Hacker News Reader

Comment by treyfranciscoh | Hacker News Reader

Go vegan. Problem solved/avoided.

This thought process seems to use a similar logic as preventing STDs through abstinence.

Not even remotely similar. HN’s reaction to OPs suggestion is downright hostile and dismissive. Veganism is all about thwarting disease by cutting out harmful dietary choices. People may disagree with that premise, but that doesn’t negate the validity of avoidance as an option to consider.

Love it or hate it, but humanity has a diverse enough source of protein to not be reliant on pork.

"Veganism is all about thwarting disease by cutting out harmful dietary choices"

That may be a side effect of veganism, but I hardly think that's the central thesis of that dietary and lifestyle choice.

People have different motivations. Many are ethical / philosophical, not just about diet and lifestyle. Check out Peter Singer or Pythagoras.

https://www.history.com/news/beans-and-greens-the-history-of...

https://www.utilitarian.net/singer/interviews-debates/200106...

Which is why I followed it up with “People may disagree with that premise, but that doesn’t negate the validity of avoidance as an option to consider.”

This is also the internet and reality. What I consider the root or definition of veganism is my operational definition.

I disagree with your premise that veganism is all about thwarting disease by cutting out harmful dietary choices.

I agree that avoidance in an effort to thwart disease may be a valid option.

This has nothing to do with veganism.

Veganism is all about rejecting the commodity status of animals and generally abstaining form activities that commodify animals.

What I consider the root or definition of veganism is my operational definition.

That doesn't mean you aren't wrong.

“Veganism is all about rejecting the commodity status of animals and generally abstaining form activities that commodify animals.”

and why? Because people are a disease in the truest sense to those animals.

> Veganism is all about rejecting the commodity status of animals and generally abstaining form activities that commodify animals.

I strongly disagree. Someone who does not eat animals because they dislike the taste, while not subscribing to "the vegan philosophy", is still vegan.

Even if they wear a lot of fur?

One can wear as much fur, hunt as many animals and club as many baby seals as one wants. A vegan is someone who doesn't eat animals and animal products.

Fair.

Though I’d make a distinction between ‘vegan’ and ‘veganism’.

Sure, I'd still call them dietary vegans.

But not "vegans"?

Dietary vegan, a type of vegan?

It is quite similar in that it manages to be both technically correct and completely irrelevant to the problem. The Chinese lower and middle class aren't going to start going vegan any time soon. Sorry for the "no u" but in this case it was OP who was being hostile and dismissive with their glib statement.

The way it was suggested was quite dismissive as well, so it's not hard to see why it was killed quickly.

Since your entire village let alone town/city/country/continent is never going to go vegan, this isn't a solution to the problem.

That's begging the question. No problem caused by human behavior can be solved without changes to human behavior, but society does change. For something like this, it's mostly a matter of people who grew up before the Reaganisation of agriculture dying off, and successive generations in the CAFO era being increasingly aware of the modern reality of how animals are grown.

They will if the price of animal products rises.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com