Interesting discussion throughout the article. It seems like a good idea to “re-wild”, but there are many side effects that can result from this sort of individual action. I also worry that we’re putting our efforts into projects with minimal gain for every creature. I believe we ought to focus on limiting our harmful effects first through means of more advanced farming techniques, removing reliance on animal agriculture, and returning previously required farm land to wilderness. Then, maybe we can talk about introducing other species. Until then, this seems like a risky bet for any individual activist.

Hard to tell of course, I’m sure some of their actions have been net good, but I worry y’know?

Always good news. Unfortunate that so many families (~40% in article) still keep with an attitude of “okay for them, but not for us” when considering their own family. I see that a fair bit in the US as well where people point out they have “no problem with the gays,” while still being outwardly against their kids being anything outside of their expected sexuality/identity.

My personal setup is using a markdown app like Trillium or Obsidian and then referencing locally stored code snippets or actual development files.

As for the reading-to-note process, I opt to take in information, then write the notes after. In early undergrad, I used to take notes for everything as I was reading, but found I didn’t actually understand, was wasting lots of time, and had too many notes. Instead, I started just taking more generalized notes with highlighted key terms after I read each section. Then when I was done with a chapter, I looked at the section notes and tried to link them together - removing notes that are not necessary or I already knew. If I could, I’d try to implement them into code and link the files so I had a mental bookmark linking the two. I’ve found asking myself what I learned after reading is far more helpful than regurgitating content as I read.

That’s what works for me at least. Hope you find a method that works best for you!

I don’t really want to get into ethics rn because it’s too long of a conversation, but are there really no available alternatives for that specific circumstance? Seems like a market ripe for some company specializing in vegan fabrics to step in if not.

I acknowledge that a few comments down (forums are annoying sometimes lol). In my post history, if you have unlimited free time, you’ll find I advocate for doing what is best with what we can handle. I find that our personal choices, for the most part, allow us to never harm other animals. For example, there is plenty of wool in second hand shops for the odd occasion you need it.

I agree that we do indeed need to think past the food. Although food is far more important in terms of greenhouse gases, clothing waste is an issue. I solved that personally by simply not buying plastic-based clothing anymore. It is incredibly easy to purchase sustainable cheap clothing made of non-plastic containing options like cotton. Thicker weaves like those found in my socks and jeans allow me to stay warm during the cold snowy winter where I live. Plus, I can easily stitch any of my clothes with a $0.99 roll of cotton from the store.

I see no reason to opt for something like leather or wool - which of course carry the same environmental issues of food from those animals.

less sustainable than their animal-based counterparts for a variety of reasons.

Which products specifically? From what I can ascertain, the vast majority of vegan options are better for the environment for several reasons. Even though some vegan products are better than other vegan products (e.g., oats and soy beans over almonds), they all beat out their animal alternatives by a mile.

Plus, as pointed out by eeeeeb, switching the world to a vegan diet causes a chain reaction of positive changes. If we have less demand for animal products, we raise and slaughter less animal. If there are less animals, animal products are more expensive and plant-based alternatives gain market appeal. If this happens, it becomes more available. As an example, Beyond and Impossible Foods led the way with plant based beef. But now, they’re expensive and niche products. However, they paved the way for companies like Gardein or grocery stores like Aldi to release beef products for a fraction of the price. In fact, per gram of protein, they’re now cheaper than their animal alternative. Thinking of individual products may not be the best approach here - rather, we ought to focus on actions that make wide changes. This step requires first world nations to be the first to do so.

Haven’t read that, no. Seems like something to add to the reading list though

I have to strongly agree with you there. We already have the technology available to perform what this article labels as potentially troublesome. It seems to me that this is a far better innovation than current live-subject testing. Hell, we already have human cell testing, this just allows for organ level testing instead of just at the cellular level.

I’ve continually thought that tests like the mirror test were inadequate at telling us whether or not an animal has some subjective self-awareness or internal thought outside of survival; or equally, that it means anything significant. It seems to me that each animal has a particular set of thoughts that govern their actions which are brought about by their genetics and environment.

Similarly, I’ve seen people close to me point out that dogs engage in empathetic group behavior while it seems some fish do not. But that seems like a silly line to draw on their value. After all, there are many traits that animals of different species posses that we do not. Yet, we do not put them on some pedestal of worth because of that. For example, the banded archer fish is capable of performing calculations to arch a stream of water to hunt flying insects above water. Meanwhile, my dog struggles to catch a treat falling towards his mouth.

Maybe, it could be argued, that certain very low thinking animals such bivalves are indeed not worthy of consideration. Not because they lack subjective features like empathy, self-awareness, etc, but because they lack thinking at all - like a group of individual organs communicating without a central thought collector to organize it - unlike most other animals. It is possible that new evidence will come out about specific neural capacity for bivalves, but for now, I am about as convinced as I am for most plants and fungi.

