FUCK NEGATIVE HARDCORE!
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Friday, December 4, 2009
Interview with xScottx of EARTH CRISIS
Apr 30 2009
Earth Crisis was among the most aggressive and opinionated bands of the 1990s. The combustible blend of hardcore and metal displayed on now-classic albums like Destroy The Machines and Gomorrah’s Season Ends was the perfect vehicle for the band’s strident animal rights, straight edge and vegetarian messages. While straight edge started in the 1980s hardcore community, Earth Crisis is often credited for bringing the sometimes controversial movement to prominence. Earth Crisis was also known for their intense physical shows and relentless mosh pits, and vocal frontman Karl Buechner was often seen defending the straight edge and animal rights movements on television.
Earth Crisis split up eight years ago but the band members stayed close in the ensuing years while pursuing other musical projects. The band reunited to play shows and are releasing their comeback album To The Death via Century Media Records. Guitarist Scott Crouse checked in with About.com to discuss the new album; staying vegan for life; the challenges of highly physical shows in your mid-30s and the band’s family-like relationship.
Justin M. Norton: How did Earth Crisis get back together after separating in 2001? How are all of you different than when the band parted ways?
Scott Crouse: When we stopped it wasn’t for the reason that most bands quit. Usually it’s a falling out or musical differences. We had just been doing it for 10 years and things like family and other career goals were being neglected. So we just decided to end it while things were good and let everyone pursue other ideas. When we look back on it, the smarter thing to do would have been a hiatus, because in the back of our minds we knew we would play together again. We’re pretty much the same people, but there may be other things on the table; people have families and different responsibilities and careers. But for the most part we are the same guys we were eight or nine years ago.
With global warming an increasing threat and even things like drinkable water not a given for people anymore do you feel like the things Earth Crisis warned about are coming to pass? And given that do you ever consider your fight futile?
It’s definitely more undeniable. Most people care about things like the environment and our resources being tapped out than when we first started. These were controversial topics when we started in the early ‘90s. The average person now sees the irresponsible footprints humans have been making on the earth. When you are involved with any struggle you go through a point wondering if it’s worth it and if anyone listens. But you have to look at the positive things that have happened. If you look at all the accomplishments, like animal rights have really come to the forefront. In the last five or six years people have also started to notice the environment and hopefully it’s not too late.
Was there ever talk of bringing Earth Crisis back before this given the widespread dissatisfaction with America’s political and social direction during the Bush years?
We’d been talking about it for years. About three years after we broke up we talked about doing a record or playing a couple of shows. It was just one of those things we didn’t get around to until 2007. In hindsight a hiatus would have been the proper way to go rather than an “ok guys, we’re done.”
With Karl’s frequent appearances on television and the band always lumped in as the prime example of straight-edge ideology in music do you ever worry that the music is overlooked for the message?
Sometimes it can be frustrating. Karl and I had a conversation about that recently. He was telling me that he met someone while he was on tour with his other band Freya who said they just read his lyrics and didn’t care for Earth Crisis. Karl writes all of lyrics and I’m responsible for a lot of the music. You wish that people would be into both but that’s not realistic. There is a core group of people where it’s a perfect marriage. Then there are some people who only appreciate the heavy music or Karl’s lyrics. In a lot of ways we’re fortunate to have both.
Friday, November 27, 2009
Interview with xKUROHATAx (militant vegan hip hop)
* To start off, can you tell us where the inspiration came from to start this project?
My inspiration comes from the Earth and its beauty. It comes from watching animals in the wild, living free from human touch and it comes from people, people who resist and who stand up for what they believe in. Every single day, species extinction takes place on a huge scale. The biodiversity of this planet is shrinking, our waters are being polluted, rainforests are being deforested, we vivisect on animals; indigenous peoples, those that are left anyway as most have either been wiped out or assimilated into our culture are struggling for survival and all the while, civilization, like a juggernaut just does not stop. It scares me when I think about what we are doing to this planet and its inhabitants. We just could not sit back any longer and watch this carnage take place. Don’t get me wrong, we are under no illusions that we will reach lots of people or even change people’s thinking, we probably won’t, but we just needed to do something.
* The recordings sound very raw, is it home recordings?
Yes they are home recordings. Our aim is to go into the studio once we have more songs written and once we know more about what we are doing; we are complete amateurs at making hip-hop. This project was and is only about one thing and that is the message. The sound and everything else regarding Kurohata is secondary to the message. We are aware though, that in order to reach more people we will eventually have to invest time and money in order to make this project more professional, but for now though I guess we are kinda happy with what we have got.
* How has the reaction been so far?
The reaction has been great. We have only been in existence since January 08, and in this short time we have had lots of positive feedback. We have been played on radio / internet stations and have had a few labels asking to put our stuff out. We are also on a vegan hip-hop comp from the US which we are really excited about.
