Why vegan is the fastest growing food movement in the world

Beanz meanz fartz.

My turkeys do. Killed a few over Christmas.

I agree,i hunt,have done most of my life.

Why vegan is the fastest growing food movement in the world

Because its fashionable

And it is very tasty and good for you
The animals would thank us if they could and there's a lesson for all of us.

The aptly named Larry Lamb is on TV at the moment in the UK's first insect farm/restaurant,he has just been chowing down on mealworm patty burgers,a new alternative to meat.

Think I'll give that a miss

BURGER KING LAUNCHES THE VEGAN ROYALE BURGER AND PLANT-BASED WHOPPER

Bad for keto, skip the bun and bread crumbs and fries. Mayo good for keto, vegetable good also. Not sure what's inside the vegan burger! Water very good for keto.
Great for Vegans.

What right do cattle and other meat providers(animals) have to live over insects?
Same goes for non meat eaters but will eat fish!

Pescatarians, I ain't fussy, I eat anything except pork, a Filipino friend sent me pics of a dog they were preparing for the table a few weeks back, cost them 300 peso I think

No, because people have realised that eating animals is fundamentally wrong
If you look at the vegan chillers in Tesco, it grows month on month.

This is a massive topic and one I have looked at closely. Keeping it short, there is no need to eat a veggie burger to save the planet, eating animals is what man does and has done going back to the year dot, it isn’t dirty if cooked and I quite like meat.

I follow a guy called Frank Mitloehener who is a greenhouse gas guru, who’s job it is to research all of this and he explains amicably why we shouldn’t blame the cow for what fossil fuels have done to the planet.

Do eat fish?

The bogus burger blame...


https://clear.ucdavis.edu/blog/bogus-burger-blame

Everybody does.

The difference for me is that the explanation given and the one he underlines tallies up with the geological record. All Frank is saying is this. It is well known. It’s a cycle. There is no net addition to greenhouse gases generated by ruminants. But there is from fossil fuels in the much shorter term than the long (geological) carbon cycle.

What that guy at John Hopkins is picking with becomes irrelevant.






What many people just don’t get is that there is more than one carbon cycle. Simply put, a long cycle and a short cycle. The short cycle includes ruminant gases which essentially neither increase or decrease greenhouse gases. The long cycle includes fossil fuels that would never have been released if it were not for man’s intervention. Hugh Jenkyns explains the long cycle from the geological slant.