No, fat shaming is still not okay

April 5th, 2012 by Gary Smith

I received a lot of feedback on my post about large animal organizations using fat shaming as part of their advocacy. Between the comments I received as well as reading the comments on well written blog posts on the subject such as this and this, that body image and fat shaming are a serious issue in the vegan community.

Not only are we dealing with the pressure of traditional body image issues that everyone deals with, especially women, in this unhealthy and perverse culture, but we are dealing with it within our own community. Many vegans responded by saying that they are overweight and face negative attitudes regularly within the community. Some said that they’ve been told that they should closet themselves so as to not make veganism look unhealthy. There are many reasons why someone may be overweight – some physical and some emotional. Neither may automatically disappear because one stops consuming flesh and secretions.

“As a dietitian, I can tell you that the idea that “being fat is 100% the fault of the person” is dead wrong. There are hundreds and hundreds of studies on obesity and scientists still don’t have the answer about what causes it. Please be careful about placing blame when you don’t understand the science,” said Ginny Messina, R.D., M.P.H. “The obesity research is extremely extensive and complex and the one thing that obesity experts agree on is that no one has the answers about this difficult problem. It’s extraordinarily unkind–and completely unscientific–to insist that anyone can be thin if they want to.”

Veganism is much more than what one chooses to eat, wear, entertain themselves and purchase in terms of cosmetics and household items. Animal rights at its core is about justice. It is a social justice movement that places an animal’s right to be left to his or her own devices as the center of justice.

Why am I defining veganism to vegans? Because sadly, we seem to be moving further and further away from the core of it and more towards a superficial, material definition that focuses on diet, cookbooks, trendy fashion and body images. Veganism is not superficial, nor should it give a shit about the size and shape of your body.

Which brings me back to body shaming. I read many comments about how vegans need to be thin, attractive, and healthy if we really want to help animals. Huh? Vegans need to be vocal, consistent, educated on all nonhuman issues, eloquent, patient, active and willing to fight for the rights and dignity of nonhumans. Period. Attacking someone or shaming someone over the size and shape of their body doesn’t help animals.

Shaming vegans who have made the choice to be a pariah in this culture by abstaining from exploiting other animals, is shameful in itself. It is difficult enough to cope and heal from the traumatic awareness of the animal holocaust; to be attacked because of your body shape literally adds insult to injury.

Ethical vegans shouldn’t care about what other vegans are eating, as long as they are not eating animals and their secretions, shouldn’t judge other vegans about the size of their bodies, or be concerned with how physically attractive we are to the people who are supporting exploitation and oppression. I would like to see vegans get clear about the ethics behind animal rights, and not let us lose this fight before we’ve really even started.

Share and Enjoy

  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Twitter
  • email

, , , ,

Fat shaming doesn’t help animals

March 29th, 2012 by Gary Smith

 

Large animal protection organizations are famous for their attention-getting, eyebrow-raising campaigns – but shaming overweight people in hopes of getting them to go vegan should never be accepted by our movement.

In the latest example, people are shamed for being fat, and told that vegans are thin (and obnoxious). Not only is it offensive to non-vegans who are overweight, but it is also offensive to vegans who are not thin.

Being vegan does not necessarily equal being thin. Vegans come in all shapes and sizes. Some vegans care about their health and weight, others do not. Some vegans will never be thin, no matter how low-fat, clean, pure, oil-free, sugar-free, salt-free and raw their diets are. And even if it did equate to being thin, how is shaming others for the size and shape of their bodies going to endear them to our cause? How is bashing overweight people going to help animals?

These types of campaigns make all of us look bad. They make us look like we are not compassionate and empathetic. They focus on looks and vanity, instead of the ethics of eating a vegan diet. They also make us look desperate. The ethics and facts are on our side, why would we attack overweight people and spread disinformation?

Eating a vegan diet does not guarantee any health benefits, body size, sexual prowess or any other magical superpower. Being vegan only means that you have chosen not to support the exploitation and murder of other animals. That’s it. That’s the special prize behind curtain number three.

I am not so naïve to think the only reason the world isn’t vegan is because of our “tone” or attitude, but fat-shaming is low and beneath us. Vegan outreach and education can and must do better.

Share and Enjoy

  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Twitter
  • email

, ,

Warning: this post contains infographic images

March 27th, 2012 by Kezia

This cute infographic on calcium is making the vegan rounds lately. At first it seems like an innocuous way to address the “where do you get your calcium” question. Think about it further, and you can see the danger of presenting data like this.

Here’s the thing: 100 grams of raw chopped greens is about a cup and a half. That’s a lot to consume at one sitting. 100 grams of whole almonds is almost a full cup. 100 grams of parsley is about one and two-thirds cups. But 100 grams of liquid (such as milk) is only about a half cup, give or take.
Calcium chart from Kind Diet
Comparing a small volume of fluid to a large volume of plant foods is a losing game – if you want the plants to come out ahead.

