= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
I'd appreciate greatly if I could fill in the second part of the form at a later date, maybe ~3 months prior to the weekend.
Good point, done!
Great! I'm in for this one.
Yeah, I meant e.g. adopting a vegetarian diet for three days a week and an unchanged diet for the other four; it would seem to offer 3/7 of the benefits of being fully vegetarian.
Okay, now I see what you meant. I assumed that since you'd optimize for financial benefit you want to start with a reduction of the most expensive meat options and thus get more than 3/7 of the financial benefit when adopting it three days a week.
You should read the results of the first study you posted more carefully:
Cohort studies of vegetarians have shown a moderate reduction in mortality from IHD but little difference in other major causes of death or all-cause mortality in comparison with health-conscious non-vegetarians from the same population.
The other links don't contradict this study, and only look at deaths from specific causes, and not general mortality.
You should read the results of the first study you posted more carefully:
Good point, thanks. My statement is not exactly wrong, but I should have written "healthier than average diets".
The other links don't contradict this study and only look at deaths from specific causes, and not general mortality.
That's quite wrong, examples:
Key 1999:
Total mortality and longevity also differed according to vegetarian status in California Seventh-day Adventists. After adjusting for age and sex, Seventh-day Adventist vegetarians had a relative risk for total mortality of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.74, 0.87) compared with those who ate any meat products. Using a multivariate, multiple-decrement-lifetable approach (19), we showed that vegetarian Seventh-day Adventist women live 2.52 y longer than their nonvegetarian (meat ≥ 1 time/wk) counterparts (P < 0.001), and a similar comparison in men showed a 3.21-y difference in longevity (P < 0.001).
McEvoy 2011 (review):
Overall, vegetarians tend to be slimmer, appear to be in better health, with reduced risk of chronic diseases and greater longevity when compared with omnivores
In that analysis, no significant differences were observed for stroke mortality or overall mortality between vegetarians and non-vegetarians(12).
(...) but no significant differences were observed for overall mortality rates between vegetarians and omnivores in these cohorts. One possible explanation may be that overall mortality was low in the cohort populations compared with the general Western population.
I deliberately only quoted very conservative and reliable sources, and although the effects are not really large, they are statistically significant and positive.
Is the benefit of not hurting sentient beings at all significantly different from the benefit of not hurting sentient beings as much?
Treat me as though I don't understand the moral value in not hurting animals...
If the part-time vegetarian still eats significant amounts of meat and eggs, then yes, there will also be a significant ethical difference.
If you're just interested in cutting down the cost of your diet, you also might switch to different products such as cage eggs. The cheapest production often is also the most cruel. But I assume that's not what you meant (and it's not what I meant either).
I got anecdotal evidence from quite a few people telling me that going and staying veg is actually much easier than they anticipated.
I would expect this, but my point is that if non-vegetarians have inaccurate impressions about how hard it is to go vegetarian then that could be a useful misconception to clear up.
Agreed. Do you have an idea how to go about this?
Is this still true after accounting for nutritional and health changes necessary to get a vegetarian diet with the same quality as an omnivorous diet? I could cut out all meat, and just replace it with more of the vegetarian things I typically eat, but I would get less protein, and healthy fats, creatine, etc... which I would have to compensate for.
Protein deficiency is very rare even among long-term vegans and it's pretty hard to miss out on essential amino acids. As for "healthy fats, creatine, etc...", those can be easily supplemented, which is particularly important for vegans. Also note that meat eaters usually don't get enough healthy fats either.
Vegetarians have higher life expectancies (1-9 years), as also stated here.
Can't you get almost all of that cost reduction without becoming fully vegetarian? For that matter, could one get some portion of almost all of the befits of being completely vegetarian by becoming a part-time vegetarian?
Yes, except the benefit of not hurting sentient beings, I'd say. And probably except the benefit of not being biased towards hurting animals.
View more: Next
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
For me, this is not working for some of the posts,
e.g. http://lesswrong.com/lw/kd/pascals_mugging_tiny_probabilities_of_vast/?sort=top