* Do you come from a musical background? if so, what other projects have you been involved in over the years?
I have been in various bands over the years, Slavearc, Canaan, Eyes of Armageddon and Touchdown. However, this project suits me way more than a band format as I can be more creative and am not restricted in what I can or cannot say.
* Who and where do you draw your influences from?
Lyrically, primarily from hardcore bands such as Earth Crisis, Abnegation and Day of Suffering and other bands from this era, lyrically these bands were awesome. I even quote an Abnegation lyric in one of the songs. Musically, Lost Children of Babylon, Dead Prez, Paris, and Immortal Technique, the list goes on. The overall and I guess more important influence is ideological. This project is influenced by the many social uprisings throughout history and the people who fought for that. It is the courage and the heart of these people that really pushes us on to do something. In all of our songs we try to talk about these influences as much as possible. We feel that it is very important that we keep these names and struggles in people’s minds; we do not want them to be forgotten.
* What keeps you angry, and determined to carry on doing what you do? Do you ever feel useless in your fight against the injustice in this world?
You know, what we are doing to this planet is just awful, it’s not right. I have to do something, talk about these issues or write about them, anything, because if I don’t what is there to look forward to? Yes I do feel pretty useless and I guess no matter what we do right now will change much, but I look at it this way, soon this system, capitalism, civilization, will crumble, it has to. This system survives only on the resources of the earth and these resources will not last much longer. So before that crash happens it is imperative that people are made aware of how we got to this stage in order to never let this happen again.
* Am I right in thinking that xKurohatax is the only active vegan hip-hop project in the UK at the moment?
I guess it could be as we have not heard of any other projects like this. But if so, that is quite sad. I mean, even in terms of hardcore, let alone hip hop, why are there no bands in the UK really talking about veganism or political activism? Everybody who has a mouth and is even slightly aware of these issues should be screaming about this. A band is perfect to spread this type of message, there is no excuse for apathy really, so I hope that bands start to talk more about these issues.
* Your lyrics are in great support of a vegan lifestyle, how long have you been vegan now and what made you take up the change?
I have been vegan for 12 years. I was introduced to veganism through hardcore, I mean, back then I never really knew what vegetarianism was so I learned a lot from the hardcore scene. And I guess because of my childhood I was quite susceptible to vegetarianism. I came from a pro-hunting family and as I was growing up I had constant battles with them about this and still do; so from a young age I struggled to justify the hunting and killing of an animal. Hardcore made me realise that these thoughts and feelings I had were ok and that there were other people out there who had the same thoughts as me.
* What advice would you give to someone thinking of taking up veganism, but is worried about not being able to manage it?
Personally, I would say to take it slow, don’t rush into it, and cut out meat or dairy slowly. There are meat and dairy substitutes which you can use to replace the meat or dairy in your meals. I mean, there are substitutes for everything and they taste great. But don’t feel bad if you give in occasionally, keep your goal in mind and give yourself time to achieve that, it won’t happen overnight.
* Is there any issue of animal cruelty (vivisection/factory farming etc) that bothers you most?
All cruelty in any form is the same to me. I mean, animals may suffer different forms of torture whether it’s the rape rack at the dairy farm or animals eyes being injected at the vivisection lab, but I feel that it is important not to place emphasis on any one form of cruelty over that of another. All cruelty needs to be fought with equal measure.
* Harsh jail sentences, in the UK especially, are being given to animal rights activists for doing nothing more than running legitimate campaigns and being active for animal rights. How do you think this effects the movement? Do you think it scares future activists from getitng involved with campaigning?
It’s hard to fathom that people who show compassion and love towards other living beings are given jail terms longer than rapists and murderers. My heart goes out to all those animal and earth liberation activists who are in prison right now. I think, obviously, it does have some influence and may make people think twice about committing an action. But I hope that people look at the bigger picture, for all the actions carried out in defense of animals only a small, small handful of people are caught. This has to give people some heart. We are fighting against a murderous system, an evil system that thinks nothing of life. We have to keep the struggle active. But if people feel they cannot do direct action, then fine, there are other ways of being active and helping the liberation struggles.
* What are your views on direct action? do you think there is a genuine need of it or do you see it as a hindrance to the movement that plays right into the hands of animal abusers?
Direct action is essential to this movement, absolutely essential. If you look at any struggle throughout history it is direct action that has always pushed that movement forward. If you look at the Black Panthers, they actually went out there into the streets and defended black people against the racist police and the racist system. They were able to defend their community more in the short years they were in existence than the peace movement led by Martin Luther King managed to do in nearly 20 years. Groups like the Red Army Faction or the Weathermen Underground for example, carried out militant direct action against the capitalist militaristic system. They done what they thought was necessary at that particular time. The anti-capitalist movement, particularly the Black Bloc put their lives on the line to do what they can to halt the global elite as witnessed in Seattle, Genoa and Rostock just recently. And of course, look at the ALF or ELF, how many lives have been saved through direct action which would have otherwise have been killed if it were not for them?
