Eggs, a typically brutal vegan debate (w. Mic the Vegan)

is what they should be saying in the
same way that bowel cancer societies should be just saying outright don't consume presence made often the language that they'll use will be something like eat the least amount possible or minimize it or something like that but with one egg you've basically maxed out your daily allowance for cholesterol so if you're eating one egg the rest of your diet that day would have to be vegan to stay within the guidelines when you're talking about a whole egg you're talking about a food product that's sixty-three percent fat if there's so much obviously wrong with eggs in terms of just just taking a glance at what nutrients they can take do eggs are not health on blood but raw eggs I used to make chocolate cake okay what they used to make well that's like salt is you does that's irrelevant I want to point out though that eggs in terms of affecting blood cholesterol I'm finding a lot of contentious reports on that one there is no no doubt to the fact that they have there's something called the hex Ted equation there's also the keys of question basically the idea is what happens is if you don't have any cholesterol in very low saturated fats in your diet if you add a stack of it to your diet it'll have this huge spike and as you add more and more there's the response is less and less and that's where the contention comes in so what happens is if if we got on someone like me or one of the other people in here who has you know no cholesterol and low saturated fats in their diet and you just added a bunch of saturated fat and cholesterol till they died you'd see a massive spike in their cholesterol levels but then if you got somebody on average who's eating quite if you know let's just say two three eggs for the sake of the argument and then you add an egg the the effect that the first two three eggs would have had on the vegan or whatever is is or the fer the effect that the first egg would have had on the vegan is not going to be the same as the fifth egg or the person who's eating right I think kind of understanding it seems like if you have the right diet multiple eggs are fine and if it matters my blood closer ours well under control and I've had like about two eggs like on a verge a day yeah I mean it depends on what you mean by under control because okay so then regardless that I may find one egg is giving you 24 grams of fat seven point five grams of saturated fat I'm sorry just looking at the basic basic facts of what is an egg eggs are not health food they have never it's not broccoli my house it seems to be anjana health and food stuff it never has been like Lester why doesn't matter right this migraine I'll just make a simple statement so that the amount that you would have to eat to get good amounts of nutrients from eggs is quite a lot and by the time you actually start getting some nutritional value from them you'll also be adding a whole lot of problems from them as well so I think I can remember I've done mine because I've seen four haven't looked it up for a while but they'll often talk about things like selenium b12 and like that I think yes well you can get some like fermented things they do it from several other person you can just do yeah I'm just using it as an example so you've got things like b12 and selenium and we told you can get from a lot of vegan places yeah that's not the point the point I'm making is that the things that are advertised as being good from that you can get from eggs you often have to eat quite a lot of eggs to get an okay amount of of that thing so whether it's b12 selenium whatever but once you start actually eating enough to get some value from the eggs you start getting such a large amount of cholesterol that the positive is far outweighed by the negative in the ideal amount of cholesterol in the human diet and zero look to get the same amount of protein from I can if you're not sure about that I want happy for you to just just tell me what nutrients you think you're getting big I mean I would just like to see I would just like to see like some maybe some academic papers that say that pegs are just a waste of time because you're each other yeah like thank you so just for what is worth if your that are as far as I know eggs are seen to have beneficial amount of nutrition especially for like what they like per weight or per ounce and if you want to show me if you want to convince me that eggs are just a watch they're just basically sacks of fat or sacks of cholesterol just like give me the empirical on that one yes what nutri I mean I'll just ask you what nutrients you're actually do you think you're actually getting from them and what they look like this question so he's asked a direct question that your skin cancer that Sri PCRM had a famous of PCRM is Physicians Committee for Responsible medicine that a famous famous lawsuit taking the egg Lobby to court precisely because they were violating the u.s. national guidelines on health that they were presenting advertising claiming the eggs were healthy and that actually even if you read the US government's own guidelines that were not healthy for exactly these reasons so there are famous cases that document this with real facts and real studies and everything else that went to court and set precedent in med states American that's not that many years ago it's whether they're famous well-known cases yes it's good for you to ask for academic studies but as I said earlier you haven't looked up the basic nutrition data like the ratio of fat to protein eggs do