• samus12345@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Why aren’t you living out in the woods eating nuts and berries? Whatever device you’re using to post this, it’s terrible for Earth!

  • DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Why do people eat food they know isn’t good for their health? Why do people continue to buy products from companies that have proven to only sell bad products or engage in scumbag practices?

    They all have the same answer.

    • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      It turns out in 1961 the American heart Association took bribery money from procter and gamble, who owned and sold “healthier Crisco” cooking oils that weren’t high in saturated fat, like beef and other cooking oils were.

      The AHA then claimed and pushed that saturated fats caused heart disease.

      Problem is, something like 88% of every study done in the past 60 years has found little to no link between heart disease and saturated fats.

      So beef, according to most studies, isn’t bad for you. The AHA was just crooked and on the take, being paid off to sell Crisco.

      Now it is calorie dense and people tend to eat too much of it, but that seems to be a lot of things. Don’t eat too much or you get fat. But apparently, you don’t have to worry about saturated fats being bad for you.

      • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        WHO report

        someone else online summarized the genetics part as the following:

        Mandelian randomisation studies show that LDL-c is causative in atherogenic plaques 1 and metabolic ward RCTs show that SFA intakes increase LDL-c, while the decrease in SFAs lead to lower total and LDL-c 2.

        But yes, almost all nutrition science is a bit inconclusive because of genetic variation.

        • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          Forgive me, because I’m struggling to understand the linked information, but as someone with atherosclerosis this is an issue close to my heart (ha!).

          I just want to make sure I understand you.

          Your link to the european heart journal says that the causal link between LDL and ASCVD is “unequivocal”.

          I think the WHO study says (amongst a lot of other complicated stuff) that replacing SFAs with PUFAs and MUFAs is more favourable than replacing SFAs with complex carbohydrates? The strong implication being (although I couldn’t see this exactly) that higher SFA intake contributes to heart disease.

          • EndRedStateSubsidies@leminal.space
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            I always keep in mind the first doctor to advocate washing hands after handling corpses was laughed out of medicine and died alone in an asylum ironically enough from sepsis.

            To that point, the vast majority of research on nutrition is done on the presumption carbohydrates should be the foundation of our diet. Even “low” carb diet studies with have 30% of the calories coming from simple carbs. Oddly enough, the human body works much differently and much better when you don’t give it -any- sugar: https://youtu.be/cST99piL71E

            I can expand, but briefly, sugar acts like a sandblaster through your heart and shreds the endothelium (the finger-things that move things in and out of the bloodstream). LDL is a repair van that drives around with cholesterol and saturated fat to repair the plaques. (HDL brings empty LDL back to the liver) The entire logic of blaming cholesterol for heart disease is like blaming bandaids for stab wounds. Doctors say eat less fat and more “healthy whole grains” (carbs) and the liver makes more cholesterol. Doctor sees cholesterol is still high because the body needs it and prescribes statins which impair production. This leads to nerve pain because it’s what literally every nerve in the body is insulated with.

            The problems with cholesterol stem from it sitting in the bloodstream and glycating due to prolonged sugar exposure. Sugar staying in the bloodstream is basically ketoacidosis, so clearing sugar is a priority that results in LDL gumming up and going bad, essentially.

            I can expand on this, but basically the human body needs predominantly fat with some protein and actually zero carbs.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Each individual is facing the following choice in life:

    • sacrifice to save the planet, and fail
    • or not

    People want to immediately jump to “if everyone would just …”

    Nobody is looking at an “everyone does X” button. People only have their “I do X” button available.

    So that is literally the answer to your question. Very few people would sacrifice the civilization to eat a cheeseburger. But nobody has that choice or that power in their hands. Their choice is eat the cheeseburger or not, and the survival of civilization stays rigidly the same between those two choices.

    • Chemo@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      25 days ago

      The bitter thing is: we could just implement the “Everyone does X” button. By creating according laws. But that doesn’t happen either. Because suddenly “I would do it, if everyone else did it too” turns out to be just an excuse.

    • sailingbythelee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Best response. Almost everyone alive has a net negative impact on the environment. Maybe that one Indian guy who planted a whole forest by himself gets a pass. We can try to be less negatively impactful depending on our inclinations, resources, and other interests and priorities. Some people may choose vegetarianism, some might buy an electric car or install some solar panels, some might organize politically for a new policy. Some might spend their altruism improving social conditions rather than focusing on the environment. But being ever so slightly less of a negative impact on the environment than your neighbour who has a slightly different set of priorities is hardly a reason to feel morally superior.

