Progressive? Veganism? Beyonce? Jay Z? So it has come to this. People are having the hard earned coin stolen by taxes to pay for an absolute plonker to discuss this?
Sorry for all the questions marks but honestly the sooner we HALVE their university funding and reduce our taxes the better for us all.

Perhaps more and more people are beginning to understand what is communicated in these three related references.
http://sacredcamelgardens.com/wordpress/wisdom/observe-non-humans-and-learn
http://global.adidam.org/books/lawful-management-of-the-body
http://www.rawgorilla.org

Please don't apologise for the question marks JB. I, too, had them popping up in my head as I read the article. I know the B woman screaches a lot but who is JayZ and why do I care what he eats? Or why would anyone else be concerned with their dietary habits?

I know what needs a thorough cleansing though, preferably with a thick red pen (an environmentaly friendly one, of course).

>>it is veganism that brings about the most benefits.<<

For the animals: it's not so great for us people. Eating a strictly vegan diet with no animal products means that there is no natural source of vitamin B12 in the diet so it has to be taken as a supplement. It also makes it difficult to get enough iron and supplements are usually needed to avoid anaemia. Vegetarians can get their B12 but the iron is still a problem.

It is generally considered that the average Australian diet contains more meat than is healthy. I suspect most people would probably benefit from a bit less meat and bit more fruit & veg, but the occasional serving of meat plays an important role in a healthy diet.

Cheers,

Tony

that cow was asking for tasting all hummy and that......

It is indeed somewhat chilling to see such a badly written oeuvre from someone in receipt of our tax dollars, and who is presumably representative of his cohort.

His argumentation is all over the place.

We are told that "the hosts use the words 'plant-based diet' and 'vegan lifestyle' interchangeably", followed by the wagging-finger admonition "the mainstream media generally uses the 1944 definition of veganism rather than the definition that has been in place from 1951 onwards."

Who knew? Some people choose not to eat meat. Some choose to shun animal-based products of all types. Find someone who cares that there is such a disastrous a terminological crime being committed on the ABC.

The quotation in support of this duality is equally pointless:

"'I don't use the word "vegan" or "vegetarian". I don't like those words. People who chose to eat that way chose to because of ideological reasons.'"

Well, pardon me, but every single one of the vegetarians I know claims to "eat that way" either for health reasons or simply because they can't stand the taste of meat. Ideology - especially when used in this sneering, would-be-pejorative manner - doesn't enter into the equation.

Vegans, on the other hand, tend towards fundamentalism on the topic, and have been known to lecture omnivores at every opportunity. For this reason, as much as their dietary faddery, they rarely get invited to dinner. Except, of course, by other vegans.

For such small mercies...