Whether it plays into the hands of animal abusers or not, I could not care less. You know, animals do not have time to wait for people to change consciousness; action needs to be taken now!
* Can you tell us about campaigns you currently support or might be involved with, or what we should be checking out..
At the moment a lot of my energy is placed on the Palestinian struggle against Israeli occupation. This is something which I feel really passionate about. A clear injustice is taking place with the seeming approval of most world governments. What’s happening there is pretty horrific. There are a lot of local groups throughout the UK where people can get further information, check out the site www. palestinecampaign. org.
Additionally, we really support the anti-g8 protests, having attended Rostock just recently, we witnessed firsthand the very direct and violent way this system deals with those who dissent. It was also an opportunity to appreciate the mutual support which took place between different left groups.
*What are the future plans for xKurohatax? could there be the chance of live shows?
We will just see what happens and basically take one song at a time and work towards releasing a mini-CD or something. But we will never do live shows; we do not have the skill or talent to do this.
* What current bands/artists are you listening to?
Lost Children of Babylon, Tragedy, Jedi Mind Tricks, Daymares, Klashnekoff, The Mitchell Brothers, Terra Firms etc all sorts really
* If you could put together a bill of 5 bands past or present - who would you get to play?
There are way too many bands to choose from, but hardcore wise, I would probably choose Abnegation, Judge, Youth of Today, Unbroken and Outspoken.
* Why should we Respect Life?
If we do not respect life I cannot see a reason for living really. I do not want another animal or person suffering because of my actions. I believe that all life is equal and we have to do what we can to make sure that we all live in harmony with each other and with the earth.
* Any thanks/shoutouts?
Just to those people who sacrifice themselves for the cause of animal, human and earth liberation. They are my inspiration.
------------
Interview taken from www.respectlife.ning.com
Check xKUROHATAx at:
Vegan is.. (in common notion)
But we use violence when it's needed.www.VeganStraightEdgePatriot.blogspot.com
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
COURAGE CREW, who are they?
Who are they? What do they do in hardcore scene?
Many question is still ion our head about Courage Crew. It’s a group of straight edge guys from
Actually VSEP doesn’t have connection or contact with Courage Crew. We know about them from internet or from some bands who played in
Many negative opinions from people about Courage Crew:
“Courage Crew is faggots”
“Courage Crew is a group that spread what they believe with violence”
“Courage Crew is terrorist”
And many more bla bla bla..
What inside the Courage Crew’s head is a pretty simple mindset: NO DRUGS, NO SMOKE, NO ALCOHOL, JUST FIGHT PEOPLE WHO LIVE WITH THOSE SHITS!
At that point, VSEP has a little bit same agenda. But if the rumours about Courage Crew that beat some whore and same things like it, we’re totally opposite with them. In vegan, we has big respect to women's right too. It’s all the girl’s or women’s right to be what they want to be. As long as they don’t give people shits like drugs/alcohol/tobacco, we’re cool.
So, we support what Courage Crew did and still does until right now. As long as what they fight are on drugs dealers, negative hardcorepunk hypocrites, liquor dealers, and stuffs like it. Out of those things, we’re opposite.
And if most of Courage Crew members have big body-shape, we’re not into gym stuffs. Maybe Courage Crew like to have fight with fists/kicks on the street. We, just fight with what we have, from fists, punches, kicks, knives, to weapons. And most of all, we do it with strategy.
-Anthony, VSEP, Brasil
About SHAC (Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty)
The campaign Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) was set up at the end of 1999 by a group of activists who had successfully closed down lab animal breeders, Consort kennels and Hillgrove cat farm. Both of these campaigns ended with the businesses closing down and hundreds of animals being safely rehomed instead of tortured in laboratories.
In 1996 SHAC started a campaign against Consort kennels near Hereford. Over eight hundred beagles were kept at the kennels waiting to be sold to labs like Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS).
The campaign was intense, involving daily demonstrations, national demonstrations and regular all night vigils. During the campaign three rescue operations took place seeing 26 beagles go free to safe and loving homes. After just ten months of campaigning they could take no more pressure and the kennels closed in July 1997. A total of 200 beagles were successfully rehomed following the closure.
The campaign was intense, involving daily demonstrations, national demonstrations and regular all night vigils. During the campaign three rescue operations took place seeing 26 beagles go free to safe and loving homes. After just ten months of campaigning they could take no more pressure and the kennels closed in July 1997. A total of 200 beagles were successfully rehomed following the closure.