(And don’t get me started on the charts that compare nutrients by calorie count; they’re even worse. You’ll be eating two and a half cups of raw kale to get to 100 calories.)

There is a problem looking at nutrition through a reductive process that defines and judges the merits of a food based on its individual nutrients. Milk does in fact contain a number of substances that bodies need in order to function. It is, after all, the ideal food for vulnerable mammal babies. Based solely on these individual nutrients, milk’s “nutritional profile” is overall pretty good, and a couple swallows of milk is an efficient way to deliver those nutrients. Yes, milk also contains many substances that are not nourishing, dangerous in high doses, and frankly disgusting. But if we’re merely looking at the “box scores,” as these infographics encourage us to do, milk would be considered a healthy food.

This seemingly anti-vegan rant helps illustrate why an ethical argument for veganism, not a health argument, works best. People will not be won over based on faulty or misleading nutritional claims (nor should they be). If they are, it won’t be for long. Nutritional science is still an evolving field of study. Research and evidence is scant, difficult to interpret, even contradictory.

Food processing is an evolving industry as well, so we may see a day when cow’s milk is engineered to provide the most calcium per gram of any substance the world has ever seen. The ethics, however, are bulletproof. Consuming milk is cruel and unjust. It is cow slavery. The end.

Share and Enjoy

  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Twitter
  • email

, , ,

Interview with Jasmin Singer and Mariann Sullivan of Our Hen House

February 26th, 2012 by Gary Smith

 

Mariann Sullivan and Jasmin Singer are the top hens at Our Hen House, a unique nonprofit that helps activists develop new tactics for helping animals. Through a daily blog, a weekly podcast, videos and other content, Jasmin and Mariann pinpoint opportunities for activism through channels such as law, art, academia, journalism and business.

Executive director Jasmin Singer is a longtime activist and writer whose byline appears frequently in VegNews and other progressive publications. Board president and program director Mariann Sullivan is an attorney and a professor of animal law at Brooklyn Law School, Cardozo Law School, Columbia Law School and others.

 

Share and Enjoy

  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Twitter
  • email

, , , ,

More Green Smoothies for Me!

February 1st, 2012 by Gary Smith

Yesterday, a blogger wrote a piece about green smoothies. Her conclusion was that combining a couple of pieces of fresh fruit with handfuls of leafy greens in a blender is bad for you. Yes, that was her conclusion, and the conclusion of a couple of health gurus, based on specious science such as chewing those same foods would burn 100 calories.

Now, I don’t really care if you take that information and cease making green smoothies. What I do care about is when veganism moves away from ethics and towards some sort of dietary perfection. What I care about is the perception of veganism to the mainstream population. Whether we like it or not, vegan diets are perceived as extremely radical and restrictive, and that vegans only eat salad. When we ask the public to stop eating meat, dairy, eggs and honey, we are asking them to remove foods that have been part of the culture’s diet for thousands of years. We are asking them to go far outside the mainstream.

My concern with the cult of health is that its outspoken advocates are conflating a vegan diet with limited diets that abstain from all oils, sugars/sweeteners, salt, gluten, soy and/or other foods. The same goes for popular “vegan cleanse” products and protocols. At best the public is led to believe these foods are not vegan and cannot be eaten if they choose to try a vegan diet. At worst, it makes it appear like we truly only do eat salads – and makes us look a little crazy.

This is destructive to our goal of converting people to a vegan diet and lifestyle.

The cult of vegan health is very similar to what happened and continues to happen within the raw food community. Gurus emerge, disparage perfectly healthy foods, and confuse the public; raw foodists choose gurus and take sides, while the ethics of eating a vegan diet are lost. The no oil/sugar/salt crowd is getting louder and more strident about their dietary beliefs. It’s an ego- and vanity-driven “my diet is cleaner than yours” competition, and it ultimately hurts veganism.

As an ethical vegan, I don’t really care what you eat – as long as you aren’t eating meat, dairy, eggs and honey. If you want to eat soy and gluten meats, non-dairy milks, oil, vegan sugar and sweeteners, salt, baked goods, dog bless you. The goal is to create vegans and save animals, not create healthy eaters. The goal is to make a vegan diet and lifestyle more mainstream, attainable and practical, not bamboozle people into thinking that they need to achieve dietary perfection. Banning veggie burgers, agave syrup or green smoothies is certainly not helping animals any.

I happen to eat a very clean diet because I didn’t get the vegan superpowers that many claim to get by eating a vegan diet. This is fine, since I did it for ethics. I don’t write about what foods I omit from my diet because I see that as being harmful to my message, which is that it is unethical to eat and use individuals. Period. What vegan foods I eat or don’t eat is immaterial to that message.

