Milk Cow in California discovered to be infected with Mad Cow disease.

[werepossum]

What does veganism have to do with actively condemning industrial meat farming and meat consumption? Does being a racist also make you actively condemn racial integration?

I'm going to assume you accidentally fell on your keyboard because those can't possibly be serious questions.

 

[Howard]

I'm going to assume you accidentally fell on your keyboard because those can't possibly be serious questions.

Veganism is the practice of abstaining from the use of animal products. Ethical vegans reject the commodity status of animals and the use of animal products for any purpose, while dietary vegans (or strict vegetarians) eliminate them from their diet only. Another form, environmental veganism, rejects the use of animal products on the premise that the industrial practice is environmentally damaging and unsustainable.[1]

See veganism and dietary veganism.

If you can't see the connection between the racism thing and the vegan condemnation thing, well, sucks to not understand that. You know what a Venn diagram is, right?

 

[werepossum]

Quote:
Originally Posted by werepossum
I'm going to assume you accidentally fell on your keyboard because those can't possibly be serious questions.
Quote:
Veganism is the practice of abstaining from the use of animal products. Ethical vegans reject the commodity status of animals and the use of animal products for any purpose, while dietary vegans (or strict vegetarians) eliminate them from their diet only. Another form, environmental veganism, rejects the use of animal products on the premise that the industrial practice is environmentally damaging and unsustainable.[1]
See veganism and dietary veganism.

If you can't see the connection between the racism thing and the vegan condemnation thing, well, sucks to not understand that. You know what a Venn diagram is, right?
__________________

I'm perfectly willing to concede that not EVERY vegan is necessarily against anyone else consuming meat and that not EVERY racist is necessarily against integration. I'll just insist that the portion of each population not following these behaviors is small relative to those who do. It's like arguing that not all forest fires destroy trees or not all bullets to the head are destructive; you can be correct on a technicality while being wrong in the general condition.

And yes, I'm quite familiar with Venn diagrams and their primary use - propping up morons who want to argue against reality because it isn't absolute. So if you want to argue that vegans aren't necessarily against eating meat and racists aren't necessarily against racial integration, just remember to put on your helmet first, because not everyone making an argument does so without being struck by a meteorite. Hey, that would make an interesting Venn diagram; I suggest a large sheet of paper and some sharp crayons. And adult supervision, of course. There is some overlap between the population of people coloring and the population of people injured.

And when your child's babysitter shows up with a big ol' album of kiddie porn, be sure and point out that not all consumers of child pornography molest children. 'Cause these things are important to know.

 

[Howard]

I'm perfectly willing to concede that not EVERY vegan is necessarily against anyone else consuming meat and that not EVERY racist is necessarily against integration. I'll just insist that the portion of each population not following these behaviors is small relative to those who do. It's like arguing that not all forest fires destroy trees or not all bullets to the head are destructive; you can be correct on a technicality while being wrong in the general condition.

And yes, I'm quite familiar with Venn diagrams and their primary use - propping up morons who want to argue against reality because it isn't absolute. So if you want to argue that vegans aren't necessarily against eating meat and racists aren't necessarily against racial integration, just remember to put on your helmet first, because not everyone making an argument does so without being struck by a meteorite. Hey, that would make an interesting Venn diagram; I suggest a large sheet of paper and some sharp crayons. And adult supervision, of course. There is some overlap between the population of people coloring and the population of people injured.

And when your child's babysitter shows up with a big ol' album of kiddie porn, be sure and point out that not all consumers of child pornography molest children. 'Cause these things are important to know.

And tell me what all this drivel has to do with your assumption that there is a strong likelihood Dr. Greger's position is deceiving and/or wrong strictly due to the fact that he is a vegan?

 

[Howard]

Really, I have no idea what Dr. Greger said, but I just compelled to jump in and piss all over the people who couldn't differentiate between personal beliefs and professional work.

 

[werepossum]

And tell me what all this drivel has to do with your assumption that there is a strong likelihood Dr. Greger's position is deceiving and/or wrong strictly due to the fact that he is a vegan?

I'm sorry, you need to go back and read my post and - sorry, that was cruel. You need to have someone read to you my post, and explain it. I said specifically:

I take no position (on Dr. Gregor) either way and I agree that our testing and tracking system is frightfully limited and outdated - not only on BSE prions but on botulism and other dangerous bacteria too - but a vegan making complaints about the beef industry deserves a LOT more than one's normal healthy skepticism simply because making such complaints is part of the vegan lifestyle.

