I know this is kind of a joke but this is legitimately one of the reasons I went vegetarian. Felt very “icky” to build my body out of other dead bodies.
That’s also a bit of a peculiar feeling after being vegan for a while. My whole body consists out of plant matter and the occasional mushroom. I’m practically a plant at this point.
(Obviously irrational, though. Meat, dairy, eggs etc. are also just pre-digested plants. We’d all be practically plants by that logic.)
The evidence is pretty weak for plants, but even it that were true, it takes more plants to produce animal products than it does to eat plants. If we are concerned about plant death, it’s happen even more for animal products
1 kg of meat requires 2.8 kg of human-edible feed for ruminants and 3.2 for monogastrics
Let’s say that plants really feel pain. How do we reduce that pain to a minimum?
To get 1kg beef you need roughly 50kg plant matter. So eating only plants would be much more humane.
Anyways, the poing on eating meat is that plants don’t give you as much energy as plants, so you’ll need to be as a panda, a koala or a cow to be able to survive (like, pass the vast majority of every day in your life just eating).
Or well, at least that’s in a purely natural/primitive/pre-industrial enviroment.
That’s only for certain plants. I could get fat off a pre modern vegan diet. Mostly it’d be by overconsuming nuts, grains, and legumes. Probably mushrooms fried in olive oil as well. Like it’d take some doing because fiber sends satiation signals. But of course, I could bypass the fiber easily with beer, and it’d make having too many nuts sound perfect.
It’s more the processing that’s relevant for pain. No processing, no pain.
For instance, some humans have very specific genetic mutations that do not allow them to feel pain. The peripheral nerves still send the pain signals to the brain but it cannot process them. Therefore, no pain.
There could be a discussion on whether very simple nervous systems (like in jellyfish) without a central component (brain) can process pain. But I’m not a biological researcher or philosopher so that’s outside my Lemmy paygrade.
And what makes them different from any other chemical reaction is a little disingenuous. Might as well ask what’s the difference between burning a human on a stake and melting glass? Both are just chemical reactions involving heat from a certain perspective.
There is simply no organ comparable to the brain in plants that would allow for plant pain. That’s pretty much it.
You are aware systems are more than the sums of their parts…?
A book is more than the sum of its words.
A painting is more than the sum of its pigments
Music is more than the sum of its sine waves.
This is called emergence and is a very basic principle of - well anything, really. The same building blocks arranged in different ways will result in entirely different new objects.
If you’re interested in philosophy, feel free to read a few Wikipedia articles. You’re not the first one to ask about the nature of feelings and I am not qualified to have deeper discussions about this topic.
Why does one combination of quarks produce a shiny, malleable solid that’s conductive and stable, and yet another produces a highly reactive liquid at room temperature
Well you have to understand that elements, much like molecules aren’t really made of things, they’re made of the math, physics, and chemistry acting on the things that’re there
I mean, it’s not really fair because plants don’t have any of the same “parts” we do that would constitute a body as such. When I think of growing my body, I think of organs and tissues such as muscle, bone, blood, neurons, etc. These are primary components of what would be considered nutritional intake from a dead body that would be reconstructed for use in our own body. Plants do not have muscles, bones, etc. We are using basic nutrients like cats, proteins, and carbohydrates as building blocks for our own parts. As noted elsewhere it takes a fraction of the plant matter necessary to build our own muscles than it does to feed a pound of meat to them use to build muscle from that. So even by your flawed logic, it’s still less plants to eat them directly than it is to eat meat grown from them.
Additionally, the vast majority of plant products don’t even require a plant to “die” to eat. Many fruits and vegetables are just the reproductive structure of the plant, not vital for the health of the plant at all. I am an avid gardener and the only plants I can think of that have to “die” for me to eat them are root vegetables. Even then if you’re diligent you could save, for example, the tops of carrots or bottom of onions to regrow.
They are completely different concepts and it’s bad faith to argue otherwise.
I know this is kind of a joke but this is legitimately one of the reasons I went vegetarian. Felt very “icky” to build my body out of other dead bodies.
That’s also a bit of a peculiar feeling after being vegan for a while. My whole body consists out of plant matter and the occasional mushroom. I’m practically a plant at this point.
(Obviously irrational, though. Meat, dairy, eggs etc. are also just pre-digested plants. We’d all be practically plants by that logic.)
Its sunlight all the way down.
Due to how the US meat and dairy industry works, most US omnivores are largely corn based. You can have the carbon in your hair tested to verify this.