To strike a sombre note we must never forget that it was Huntingdon Life Sciences who bought all the breeding beagles from Consort before they closed.
In September 1997 the campaign moved swiftly against the last remaining UK breeder of cats for vivisection, Hillgrove farm near Witney, Oxfordshire run by the obnoxious Christopher and Katherine Brown. Hillgrove sold kittens worldwide for experiments from ten days old and held over 1,000 cats in windowless sheds at the back of the farm. The scale of the campaign really begun to take off at this point seeing many demonstrations at the farm and the city centre of Oxford.
After unbelievable pressure Hillgrove buckled and closed after an 18 month campaign in August 1999. It was headline news all around the world as over 800 cats were rescued from the farm and rehomed on the night of August 12th 1999.
The most important lesson from all these campaigns is to remember that all those animals would still be inside Consort and Hillgrove if we had waited for politicians to act. The lesson is that if we really want these hell holes to close then we have got to do it ourselves - action is what it is all about. We have to fight to win.
Following these victories we launched a global campaign against Europe's largest animal testing facility, Huntingdon Life Sciences. We hope that you will join us in this fight to free the 70,000 animals locked inside waiting to die.
SHAC is an innovative campaign, and has received worldwide media coverage for the success of its methods, the intelligence of its tactics and the determination of its supporters.
Two million members of the public have signed a petition to have HLS closed, thousands have protested and we can prove that HLS are responsible for animal cruelty and lawbreaking over and over again. During one study involving wild caught primates, HLS broke the law over 520 times. The Government have failed to close HLS so it is up to each and everyone of us to close them down.
SHAC is an international campaign, and the first of its kind, with SHAC groups in the UK, USA, France, Holland, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, and many other countries all uniting to target HLS and the companies that support them globally.
SHAC is made up of compassionate people from all walks of life and people of all ages from children to pensioners. All of us are outraged at the existence of HLS and all of us are doing as much as we can to make sure that this evil company is closed down for good.
SHAC takes a three tier approach, campaigning against customers who provide HLS with an income and profits; suppliers who provide HLS with vital tools to carry out research and financial links such as shareholders, market makers and banking facilities. SHAC has called on a mass boycott of HLS and is calling on all companies that do business with Huntingdon to turn their backs on animal cruelty. If you are happy to pay for, or profit from the cruelty HLS inflict on innocent animals then you are just as much responsible as the vivisectors themselves.
This is where SHAC supporters play a vital role. Many companies working with HLS may not be aware of their history of animal cruelty, falsified data and negligence, so by taking part in letter writing, email campaigns and peaceful protests calling on the boycott of HLS you can bring the issue to their attention. Many companies have already vowed not to deal with HLS thanks to SHACtavists around the world.
We all have an important role to play, so please join us and help close down HLS! (http://www.shac.net/)
VSEP says: Support the SHAC movement!!!
Vegan is...
History
The Vegan Society was founded in 1944 by Donald Watson and Elsie Shrigley, in response to the broadening of the term "vegetarian" to include the eating of dairy products.[9] The first vegan society in the United States was founded in California in 1948 by Dr. Catherine Nimmo and Rubin Abramowitz,[10] and was subsequently incorporated into the the American Vegan SocietyJay Dinshah.[11] In 1984, a 'breakaway' group from the Vegan Society, the Movement for Compassionate Living was founded by former Vegan Society secretary Kathleen Jannaway to promote sustainable living and self-sufficiency in addition to veganism.[12] Today, there are many vegan societies worldwide, including national societies in Australia, India, New Zealand, and South Africa.[nb 1] In 1993, the advocacy organization which would become Vegan Outreach was founded by Matt Ball and Jack Norris.[13] after its founding in 1960 by
In 1994, the annual World Vegan Day was established on November 1st, the day of the Vegan Society's founding.[14]
Definition
The word vegan was coined in 1944 by Donald Watson, who combined the first three and last two letters of vegetarian to form "vegan," which he saw as "the beginning and end of vegetarian."[9][15] Vegan is pronounced /ˈviːɡən/[16] or /ˈvɛdʒən/,[17] although Watson considered the latter pronunciation to be incorrect.[18] The Vegan Society defines veganism in this way:
[T]he word "veganism" denotes a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude — as far as is possible and practical — all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of humans, animals and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.[1]
Other vegan societies use similar definitions.[19][20][21]
Animal Products
Main article: Animal product
The term "animal product" in a vegan context refers to any material derived from animals for human use.[2] Notable animal products include meat, poultry, seafood, eggs, dairy products, honey, fur, leather, wool, and silk.[3] Common animal by-products include gelatin, lanolin, rennet, whey, casein, beeswax, isinglass, and shellac.[3]
Animal products are ingredients in countless products and are used in the production of—though not always present in the final form of—many more.[22][23][24] Many of these ingredients are obscure,[25][26] also have non-animal sources,[27] and may not even be identified.[22] Although some vegans attempt to avoid all these ingredients, Vegan Outreach argues that "it can be prohibitively expensive and time-consuming to shun every minor or hidden animal-derived ingredient," and therefore that doing what is "best for preventing suffering" is more important than identifying and excluding every animal ingredient.[28][29]
Although honey and silk are by definition animal products, and although abstaining from honey is a requirement for membership in the American and British Vegan Societies,[30][31] some vegans consider their use and the use of other insect products to be acceptable.[32]
Demographics
Data regarding the number of vegans is available in some countries.
