re: The Naïve Vegetarian

HEburnLL — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 20:39:50 GMT

...continued from my previous comment.

Mercola's next point about our earth not having enough suitable land to grow enough food for the human population and attempts to show evidence of this by telling us that 1/3 of the earth's population is starving. His "evidence" is full of holes and does not take into account corrupt governments, failing economies, and food waste. As long as governments rely on capitalism to purchase food to nourish us, there will always be people who can't afford food. It has nothing to do with the lack farmable land area. People waste food all the time that could have gone to starving people. Also, inefficient use of land in mass monoculture farming destroys previously usable soil that would otherwise be used to grow a variety of crops. After the soil is ruined, the farms have to close down and move their business elsewhere. When you compare the amount of space it takes to grow enough nutrients and calories to feed a population, Meat is much less nutrient dense, and takes much more space and energy to produce. That's why there are factory farms. They use the smallest amount of space possible to produce meat, even at the expense of the animals' suffering. So contrary to Mercola's belief, starvation is an economics problem, not that there isn't enough space to grow food for the Earth's population.

Also, contrary to Mercola's view, there are very few places that people live that cannot support vegetable growth. People have been living and growing vegetables in cold areas like Canada, Norway, and Alaska for a very long time. Even here (www.hridir.org/.../index.htm) it says that vegetables can grow in the most northern climates in Norway. So even with his example of New Zealand, his argument that people would starve without eating meat is ridiculous.

more continued in my next comment...

re: The Naïve Vegetarian

naturaljrny — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 19:13:56 GMT

This article is so rediculus!!! Obviously this is a person with a strong opinion. I personally don't buy this information. Yeah you have a lot to say and I'm sure you got your info from credible sources, although I feel you are very close minded to the idea of being vegetarian. I have a lot of mean things I want to say but I won't. I will let them go. I know in my heart what I am doing is right for me and I don't need someone (who has God complex) telling me it is unhealthy and unnatural. I am as healthy as ever and I know many vegetarians who are also. I think your science is a little misleading and also untrue. I don't believe in farming animals for food. If there are starving people who need to eat, then by all means go hunt yourself an animal to supply nutrition for your family. Do you think the Native American would have caged up buffalo so they can live in one spot and eat meat at their own will? I think not. They had respect for the animals. They also knew there is a balance to uphold in nature. Which obviously is not happening now days. Plus when they hunted it was man vs. animal. They hunted, which gave the animal a chance for survival if it was fit to. Respect of nature is the key in my opinion. Farming animals for food is the furthest from respect...