Eating vegetables is killing. What are the reasons behind this statement.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/09/2006 05:05PM by greenman.

I don't agree with it, but I guess it's refering to the killing of the plant. If you dig up a root you kill the plant, if you eat a fruit, especially if it fell off the plant naturally, the plant continues to live.

Rob

--
Rob Hull - Funky Raw
My blog: [www.rawrob.com]

> What are the reasons behind this statement.

Reaons behind that statement are most likely stupid.

Rob - you're killing enzimes when you eat that fruit! Murder!!

Maybe you could eat rocks. Hmmmm, grit smoothies!

GM, Is there any thing logical or sensible you'd like to add to this thread or is it really just another lame attempt to bait people? (Which we see far too much of on this board lately)

Ian.

Do enzymes have feelings too? Sorry, I didn't realise

Rob

--
Rob Hull - Funky Raw
My blog: [www.rawrob.com]

Actually it is a true statement. Eating plants does destroy much more than the plant.

As of today the world population is 6.663 billion.

As of today, a cultivated diet based exclusively on plant foods is still unsustainable, at least in the USA. See Pimentel's AJCN paper
[www.ajcn.org]

A diet based on gathering wild uncultivated plant foods would not be able to sustain more than an estimated 200-500 million. At least 11/12 of us would have to die without replacement for such a scenario to work, and we'd need another 100 years or so of one-child only to reach it.

I'm doing my part! I never had kids.

This is a great argument for eating fruit!

Also, you can eat lettuce without killing the plant. Just take leaves off the edge of the plant, and it will grow new ones.

i pick leaves off my kale, collards and lettuce plants, and they still grow. It depends on how the leaves or vegetables are harvested. I have picked off brocolli florets without harming the plant.

How do you know it doesn't hurt the plant? If we are comparing the eating of plants to killing, then isn't tearing of leaves just the same as cutting off an animal's leg to eat without killing the animal.

Just wondering. Personally I don't buy the eating plants is killing, but I could see that some devout religion might have a problem with it.

Ian.

<quote>How do you know it doesn't hurt the plant? If we are comparing the eating of plants to killing, then isn't tearing of leaves just the same as cutting off an animal's leg to eat without killing the animal.</quote>

We know it doesn't hurt the plant because plants don't have a nervous system. . . There is no such thing as pain to a plant.

plant pain? sure why not? why must a nervous system be required to feel pain?

Study Shows Aspirin Blocks "Plant Pain":

[www.sciencedaily.com]

YES--

from a buddhist perspective actually! Although buddhists don't think of it as "killing vegetables"...many beings are being killed in the process. Microscopic bugs living on the plants are being killed...bugs are killed in farming.. and in Tibetan Buddhism bugs are sentient beings and should not be killed. Killing things are unavoidable for human beings. Breathing, walking, etc. kills millions of living microbes. So in that sense buddhists don't see anyone as being "vegetarian". All we can really do is be thankful for our food and conscious of all the living beings that die so that we may eat.

Actually, we can read up on factory farming and become informed about the absolute misery that these innocent animals go through - not just the killing, but also the entire length of their lives - they suffer.

They suffer from cramped cages, they suffer from overcrowding, cruel treatment, forced feedings, separations of mother and babies, brandings, unhealthy diets, broken limbs, seared beaks, etc. etc. I suggest that we should ALL get informed before we make statements like "all we can really do is be thankful for our food and conscious of all the living beings that die so that we may eat."

Just because we can't save ALL animals doesn't mean we should shut our hearts to ALL animals. Gratitude isn't REALLY gratitude until it includes action.


Life Is Good! (but not for ALL of us)


alive!

The best way to "not kill" stuff is to die..... hope that doesn't disappoint you.

ThomasLantern Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The best way to "not kill" stuff is to die.....
> hope that doesn't disappoint you.


That is still killing, in this case yourself. lol

greenman,

When you say "Eating vegetables is killing", is this a rationale for you to eat only fruit, or is it a rationale to eat animals?

Bryan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> greenman,
>
> When you say "Eating vegetables is killing", is
> this a rationale for you to eat only fruit, or is
> it a rationale to eat animals?

I am an animal so I do not eat my fellow animals.

For me this is a rational to eat only fruits.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/29/2006 05:01PM by greenman.