United States
A 2002 Time/CNN poll found that 4% of American adults consider themselves vegetarians, and 5% of vegetarians consider themselves vegans, which implies that 0.2% of American adults are vegans.[4] A 2006 poll conducted by Harris Interactive in the US listed specific foods and asked respondents to indicate which items they never eat, rather than asking respondents to self-identify. The survey found that of the 1,000 adults polled, 1.4% never eat meat, poultry, fish, seafood, dairy products, or eggs and were therefore essentially vegan in their eating habits. The survey also found that about 1.4% of men and 1.3% of women have vegan diets.[7]
United Kingdom
In 2002, the UK Food Standards Agency carried out a National Diet and Nutrition Survey, which reported that 5% of respondents self-identified as vegetarian or vegan. Though 29% of that 5% said they avoided "all animal products", only 5% reported avoiding dairy products.[5] Based on these figures, approximately 0.25% of the UK population follow a vegan diet. In 2005, The Times estimated there were 250,000 vegans in Britain, which suggests around 0.4% of the UK population is vegan.[8]
The Netherlands
The Netherlands Association for Veganism estimates there to be approximately 16,000 vegans in the Netherlands, or around 0.1% of the Dutch population.[35]
Sweden
Various polls and research conducted during the 1990s put the overall percentage of Swedish[36] A study of the eating patterns of 2,538 Swedish children of ages 4, 8 and 11 by the Swedish National Food Administration found that about 1% of the children were vegetarian, less than 1% were lacto-vegetarians, but found no children to be vegans.[37] A 1996 study of over 67,000 Swedish students between the ages of 16 and 20 found 0.1% to be vegan,[38] and found a particularly high concentration of vegans in Umeå where 3.3% of the students were vegan.[39] residents being vegan at between 0.27% and 1.6%.
Norway
A 1996 study of 952 15-year old students in Bergen found 0.2% of females to be vegan, but found no male participants to be vegan.[38]
Germany
The German Federal Study on Food-Consumption reported 0.1% of female and 0.05% of male participants to be vegan.[40]
Ethics
See also: Animal rights, Ethics of eating meat, and Factory farming
The central ethical question related to veganism is whether it is right for humans to use and kill animals. This question is essentially the same as the fundamental question of animal rights, so it has been animal rights ethicists who have articulated the philosophical foundations for veganism. The philosophical discussion also therefore reflects the division of viewpoints within animal rights theory between a rights-based approach, taken by both Tom Regan and Gary Francione, and a utilitarian one, promoted by Peter Singer. Vegan advocacy organizations generally adhere to some form animal rights viewpoint, and oppose practices which violate these rights.
Philosophical Foundations
Tom Regan, professor emeritus of philosophy at North Carolina State University, argues that animals are entities which possess "inherent value"[42] and therefore have "basic moral rights," and that the principal moral right they possess is "the right to respectful treatment."[43] Regan additionally argues that animals have a "basic moral right not to be harmed," which can be overridden only when the individual's right not to be harmed is "morally outweighed" by "other valid moral principles."[44][45] From this "rights view," Regan argues that "animal agriculture, as we know it, is unjust" even when animals are raised "humanely."[41][46] Regan argues against various justifications for eating meat including that "animal flesh is tasty," that it is "habit" for "individuals and as a culture", that it is "convenient," that "meat is nutritious," that there is an obligation the economic interests of farmers or to the economic interests of a country, or that "farm animals are legal property," and finds that all fail to treat animals with the respect due to them by their basic rights.[47] Regan therefore argues that "those who support current animal agriculture by purchasing meat have a moral obligation to stop doing so" and that "the individual has a duty to lead a vegetarian way of life."[48]
Gary L. Francione, professor of Law at Rutgers School of Law-Newark, argues that animals are sentient, and that this is sufficient to grant them moral consideration.[49] Francione argues that "all sentient beings should have at least one right—the right not to be treated as property" and that there is "no moral justification for using nonhumans for our purposes."[49] Francione further argues that adopting veganism should be regarded as the "baseline" action taken by people concerned with animal rights.[49]
Peter Singer, professor of bioethics at Princeton, argues that there is "no moral justification" for refusing to take sentient animal suffering into consideration in ethical decisions.[50] Singer argues that an animal's interests warrant equal consideration with the interests of humans, and that not doing so is "speciesist."[50] Based upon his evaluation of these interests, Singer argues that "our use of animals for food becomes questionable—especially when animal flesh is a luxury rather than a necessity."[51] Singer does not contend that killing animals is always wrong, but that from a practical standpoint it is "better to reject altogether the killing of animals for food, unless one must do so to survive."[52] Singer therefore advocates both veganism and improved conditions for farm animals as practical means to reduce animal suffering.[53][54][55]
Advocacy Organizations
Vegan advocacy organizations generally regard animals to have some form of rights, and therefore consider it unethical to use animals in ways that infringe those rights.[56][57][58][59][56]Vegan Action asserts that "animals are not ours to use,"[57] PETA states that "animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment,"[58] and Mercy for Animals writes that "non-human animals are irreplaceable individuals with morally significant interests and hence rights."[59] The Vegan Society, for example, maintains that "animals have the right not to be farmed,"
Advocacy organizations regard practices such as factory farming,[60][61][62] animal testing,[3][63] and displaying animals for entertainment in circuses,[64] rodeos,[65] and zoos[66] as cruel to animals.
