jamesgagan

"Sorry, keto fans, you're probably not in ketosis Then again, you shouldn’t be anyway."

https://www.popsci.com/not-in-ketosis/

This is discussed in the article: "Some scientists have suggested that grass-finished beef, if managed properly, can be a more sustainable option: As the cattle graze, they stimulate grass to grow deep roots and pull more carbon into the soil, helping to offset the cows’ climate impact. But, on the flip side, grass-finished cattle also take longer to reach slaughter weight, which means they spend more time burping up methane into the atmosphere. Because of this, some studies have suggested that grass-fed beef can actually be worse for the climate over all, though the debate about this continues to rage.

For now, it’s hard to say with confidence that grass-fed beef is consistently more climate-friendly than conventional beef."

All the evidence seems to indicate that the less meat and dairy one eats, the healthier they are. I also used to believe vegans were unhealty until I did some research. As a personal anecdote, I've been vegan for about 4 years now and my health is better than ever.

I have been actively trying to reduce my ecological footprint because I believe climate change is real. I don't feel it's a matter of "personal choice" at this point. The way we live has a profound impact on the planet, and we all need to try and reduce that impact in any way we can. I realize this is a message people don't want to hear, but I believe they need to hear it. Going vegan and flying less are two of the biggest changes an individual can make.

I feel like this attitude is popular because it gives people an excuse to not change their lifestyle.

I know there will be comments saying that individual action is not enough to combat climate change, or that it's too late for that, but when governments are so slow to act and corporations will only change when their bottom line is at stake, it is left to individuals to take action. Going vegan is simply the right thing to do at this point.

Shameless self-promotion, but I've recently built a replacement for goo.gl url shortener with an API: https://plip.io

With google shutting down it's URL shortener at the end of March 2019, I built a replacement that also has an API. I'm currently working on an import function to add your google url's from a csv as well as some advanced stats.

How about adding iodine to table salt? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iodised_salt

Or pregnant women taking folic acid to prevent birth defects? https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/pregnancy/fo...

Or giving vitamin d to newborns? https://www.cdc.gov/breastfeeding/breastfeeding-special-circ...

Should these practices be stopped because they aren't "natural"? Are breast fed babies not "eating correctly"?

This is patently false.

It's not really difficult at all. You need to make sure you get adequate b-12, iron, omega-3 but many foods are fortified (at least in Canada where I live) and many people are already taking a multivitamin.

"Human Ancestors Were Nearly All Vegetarians"

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/human-ancest...

here in canada (bc) the oat milk is usually a bit cheaper than soy milk.

Funny enough, nobody complains about "peanut butter"!

"In English, the word "milk" (at the time spelt "mylk") has been used to refer to "milk-like plant juices" since at least 1200 AD." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_milk https://www.etymonline.com/word/milk#etymonline_v_16158

have you tried oat milk?

that's true, yet cheese is still in the top 5 on the chart and still produces much higher emissions than plant based alternatives.

friendly reminder that if you are concerned about animals or the environment, you should give up dairy products.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/may/31/avoiding...

as well, these animals are apparently not well treated https://action.ciwf.org.uk/page/20874/action/1?locale=en-GB

I guess if I was stuck on a raft at sea and starving I would eat a sea turtle, but nearly all species of sea turtle are now endangered because of humans. https://www.worldwildlife.org/species/sea-turtle

Those are all excuses to justify keeping the ravens captive because of a ridiculous superstition. The only ethical thing is to not keep these birds and let ravens (and all birds for that matter) live their lives naturally in the wild. I could chain you up "just a little" and let you have a walk now and then and even feed you well and treat you nicely, but you would still be a prisoner and it would be wrong for me to do that to you.

Found the info in the article referenced in the footnote. They are clipped but they can fly as far as the roof of the tower. If they do fly away, they catch them and bring them back.

"Their wings are also less severely clipped than they were in the past, giving them a greater ability to fly. Now they can flap up to the roofs of the Tower buildings, and Merlina, the raven most bonded to Skaife, flies so well that she regularly spends time outside the Tower walls. “They need freedom, but they also need protection,” Skaife says of his ravens, as a soldier would speak of the British people. His new regime has been a great success, though changes to the wing-clipping routine have resulted in several chases to retrieve ravens gone awol. One bird was returned to him—alive—inside a gym bag."

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/10/ravens-...

If the birds are staying because they like it, or have some special "bond" then why clip them at all? Clearly they can't fully fly as they would naturally. It doesn't add up.

If they do it continually, so the birds can never fly off, what is the difference? It's needlessly cruel, all because of a superstition. Seems to me that birds are meant to fly.

The article fails to mention the ravens cannot leave because their wings are clipped, leaving them unable to fly. So there would likely be no "relationship" if the ravens were not intentionally crippled. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravens_of_the_Tower_of_London#...