A refutation to vegan arguments

Hello, and welcome.

I would like to begin by saying that I actually have nothing against vegans in general. Truth is, I understand that most vegans just want to live their lives and make the best decisions they can about doing so. While I may disagree with them, I understand and respect the passion and thought they put into their lifestyle.

That said, there are some vegans who cannot just co-exist with their fellow man, and feel a need to go to videos involving meat, cheese, and other animal related products and become quite argumentative. These are the radical vegans, and I cannot help but loathe them. Yes, there are meat-eaters who go to vegan videos to instigate fights, but I have as little respect for those combative meat-eaters as well.

On a video like this one, I would expect to see comments disagreeing with me, as I am laying down a refutation of vegan arguments, however.

And so... Vegan arguments fall into (as far as I can see) three major categories;

A: Meat is unhealthy.

B: Meat is bad for the environment.

C: Meat is wrong.

Let's start at the top. The "meat is unhealthy" argument is based (mostly) on studies on meat and heart health, as well as studies on meat and cancer.

The first of these is centered around cholesterol levels. Now, what radical vegans aren't saying is that in the studies, first, the meat identified as the culprit is red meat, note, that this does not include white meat or fish. And second, the observed individuals ate large amounts of red meat very often. If you eat enough potatoes, it can make you obese and give you diabetes because of the sheer amount of calories. So, should we stop eating potatoes? No, but we should eat them in moderation. The same can be said for red meat.

Also, cholesterol levels are more complex than just what we eat, with genetics and exercise also playing a role (not to mention cholesterol lowering foods like apples and garlic). Take a look at the Maasai, in Africa. These interesting people eat almost exclusively red meat and milk, with essential nutrients coming from animal blood. That said, the Maasai also are very active, and burn up to seventy percent more calories than an average U.S. citizen.

As for cancer, the culprit here is improper cooking methods, as cooking meat at very high temperatures creates polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which can cause cancer. The answer to this is... don't cook meat above three hundred degrees. It's that easy.

Now for the second argument, "meat is bad for the environment". This argument is, in fact, correct, but I feel that the answer that vegans give is not.

The negative impact that the meat industry has on the environment comes in two forms. The first one most vegans know about, greenhouse gases, and the second, a little more obscure, is nutrient pollution. Greenhouse gases come from cow flatulence, which releases methane. It is estimated that fifteen percent of man-made greenhouse gas is caused by the meat industry. Now, think about that. If we could eliminate all the greenhouse gases that the meat industry makes entirely, then we'd still be left with eighty-five percent of what we currently make. It's not a significant amount, but still it is a negative impact.

Also, again... red meat. White meat and fish, not even a factor.

As for nutrient pollution, this comes in the form of runoff from animal waste that has not been properly disposed of. Yes, it causes "dead zones" in waterways, where aquatic life cannot live.

So, what is the answer to these problems? I feel that we could easily turn the meat industry into something positive, in regards to the environment. The way we do this is by placing the animal waste into large anaerobic decomposition tanks. This would in fact produce far more methane than simple cow flatulence, but it would be totally contained. The interesting thing about methane is that it is flammable. And in turn could be used for fuel to produce electricity, thus replacing fossil fuel usage to some degree. The contained waste would not contribute to runoff, and in fact could then be used to replace artificial fertilizers, which would reduce nutrient pollution even further.

This leaves the third argument. "Meat is wrong".

This argument is the easiest to refute. I reject the moral decisions vegans have made, and do not feel the need to allow radical vegans to tell me what is right or wrong. If someone wants to eat meat... that is not, in my mind, murder.

[SolasComposer]

I am respectful that you keep an open mind, the worst thing for the earth ultimately, is a strong enough belief and feeling for the need for fast change in something, that it leads to militant action. ❤️

[Lunamorexx]

I subbed to you because you seem very rational. I’ve enjoyed seeing your way of expressing your arguments, and I hope you don’t stop at just this vid.

[adenovirus.]

Interesting video. You neglect to mention that total green house gasses of all humanity is a tiny fraction of natural occurring. Also in holistic farming practice animals grazing form part of the natural cycle which feeds the soil with minerals and nutrients. Leave a paddock empty and after a while it gets covered in one noxious weed which doesn’t convert CO2 to oxygen very well. Put a bunch of cows there do nothing and let it rain and you end up with a paddock full of good grass and more oxygen. The ocean and the entire atmosphere act as a green house gas in terms of regulating temperature. It’s essential for life. Without green house gases you would burn during the day and freeze at night. There would be no life as we know it. We are carbon based life forms. We must learn to love carbon. Agriculture kills more animals through poisoning and traps and removing habitats. A combination of a lack of commonsense and observation (Venus has global warming and cooling cycles like we do - it is mainly about the sun and it’s cycles) and an education system that does not encourage question things has led to this . In the last century we have seen nothing but fake science for profit leading to more of the same and this preys on well meaning and gullible people. It’s so ingrained it cannot be explained. It is like a religioun now.