contain a lot of protein okay it's a significant concession I'm not going to say you guys have zero in value eggs contain a lot of protein so a whole egg has about thirty point six grams of protein that's a lot of protein okay however in order to get those thirty point six grams of protein you're getting 24 point 2 grams of fat and a lot of that is saturated fat it's incredibly unhealthy and there's cholesterol now by contrast the staple of my diet is a type of red bean called an adzuki beat for me to get the same amount of protein as one egg from these red beans gives me 0.4 grams of fat okay so 0.4 grams of fat versus 24 point 2 grams of fat and adzuki beans have zero cholesterol zero cetera that these are trace amounts of plant fat that are contained in these beans okay there is there is no comparison eggs are not a health food they're not comparable to beans or broccoli or salad or anything that's healthy I'm just going to put a picture up in alright and I also had I'm uh while I was saying something I was looking at different like academic sources about the effect of eggs on health some as far as I know seem to be suggesting that eggs are part of a healthy diet and some are saying that eggs are neutral and I'm trying to find ones where they say that eggs are like a component of like heart disease as I'm I think I might be I might be doing this wrong or I think I might be uncharitable in the sense that I'm limiting my my eye surgeons from 2015 so it could be just one second so like I put up just this is just a quick google nutrition sort of table that I put up so I don't know where I think I see friends but this is yes sir egg one 100 this is 100 grams of eggs which i think is like I think a lot or medium or large egg is something like 50 grams or some was what it calculated but so this is about no one egg or so it may be worth I think it gives you about 13 grams of protein which isn't a huge amount it covers your entire days worth of cholesterol and for so vitamin A 10% vitamin C nothing vitamin D 20% calcium 5% is garbage if you think that through and b12 I think it says 14% so which is b12 so if you think that through that's the you'd have to get any of those up to a hundred to your daily amount you'd have to eat about five eggs a day to actually get a decent amount from them right and that's just probably maybe vitamin D and the best way to get vitamin D really is to just go out into the Sun things like vitamin A you can eat two carrots and that will give you your entire days worth of vitamin a b12 again you can just take fortified calcium you can eat fortified soy milk or whatever and that'll give you more than that just from just from a glass or just from a bowl of cereal worth of of soy milk that'll easily give you way more calcium there's the the mechanism by which it causes heart disease is the cholesterol that is is in in the egg so it's not just saying eggs cause cholesterol so egg cause heart disease its egg the cholesterol in eggs cause a spike in your cholesterol and that is the mechanism by which it occurs so you both got that infographic the first point made on that infographic be CRM is the same thing I said it's over 60% fat calories from fat there's no way any food is gonna be healthy that way doesn't matter if it's vegan or not it's you know obviously it's not a health food consuming eggs increases your risk of cardiovascular disease by 19% colons guy and served by five times diabetes by 60% li the prostate cancer by 81 percent it's it's rich in cholesterol the ideal amount of cholesterol in human diet is zero some people there was a genetic range of how much cholesterol you produce how much you retain this person somebody needs ik will remember Maude vegan she has that genetic anomaly she can eat an infinite amount of cholesterol and never have foster Oklahomans she's one of those people on the spectrum before she was vegan she could eat bacon all day and her lip cholesterol would never go up some people have that condition but nevertheless the ideal amount of cholesterol in the top human diet is zero you but hey it was more intellectually stimulating to have to debate whether or not you know using chicken poo as fertilizer ethically justified product can I had a couple more it difficult to debate hey it's Mike here I just want to I want to add a couple points if yeah so uh I'm not sure if anybody linked it I'm in like my tiny house right now so I can't type anything but obviously got me cut out he was silence for the Russians egg egg consumption and carotid plaque that shows an exponential association between a consumption carotid plaque that's pretty much on par with smoking cigarettes and I just want to know my main question is why do you think that cholesterol doesn't cause heart disease so I assume you admit that eating cholesterol raises cholesterol deep depending on how so there's like ways that clozaril interacts with the body we're eating cholesterol doesn't necessarily translate into blood cholesterol right there's different you can literally when you eat a egg you see a spike in cholesterol two eggs large respectin cholesterol three is the studies in my cholesterol doesn't race eating cholesterol doesn't raise cholesterol this video I'm sorry I can't get it for you guys but I had the study yet I can I can put up a meta-analysis where they had a people in wards so basically they control the entire diets and there's a meta-analysis of several kinds of these studies whereby they might in today one of them out of people starts and it had a predictive effect of increase in reducing all right cholesterol