Criticisms
Steven Davis, a professor of animal science at Oregon State University, argues that following Tom Regan's "least harm principle" may not necessarily require the adoption of a vegan diet because there are non-vegetarian diets which "may kill fewer animals" than are killed in the intensive crop production necessary to support vegetarian diets. In particular, Davis calculates that a diet partially based on large grass-fed ruminants like cows, would kill fewer animals than a vegan diet.[67]
Davis's analysis has itself been criticized, notably by Gaverick Matheny, a Ph.D. candidate in agricultural economics at the University of Maryland, College Park, and by Andy Lamey, a Ph.D. student at the University of Western Australia. Matheny argues that Davis's miscalculates the number of animal deaths based on land area rather than per consumer, and incorrectly equates "the harm done to animals … to the number of animals killed." Matheny argues that per-consumer, a vegan diet would kill fewer wild animals than a diet adhering to Davis's model, and that vegetarianism "involves better treatment of animals, and likely allows a greater number of animals with lives worth living to exist."[68]
Lamey characterizes Davis's argument as "thought-provoking", but asserts that Davis's calculation of harvesting-related deaths is flawed because it is based upon two studies; one includes deaths from predation, which is "morally unobjectionable" for Regan, and the other examines production of a nonstandard crop, which Lamey argues has "little relevance" to the deaths associated with typical crop production. Lamey also argues, like Matheny, that accidental deaths are ethically distinct from intentional ones, and that if Davis includes accidental animal deaths in the moral cost of veganism he must also evaluate the increased human deaths associated with his proposed diet, which Lamey argues leaves "Davis, rather than Regan, with the less plausible argument."[69]
William Jarvis, writing for the Nutrition & Health Forum newsletter, attacks "ideologic vegetarians," whom he claims believe that "all life is sacred" and that "all forms of life have equal value," saying that these beliefs "can lead to absurdities such as allowing mosquitoes to spread malaria, or vipers to run loose on one's premises."[70] However, the ideas that all life is sacred or that all forms of life have equal value are not universal among vegans, many of whom do not grant moral standing to insects. As the advocacy organization Vegan Action notes, "[m]any vegans, however, are not opposed to using insect products, because they do not believe insects are conscious of pain."[71] A similar view is expressed by Gary Varner, a vegan philosophy professor at Texas A&M University.[72] "The case for thinking that all vertebrates can feel pain is thus very strong, while the case for thinking that invertebrates can feel pain is extremely weak by comparison (with the possible exception of cephalopods like octopus and squid)."[73][74] They therefore are no more committed to allowing dangerous vipers to run loose in their homes than advocates of human rights are committed to not fighting back against human attackers. Varner and other vegans who share his view do not feel obliged to respect the rights of mosquitoes, as they do not believe mosquitoes can suffer. Vegans and vegetarians also typically do not deny the moral right of self-defence.
Health
Dietetic association positions
The American Dietetic Association annually publishes its position on vegan and vegetarian diets:
[A]ppropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. Well-planned vegetarian diets are appropriate for individuals during all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, and adolescence, and for athletes.[6]
In 2003, the Dietitians of Canada joined with the ADA to release a position paper to the same effect.[75] Similarly, the British Nutrition Foundation considers "well balanced" vegetarian diets to be nutritionally adequate,[76] and the Irish Nutrition and Dietetic Institute considers "well planned" vegetarian diets to be "nutritionally balanced for both adults and children".[77]
In contrast, both the Swiss Federal Nutrition Commission and the German Society for Nutrition recommend against a vegan diet, particularly for children, the pregnant and the elderly.[78][79]
[edit] Nutritional benefits
Scientists such as Roger Segelken and T. Colin Campbell believe that some diets (such as the standard American diet) are detrimental to health, and they believe that a vegan diet represents an improvement,[80][81] in part because vegan diets are often high enough in fruit and vegetables to meet or exceed the recommended fruit and vegetable intakes.