I’m positive on veganism as a whole, but consuming corpses to grow stronger is kind of metal as hell
Confirmed. Mushrooms are metal
This is actually a fundamental part of dark magic. To eat the blood, heart, or liver of a pure person to gain their power.
Shit. Did I just make myself a vegan?
You’re still building your body out of mushrooms and plants dead bodies, and also stealing other animals food! /s
deleted by creator
The evidence is pretty weak for plants, but even it that were true, it takes more plants to produce animal products than it does to eat plants. If we are concerned about plant death, it’s happen even more for animal products
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2211912416300013
We know plants can respond to stimuli, saying they feel pain is a big jump to conclusions
Let’s say that plants really feel pain. How do we reduce that pain to a minimum? To get 1kg beef you need roughly 50kg plant matter. So eating only plants would be much more humane.
Anyways, the poing on eating meat is that plants don’t give you as much energy as plants, so you’ll need to be as a panda, a koala or a cow to be able to survive (like, pass the vast majority of every day in your life just eating).
Or well, at least that’s in a purely natural/primitive/pre-industrial enviroment.
That’s only for certain plants. I could get fat off a pre modern vegan diet. Mostly it’d be by overconsuming nuts, grains, and legumes. Probably mushrooms fried in olive oil as well. Like it’d take some doing because fiber sends satiation signals. But of course, I could bypass the fiber easily with beer, and it’d make having too many nuts sound perfect.
People that only eat plants exist and they are doing totally fine.
Because they’re taking a lot of meds and a lot of supplements. Not everybody can’t do that.
deleted by creator
Plants can feel pain the same way a machine can learn. Which means not at all outside of marketing.
In reality they simply have mechanisms to react to damage. But that’s not pain.
Pain is the processing of injury in a nervous system. Plants lack the nervous system required to feel anything.
Just like a brain dead human, sponge or bacteria plants cannot feel pain in any meaningful way.
And what is a nervous system really? Why is it so special and different from any other chemical reaction?
It’s more the processing that’s relevant for pain. No processing, no pain.
For instance, some humans have very specific genetic mutations that do not allow them to feel pain. The peripheral nerves still send the pain signals to the brain but it cannot process them. Therefore, no pain.
There could be a discussion on whether very simple nervous systems (like in jellyfish) without a central component (brain) can process pain. But I’m not a biological researcher or philosopher so that’s outside my Lemmy paygrade.
And what makes them different from any other chemical reaction is a little disingenuous. Might as well ask what’s the difference between burning a human on a stake and melting glass? Both are just chemical reactions involving heat from a certain perspective.
There is simply no organ comparable to the brain in plants that would allow for plant pain. That’s pretty much it.
Aren’t we just like Quarks on the most basic level? So why would one arrangement of Quarks, produce feeling people and not another?
Maybe objects feel pain, but can’t remember it, or react to it.
You are aware systems are more than the sums of their parts…?
A book is more than the sum of its words.
A painting is more than the sum of its pigments
Music is more than the sum of its sine waves.
This is called emergence and is a very basic principle of - well anything, really. The same building blocks arranged in different ways will result in entirely different new objects.
If you’re interested in philosophy, feel free to read a few Wikipedia articles. You’re not the first one to ask about the nature of feelings and I am not qualified to have deeper discussions about this topic.
Why does one combination of quarks produce a shiny, malleable solid that’s conductive and stable, and yet another produces a highly reactive liquid at room temperature
Ikr? Makes no sense. It’s like if 12 + 4 equals 25^3
Well you have to understand that elements, much like molecules aren’t really made of things, they’re made of the math, physics, and chemistry acting on the things that’re there
Really living up to your username today
I mean, it’s not really fair because plants don’t have any of the same “parts” we do that would constitute a body as such. When I think of growing my body, I think of organs and tissues such as muscle, bone, blood, neurons, etc. These are primary components of what would be considered nutritional intake from a dead body that would be reconstructed for use in our own body. Plants do not have muscles, bones, etc. We are using basic nutrients like cats, proteins, and carbohydrates as building blocks for our own parts. As noted elsewhere it takes a fraction of the plant matter necessary to build our own muscles than it does to feed a pound of meat to them use to build muscle from that. So even by your flawed logic, it’s still less plants to eat them directly than it is to eat meat grown from them.
Additionally, the vast majority of plant products don’t even require a plant to “die” to eat. Many fruits and vegetables are just the reproductive structure of the plant, not vital for the health of the plant at all. I am an avid gardener and the only plants I can think of that have to “die” for me to eat them are root vegetables. Even then if you’re diligent you could save, for example, the tops of carrots or bottom of onions to regrow.
They are completely different concepts and it’s bad faith to argue otherwise.