Registered dietician and animal rights activist Ginny Kisch Messina wrote on her blog The Vegan RD, “Ten billion (land) animals live and die under the most horrible conditions imaginable in the United States every year. So obviously, our efforts should focus on getting people to consume less…olive oil?” For more of her wisdom on the flawed “health argument” for veganism, see our interview last year here.

So, please be cognizant in your outreach about what a vegan diet and lifestyle are, and if you wish to follow a guru or decide to eat a highly restrictive diet, keep it to yourself.

Share and Enjoy

  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Twitter
  • email

, , , ,

Top 10 Animal Rights News Stories of 2011

January 13th, 2012 by Kezia

Can you stand another year-end list?

Below are what we believe were the ten biggest news stories of 2011 for animal rights initiatives. While some of these generated massive amounts of ink and airtime, a few were important stories that flew under the radar. A few have importance to the animal rights community, while others are more notable for their impact on the animal-eating/using/wearing public.

(Yes I know that top 10 lists are generally in “countdown” form from tenth place to first place. However, I’ve started with number one, in case readers get bored before they get to the end.)

1. Mercy For Animals’ undercover investigation into E6 Cattle Co. in Hart, Texas, received so much press and public attention it actually impacted the market price of cattle futures. One of the nation’s best investigators gained employment at E6, where he observed and recorded workers bashing in the skulls of calves with hammers and pickaxes, among other horrors. (The facility specializes in raising female calves until they are old enough to be impregnated and turned into milk machines.) The American Veterinary Medical Association, not known for opposing agribusiness, even issued a statement condemning E6’s behavior. For a short time, the undercover video was banned by YouTube – a bad PR move on their part – and news of the ban reached the sizable audience of consumer tech websites, so the video received even more views. For many Americans, watching this footage was the first time they had ever considered the cruelty inherent in dairy products.

Calf rescued from E6 Cattle Co./Photo by Susan Weingartner

 

2. West Hollywood became the first fur-free city in the U.S. and one of only a handful in the world. This small independent city, surrounded on all sides by Los Angeles like Vatican City is by Rome, voted in September to ban the sale of fur apparel after a time interval to allow retailers to phase out inventory. “Fur Free WeHo” received national media attention. Although largely a symbolic gesture in terms of its impact on fur-bearing animals, the legislation drafted will serve as a model for other communities. Similar campaigns in other cities are already underway.

3. Congress introduced the Traveling Exotic Animal Protection Act (TEAPA), now HR 3359, which would effectively shut down traveling circuses such as Ringling Bros. in the U.S. Animal Defenders International led the charge after successful circus bans in other countries, with assistance from experts from the Performing Animal Welfare Society, exotic animal veterinarian Dr. Mel Richardson, philanthropist Bob Barker, and actress/activist Jorja Fox, all of whom testified before Capitol Hill staffers in early November. The announcement of the bill received huge media coverage and offered a platform for ADI to discuss the ethics of animal circuses.

4. Beagle Freedom Project’s rescue of 40 beagles from an animal testing laboratory in Spain (soon joined by three more) was the third rescue by the group. Coverage on NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams two nights in a row, as well as the Today Show, catapulted the group to national and international attention. In the process, people worldwide learned for the first time about the horrors of animal testing, and were motivated to shop cruelty-free. The video of BFP’s second rescue in June of this year racked up over three million YouTube views because of the interest in the rescue.

5. Another investigation by Mercy For Animals into Sparboe Egg, the fourth largest egg producer and a key supplier to McDonald’s, resulted in what was undoubtedly the biggest economic hit to a factory farm in history when the fast-food chain, and several other major retail customers, cut ties with Sparboe. To add insult to injury, MFA filed a complaint with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission for Sparboe’s false and misleading claims about its animal care standards.

6. Stop Animal Exploitation Now released a comprehensive report on the use of non-human primates in federally regulated animal testing labs in October. The report, based on USDA documentation, included the little-known “exemptions” to welfare laws that mean animals can be deprived of enrichment, food, and water; that permit severe confinement; that deny anesthesia for procedures; and that even allow cages to go weeks without cleaning. Although this story did not receive nearly enough attention from news media, SAEN’s research into the issue was validated when in December the National Institutes of Health announced that it would temporarily stop funding chimpanzee research, and Harvard University’s primate lab was found committing five violations of the Animal Welfare Act.

7. Compassion Over Killing announced a class-action lawsuit on behalf of consumers alleging a price-fixing scheme by dairy industry trade groups representing 70 percent of the market. The suit relies on the common practice of “dairy herd retirement” in which cows are killed, thus reducing dairy supplies and inflating prices. This is another story that received little major media attention, and we hope that developments in the case will allow it to come into the spotlight in 2012.