According to the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada, diets that avoid meat tend to have lower levels of saturated fat, cholesterol, and animal protein, and higher levels of carbohydrates, fiber, magnesium, potassium, folate, and antioxidants, such as vitamins C and E, and phytochemicals.[6] People who avoid meat are reported to have lower body mass index than those following the average Canadian diet; from this follows lower death rates from ischemic heart disease; lower blood cholesterol levels; lower blood pressure; and lower rates of hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and prostate and colon cancer.[6]
A 1999 meta-study of five studies comparing vegetarian and non-vegetarian mortality rates in western countries found the mortality rate due to ischemic heart disease 26% lower among vegans compared to regular meat eaters, but 34% lower among ovolactovegetarians and those who ate fish but no other meat. No significant difference in mortality was found from other causes.[82] A 2003 review of three studies comparing mortality rates among British vegetarians and non-vegetarians found only a nonsignificant reduction in mortality from ischemic heart disease, but noted that the findings were compatible with the significant reduction found in the 1999 review.[83]
A 2006 study found that in people with type 2 diabetes a low-fat vegan diet reduced weight, BMI, total cholesterol, and LDL cholesterol and did so to a greater extent than the diet prescribed by the American Diabetes Association.[84]
Nutritional oncerns
Specific Nutrients
The American Dietetic Association considers "appropriately planned" vegan diets "nutritionally adequate",[6] but poorly planned vegan diets can be deficient in nutrients such as vitamin B12,[85] vitamin D,[86] calcium,[86][87] iodine[88] and omega-3 fatty acids.[89] These deficiencies have potentially serious consequences, including anemia,[90] rickets[91] and cretinism[92] in children, and osteomalacia[91] and hypothyroidism[92] in adults.
[edit] Vitamin B12
Deficiencies in Vitamin B12, a bacterial product that cannot be reliably found in plant foods,[90][93][94] can have serious health consequences, including anemia and neurodegenerative disease.[95] Although clinical B12 deficiency is rare in vegans,[90] if a person has not eaten more than the daily needed amount of B12 over a long period before becoming a vegan then they may not have built up any significant store of the vitamin.[96] In a 2002 laboratory study, more of the strict vegan participants' B12 and iron levels were compromised than those of lacto- or lacto-ovo-vegetarian participants.[97]
The Vegan Society and Vegan Outreach, among others, recommend that vegans either consistently eat foods fortified with B12 or take a B12 supplement.[98][99][100] Tempeh, seaweed, spirulina, organic produce, soil on unwashed vegetables, and intestinal bacteria have not been shown to be reliable sources of B12 for the dietary needs of vegans.[90][101][102]
Calcium, vitamin D
It is recommended that vegans eat three servings per day of a high calcium food, such as fortified soy milk, and take a calcium supplement as necessary.[6][86] The EPIC-Oxford study showed that vegans have an increased risk of bone fractures over both meat eaters and vegetarians, likely due to lower dietary calcium intake, but that vegans consuming more than the UK's estimated average requirements for calcium of 525 mg/day had risk of bone fractures similar to other groups.[87][103] A study of bone density found that vegans have bones 6% less dense than omnivores but that this difference was "clinically insignificant".[104] Another study by the same researchers examined over 100 vegan post-menopausal women and found that “…although vegans have much lower intakes of dietary calcium and protein than omnivores, veganism does not have (an) adverse effect on bone mineral density (BMD) and does not alter body composition.”[105]
The authors of The China Study argue that osteoporosis is linked to the consumption of animal protein because animal protein, unlike plant protein, increases the acidity of blood and tissues which is then neutralized by calcium pulled from the bones.[106] The authors add that "in our rural China Study, where the animal to plant ratio [for protein] was about 10%, the fracture rate is only one-fifth that of the U.S."[107]
For light-skinned people, adequate amounts of vitamin D may also be obtained by spending 15 to 30 minutes in the sunlight every few days. Dark-skinned people need significantly more sunlight to obtain the same amount of vitamin D, and sunlight exposure may be difficult for vegans in areas with low levels of sunlight during winter; in these cases supplementation is recommended.[91][93][108]
Iodine
Iodine supplementation may be necessary for vegans in countries where salt is not typically iodized, where it is iodized at low levels, or where, as in Britain or Ireland, animal products are used for iodine delivery.[88][98] Iodine can be obtained from most vegan multivitamins or from regular consumption of seaweeds, such as kelp.[88][98]
Pregnancies and children
The American Dietetic Association considers well-planned vegan diets "appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy and lactation,"[6] but recommends that vegan mothers supplement for iron, vitamin D, and vitamin B12.[109][110] Vitamin B12 deficiency in lactating vegetarian mothers has been linked to deficiencies and neurological disorders in their children.[111][112] Some research suggests that the essential omega-3 fatty acid α-linolenic acid and its derivatives should also be supplemented in pregnant and lactating vegan mothers, since they are very low in most vegan diets, and the metabolically related docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) is essential to the developing visual system.[113] A maternal vegan diet has also been associated with low birth weight,[114] and a five times lower likelihood of having twins than those who eat animal products.[115]
Several cases of severe infant malnutrition and some fatalities have been associated with a poorly planned vegan diet,[116][117][118][119][120] and provoked criticism of vegan diets for children.[121][122] Parents involved in these cases were convicted on charges ranging from assault to felony murder. Addressing criticism of veganism, Dr. Amy Lanou, an expert witness[123] for the prosecution in one of the cases, asserted that the child in that particular case "was not killed by a vegan diet" but that "the real problem was that he was not given enough food of any sort."
