Now Contador is on the fruit gig. A mate in Spain said he has been watching my youtube vids. If Contador does it right (get enough carb cals(, he will be un touchable in the TDF.
The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
durianrider said:Now Contador is on the fruit gig. A mate in Spain said he has been watching my youtube vids. If Contador does it right (get enough carb cals(, he will be un touchable in the TDF.
craig1985 said:So if you eat vegan you won't get attacked by a shark? WTF. Or how about you are in their territory and it can happen, even though it doesn't happen often. And I thought sharks weren't fish.
richwagmn said:Sharks prefer more fat on their victims I guess?
I understand the health reasons for a vegan (or mostly vegan) diet. I've never understood the morality argument though. We shouldn't eat other animals because...?
Who is supposedly "watching your vids"? AC or your friend?durianrider said:Now Contador is on the fruit gig. A mate in Spain said he has been watching my youtube vids. If Contador does it right (get enough carb cals(, he will be un touchable in the TDF.
The problem with this though is that it's a lose-lose for us.Race Radio said:Durian....I thought we had a deal, we would listen to the Veggie stuff if you posted more hot girlfriend pictures.
+ 1Barrus said:Are people still trying to argue with this pompous, holier-than-thou *******? I would presume people would know by now that there is no real discussion possible with him, unlike some of the other vegans on here and in the world. But this guy is only interested in himself and to aggrandize himself by linking himself with succesful people and his "beautiful" girlfriend. It appears as though he is so insecure that he needs to come on this forum solely to justify his decision and lifestyle to himself
richwagmn said:Sharks prefer more fat on their victims I guess?
I understand the health reasons for a vegan (or mostly vegan) diet. I've never understood the morality argument though. We shouldn't eat other animals because...?
elapid said:While meat is meat, there is an emotional component as well. Chinese and other cultures eat dogs because this is traditional and dogs do not have the same emotional attachment as they do to Westerners. Same goes for other species such as cats and horses. Whereas in other cultures, cows are sacred. To over-simplify cultural and emotional influences on what meats are eaten by what people is not hypocritical, just ignorant.
Arguments blaming the meat production on loss of environment and loss of habitat are a bit of a stretch when the loss of the Amazon at such rapid rates is primarily because of logging. Following logging, big corporations then move in and use the logged land for large-scale cattle operations as well as mining and hydroelectric operations. The large-scale cattle operations are run by big business and that, in combination with logging, mining and power generation, are influenced by money and greed. Cattle or other meats are not the impetus for the loss of environments such as the Amazonian rainforests.
Contador and Bruce Lee ate fruit diets for specific reasons, weight loss and spiritual reasons respectively. An all fruit diet is/was not their normal diet. Using them as poster children for a vegan diet is wrong because they are not vegans.
I have no problem with people chosing whatever diets they want to eat, and presenting the appropriate information to inform the rest of us of the benefits and disadvantages of these diets, but some of this stuff is just ridiculous.
Polyarmour said:Hiding behind cultural constructs doesn't make a thing right. Maybe my culture is to eat endangered Dugongs, is that ok too?
Polyarmour said:The economics behind deforestation has to include the value of the land as pasture after it has been cleared. If no-one ate meat it would have no residual value as pasture, it would be less attractive to log.
Polyarmour said:30% of the Earth's land area is devoted to rasing animals for human consumption. The only "stretch" is to suggest that eating meat is not contributing to loss of natural habitat.
durianrider said:Basically in 2012 nobody has any excuses any more to stuff their faces with animal products that have been proven OVER & OVER to increase chances of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity, stroke, osteoporosis, mercury poisoning etc.
The worlds oceans are in turmoil from the desire to eat sea creatures. From sardines to whales, all species are becoming minimised.
The worlds forrests are being clear cut at never before rates to produce grains to feed livestock or pasture to feed livestock.
Water usage and pollution is also at the highest levels ever in human history and the worlds biggest users and polluters of water are the animal product industry.
There aint no excuses no more.
Especially when you have a long term vegan like me that rides an 11kg bike and drops almost everyone I ride with. Even world famous riders are using vegan diets more and more as part of their tool box for important races. Give it another 5 years and its going to hit mainstream even more.
If you love animals and decided to stop eating them, then feel free to do so. Its ok to listen to your heart and become deficient in dogma. Dont let society tell you what acceptable when it comes to destruction of the environment, your health and the animals.
Peace.
craig1985 said:I guess we all should throw our mobile phones in the bin, I mean you know the cancer links and for all the smartphones have coltan in it, sourced from Africa, where the Silverback Gorilla live. Dang.
Excellent post. Sums up the entire discussion fairly well.elapid said:I know your intentions are good DR, but broad brush strokes taken as facts do not help your cause...As far as society dictating what most of us here eat ... pffff.
Polyarmour said:30% of the Earth's land area is devoted to rasing animals for human consumption. The only "stretch" is to suggest that eating meat is not contributing to loss of natural habitat.
Polyarmour said:The economics behind deforestation has to include the value of the land as pasture after it has been cleared. If no-one ate meat it would have no residual value as pasture, it would be less attractive to log.
richwagmn said:Source?
Deserts aren't usable. Antartica isn't. Much of the land in North American from Alaska northwards.
Do you count animals grazing also? How is grazing (say in the western US) exclusive to raising animals for food?.
What about corn used for ethanol where the silage and waste is fed to animals? Is that exclusively for animal production?
I know of at least one person who saw at least one of his videosGranville57 said:Who is supposedly "watching your vids"? AC or your friend?