  • NeilBrü@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    11 days ago

    I eat beef (occasionally) due to its excellent flavor, versatility in cuisine, and high complex protein density.

  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Same reason we use electricity despite not being 100% green energy and thus being even worse for the earth?

    If you actually wanna guilt this question then the fuck are you doing using your coal and gas powered electricity to do it?

    There is no ethical consumption under capitalism, because the capitalists have seen to it that you will never be permitted to make an ethical choice that would dare compete with what they expect you to choose.

    Being a moralizing prick doesn’t send any message, what gets people to change is making that change easy, that’s why instead of being terminally online fuckwads, british vegangelists spread the good news by hosting free kitchens, volunteering to take people grocery shopping on their own pound, teaching vegan cooking classes, and all other sorts of actually addressing literally any of the actual concerns people have about going vegan instead of being a condescending snob about it.

    • Chemo@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      25 days ago

      If you actually wanna guilt this

      Being a moralizing prick

      All OP did was stating a simple fact. If you feel the need to outrage over science, then the problem is certainly not OP.

    • Sizzler@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      So honestly, in your opinion, one of the only ways a vegan can change people’s minds is to take them shopping and PAY for their food for them. Amazing, this is a new level of shitty push the blame away behaviour. Pathetic.

  • TypicalHog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s very, very simple. It’s cuz shit’s tasty AF and most people care more about themselves and their tastebuds than climate.

  • nutsack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Because they’re lazy and comfortable and stupid and they don’t give a shit about anything.

  • iiGxC@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Because people are selfish, stuck in their ways, and speciesist. Some are also ignorant

  • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    It’s nutritious. Instead of carefully observing some diet you can eat some beef and buckwheat or cabbage or beans, and you’re good.

    That said, I eat meat so rarely that my relatives worry, mainly because it takes some time to cook if you boil it, and I’m lazy and unorganized, and frying it has the potential of, eh, leaving the kitchen for 5 minutes which turn out to be half an hour and returning for the smell.

    Other than that people can’t care about every problem at once.

  • thesink05@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Not everyone has the time and resources to commit to every ‘good’ fight under the sun especially when the systemic problems are as deeply rooted in our society as they are.

    Which device did you post from? Did you vet it wasn’t made with slave labor? You might need to go recycle all your devices and unfortunately that will cut you off from getting your message out to the world.

    Your post does more harm to your cause than good because it just makes everyone angry at you.

    • Sizzler@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Stop eating meat, it’s easy, you change your diet and are healthier.

      Honestly stop saying “Your post does more harm to your cause than good because it just makes everyone angry at you”

      It’s a tired and worn out excuse to avoid saying “I’m lazy and selfish”

      • dacreator@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        It’s easy when you only need to care about your own needs. Try saying that with a family and kids…based on your comment I suspect you can’t.

          • stephen01king@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            You could certainly lead by example by not acting like an insufferable asshole and giving the movement a bad look.

              • stephen01king@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                I’m pretty sure more animals got killed by you turning off people against the movement than I ever cause by eating beef my whole life. I barely eat beef in the first place, and most of what I eat comes from small scale local farmers. So congrats, I guess, for killing more cows than me.

                • Sizzler@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  You’re just making shit up to try and justify your stance. It’s hilarious.

      • thesink05@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Can you provide some product comparisons that include cost and nutritional value? Take into account dietary restrictions as well. Not for me personally but for anyone in general.

        • Sizzler@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          No, do your own work if you actually care or are you just trying to “gotcha” me?

          • thesink05@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            The ‘gotcha’ was going to be: “Great information! This is the kind of post that might actually change someone’s mind.”

            But instead we have condescending posts/comments that assume everyone simply has the means to make a significant change in their life.

          • fuckingkangaroos@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Yes, they’re just trying to “gotcha” you. They could spend five seconds and look up that information on the same device they’re posting from.

            • stephen01king@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              So could the poster, but you certainly are not accusing him of trying to “gotcha” other people.

              • fuckingkangaroos@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                OP? Seems like they’re asking for anecdotes and wanting to discuss it. The “gotcha” commenter seemed to clearly be insincere.

                • stephen01king@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  In what way? He was clearly receptive to the link given by the other guy. The fact that you only see what you want to see is the real problem here.