8. HSUS announced it would end state-based campaigns for egg-laying hens in favor of working with agribusiness trade group United Egg Producers, and UEP agreed to dump battery cages in 18 years and replace them with “enriched colony cages” featuring tiny perches and plastic strips for nesting. The agreement struck a blow to animal rights organizations such as United Poultry Concerns, the leading advocacy group for hens, who said “Unfortunately, victories for organizations do not necessarily translate into victory for animals, and this is how we view the current deal. We dissent from the view that HSUS’s agreement with United Egg Producers is ‘a step in the right direction.’ We will continue to educate our members and the public to understand that the only true way to animal welfare – to animals faring well – lies in eliminating the demand for animal products in favor of vegan food.”

9. The 11-minute video “Farm to Fridge,” narrated by actor James Cromwell, hit with a bang in Spring 2011. The compilation of footage included pigs, egg-laying hens, chickens, turkeys, dairy cows, beef cows, and fish. It was a wake-up call for omnivores all over the world, and was viewed online by millions. Mercy For Animals also sponsored a 42-city, 12,000-mile tour where “Farm to Fridge” was shown on giant TV screens on a specially designed truck that parked in conspicuous areas like shopping and dining districts. The tour earned massive press coverage in each city, from TV news to college papers and everything in between. The success of the tour and of “Farm to Fridge” has inspired numerous “pay per view” events where people are offered a few dollars to watch a video about where their food comes from.

10. Humane Research Council released its research report Humane Trends, after compiling years of data across 25 different categories to evaluate the status of animal protection in the U.S. Although not a top public or media story by any means, the information, like all HRC’s work, is illuminating and of value to activists. Incidentally, the U.S. received a score of 34 out of a possible 100 for its treatment of animals based on data on companion animals, farm animals, wildlife, and animals used in science and entertainment. HRC also released an illuminating report on all USDA food recalls of animal products from 2006-2010 that should be of great interest to food safety advocates.

Evolotus was proud to play a role in earning media coverage for clients such as Mercy For Animals, Animal Defenders International, Beagle Freedom Project and Fur-Free West Hollywood in 2011.

Share and Enjoy

  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Twitter
  • email

, , , , , , , , , ,

Who is Saving Animals?

January 5th, 2012 by Kezia

Many vegans lament that there are dog/cat rescuers and other animal activists in their communities who are not vegan. I’m with you, believe me. I get it. It is shocking when humane societies serve animals on plates at fundraisers. It is a head-scratcher that someone who works to save whales would order sushi in a restaurant, failing to recognize he is destroying the ocean habitats and food chains that support those whales.

I understand your frustration that nonvegan companon animal rescuers don’t recognize that a pig is every bit as lovable as a dog, and a turkey can be just as cuddly as a cat. They work hard for one or a few species but not every species – just like there are people who feel called to get active on behalf of sea turtles, elephants, wolves, or other specific animals.

Although it would be wonderful if more dog/cat rescuers were vegan, I’d also like it if more vegans gave a crap, and actively helped animals in need. Not eating, wearing or exploiting animals is the absolute bare minimum a person can do. It is the default setting. It is the “moral baseline,” as some say.

Over the years I’ve worked with people and organizations who rescue dogs, cats, birds and other domestic pet species, those who are doing the dirty work of animal liberation. There should be much more respect, and less derision, for “dog and cat people” from the vegan community.

The animal rescuers I know do things that most vegans wouldn’t deign to do – such as run into traffic with a leash in one hand and a can of dog food in the other; wake up every two hours to bottle-feed kittens, crawl through mud to save a lost cat who scratches the hell out of them as a thank-you, cut the chain embedded in the neck of an auto yard pit bull who has never known a kindness from a human, pay their unemployed neighbor’s vet bill, not to mention clean up piles upon piles of shit.

Animal rescuers are willing to trap, trespass, surveil, steal, and otherwise do whatever it takes to do the right thing for an animal, right now, regardless of what the law says. As activists, most of us don’t hold a candle to these people. Too many vegans do very little to proactively help animals.

But what about the estimated 100 animals a year we save by being vegan? Let’s not strain ourselves patting each other on the back.

Going vegan doesn’t “save” 100 animals a year. 100 animals don’t go to sanctuaries or aquaria each year because you are vegan. In theory, you are preventing the future births of 100 animals a year. But with the realities of animal agribusiness, I’m loath to consider that anything more than theory. The minor losses the vegan population causes to animal processors are more than made up for by government subsidies and bailouts, plus exports to developing countries.

Ordering a pizza without cheese or buying cruelty-free makeup doesn’t make you a hero. Going to a potluck or a protest a few times a year is a nice opportunity to have your picture posted on Facebook so other people can congratulate you for changing the world. We should do those things. They feed us – literally and emotionally.

