Vegetarian or Not? Poll & Forum Discussion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Centaur
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the dietary preferences of scientists, particularly the prevalence of vegetarianism among them. A poll was initiated to gauge the dietary habits of forum members, revealing that most identify as omnivores. Participants debated the terminology used in the poll, suggesting "omnivore" instead of "meat-eater" for clarity. Claims were made about notable scientists, like Einstein, who adopted vegetarianism later in life, but many participants expressed skepticism about the prevalence of vegetarianism in the scientific community. Humor was prevalent throughout the conversation, with jokes about cannibalism and dietary labels. Some participants shared personal experiences with vegetarianism and hunting, discussing the environmental impact of meat production, including water usage statistics. The conversation also touched on the potential of lab-grown meat as a solution to environmental concerns related to traditional meat production. Overall, the thread highlighted a mix of serious and humorous takes on dietary choices, with a focus on the implications of those choices in relation to science and the environment.

What type of diet do you mostly follow?

  • Vegetarian (inc. lacto- [dairy] or ovo- [eggs])

    Votes: 11 16.9%
  • Pescatarian (love fish)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Vegan

    Votes: 2 3.1%
  • Raw Vegan

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Fruitarian

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Flexitarian (I still love my meat sometimes)

    Votes: 8 12.3%
  • Meat-eater

    Votes: 41 63.1%
  • Other (please state in thread)

    Votes: 3 4.6%

  • Total voters
    65
Centaur
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
There are so many claims that scientists become vegetarian, so I was wondering who on these forums are vegetarian or similar. Therefore, I made a poll...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Centaur said:
There are so many claims that scientists become vegetarian, so I was wondering who on these forums are vegetarian or similar. Therefore, I made a poll...
All of the scientists I know are normal, they all eat meat and vegetables. I don't know where you saw any of those claims.

By the way, you have no selection for a normal diet.
 
Why is there no option for cannibalism?
 
Topher925 said:
Why is there no option for cannibalism?
I think that's covered by 'meat eater'.
 
Topher925 said:
Why is there no option for cannibalism?

That would fall into the other category.
 
"Meat-eater" should be "omnivore".
 
Yeah, thanks. But how do you edit a poll? I want to change the meat-eater to Omnivore (normal diet - meat and veg)
 
I eat anything that looks hot and interesting :-p I always have preference for meat though.
 
  • #10
What would I be considered if I eat vegetarians?
 
  • #11
I always thought it was mainly liberal arts and art majors that become vegetarians.
 
  • #12
KalamMekhar said:
What would I be considered if I eat vegetarians?

Lol, that would be healthy-cannibalism...



* Even though I just associated vegetarianism with health (a joke), this thread is not there to discuss which diet is better or more healthy, I only made it for interest sake.
 
  • #13
KalamMekhar said:
What would I be considered if I eat vegetarians?
A humanitarian?
 
  • #14
ibnsos said:
I always thought it was mainly liberal arts and art majors that become vegetarians.
No they become vegetables.
 
  • #15
Wow, it looks like most of you are omnivores, was actually expecting a little bit more diversity.
 
  • #17
Evo said:
I think that's covered by 'meat eater'.
Cannibalism falls under humanitarianism.
 
  • #18
turbo-1 said:
Cannibalism falls under humanitarianism.

:smile: :smile: :smile:

After all of these years thinking that you were humourless... :-p

I have always described myself as a strict carnivore. The only pleasure that I derive from eating is in knowing that something died violently so that I could eat it.

This thread, though, presented me with an epiphany. My previous opinion was somewhat more limited than it should have been. In the space of about 3 seconds, I redefined myself as an opportunistic omnivore. I have enough Irish blood that potatoes are honorary meat, but that doesn't make me a vegetarian.
(And before some smart-*** makes a joke about me eating a vegetable and then picking my teeth with the spokes, I don't want to hear it.)
The basic rule is that if it can't outrun me, it's food. (And the term "me" includes high-velocity rifle ammunition.)
 