Kiwis are usually underappreciated. Plus they can easily be sliced into really appealing eye-catchers to accent the rest of the plate

If you want some cool potato facts, you might be best off boiling and then cooling your potatoes before eating. There is some preliminary evidence that cooling the potato instead of eating it directly from heat may lower its glycemic index and thus limit blood sugar spikes. The mechanism is still uncertain, but there is thought that the crystallization of the gelatinized starches from cooking may lead to a slower break down of sugar in the small intestine.

I am calling this an overall win for potato salad lovers everywhere.

The study did not specifically test said products, yet they note future studies ought to do so.

However, given that dairy products do indeed have DNA from the cow they are taken from and are pasteurized at 280-320C, a temperature range far greater than anything tested in this study, it stands that the conclusion could be the same. I am unfamiliar with the specific heating practices in common yogurt brands, so I cannot even begin to speculate there.

This would match up with some initial evidence that cancer, especially prostate cancer, may be linked with higher dairy consumption. However, the authors in these studies speculate that the cancer risk is from high consumption of IGF-1 (insulin-like growth factor 1) which is especially high in dairy products. The linked study looked at direct comparison between soya milk and dairy milk which can be troublesome because soy products have been shown decrease risks of cancer. Other studies comment on the effects of milk on cancer risk from several linked papers.

To gain deeper understanding of whether dairy milk may influence cancer risk, more research is needed to clarify whether there are plausible biological mechanisms, including how different dairy products relate to the IGF system, to other hormones and to other bioactive constituents.

This is especially important with the original post here. There may be future studies that expand on the relative risks of both IGF-1 and damaged DNA in dairy.

Long comments are good comments in my opinion lol.

If you’re looking for a chicken substitute that holds up, look no further than Sweet Earth’s “Chik’n” strips. I tried Morningstar’s and I didn’t find it to be the right texture. Sweet earth somehow figured out the perfect non-breaded chicken strip. I’d use that jazz in anything if I wasn’t trying to conserve my budget.

Also, idk if you’ve tried it yet, but Gardein makes a great “chick’n” noodle soup for lazy days.

I wish the seafood substitutes were there. The breaded stuff like fish and chips are great and there are a few brands of tuna substitutes I like, but I haven’t seen a shrimp or salmon substitute. For sushi or smoked salmon bits, sure, there are lots of things that have a similar taste, but I haven’t found anything like something you’d get in a restaurant. If you like to cook, (sauce stache)[https://youtu.be/T8MaZXj9N-U] always comes through with surprisingly good tasting recipes.

I also have no ability to detect sarcasm so apologies if this was in jest.

Eating raw foods doesn’t guarantee not getting cancer. We’re constantly exposed to carcinogens so the best thing we can do is reasonably avoid them when we can. Raw food diets are pretty tough to keep up with and have their own risks. Just eat a diet comprised of mostly or all plants, avoid a lot of added sugar, saturated fat, sodium, alcohol, and nicotine containing products. Just by doing that, you give yourself a pretty good chance of a healthy life.

Would recommend trying some of the new plant-based meat products while you’re at it. Stuff from Impossible and Beyond Foods are pretty much taste-alikes for burgers. Morningstar has the same with appetizer items like chicken nuggets. Gardein is cheaper and usually marketed as healthy (lower saturated fat and sodium), but isn’t as good for said healthy reasons. I still buy that because of the low cost though. Places like Aldi have their own products that are the cheapest of them all and pretty decent tasting ngl.

Given that heat-induced deamination producing dU in isolated DNA continues to proceed over extended times (Figure 2b), (18) hours of roasting or smoking could potentially result in higher levels of damage, although this was not tested here. For dU in briefly roasted beef, the amounts found here correspond to milligram quantities in a serving of cooked meat, as much as 1000 times greater than concentrations of HCA or PAH molecules in cooked meats

Summary here

That is some damn great food diversity if I’ve ever seen it

Sounds like a solid choice! Maybe not for the cancer risk alone, since that is tough to prove definitively, but for the ethical and environmental concerns for sure. I used to eat meat 2+ times a day, but one day like 5 years ago I just stopped. Seems too easy with all the options available to us

I think what they meant by “being a vegetarian is healthier” is from the point of conclusion from this study referencing lower cancer (and all cause-mortality in referenced analysis) rates for plant based vs animal containing diets. I agree it’s a tough claim to make since a vegetarian diet could literally just be oreos for 3 meals a day, but if I had to guess what they meant, it’s probably what I mentioned.

Also, the linked summary doesn’t provide too much info. They talked about more than just the listed plant/animal foods and tried to speculate on why they, and the studies they referenced, got their results. I summarize those points here

More info from actual study here