But there are no photo galleries for people who spend their entire weekend doing home checks to make sure that companion animals are being adopted by loving families instead of creeps. There are no awards for people who foster yet another animal because the “owners” are having a baby and don’t want him or her anymore, or people who go out night after night to trap homeless cats so they can be treated for mange, vaccinated, and fixed. They don’t get a prize for every box of starving abandoned kittens they find on the side of the road or every injured, bleeding dog they rush to a 24-hour vet. It is thankless, unglamorous work. It saves animals.

So be kind to dog and cat rescuers. Befriend one who isn’t vegan. Walk some dogs, scoop some poop, volunteer at an adoption event, help feed a feral cat colony. Buy them lunch and ask why, since they do so much for animals, they aren’t vegan yet. Give them a popular cookbook. Take them grocery shopping. Find out how you can be supportive and encouraging.

Then find out how you can do more for animals than signing a few online petitions and clicking ‘like’ to give a nonprofit a dollar.

A rescuer spotted "Reese" running across Exposition Boulvard in South L.A. near USC. She was one foot away from being killed by a van. When she got to campus, people helped catch her, but would do no more. To adopt Reese email SCAadoptions@yahoo.com.

 

Los Angeles area rescues with vegan cred:

ARME

Stray Cat Alliance

Strangest Angels

Molly’s Mutts and Meows

Share and Enjoy

  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Twitter
  • email

, , , , , ,

An open letter to a vivisector

December 5th, 2011 by Gary Smith

I received an email from a vivisector regarding from the media coverage for Beagle Freedom Project, which my company Evolotus has managed for almost a year. Below I’ve included her letter, in sections, then my responses.

“First, I should introduce myself. I am a middle-aged woman who has been a life-long animal lover and animal welfare advocate. I have been a licensed veterinary technician for over 30 years and have been involved in animal control and humane society work for 20 years. I am also a registered laboratory animal technologist and have worked at a university in animal research for 25 years.”

How exactly do you marry the idea of being an animal lover and advocate when your career calls for the unnecessary confinement, torture and suffering of animals? Do you not see the obvious contradiction? I fear for the people and animals that you exude compassion and love towards. Yikes. Do you show your love for children by confining and torturing them as well? You mention that you have been involved in animal research for 25 years. How exactly are you expressing your love and welfare for animals when you profit directly from confining and using them against their wills? Maybe you mean that you love your hefty paycheck?

“I do applaud your efforts in finding retired research dogs new forever homes. These animals have given so much to the advancement of science, medical breakthroughs and society — the least we can do is try to find them the green-green grass of home!”

We agree that “these animals have given much.” Unfortunately, they have given much without being asked if they desired to do so. It would be far more accurate to say that these animals have had much taken. Your other point about “the advancement of science, medical breakthroughs and society” is totally disingenuous. We both know that animal testing is bad science at best, and more accurately, fraud. When 92 out of 100 medications which make it out of animal testing and into human testing fail, the science is clearly garbage. In essence, you have spent 25 years confining and torturing animals, against their will, for fraudulent and dangerous science. Not only have you been harming animals, you have been putting the public at risk. It would be more accurate to say that you have spent 25 years testing on humans.

“BUT…the statement you use such as “known nothing except the confines of metal cages,” “They have known no soft human touch, no warm bed, no companionship, no love” could not be further from the truth!!! I am personally offended by these statements because I have been a part of making sure dogs (as well as many other species) are cared for and treated with the most compassion when they serve their purpose of being research subjects. Many live in large runs with “furniture” and enrichment devices. Many are housed in compatible groups. If individually housed, they are allowed out daily to play in groups. They are given social time with the animal care staff, research personnel and volunteers.”

You claim to know the conditions that our 55 rescued beagles have come from. You don’t. But I do. We have worked with contacts at different labs and they confirmed that these dogs were not exercised, were bred directly to go to labs, fourteen had their vocal chords cut so as to not bother the research staff, all were fed absolutely atrocious diets to minimize waste and costs, all were emotionally and psychologically damaged as a result of their time being caged, all came out with fear of other dogs and humans and all needed a lot of time, love and patience to become trusting of humans. Making false claims about these beagles having access to furniture, grooming, socialization/play, or leash training is an insult to those of us who rescued, fostered and adopted these victims of violence you directly profit from.

I lived with one of the rescued beagles for five weeks this summer. He did not come to us from a place where he was treated with any compassion or provided with any “enrichment.” He was frightened of sounds, of human touch, of cats, of toys — of life. We nurtured him into a loving dog.

More recently, we had eight of the beagles from the Spanish laboratory rescue in our home for five days. All of them were emotionally and physically scarred and violated. All of them will have long-term issues as a result of being held against their wills.