Note that I was not taking a position on Dr. Gregor either way. I was explaining to Dr. Pizza that he had misconstrued Monovillage's objection to assuming that Dr. Gregor was not a credible source on information because of his personal bias. Again, I personally take no position either way. However . . .
1. Dr. Gregor is apparently a vegan.
2. Vegans as a group object to the eating of beef. Yes, I am aware that not ALL vegans object to others eating beef or to the beef industry, just as you are aware that most vegans DO object to eating beef AND/OR to the beef industry. (Hint: It ain't the NRA and the National Hot Rod Association sending undercover dweebs to expose the meat industry.) If Dr. Gregor objects morally to eating meat, his discovery serves him by discouraging others from eating beef, thereby advancing his belief system. If Dr. Gregor does not eat meat because of potential safety hazards, then his discovery serves him by discouraging others from eating beef and encouraging the meat industry to do a better job, thereby advancing his belief system. And again, I acknowledge that it's perfectly possible Dr. Gregor is one of those rare vegans who made that choice due solely to his own personal health issues with no desire to impose that choice on others, AND that it's perfectly possible Dr. Gregor is one of those unfortunately much less rare vegans who does desire to impose that choice on others, yet honestly made a fortuitous discovery furthering his goals. (Again, I make no judgement on Dr. Gregor either way, I merely note a potential motivation for wanting this goal.)
3. Dr. Gregor therefore has a potential pre-existing motivation to be opposed to the beef industry. I don't know enough about Dr. Gregor to make a judgement either way. I do know enough about people to not discard this knowledge.
4. At least from one member, we have heard that the cow in question had a non-transmissable form of BSE. If true, and I have no information or opinion either way, then Dr. Gregor has at the least shaded the truth for an ulterior motive. That motive may be based in his vegan lifestyle choices, or in his desire for the nation to have a safer meat supply, or in his desire to impress and bed the hot PETA chick with the hairy legs. (Again, I take no position either way, I'm just pointing it out.)

Thus the information I have about Dr. Gregor leads me to be suspect about his motivations in much the same way I am suspicious of anyone making what appears to be a self-serving statement. A vegan may honestly discover problems in our meat industry, just as an anti-abortion activist may honestly discover that abortion causes mental problems or a swinger may honestly discover health problems caused by monogamy. However, a smart and prudent person is more suspicious of those making statements which appear to be self-serving, or which fall in line with their demonstrable belief system, than of those who appear to have no vested interest either way. If you personally insist on not prejudging anyone based on anything, even to the point of being no more suspicious of an approaching gangbanger carrying a knife than an approaching Brownie Scout, then I'll simply applaud your lack of prejudice and enjoy the comedic value of your continually being surprised by life.

 

[Moonbeam]

I'm perfectly willing to concede that not EVERY vegan is necessarily against anyone else consuming meat and that not EVERY racist is necessarily against integration. I'll just insist that the portion of each population not following these behaviors is small relative to those who do. It's like arguing that not all forest fires destroy trees or not all bullets to the head are destructive; you can be correct on a technicality while being wrong in the general condition.

And yes, I'm quite familiar with Venn diagrams and their primary use - propping up morons who want to argue against reality because it isn't absolute. So if you want to argue that vegans aren't necessarily against eating meat and racists aren't necessarily against racial integration, just remember to put on your helmet first, because not everyone making an argument does so without being struck by a meteorite. Hey, that would make an interesting Venn diagram; I suggest a large sheet of paper and some sharp crayons. And adult supervision, of course. There is some overlap between the population of people coloring and the population of people injured.

And when your child's babysitter shows up with a big ol' album of kiddie porn, be sure and point out that not all consumers of child pornography molest children. 'Cause these things are important to know.

Interesting. I will have to reconsider my assumptions that many conservatives might not actually have defective brains, ones, for example, who can say that while all conservatives may not be defective, most of them surely are.

 

[blankslate]

That's the.... thing he's not calling people who eat meat evil.

Dr. Gregor brought up a couple of concerns.

1) very few of the regular population of cattle are tested (while 100% of cattle that seem sick are)... 1 out of a 1000 cattle on average is not enough.

2) One company who wanted to test 100% of their cattle, and sell that beef to Japan however I also think that a market for that would've been found in the U.S. They were prevented by the USDA (at the behest of other large beef producers) from doing so.
This bothers me because a company should be allowed to go above and beyond the "minimum standard"

3)He's advocating measures that would make the supply of beef safer... who is against that? Really other than people who want to save 10-20 cents on the pound.

 

[werepossum]

Interesting. I will have to reconsider my assumptions that many conservatives might not actually have defective brains, ones, for example, who can say that while all conservatives may not be defective, most of them surely are.

Fair enough.

That's the.... thing he's not calling people who eat meat evil.

Dr. Gregor brought up a couple of concerns.

1) very few of the regular population of cattle are tested (while 100% of cattle that seem sick are)... 1 out of a 1000 cattle on average is not enough.

2) One company who wanted to test 100% of their cattle, and sell that beef to Japan however I also think that a market for that would've been found in the U.S. They were prevented by the USDA (at the behest of other large beef producers) from doing so.
This bothers me because a company should be allowed to go above and beyond the "minimum standard"

3)He's advocating measures that would make the supply of beef safer... who is against that? Really other than people who want to save 10-20 cents on the pound.

