally beyond meat in one case. Umm. Yuck?

How about trying them first? The products pictured are all high in protein, easy to cook and tasty.

We in the West are spoiled for choice by the range of products to choose from, but then, this post isn’t intended to be an advert.

The subject of what meat is, and its changing definition, is a rabbit hole for another time.

It’s worth noting that even the Medical Journal of Australia (that has influenced the Australian Dietary Guidelines) acknowledges that diets dominated by plant foods are likely the way of the future.

When something tastes as good as meat, is better for you, the environment and, obviously, the animals, isn’t it reasonable to at least give it a try?

Animalia Commonalis: Truth, Suffering and Ethics

April 19, 2020

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them. (Galileo Galilei)

Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth. (Buddha)

The truth will set you free, but first it will make you miserable. (James A. Garfield)

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. (Arthur Schopenhauer)

Why do we want so desperately to know whether there is life elsewhere in the Universe when we treat so much human and non-human life on this planet with such disdain?

blue turtles on brown sand
Photo by Jolo Diaz on Pexels.com

I’ve written briefly here about what makes homo sapiens special.

We know that species other than ours exhibit some of these qualities:

  • Problem solving
  • Sophisticated memory
  • Ability to plan
  • Tool use
  • Culture
  • Ability to act contrary to instinctive behaviour
  • Belief in gods of one sort or another

As far as we know, the last item on the list is unique to us. This could mean either that there are gods of some kind or that we have a tendency to mistake certain types of patterns for gods.

What of the second to last? We are not purely instinctive creatures. Without that, we would never have developed Science, mathematics, technology.

But there exist humans with a severe mental handicap who cannot participate in anything approaching the “lofty intellectual heights”. Neither can young children.

For children, this is only transient you say. Rightly so. Children mature.

Not so for someone with a severe mental handicap.

Perhaps questions like “what makes us special?” or “what sets us apart from other animals?” are less than useful.

Perhaps it would be better to ask instead: What do we have in common?

Animalia Commonalis popped into my head when I was writing this post. By this latin-sounding (but not real) phrase, I was trying to capture this idea: The Commonality of Animals.

Of course, there’s a continuum of complexity of animal life starting from self-replicating molecules (RNA, DNA), to viruses, bacteria, fungi, insects, reptiles, fish, birds, and mammals like us.

Just limiting ourselves to mammals, all have:

  • A common body plan. Animals as diverse as whales and bats share the same basic skeletal structure and organs.
  • An apparent desire, or at least a strong instinct, to care for their young.
  • The ability to feel pain, to suffer.

The question is not, Can they reason?, nor Can they talk? but, Can they suffer? Why should the law refuse its protection to any sensitive being? (Jeremy Bentham 1789, in An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation)

Bentham said this more than 200 years ago!

Where on this continuum from viruses to us does the ability to suffer begin? Dogs don’t pass the mirror test whereas chimps do, but few would say that a dog cannot suffer.

Do bees feel pain or is the avoidance of harmful stimuli purely mechanical with no pain response? It seems that no-one really knows the answer yet.

I’ll be honest and say that right now I’m more concerned about dealing with the more obvious and well-documented suffering of mammals, birds, and fish by our hand. The “low hanging fruit”. Even choosing not to consume one of these groups is a big win at this point. The jury is still out for me regarding insects.

Think occasionally of the suffering of which you spare yourself the sight. (Albert Schweitzer)

Whether starting from the idea that not consuming animal products may be healthier for us, from worrying about the environment and sustainability, or from a concern for the welfare of animals other than ourselves, one can eventually be led to the realisation that what we once did only to people taken out of Africa to America and to other “civilised” countries, we are now doing to other species, but worse.

The time will come when men such as I will look upon the murder of animals as they now look on the murder of men. (Leonardo da Vinci)

Speciesism is just a generalisation of racism beyond the borders of homo sapiens.

In my view, along with Climate Change, Speciesism is the defining issue of our time, and we will be judged by future generations on how we responded to both.

If Climate Change is an existential crisis, Speciesism can be thought of as a battle for the collective “soul” of homo sapiens.

The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way in which its animals are treated. (Mahatma Ghandi)

Vegan Vignette: Lions Though…

April 13, 2020

lion on green grass field

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

The argument goes something like this. Lions (and other predators) hunt and kill prey.

While horrible for the prey, this is also natural. So, eating meat is natural.

This argument from nature is flawed.

A lion, and the scavengers that come after the hunter has killed its prey, waste little.

Lions act out of instinct. Much of what we humans do is contrary to our natural tendencies.

Most meat consumed by humans is cooked, not raw, as a lion would eat it. Further, there is some evolutionary evidence that we were never natural meat eaters.

While they may hunt in packs, lions don’t intensively factory farm their prey by the billions per year worldwide.

We bear the terrible burden of being free to choose and the only thing we are not free to choose is our freedom to choose. Especially those of us in the affluent west.

On How Not to Protest (again)

January 19, 2020

Recently, Karen and I were waiting for a tram in Bourke Street to take us to a vegan pizzeria in Melbourne I’d heard good things about.