Right now we are living with two of the beagles rescued from Spain. They were not able to walk on leashes. They showed anxiety about eating. They were afraid, suspicious, antisocial. One of the boys was so psychologically scarred that it took six days before he allowed me to touch him. So stop pretending that you know how these dogs were treated when you have not spent one single minute with them.

“The personnel who care for our research dogs are some of the most compassionate, loving and caring individuals I know. They LOVE these dogs…they give them names…they bathe and groom them…they teach them to walk on leashes…they sit and cuddle with them… they give them LOVE!!”

Wow. Really? The personnel who care for your research dogs are compassionate and love the dogs? I will consult my dictionary to find an appropriate definition of compassion and love that includes confining and harming animals against their wills. Compassion is rescuing these beagles from your labs of torture. Loving them would be providing homes for them so that they can begin to heal.

“Also you should not use this statement: PLEASE DO NOT BUY PRODUCTS TESTED ON ANIMALS! You can see their faces now…buy only products that have the cruelty-free symbol. Buying cruelty-free products just means that a company purchased chemicals to use that had been tested elsewhere. The use of animals in research has been the reason for EVERY SINGLE MEDICAL DISCOVERY in the past 100 years. If you do not want to take products tested on animals, then stop taking antibiotics when you have an infection, don’t take your high blood pressure medication, refuse anesthesia when you have to have surgery, stop using sunscreen and get burned, don’t let your loved one get treated for cancer…because all the drugs used to treat that terrible where [sic] developed through the use of animals in research!!! Also, have you ever had to take your dog, or cat or other pet to the veterinarian and they had to be treated with medications or surgery — how do you think THOSE were developed!!!???”

This is quite a statement. Every single medical discovery over the past 100 years was due to animal research? Can you show me any proof?

You and your colleagues constantly justify your sickening industry as if you are saving the world, when we all know the majority of animal testing is done for non-biomedical products such as cosmetics, fertilizers, shampoos, and household cleaners. Enough with the propaganda already. Stop creating fear in the public. Stop pretending that medicine will fail without animal research, that our children will die without the important and vital work you do. People are waking up, and the work Beagle Freedom Project does threatens your livelihood. The sole reason you have a job is because you work in secret. As the public becomes aware of what you and your colleagues are doing to animals, your career is over.

You are clearly scared and know that the public will come to look at you and your profession as barbaric and will shun people like you. You’ve followed the media coverage. You’ve read the comments following our articles and videos and seen that the public does not support the obscene cruelty of your profession. The majority finds it morally and ethically unacceptable, and they want it to be illegal.

You know that the truth is on our side. Animal testing is not only unethical, but it is also fraudulent science. I understand that most people in poor health would be unlikely to give up their medications. Until animal testing is illegal, many feel they have no choice. However we do have choices in consumer products. You’re correct that many products that claim to be “cruelty free” are not, but you’re ignorant if you think that there aren’t real alternatives today.

“Stop bashing and telling LIES about the use of animals in research just to raise your funds!!! Stick to just wanting to find these great dogs new homes and that will be enough…and what is right.”

Rather than spend your time attacking those of us who are trying to clean up the violent mess that you created, and provide lives of love for the victims of your profession, it might be time to ask yourself if you truly do love animals. My suspicion is that if you sat with yourself for a moment, you would realize that you are nothing but an abuser of innocent beings.

Share and Enjoy

  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Twitter
  • email

, , ,

I am grateful for you

November 22nd, 2011 by Gary Smith

As I was tossing and turning in bed, between the hours of two and four a.m. last night, a wave of gratitude hit me. I’m not sure exactly why; maybe because it is so close to Thanksgiving and we are told that we should reflect on what we are grateful for in our lives.

What I was reflecting on is how grateful I am for all of the vegans and animal rights activists in the world. We make up such a small minority (one half of one percent in the US, which is smaller than the margin of error in polls!) on this planet. It warms my heart to know that there are others who see nonhuman animals the same way as I do. There is a group of people who view other animals as unique, sentient beings who are worthy of moral consideration, just as other humans are worthy.

Being vegan brings with it prejudices, ostracization, loneliness, strained and failed relationships, extreme sadness bordering on depression, and many other negative consequences. The very act of omitting other animals from our food, clothing, entertainment and household/cosmetic purchases is a serious offense to the 99.5 percent of people who view animals as property and things. Making a conscious and compassionate choice to view others as equal is an affront to those who use and exploit others.

The world we live in is a literal hell for other animals. I don’t have to remind you why. The world we live in is also extremely vegan-unfriendly. You cannot turn on the television, walk into a mall, office or your family’s home without being confronted by violence towards animals, whether that violence is manifested as meat, dairy and eggs or leather and fur, for instance. The world is a personal affront to our ethics. And yet we find ways to manage and remain sane.