And I agree with him on both of those first two things. And while I don't know the markup on beef, I'm willing to pay an extra nickle plus markup to test all cows, plus costs to get a first rate tracking system to ensure that we really are testing all the animals used to feed humans, even though Mad Cow Disease is not really on my radar. I'll go further and say that NO cows unable to walk should be used to fed humans in any form, NO animal products (other than heat sterilized things like bone and blood meal treated sufficiently to destroy prions which I believe are the very toughest things to kill) should be used to feed food animals, and NO SRM or pressure-stripped meat should be used in food for humans. But again, I support Mono's original contention that a vegan asserting that our beef is unsafe should be taken with a large grain of salt (though not dismissed out of hand for being a vegan, as Mono too has admitted) not as a comment on Dr. Greger, but as wise policy in general.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Whoever thought that feeding cows (vegetarians) chopped up cow meat was a good idea should have their entire ancestry dug up and slapped.

It can be spread that way but since it's usually only discovered later in life it's more likely that it was spread via offspring in this case.

Anyway, these types of prions are not like viruses nor bacterium, you can safely drink the milk from it, i'd be weary of meat though since the bone marrow can contaminate it if in contact after slaughter.

 

[soccerballtux]

OP, this is very interesting good find and good research. Please post more stories you find like this.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

That's the.... thing he's not calling people who eat meat evil.

Dr. Gregor brought up a couple of concerns.

1) very few of the regular population of cattle are tested (while 100% of cattle that seem sick are)... 1 out of a 1000 cattle on average is not enough.

2) One company who wanted to test 100% of their cattle, and sell that beef to Japan however I also think that a market for that would've been found in the U.S. They were prevented by the USDA (at the behest of other large beef producers) from doing so.
This bothers me because a company should be allowed to go above and beyond the "minimum standard"

3)He's advocating measures that would make the supply of beef safer... who is against that? Really other than people who want to save 10-20 cents on the pound.

Ok, STFU about Dr Gregor and post real sources with links that refers to both the scientist and the study.

I am aware of the US restrictions for some to test all animals and i think it's stupid as hell, this is when government regulation has gone horribly WRONG. In the meantime, i only eat Irish beef because they DO test every single animal.

I bet you couldn't get an American to buy that though.

Meanwhile people care about crap like salmonella which isn't even a problem in properly prepared meat and eggs but when it comes to the prions that WILL kill you no matter how you cook your meat, yeah that's all good, it's tasty prions.

Perhaps the RP lovers are all carriers, they sure as hell act like retards, the more RP lose the more they are sure he'll win eventually via the convention and unbound delegates...

It's mad cow or mad something.

 

[blankslate]

Ok, STFU about Dr Gregor and post real sources with links that refers to both the scientist and the study.

I am aware of the US restrictions for some to test all animals and i think it's stupid as hell, this is when government regulation has gone horribly WRONG. In the meantime, i only eat Irish beef because they DO test every single animal.

I bet you couldn't get an American to buy that though.

Meanwhile people care about crap like salmonella which isn't even a problem in properly prepared meat and eggs but when it comes to the prions that WILL kill you no matter how you cook your meat, yeah that's all good, it's tasty prions.

Perhaps the RP lovers are all carriers, they sure as hell act like retards, the more RP lose the more they are sure he'll win eventually via the convention and unbound delegates...

It's mad cow or mad something.

read my links I already posted.

According to the person interviewed in the CS monitor article about 40,000 animals are tested a year that seems in line with Dr. Gregers, statement in the radio interview link that 1 out of 1000 cows in the general population are tested.

Where is the hostility coming from in regards to the statements... the Christian Science Monitor isn't some sensationalist rag.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

read my links I already posted.

According to the person interviewed in the CS monitor article about 40,000 animals are tested a year that seems in line with Dr. Gregers, statement in the radio interview link that 1 out of 1000 cows in the general population are tested.

Where is the hostility coming from in regards to the statements... the Christian Science Monitor isn't some sensationalist rag.

Wait what? The Christian science monitor is a fucked up paper all in itself and Dr Gregers (whom you mentioned AGAIN) is even more of a whacked up idiot...

Do you have an actual source for any of this other than a whackjob and a christian "science" magazine (one that supports IC studies from decades ago as new science even though it's been proven incorrect over 20 times in peer reviewed studies)...

It's not a sensationalist rag, it's main premise is that it provides stupidity devoid of all evidence and is as close to science as my turd in the toilet is to an Aston Martin DB9

 

[blankslate]

I have a different opinion of the CSM.

You haven't even clarified what study you are talking about.

The subject of the news article was a cow found in California which tested positive for BSE.

In the meantime, i only eat Irish beef because they DO test every single animal.

I bet you couldn't get an American to buy that though.

As I have said if Creekstone Farms weren't prevented from testing every one of their animals I would be happily spending the extra 10-20 cents per pound or ~1/2 kilogram of beef it would've cost to buy from them.