IMG_4752

Before the tram was able to come, hundreds of climate change protesters emerged. It was an unseasonably cold, wet day, as the picture suggests.

Now, as someone who in late 2019 attended a climate rally and a protest against oil and gas exploration in the Great Australian Bight, I’m broadly supportive of such public protests and marches.

However, there were a few problems with this one…

It seemed to Karen and I that the protesters were mostly preaching to the converted.

It took place in a street in which trams run. Trams. Not cars. Public transport.

Sure, not very efficient public transport given Victoria’s current reliance on coal for power (perhaps that was at least part of their point).

Why not march up a street where cars ran instead? They, at least, could have taken a different route. There was a police presence since this was a planned event, unlike another recent protest in Melbourne.

Yes, I know that disruption was probably part of the aim.

But the truth is that you don’t have to be completely disruptive to get attention like a two year old having a hissy fit.

Another problem was they appeared to circle around multiple times…

After the boredom set in, Karen and I got to wondering what a poll would show about just how seriously participants in the protest were about finding solutions to climate change.

Which of these people, we wondered, use vehicles (theirs or others) in a responsible way in order to minimise emissions?

Which of these people were vegan or at least made some significant attempt to reduce the consumption of animal products, given that the animal agriculture industry is responsible for a similar quantity of emissions as the whole of the transport sector.

Which of these people regularly waste food?

Which of them recycle? And so on…

Yet another problem was that at one point, the chants changed from being climate related to:

Always was, always will be, aboriginal Land

I encountered the same thing during the 2019 oil and gas exploration protest in Adelaide.

Now, no matter how sympathetic you are to the plight of aboriginal people in Australia (and there is good reason to be), how much you support the notion of land rights, or how positively you view the aboriginal people as good stewards of the Land, this is a problematic statement.

For one thing, it is astonishingly anthropocentric, the very thing that has gotten us into so much trouble with climate change.

For another, it’s a claim that can only have any validity for the last 60,000 years or thereabouts. Before that brief geological time span, the land “belonged” to other species.

Such a view may not be politically popular these days, especially with Australia/Invasion Day on January 26, but it has the distinct advantage of being true.

Of course, none of this excuses the terrible things done to the aboriginal people by our white settler ancestors and it is important to separate the massacres of two centuries ago from the broader historical place of homo sapiens, and the future of our species.

I’ve written more on this theme elsewhere. As I said there:

I’ve always found the Cosmic Calendar quite compelling. Popularised by Carl Sagan on Cosmos, the whole timescale of the universe is compressed into 12 months. Nothing remotely human begins until late morning on December 31. The original settlement of Australia by seafarers didn’t happen until 11:58pm and the last few thousand years of human history occupies the last 30 seconds of the day!

cosmos-04-hulu

Getting back to the chant… It was out of place in the context of this protest.

If you’re going to have a protest about climate change, stick to the point!

Don’t dilute the message!

Also, ensure that you are really making an attempt to walk the walk, not just talk the talk.

We eventually got to that vegan pizzeria, but it was far enough that we caught a cab.

Anyone who knows me, knows how much I hate catching a cab if I don’t have to!

So, thanks for that (not).

Dark horse

October 19, 2019

11611904-3x2-940x627

source: ABC (https://ab.co/35R72OW)

This week we learned of the many Australian race horses every year being slaughtered for pet food, supplied as food for greyhound racing industry dogs, or exported overseas for human consumption.

The ABC 7:30 Report’s 45 minute story is heartbreaking to watch. Some scenes are reminiscent of documentaries such as Dominion or Earthlings.

Undercover video aired by ABC combined with branding on the horses and access to official databases provides damning evidence of a system out of control.

However, the language used by racing officials to describe the horses as property provides an insight into the mindset that gives rise to this behaviour.

As I sit here in a food court, a television screen shows a horse race underway…

…and the Melbourne Cup is only a couple of weeks away.

How many animals will be injured and euthanised trackside or considered no longer useful to punters and sold off to be discarded via an abattoir, despite years of training and thousands of dollars of winnings?

But it’s not only elite horses that deserve a better end.

Untold numbers of ordinary, gentle creatures not only meet an early end in abattoirs but often live their short lives in confined squalor.

That’s speciesism in action.

African Swine Fever: with a whimper…

October 15, 2019

This is the way the world ends

Not with a bang but a whimper.

(T.S. Elliot)

11028044-3x2-940x627

source: https://ab.co/2IQVbpS

ABC News today reports that a woman has been deported back to Vietnam for trying to bring 4.6 kg of uncooked pork into Australia via Sydney airport.

Sigh. Apparently some people don’t read the news. Or just don’t care…

The Australian Pork Chief Executive Margo Andrae is quoted as saying:

“I’m outraged that someone thinks they can bring 10 kilos [sic] of pork products in their suitcases and not declare it and risk our entire $5.3-billion industry.”

Sure. Outraged, yes.

But again, the talk is all about risk to the industry, not about the consequences for the millions of gentle creatures who may be exterminated in the process.

Imagine if we treated the human carriers of infectious diseases the way we treat livestock who may not even yet have been infected, let alone those who have.

That’s speciesism in action.