We have chosen to not only wake up from this nightmare, but to also work towards ending the violence and exploitation against those most vulnerable. We choose to witness the atrocities committed daily against other animals, all for the pleasure of humans. We are living through yet another Holocaust.

And even through the personal costs, we continue on to fight on behalf of other animals. It would be much easier to spend our lives trying to figure out how to serve our own selfish desires, yet we continue the struggle. And this is where my gratitude came from. Knowing that you are out there, confident in your ethical commitment towards nonhumans, struggling to bring rights to those enslaved.

And so the entire country will be considering what they are grateful for on Thanksgiving, while munching on the corpse of a once sentient, beautiful being who desired the same life that you desire, and I will be thinking about you. I normally have a difficult time experiencing gratitude on a holiday that celebrates and worships the dual genocide of a race of people and a species of animal, but this year I will be grateful for the work you do on behalf of other animals, on the personal sacrifices you make, the protesting, shouting, leafleting, writing, fostering, rescuing and more. While we may not agree on how we are going to get to the promised land of equality for all, I am grateful to know that you are on the same team. Happy Thanksgiving.

 

Share and Enjoy

  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Twitter
  • email

, ,

Interview with “Vegan For Life” author Ginny Kisch Messina

October 22nd, 2011 by Gary Smith

Vegan For Life is the most comprehensive book on vegan diets that I’ve read yet. The subtitle, “Everything you need to know to be healthy and fit on a plant-based diet” is really true. The book literally covers every possible topic: nutrient needs, pregnancy, breastfeeding, raising vegan children and teens, transitioning to a vegan diet, needs for 50+, as well as meeting the needs of vegan athletes. The book is perfect for someone curious about transitioning to a vegan diet as well as seasoned vegans. Everything you ever wanted to know about the science behind eating a vegan diet is found in this book.

I spoke to coathor Ginny Kisch Messina, whose excellent blog The Vegan RD I also recommend.

Many of the readers of The Thinking Vegan are ethical vegans. Why should they care about their health and understanding nutritional science?

The unfortunate truth is that we vegans need to prove that our diet is a healthy choice. Anyone on any type of diet can get sick if they make bad food choices, but when vegans get sick, people blame veganism.

It can be tempting to promote the “no worries” approach to vegan nutrition, which suggests that as long as you eat a variety of whole plant foods, with an occasional B12 supplement, you’ll automatically meet nutrient needs. But the evidence suggests otherwise, and if vegans have suboptimal nutrition or develop outright deficiencies, then the animals lose in the end (as do the vegans, obviously). That’s why we’re very specific in Vegan for Life with our nutrition recommendations. Staying healthy is an essential part of activism.

I was pleasantly surprised that you included an entire chapter to the ethical question of veganism. Can you talk about why you decided to include the chapter and your thoughts on the ethical issue?

I think animals should always be part of the discussion when we talk about veganism. And while we assumed that our book would appeal mostly to those who were already vegan, we hoped that some who were kind of on the fence about veganism might pick it up. So we wanted to write a book that made a compelling case for veganism while also providing the tools for making an easy and healthy transition.

Though you are a registered dietician, you have written in the past that the best argument for veganism is the ethical/animal argument. Why don’t you believe that the health argument should be the driver?

I think it’s great if people want to talk about the health benefits of eating more plant foods and fewer animal foods. Unfortunately, though, we have no data to show that you need to go 100 percent animal-free in order to be healthy. So there really isn’t a “health argument” for vegan diet, let alone vegan lifestyle.

This means that if we want to promote veganism for personal gain or health benefits, we need to overstate the findings and tweak the science. And what does it say about our movement if we’re advocating for animals by using a not-quite-honest or not-quite-scientifically-supportable message?

Some might say that we should appeal to every possible motivation in getting people to stop eating animals, and that’s a tempting argument. I’d probably buy it if I thought it would work. But I don’t see that advocacy built on a shaky factual foundation or on precepts that are ever-changing can prevail in the long run.

No one knows what the exact “ideal” diet for humans is, or if there is any single diet that fits that definition. I talk with my colleagues frequently about new research and whether we need to reassess some of our recommendations or advice based on the latest findings – because ideas about the best way to eat are forever changing. Who knows what the research will be showing 40 years from now? But an ethic of justice doesn’t change. The argument in favor of animal rights today will be the same in 40 years. So why not stick with the argument that is 100 percent unassailable, the one that we never have to scramble to defend in light of new findings?

In addition, I think there is a real problem in shifting the focus of veganism away from an ethic of justice for animals toward more anthropocentric concerns. It actually reinforces the idea that our food and lifestyle choices should be all about us – a belief that lies at the center of animal exploitation.

How long have you been vegan and how did you come to that decision?

I’ve been vegan for about 20 years. It was a gradual process for me, and I was a dietitian before I was even a vegetarian. I have always cared a great deal about animals but somehow never made the connection between those feelings/emotions and the way I lived, aside from rescuing dogs and cats, and injured birds.