as they did it so I'll just link that up but either way I mean I don't think there's a case to be made that eating cholesterol in the form of X does not raise cholesterol I mean it's probably what I main reasons that begin to anyone's with I but the idea is that when you raise cholesterol that there is acceptable threshold you can raise it to is it's also can be a source of fat that your body might need well what do you consider an acceptable threshold that you're probably still gonna die of heart disease because the only group that has you know yeah the only group that has ideal level of cholesterol the only diet that's been shown to reverse art disease is a whole food vegan diet so the moment you're including Calypso what you say reduce heart disease you mean from people who are at risk reverse heart disease so study you know esos and study 200 people putting them on whole food vegan diet showing unclogging of arteries you know these are people with advanced cardiovascular disease over 12 years 60 percent of the people who failed the diet it was about 30 people they had 60% rate of heart attacks and strokes of the people that stayed on it 0.6% yes so that's just that's that's another end of that same discussion because most people are probably gonna die of heart disease right so in the case of someone who's at risk or has conditions where they want to reduce their cholesterol I think it's fairly obvious that you should do things to where you want to reduce your cholesterol right everybody is at risk of heart disease I mean if you look at a study I believe it was cholesterol I can find it later but virtually all children by the age of three now in the US have fatty streaks on the aorta the last thing you want is high cholesterol you know we're seeing spinal disk degeneration leading to you know caused by clogged back arteries in 11 to 16 year olds now and that's of although science awards winning study I get out of fun games less nutritional value of eggs was raised here as a justification for the acknowledged immorality of farming factory farming and from this perspective to less research but smaller farms but do the right who ray think if surges let me finish my sentences one wasn't if you think the nutritional value of eggs is so great that it justifies the animal Holocaust that justifies animals living in captivity whole lives and then having their next slaughter have their necks cut and so on then what do you think about adzuki beans adzuki beans must justify mass murder on an unbelievable skill you must worship at zukie beans as if aliens have landed from outer space because the nutritional value of a common food like adzuki beans it's exponentially so much healthier so much more impressive than eggs even if you just glance the basic nutritional data I have no idea what you're trying to communicate it so I'm going to translate for me I'll just keep it simple a little basically there's no need for cholesterol in your diet and the very small amount of benefits that come from eggs is y is going to be just way outweighed by the negative it brings there's no need for dietary cholesterol in your diet and most people is without even doing a blood work on you would benefit by far by just taking dietary cholesterol out of their diet and swapping saturated fats for it seems like that but it seems like you would need cholesterol in your diet at least some amount that's actually that's incorrect so your body synthesizes what I think it would be more convincing to me to like to see the literature in all honesty yeah I mean I can cause like literature is persuasive to me yeah yeah I mean I can I can give you a lot of literature I can just show you a link from a state government Health website which obviously is not proving you know anything like though or anti animal products but this simple they'll just say it's simply that cholesterol is not required in the diet just give me two seconds I'll get you that link yeah that's much better thank you it's frustrating because all my videos have like 15 you know an average of like 15 studies underneath them I just can't show you right now but any all the studies I mention it you know you're seeing that spike in cholesterol and then you want to go further of do you think that high cholesterol is damaging both of would you say do you believe that having high cholesterol is damaging ah yes so you do okay so that's that's a lot of people and deny that openly wait did I ever get the impression that I said that close sure like I said this the high cholesterol is just gonna be bad for you like Alfie impression I mean just the fact that you were would deny the fact that eggs would be a danger to cholesterol it's very much part of erasing the diet heart hypothesis that well the reason I've said it wasn't bad is because I'm looking at like health guidelines right now as we're talking and the amount of cholesterol per egg seems to be if you that you can have to and so with remain within the healthy level well then don't put all the ways unhealthy in this currently I didn't hear you can you repeat that someone else was saying something it was in the normal okay there's normal in a sick society where most people who are probably gonna die of heart disease and then there's optimal which is not considered the standard normal so you can yeah you can maybe hover just under 200 where you're still probably gonna die of heart disease but to get under you know 150 or you know I deal in terms of LDL is you know 50 to 70 mile is I think even lower than 50 and that's basically impossible if you eat eggs and so you're