Most vegetables are annuals. They are going to die at the end of the season after going to seed anyway.

*shrug*

Judy

Yes, Judy, you are correct. But it is also probably true that annuals have a higher impact regarding energy in compred to food energy produced than perennial fruit and nut trees. The permaculturists stress this fundamental and I think it has some merit.

My body kills bacteria every day.

I wonder if pacifists have weaker immune systems.

Narz, there is a researcher at my uni that studies the effects of various dietary substances on the immune system. She is now excluding veg*ns from her studies because they test out much higher than the omnis from the onset regarding her measured biomarkers for immune system health. So I would say, at least in that sense, no.

I meant arugla people who think of themselves as "pacifists". One can be a vegetarian without being a pacifist. I am.

Arugula,
Thats very interesting. Is there any information about those studies available at this time? I imagine that shes probably waiting until the study is complete to publish anything.

To others on this thread,

Yes, people who have studied ahimsa in the Jain religion admit that ahimsa in the absolute sense isn't possible. The immune function killing things is a great example. Its not a conscious act as far as I know, thats one distinction. Small critters getting caught between your clothes and skin, and being crushed or rubbed to death is another example. You can always run around without clothes, as some Jains have taken a vow not to wear clothes. Some have gone more than 20 years without clothes, I can't imagine. It also frees them of ownership of another object to take care of, mend and dispose of et... And of course there are other accidental deaths caused by walking, breathing, driving a car, going on a plane, train etc... I don't know what Jains do about cleaning, as I have heard they are very clean, as this reduces insects in the house, but cleaning harms living things. Even using a light bulb harms things. Someone very conscious in ahimsa on subtle level really has a lot to watch out for, and for many people it doesn't make sense.

Someone commented upon obtaining food from animals without killing. Its possible. Some people do eat animals that died on their own. There is milk. Some suggested that placenta is a great way to eat meat if you really crave it, without killing. There are parts shed by animals, such as skin from snakes, thats used in chinese medicine. Antlers from reindeer can be obtained without killing. Tails from lizards can be obtained from some lizards. They detach when pulled, and they grow a new tail. There probably are more, and I would be interested in knowing. Probabaly these aren't always ideal examples, as ahimsa also implies non-interference, not simply the lack of killing.

Nutr Cancer. 1989;12(3):271-8.

Natural killer cells, vitamins, and other blood components of vegetarian and
omnivorous men.

Malter M, Schriever G, Eilber U.

Institute for Experimental Pathology, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg.

The study population consisted of male vegetarians (aged 28-50 years), who were
recruited from the vegetarian cohort being followed by the Department of
Epidemiology (German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, FRG), and the same
number of age- and sex-matched controls from the personnel of the same center.
Among the vitamins tested, only the level of carotene was significantly higher
in vegetarians; the levels of vitamin A, K, and E were not elevated. Among the
other blood parameters tested, only creatinine and glutamine-transferase levels
were significantly lower in vegetarians. The natural cytotoxicity of peripheral
blood lymphocytes was measured using a chromium-release test. Cytotoxic
activity, which is expressed as lytic units, was significantly higher in
vegetarians than in their omnivorous controls by a factor of 2. The total number
of white blood cells, lymphocytes, and other subpopulations did not differ
between vegetarians and nonvegetarians. The enhanced natural cytotoxicity may be
one of the factors contributing to the lower cancer risk shown by vegetarians.

PMID: 2771803 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

I agree with Bryan. It's easy, just eat fruits and pick leaves off of lettuce plants. Simple, delicious and cruelty free. Gotta love raw!!!

All the best,

Audrey
www.rawhealing.com

arugula Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, Judy, you are correct. But it is also
> probably true that annuals have a higher impact
> regarding energy in compred to food energy
> produced than perennial fruit and nut trees. The
> permaculturists stress this fundamental and I
> think it has some merit.


Of course it has merit, but so does crop rotation and tilling old crops back into the soil. That said, I wish there was a pedrmaculture course being offered nearby so I could attend. I am trying to slowly replace ornamental trees and shrubs with fruit-bearing plants here. Unfortunately my zone won't allow for planting some plants/trees I would really like to have, so we're looking at purchasing a greenhouse this coming year....

Judy

wow!