I had an absolute epiphany in 1984 when I was perusing a vegetarian cookbook – Laurel’s Kitchen – and read the dedication to “a glossy black calf on his way to the slaughterhouse many years ago, whose eyes met those of someone who could understand their appeal and inspire us, and thousands of others like us, to give the gift of life.”

Wow – the little light bulb clicked on and I thought “what am I doing eating these creatures.” And this was before I knew anything about factory farming or the way animals were treated. None of that was even on my radar when I first went vegetarian. But I took a job working for the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine five years later, and found myself immersed in a little community of vegans and animal rights activists. That was really the beginning of my education. I started reading about factory farming and began a transition to a vegan diet and then to other vegan choices. I also started learning more about issues regarding animal rights and a vegan ethic.

You cover some of the key nutrients that vegans should concern themselves with. You also recommend supplements for people with greater needs or who may not be able to meet their nutrient needs strictly through diet. Some of the leading medical doctors who promote a vegan diet are adamantly against the use of supplements. Can you speak to this?

This speaks to what I mentioned in response to your first question – which is that some advocates would like to portray veganism as the “perfect” way of eating, and the idea of taking supplements challenges that perception. Unfortunately, this can end up jeopardizing the health of vegans. We owe it to those we are attracting to this movement to be 100 percent honest about the potential pitfalls of a vegan diet.

Yes, it’s always best to get nutrition from whole foods, but that’s not always possible—certainly not in the cases of iodine and vitamins B12 and D. For various reasons, some vegans may fall short on other nutrients and find it difficult to meet needs from foods alone. Taking supplements to make up the difference seems way smarter to me than trying to explain the problem away.

You have a comprehensive chapter about soy in the book. There are so many misperceptions and down right lies regarding soy. Could you touch on soy briefly?

It’s hard to be brief about soy – it’s a huge topic! Not to mention a very scientifically complex one. There are literally thousands of papers published on different health aspects of soy, so it’s not surprising that people can find a few studies here and there that will support whatever viewpoint they like.

Concerns about safety of soy have generally focused on studies in rodents, which are of questionable relevance to humans,and have not been supported by human studies. They also arise from some pretty big misunderstandings about how soy isoflavones act in the body. For an in-depth discussion of these issues, I recommend Jack Norris’ article: http://www.veganhealth.org/articles/soy_harm

In terms of health benefits of soy, not everything has panned out as anticipated, though. For example, contrary to early expectations, research does not suggest that women who consume soy have a lower risk for breast cancer. And the role of soy in protecting bone health has turned out to be pretty disappointing, too.

We do have evidence that young girls who eat soy have a lower risk for breast cancer later in life, though. Isoflavones also help alleviate hot flashes and possibly reduce prostate cancer. Some preliminary research points to cosmetic benefits, too, specifically in decreasing wrinkles.

But to me, the main advantage is that soy is a nutritious food – or group of foods – that make for some pretty fantastic vegan choices. Soyfoods are among the items that make it so easy to be vegan. I eat tofu every single day and sometimes some tempeh, and soy or gluten-based veggie meats several times a week. My soy intake is at the high end of what Japanese people consume; they average about 1 to 1 ½ servings per day, but about 25 percent of older Japanese people – those who eat more traditional diets – eat 2 to 3 servings per day. I usually eat 2, but sometimes 3.

In the book, you advocate the use of healthy oils, such as olive and canola. Many medical doctors advocate against oil. Would you mind sharing your thoughts?

Actually, I don’t think it’s true at all that many medical doctors advocate against all vegetable oils. That may have been true 25 years ago, but perspectives have changed with evolving research.

The research shows that the type of fat in your diet is far more important than the amount – up to a point, of course. And, I think most medical and health experts who follow nutrition research are on board with the idea that moderate consumption of healthy oils is safe and compatible with healthy eating. It’s too bad that the vegan community has lagged behind the science in this regard. It makes us look out of touch with current nutrition research.

I’m not for pouring buckets of oil over salads or slathering heaps of Earth Balance on bread, of course. But some higher fat foods are associated with decreased risk for chronic disease; at the very least, they are harmless in moderation. And unfortunately, efforts to define veganism as a diet that shuns all added fats – and sometimes higher fat foods – can end up turning veganism into a sort of ultra-restrictive fad diet.

The impression that vegan diets are limited and difficult is a huge deterrent toward adopting this way of eating for many people. If we want to counter that perception, the last thing we want to do is layer on more restrictions that have never been shown to be beneficial. And, with 10 billion animals slaughtered for food every year, do we really want to expend energy railing against harmless plant foods like olive oil?

 

 

Share and Enjoy

  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Twitter
  • email

, , , ,

« Previous Entries

RSS Feed