gonna have progression of atherosclerosis and likely to be diver you know still likely to dive into like a car wreck thing I was reading the talks about the the vital nacelle cholesterol in your diet or I guess in your body technically yeah just quickly so I put up just above your link it's a link to the Victorian so the state that I live in to Australia and I think it's saying the first three point yeah so we know about Akhilesh are you proposing there's a danger of not having cholesterol your day um it seems like less from what I read seems like cholesterol is needed for making like types of hormones in your body and hormones herim productions usually don't want to with we still make eighty percent of the cholesterol in our body depending on how much you can see them like on average 80 percent of cholesterol and there is I mean there are miss based off low cholesterol so people who are dying of cancer their cholesterol I might go you know crash and then people say oh low cholesterol is an issue you think that this guy gave says that you can't your body just produces all the cholesterol it needs yeah so there's sorry okay so yeah this is like one of like several things that talk about whether to eat cholesterol or the naughty cholesterol but this is this is persuasive and all yeah and if you want to tie it back to the original topic I'm I'm okay with that what is the original topic where you guys you were at debating like fertilizers or something my first hitter not ours yeah one of the justifications for eating chicken eggs so this is a conversation about X okay as you're getting habit started all right as we started talking about fertilizer and one of the things in which like farmers use chickens for right that they would still probably babe they might still probably be on a farm even if there wasn't a man that's definitely not correct it would not be cost-effective to raise chickens just for a fertilizer I don't think so for what it's worth would it be convincing like do you do you see a situation where the small-scale farms are I guess scaled out and used as the method to feed yeah I I think no one here is going to agree that we have industrial farms like the optimal mode of production should be to small-scale farms yeah that's fine and do you think we that it'd be a good way to like using animals on these plants would be a good way to I guess scale up and provide the most amount of food for people yeah cuz there's a lot of the things that we use in farms like industrially produced manure is really ought to be phased out right they can't like support or that yet but they can't support like the agriculture or over the entire world so it makes sense to go back to a more sustainable form of ecology where you would like feed scraps and things that aren't fit for consumption animals and poop it now to go back to the soil better tell me more anecdotes again what makes you think this is lost Arcadia to live on a small platform is that reference inside your window and chicken hutch you know it's horrible it's horrible for the human beings as well as the animals and yeah just guards to have a fire blood can I add a point also here okay looking you know there's there's if you look at Polyface farm which is like the face no pun intended of like where's regenerative agriculture yeah if you're looking for second Inglot Polyface farm never heard of it okay not something you can just google it but just just talking about the point here is that there's been a large I don't even want to say campaign but just a notion that chicken tractors are all you need et cetera to be fertilizing and then I believe there was a Guardian article New York Times article I can find it showing that actually Polyface farm was shipping in tens of thousands of pounds of grain to feed the chickens which were then fertilizing quote-unquote the the cow fields and so it's a matter of where the nutrients came from and it's not the chickens magically create yeah they gotta be local right this was has to be the case where you need to be able to recycle that's why like production needs to be scaled to be to local you can't have its kind of international trade of food where nutrients are like leaving it so you got it like and you end up like destroying the soil afterward yeah you know I also just put them a link in general which actually address that fact so the sort of thought about the small-scale farming and actually it's often not that efficient so if we're talking about a growing human population it's often going to be the case that some sort of industrialized methods are going to be just better at feeding people so this is an article from a couple I think that runs a small-scale farm but there's also an interesting comment by a guy called George Monbiot one bio I'll just I thought did you post the Dean isn't isn't the answer thing George a moment you wrote a series on this topic he's written several books going so is is their thesis basically that changing away from animal products isn't enough to like meet the demands that industrial farming is trying to meet is that what the trend so they're more saying that the best way to go about changing the farming products of farming production I guess is to move towards more small-scale farms yeah that's true going down yes so in the comment that I put up it's it's the first comment whether the pic comment it's written by George mom bio who's a journalist for The Guardian as well he's spent quite a lot of time he's actually pretty interesting if you look into him so he initially turned vegan and all of his concerns like