  • #19
Danger said:
:smile: :smile: :smile:

After all of these years thinking that you were humourless... :-p
I'm not humorless. Maine humor is pretty dry, so it doesn't hit you right away. Not well-suited to the 'web, I'm afraid. There was a brief exchange on PF chat tonight about playing Russian roulette, and I offered my Glock 20, with a disclaimer that it wasn't *quite* as random as a revolver.
 
  • #20
Which is the option that covers omnivores? And is there truly such a thing as a "fruitarian"?
 
  • #21
There's basically six vegetarian options in an attempt to discredit the fact that omnivore should be the massive majority
 
  • #22
GeorginaS said:
And is there truly such a thing as a "fruitarian"?

I think Gandhi was a fruitarian for a while but didn't keep it up. Talk about being weak willed!
(I maintained a fruitarian diet for about a month a year for the past three years. After it's over, plain rice and fish tastes like a gourmet meal).
 
  • #23
GeorginaS said:
And is there truly such a thing as a "fruitarian"?
That would be Sir Elton John, but I don't think that he has anything to do with this particular thread.
 
  • #24
turbo-1 said:
I'm not humorless. Maine humor is pretty dry, so it doesn't hit you right away. Not well-suited to the 'web, I'm afraid. There was a brief exchange on PF chat tonight about playing Russian roulette, and I offered my Glock 20, with a disclaimer that it wasn't *quite* as random as a revolver.

I just can't do it... (Why the hell is there no smilie that depicts me smacking myself on the forehead?)
I'm going to PM you soon. I'm quite inebriated right now, but not nearly enough to converse with you privately. Give me a couple of minutes to drop another 5 or 6 ounces of Scotch, and I'll get to you. :wink:
 
  • #25
Danger said:
That would be Sir Elton John, but I don't think that he has anything to do with this particular thread.

Okay, booooooooo.
:biggrin:Edited to add: So, are we calling the "meat eater" option and omnivore, then? I mean, I know this is all scientific and important and stuff, so I'd hate to mess it up.
 
  • #26
GeorginaS;2814614So said:
, are we calling the "meat eater" option and omnivore, then? I mean, I know this is all scientific and important and stuff, so I'd hate to mess it up.
As loathe as I am to admit defeat, there is absolutely no way that i can respond to that question that won't get me either censored or banned. It has something to do with where you draw the lines between eating, licking, sucking... I just really don't want to get involved.
 
  • #27
Centaur said:
Here are some big scientists who embraced (not necessarily became) vegetarianism.
I didn't see a choice for embracing (not necessarily becoming) vegetarianism.
 
  • #28
When it comes right down to it, I'm actually pretty much a fast-food guy.
The perfect fast food, by the way, consists of a chainsaw and a cow. Fire is optional.
 
  • #29
The perfect fast food, by the way, consists of a chainsaw and a cow. Fire is optional.

I went hunting once. Shot the deer in the leg. Had to kill it with a shovel. Took about an hour.
 
  • #30
That's still a high percentage of non-meat eaters, 20%! But I think the poll might be biased due to the title of the thread.
 
  • #31
VeeEight said:
I went hunting once. Shot the deer in the leg. Had to kill it with a shovel. Took about an hour.

I'm guessing that will be your last hunting experience.
 
  • #32
VeeEight said:
I went hunting once. Shot the deer in the leg. Had to kill it with a shovel. Took about an hour.
It was the only humane thing to do. I hope you didn't damage the head area. That would ruin the trophy.
 
  • #33
lisab said:
I'm guessing that will be your last hunting experience.

It's safe to say I won't be there next season
 
  • #34
I have been trying out a mostly vegetarian diet for the past few weeks. I don't particularly miss meat. I actually have gained five pounds.

My grocery bill has gone down somewhat. Options at my regular grocer have diminished, however.

Veggie dishes in the summer mostly cool one off compared to meat dishes. I must try vegetable/fruit stands.