Eating disorders
The American Dietetic Association indicates that vegetarian diets may be more common among adolescents with eating disorders but that the evidence suggests that the adoption of a vegetarian diet does not lead to eating disorders, rather that "vegetarian diets may be selected to camouflage an existing eating disorder."[6] Other studies and statements by dietitians and counselors support this conclusion.[124][125][126]
Resources and the Environment
Main article: Environmental vegetarianism
People who adopt veganism for environmental reasons do so on the basis that veganism is claimed to consume far fewer resources and causes less environmental damage than an animal-based diet.[127][128][129] Animal agriculture is linked to climate change, water pollution, land degradation, and a decline in biodiversity.[129][130][131] Additionally, an animal-based diet uses more land,[131][132] water,[133] and energy than a vegan diet.[131][134][135]
The Livestock, Environment And Development Initiative, a joint effort of the World Bank, The European Union, The US Agency for International Development, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and others, released a report in November 2006 linking animal agriculture to environmental damage. The report, Livestock's Long Shadow [136] concludes that the livestock sector (primarily cows, chickens, and pigs) emerges as one of the top two or three most significant contributors to our most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global. It is one of the largest sources of greenhouse gases - responsible for 18% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions as measured in CO2 equivalents. In comparison, the proportion of total CO2 emissions by passenger vehicles is 12% of the total CO2.[137] It produces 65% of human-related nitrous oxide (which has 296 times the global warming potential of CO2) and 37% of all human-induced methane (which is 23 times as warming as CO2). Those numbers are confirmed in a 2007 article in the British medical journal The Lancet, which concludes that reducing consumption of animal products should be a top priority, especially in developed countries where such a measure would also entail substantial health benefits.[138]
A 2006 study by Gidon Eshel and Pamela Martin, assistant professors of geophysics at the University of Chicago, found that a person switching from the average American diet to a vegan diet would reduce CO2 emissions by 1,485 kg per year.[139]
The International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis argues that while most meat production in industrialized countries uses inefficient grain feeding methods through intensive farming, meat production is not invariably a poor use of land, especially in countries like ChinaBrazil. Since a proportion of all grain crops produced are not suitable for human consumption, they can be fed to animals to turn into meat, thus improving efficiency.[140][141][142][143] and Further, greenhouse gas emissions are not limited to animal husbandry; but also to several plant based sources such as rice cultivation.
In the developing world, notably Asia and Africa, fossil fuels are seldom used to transport feed for farm animals. Sheep or goats, for example, require no fuel, since they graze on farmlands, while bales of hay for bovines are still transported mainly using bullock carts or similar devices. Few of the meat processing techniques that occur in developed countries takes place in the majority of developing countries. Animals are also often herded to the place of slaughter (with the exception of poultry) resulting in a very low use of fossil fuels.[144] In fact farm animals in developing world are used for multiple purposes from providing draught power, to transportation while also serving as meat once it reaches the end of its economic life.
A 2007 study which simulated various diets' land use for the geography of New York State concluded that although vegetarian diets used the smallest amount of land per capita, a low fat diet which included some meat and dairy (less than 2 oz of meat/eggs per day—significantly less than consumed by the average American) could support slightly more people on the same available land than could be fed on some high fat vegetarian diets, since animal food crops can be grown on lower quality land than crops for human consumption.
VSEP says: Vegan is absent of consuming ANYTHING from animals! Spread this truth! Destroy the labs for vivisection, and fight the guys who try to fuck with your belief. It's not a debate, it's a war.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