just completely environmental base and food efficiency based so he initially turned vegan because of the the environmental cost and how concerned he was with how much of environmental damage he was doing and it looked like you could very easily feed the world on a vegan diet instead he then met some people who said that this isn't true and if you do locavore ism and like that that would be better and so he he foot back being to being like a locavore east type diet and then about three years later he foot back again to veganism after he looked more into the numbers and found that most of the people that were making the small-scale claims really couldn't back it up with the numbers and he responded on this article and it's the I think it's the first comment so I'll just post it again but yeah basically he points out that the UK population could easily be fed if we went to a completely vegan diet just even on an industrial type and not only would they be able to easily feed them but they could easily feed probably four times as much I guess my question is do you believe that we can feed the world with the vegan diet she believes that fertilizers possible are we even disagreeing I just I just realized that I hadn't pushed the push to talk about now let's try to talk for a bit from what I've seen most a lot of a college Asst and like especially I got a Rutgers a lot as they do a lot of agricultural sciences there they say that if you wanted to create a production system that's going to be sustainable and can support people a pure vegan method this is like from like the last 2016 onward where there's like a resurgence in interest isn't going to be cutting it and that there was and I like people on the PBS articles about it earlier in that animal especially with aquaculture and with like milk friendly I hate saying that word because I don't like building cows but I don't I would like bite that bullet if it's like mint some sort of like sustainable outcome that fitment met people's needs but it seems like a lot of experts agree that a efficient and sustained and via production setup is going to involve animals to some extent ok so obviously I disagree with you you're probably getting that from the element a study on carrying capacity which looked at defeating the world without animals and in that study something you won't hear is that a vegan diet uses one sixth of the land and so and but then there the the news sort of twisted it as actually you can have a larger carrying capacity on the earth because they totally miss category is what is considered arable lands so they basically said anything that we're not growing crops on right now he's not arable which is absurd it doesn't count anything that could be Terios it doesn't count doesn't count anything that you can plant hey one of us could have did you say it's an agent under utilized no it's insane underutilized thing look you know this is in apropos the issue of fertilizer but it also covers a lot of the questions about byproducts and indirect quote unquote benefits of animal products whey powder is extremely cheap whey powder is not valuable it's a waste product spun off by basically the cheese industry by turning their products into cheese so whey powder is available low low prices chicken poo also is a non valuable waste part of the halftee widow you know whey powder also it's it's very hard to get rid of safely so they basically is a subsidized product because it's a by parts they need to get rid of if you can google what the prices are for the different types of fertilizer if chicken poo were valuable in the way you were suggesting if that kind of fertilizer available it would be more expensive than chemical fertilizer on the free market and it is not automatically cheaper and again I pointed out there is a cultural memory about bat guano I checked the prices bat guano still is genuinely valuable genuinely expensive it's more expensive than chemical fertilizer it's way more expensive than chicken fertilizer the chicken fertilizer with in Georgia it's currently you can get it for $14 per ton if they got to ship it further it looks like the corn price is $80 per tonne whereas you're talking about like eight hundred and fifty dollars per ton for bat guano so I just say the idea you started with the chicken fertilizer is something so useful and so valuable that it justifies this stuff that is very I never lose that you did just about looking at Mexico I don't why you keep straw Manning man that's ridiculous who said that did something anybody hear me like because chicken poop is so good for four farms that it's okay to his murder that was a big part of your defense of small farming as opposed to it wasn't I okay then you express yourself very poorly if you want to say that's not what you mean now that's fine and all exactly if you can't repeat my own argument to me right you just can't do that and I don't know why you're attacking it I must be I must be very stupid that must be very steep oh I think I think thank you for human soroban why don't you let me know why you cannot the only one has that opinions which is good right so what was long there if someone blow me do you want to do you want to finish up tying up just the idea quickly the idea that you need to feed the world I mean for example right yeah that's like it's just gonna be that's just gonna be like empirical right that's not something that's going to be some and that's not an ethical debate that's not any of these of the empirical debates right now I'm remembering like just one point just to close this important so the