__________Some jerk shot a deer in the flank with an arrow at my suburban park years ago. There was nothing we could do except watch it run, or preferably, shoot apples from the head of the fool.
 
  • #35
VeeEight said:
I went hunting once. Shot the deer in the leg. Had to kill it with a shovel. Took about an hour.

You don't seem to be a cruel person, so I can only assume that you're a lousy shot. Even so, it only makes sense that one will always carry enough spare ammo to administer a close-up kill shot in a situation such as yours. Or, at the very least, a large knife for introduction to the carotid.
I'm not a hunter, despite my love of weapons, but I have no argument with those who do it legitimately. Trophy hunters and thrill-killers grit my gears immensely, though. I reside in prime hunting country, and every person that I know who does it at least eats the animal. Food might not be the primary reason for the endeavour (male bonding, communing with nature, passing skills on to an offspring, etc. are instigating factors as well), but the meat isn't wasted. Killing something for food is okay, and it doesn't really make a lot of difference as to where that occurs. A meat-packing plant, forest hunting area, or tuna-canning ship all present the same net effect to the food. I just happen to have a preference for it being a "humane" kill. Even when I used to hunt gophers years ago, I always used over-loaded ammo and took the head shot so they wouldn't feel it. Nothing dismays a legit hunter more than seeing an animal wounded rather than instantly killed.
I know that I would be haunted forever over something like what happened to you (as I am by a couple of things of a minor but similar nature). Perhaps knowing that you did what you deemed necessary to alleviate the situation, no matter how distasteful, will offer you some comfort.
 
  • #36
Danger said:
You don't seem to be a cruel person

I am sometimes cruel. I can also be a downright thief and liar.
 
  • #37
VeeEight said:
I am sometimes cruel. I can also be a downright thief and liar.

Same here, but taking it out on a human, who should know better, is not the same as torturing an animal. Remember that you are dealing with an ex-professional writer here, and several other people who are a lot brighter than me. No matter how much you deny it, I can tell by the phraseology, punctuation and spacing of your post that you feel bad about it. Just remember that sometimes it's good to feel bad. It makes you think twice before repeating the mistake.
 
  • #38
I can tell by the phraseology, punctuation and spacing of your post that you feel bad about it.

Am I that transparent?! No wonder I suck at poker.
 
  • #39
VeeEight said:
Am I that transparent?! No wonder I suck at poker.
:smile:
 
  • #40
I was brought up a vegetarian, and had remained one my whole life (I am 22), up to about a year ago, when I started eating fish.

I was not the annoying sort of vegetarian who would demand that I couldn't eat from a plate which had had meat on it etc. (I do know people like that). The reason I started eating fish is that I started realising that it wasn't the actual killing of the animal that I disliked, my main issues were with the environmental aspects (although I also dislike the cruelty). Fish are already in the sea, unlike the millions of cows etc. which do more damage to the environment than cars do.

People say that this is dumb, because fish stocks are low and I am actually causing more damage to the environment, but for me it's just like any other product in the world that is in low supply, when fish stocks get so low that it is too expensive, I will just turn to vegetarianism again.

I wonder if it will ever be possible to grow giant cubes of mindless meat, without the same amount of pollution? This I would be in favour with!
 
  • #41
Jamma said:
I wonder if it will ever be possible to grow giant cubes of mindless meat, without the same amount of pollution? This I would be in favour with!

That would be super-cool, and could solve a couple of different issues at the same time. If you manage to genetically engineer a Black Angus/cactus hybrid, you could grow steaks out in the desert which is otherwise wasted space. Me likes.
 
  • #42
Danger said:
That would be super-cool, and could solve a couple of different issues at the same time. If you manage to genetically engineer a Black Angus/cactus hybrid, you could grow steaks out in the desert which is otherwise wasted space. Me likes.
I saw this in a tv documentary. Here's a news report about it.

Scientists grow pork meat in a laboratory

SCIENTISTS have grown meat in the laboratory for the first time. Experts in Holland used cells from a live pig to replicate growth in a petri dish.

