Vegans and vegetarianism
Thought about it and decided to create this topic.First: to dilute the political issues of the society
Second: usually, everywhere I look the threads on this hot
Thirdly: not found this here on the forum (surprised, or the search fails)
In fact, opinions and arguments
My personal opinion:
Meat is important for a person. Eggs also. Man is quite sensible dietary protein replacement. Of course we all want to be pigs, and chicken lived with us in total harmony and no one is cut. But nature is so constituted. I have no meat can not.
For example fur coats nowadays can be replaced quite pretty and fashionable wear (not even as thick as some time ago). And in fact, the fur coat is a luxury. In addition, plenty of animals caught and killed for the sake of the will, according to this, I am against fur. But not a vegetarian.
Vegans in the relevant forums, topics you call me a heartless and savage murderer.
First: to dilute the political issues of the society
Here and so about half the crap that politics does not belong, and now even vegans.
Well, I agree with the author about meat.
But the skin is debatable. There is an opinion that no synthetic can not replace real fur. I personally do not know whether this is so.
As for the moral side of this problem, to kill members of other species for normal existence quite naturally.
Vegetarianism has gone from fashion to Hinduism-Buddhism. It is possible for local monks it is normal - a lot of fruits, the climate is warm, osobennosti local metabolism etc. But for our bodies and our climate is crap. And assisted living s. Another thing is that it is not necessary to eat meat, but that is nature provided, man is omnivorous. Regarding the fur, in principle, agree - now all sorts of membrane jackets warm not worse(and sometimes better) than any fur. But also lighter, take up less space and are not afraid of any aircraft small animals and moisture. So fur is more of a luxury item.
Vegans are wrong.
Their arguments usually boil down to the following.
1) Mesadenia immoral by eating meat from animals we participate indirectly (cutlets) or directly (the Japanese, the Koreans, the Chinese, the savages) in their brutal murder, which was unworthy of the cultural, environmentalists-oriented person.
2) the Meat industry is corrupt, the adoption of its products means an agreement with one of the great injustices in the world and meat plants in particular. The rejection of meat to protest against this state of Affairs.
3) Eat meat - why eat meat when you can eat no meat? All meat products can be replaced by vegetable counterparts with a gain in utility.
4) Jains do not eat meat and generally try not to cause any harm to any living beings.
I tried to be vegan. Did not like. Skin color is shitty Freezing will. And strength will not be in the truest sense. But we Raschke so. And in Sunny countries think you can.
I love chew grass in the summer, in the woods, it is such a cool juice. Meat is also not refuse.
Not going to write acres of posts, just write that vegetarians-people with mental disabilities, because their identities they upset the balance in your body provided by nature. Another thing. who became a vegan because of illness and inevitably, the poor people...
they upset the balance in your body
The body is consists of eating meats, vegetables and fruits? No, depending on the organizational level, different components of cells, tissues, organs. Aristodemou the body needs food to sustain that can be achieved without eating meat. But people, increasing it is necessary, as far as I know. Because the protein (the main Builder) of plant origin does not act with the same efficiency that animal. Sports protein is also an inadequate alternative.
Vanity notice that you have to speak the polypeptide is bored all the protein.
Use option polypeptide requires clarification of the molecular weight of a set of amino acids.
Actually this link points to reputable my point, because there is the word conditional that proves my point and subverts your elitists misleading.
Worthless in conversation with an adherent of elitism to write with grammatical errors. This is the first. Second, the polypeptide is optionally a protein. The term is used to refer to all substances with the peptide bond of amino acids.
In the first place. This is the first.
Second, chemically proteins and polypeptides indistinguishable, the conditional difference in weight/number entered for the vocabulary provided and preserved due to the tradition. Chemical terminology is only partly its complexity owes his subject.
chemically proteins and polypeptides indistinguishable
It was easy to notice my agreement with this statement in the previous post. It was also stated why, however, proposed to use the term as a synonym for the protein it is impossible.
By the way, notice that the positions of the pass... the Terminology is not impressive, it is used for other purposes.
In the post prior to post prior to your post, I introduced the necessary basis for the application of the term is hateful and despicable.