amount of grain that we feed in North America alone could feed every single hungry person on earth people who are food insecure that's from a Cornell article those who can use a credible but to people FY doesn't matter you chief you just switch it over it's a matter of that we are capable of using these things the grain so the greens are edible the people use a lot more water and there are a lot more nitrogen there's a lot less nitrogen that's doing that stuff into your fine products you mean the stuff that's not fit for people yeah I mean that's isn't that like refined isn't that like corn syrup and stuff there's no toxic you made it and it's also isn't it so about when it's when it's harvested it's all sorts of fact there's both like the very plans um don't like this there's like great there's a strains of cheap grain that's used to make feed for other animals that regardless of when they're picked isn't going to be something that people should be eating should be eating the point is in terms of calories in terms of land in terms of these resources we can easily shift to feed every hungry personal in the world just with one cup I don't know about that one easily I know maybe the Kate duck that may be the case but if you want it to be convincing that's gonna have to be like empirics behind that alright I literally can't like I'd love to close the window and and look at a bunch of research but I'm on my phone again I will say Google like Lansing you're necessarily wrong but if I can Outlook or no I believe it's 300 million unless you get 300 million a few 800 million sorry that 800 million people yet 800 people in the world and there's yeah just in terms of calorie u.s. could feed this is from - still the same amount of hungry people we can also just produce a oh no this is from 99,000 yeah so that was telling actually less yeah and there's actually less animals being fed then so it's probably more now right but I think if I'm gonna be taking this as a source like I don't ever they're taking something as a source I'd like to be like more updated cutting out because like I whatever you guys said can you guys repeat because I cut out I'm just saying there's an easier point cuz that's from 1997 or whatever right this u.s. actually ate less animals back then so they actually if they're saying back then the food that they're feeding to the animals could feed a hundred million people the amount of consumption of animals in America has actually gone up so that's probably the fact that it's out of date is probably worse for your argument no I don't think that's the case if you can find like the reason I don't think it's the case is one that doesn't take into account all sorts of things we know about climate change today or things you know about the soil because like in the - in the mid 2000s we spent like a lot of money in our agricultural sciences really like really buff that up and a little bit skeptical of things like Ana's before 2010 so if we have empirical data there like from know like recently that corroborate systemsure right like I know we can feed the world but like I don't know like whether the claims that this makes is going to be eaten like we can hold - yes so we can I can just get you a paper from a guy called Joseph poor which shows that the best efficient diet is a vegan diet and that the carrying capacity of would easily feed the popular the expected population of 2050 which is like 10 billion because like I'm looking at other ideal diets and a lot of them are they involve like fishing like the pescetta which is something I don't want to like I mean you understand that you understand the main point here though is that when we are feeding animals we are siphoning grain down I mean laws of thermodynamics all right so you are faithful you're siphoning down you're losing energy by feeding food animals food to animals you know depending on the animal it's more or less loss so there's no way especially when you're feeding animals living energy and I understand that so if you feed one calorie to an animal there's no way you can get one or more calories back we didn't last Mike Mike I'm not I'm not okay okay did already circling back just before you came in that was exactly when it was the flowchart of the fact that mathematically it must be the case that eating animal products is less sufficient and kills more mice like if you're ethically opposed to mice being killed you're killing more my steed beef or chicken or eggs so we did start with that completely agree with you completely encourage you to go on but we have already shove this down this guy's throat okay but dizzy do you not believe that's true just we've uh I mean the mice thing huh I mean if we don't do the whole everyone talks at the exact same time maybe we can like and hear something okay do you believe is that the laws of thermodynamics to not apply to raising animals that we do not lose energy oh it's ridiculous so we do so it's an inefficiency it doesn't matter right there's like calories that we just don't eat so a fish like you can the efficiency is normative right so efficiency has to be with regard to some goal if the goal is merely to cram as much calories down a person's throat where they can be eating dirt whatever right anything like was gone to an animal just goes to them sure right but if we're talking about optimizing like calorie per food that we find enjoyable or palatable etc that's going to be different we're also just looking at calories we are talking about calories because that's what people died of starvation from but you can plant other plants