The advent of so-called “in-vitro” or cultured meat could reduce the billions of tons of greenhouse gases emitted each year by farm animals — if people are willing to eat it.

So far the scientists have not tasted it, but they believe the breakthrough could lead to sausages and other processed products being made from laboratory meat in as little as five years’ time.

They initially extracted cells from the muscle of a live pig. Called myoblasts, these cells are programmed to grow into muscle and repair damage in animals.

The cells were then incubated in a solution containing nutrients to encourage them to multiply indefinitely. This nutritious “broth” is derived from the blood products of animal foetuses, although the intention is to come up with a synthetic solution.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/article6936352.ece

More here. http://www.physorg.com/news178869104.html
 
  • #43
Meat ~250-300g / day. Turkey / chicken breast preferred. Milk, 1.5% fat 1-2 L / day. Eggs when I feel so. I fill the rest with vegetables soups, spinach, broccoli ,carrots, oatmeal, black bread and whatever else. Kefir / yogurt / cheese sometimes bu then I cut the milk.

I eat pasta too sometimes. Ill never give it up :P Italian recipes are too cool. Carbonara is my favorite. I love chocolate. French deserts. I indulge in them seldom.

I like to eat. In this period , I prolly average a figure close to 3500 kcal / day. It would be a nightmare to try to get them from a vegetarian diet.

I use various supplements too. I like my urine to be expensive :P
 
  • #44
DanP said:
I like my urine to be expensive :P

Maybe you should change your name to RichP :-p
 
  • #45
VeeEight said:
Maybe you should change your name to RichP :-p

:devil: Cmmon, Some Omega 3, a multivitamin, Mg, and whey protein for the times I don't get enough from food ... I keep it low :P
 
  • #46
Evo said:
I saw this in a tv documentary. Here's a news report about it.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/article6936352.ece

More here. http://www.physorg.com/news178869104.html

Thanks for this, very cool.

I'm not trying to be preachy here, I'm not like that, but I just randomly read this in a book I have, "The Oxbridge Questions- Do You Think You're Clever?", and I find it pretty staggering:

"It takes on average nearly 5,000 litres of water to produce just one quarter-pound beef burger - 1,000 times as much as for the same weight of wheat. So if you were to eat just two burgers a week for a year, it would take half a million litres of water."

:bugeye:
 
Last edited:
  • #47
Jamma said:
Thanks for this, very cool.

I'm not trying to be preachy here, I'm not like that, but I just randomly read this in a book I have, "The Oxbridge Questions- Do You Think You're Clever?", and I find it pretty staggering:

"It takes on average nearly 5,000 litres of water to produce just one quarter-pound beef burger - 1,000 times as much as for the same weight of wheat. So if you were to eat just two burgers a week for a year, it would take half a million litres of water."

:bugeye:
Are you talking about live cattle? You realize that they urinate and respirate and give most of that water back, right?
 
  • #48
I'm not sure it is meat we get in England, ever since the local butcher shops closed down we buy this pink stuff from supermarkets, it is tasteless and needs tenderising with a big hammer before it is edible.
 
  • #49
Evo said:
Are you talking about live cattle? You realize that they urinate and respirate and give most of that water back, right?
He's talking about drinking water, which is a limited commodity in certain regions. I read a story in the paper the other day about Coca Cola planting a factory on some Indian farmland, they took so much ground water from the region that none was left for the farmers and the people living there. The whole region is nothing but wasteland now. To top it off, the waste water that the factor dumped was contaminated with heavy metals.
 
  • #50
Gave up meat+fish for some weird reason when I was like 3. I simply refused. Obstinacy prevailed over parental tactics. Probably had something to do with all the animal/fable based cartoons+Discovery. Now I don't eat meat cause I have no taste for it.

I used to want to be a zoologist. :/

Anyone else here a fan of Ramen+Pizza? :)
 
Back
Top