that have higher nutrient values in certain ways it doesn't have to just be right a lot of those hat take like a hot I have a higher water requirement legumes the games high protein do you not have it super high water requirement I mean I live right next to so I think I think legumes and like beans in generals don't right but like for fruit that's one of the things that has a higher water content or a lot of leaves are free you don't have to eat fruit I mean if we're gonna be the case for a lot of cannot so we're talking I mean an optimal like production thing people would just have to eat what's local to them right like so only people would not have avocado for the nose I don't agree with that I believe that you know if you ship a banana from Ecuador on a freight freight you can actually be doing less energy than local eat local greenhouse grown veggies or emit less greenhouse gas sitting at a lower carbon into the air Nana no if you look at banana like co2 per banana co2 per Meucci and per calorie and so forth you just because of the massive size of a freighter ship and the cost of co2 per mile that Freight is driven per pound its absorbent lilo you're gonna be way lower than that then for example having a cow in your backyard that's literally ripping up sorbets amounts of methane it's saying the lifetime of a freighter operating over like the lifetime of a cow so those are the two same things you're saying the cow is gonna be more detrimental to the environment the single cow versus the freighter I'm saying freighter I'm talking about the banana or the shipment of food I'm saying that not in all cases is local lower right I'm saying that freighter is like just having freighters in general is gonna be bad for the environment right it's not as bad as a local greenhouse like I mean do you you okay so let's say you live in a foreign Earth's climate where you could be growing veggies with greenhouses you know you have to heat them that uses a lot of greenhouse gas is but it's healthy to have vegetables you should be eating vegetables I think I agree right it could be a lower footprint to be shipping them with using certain things obviously not air but in terms of freighters as in start book actually on bananas being more eco being shipped on freighter how well is this also for ninety seven are actually 1907 so it's actually no longer true he knows this charity the earth is actually there's actually not because we are not round because we discovered that too long ago it's actually flat now just put up there to I just put up the this specific paper novel I also put up a Guardian article talking to the author of the on the paper and he said that it's less it you'll have more of an impact just switching to a vegan diet and it all ties in obviously so the less the less of fish the less efficient diet is going to have more impact on the environment but it also means that you're gonna have less food to feed people right but that's we're still talking about the local the local problem right the local I can find you another one as well but I'm pretty sure is this guy who covered it who said it's usually not the case that the look of autism is just this sort of feel-good thing and quite often it's the case like what Mike was saying where food shipped from interstate or internationally it doesn't have that much of a carbon footprint compared to growing a cow for steak whatever okay no I've imported that's it's quite often the case there will be more that that will be the case but I agree that we shouldn't have cows or production at least for the most part right I think cows really gonna be useful for like producing manure that's the only like thing I would say but if we're talking about local production of vegetables versus I guess like international or foreign production of vegetables right the idea is whether or not taken in taken in whole like holistically whether or not not producing locally versus producing locally is going to contribute more toward environmental change than not right like that that's what we're looking at obviously if you hold everything steady then if you just walk over to your neighbors farm and and pick something out of their backyard that's obviously going to have less of an impact then getting the same product from interstate but if the product is expensive enough on the environment then the fact that it's next door to you is not going to it's not gonna outweigh product being flown in either I'm sorry being shipped in from interstate or overseas quite often then if you're just endlessly I think you have the sorry I'm just gonna say quickly if you have a vegan diet where you don't really check where the products are coming in from the chances are that it seems to be from what I've read that that will be less impactful on the environment than somebody who is a locavore eating some sort of a non omnivorous diet right well we're talking about people who are having like a vegetarian diet right and is it better to eat locally or to not eat locally and I think in almost all cases it's better to eat locally because even if there was the or the phrases even if like everyone is vegan the act there like having an infrastructure that can ship food around is going to negatively impact climate change right like we don't want that that's just not sustainable well just growing foods that are required but one of us is cutting out growing foods I can you can't understand me right now it's really ridiculous that you would say you can't understand I mean that's the thing that comes in clear okay try that actively infuriates me are you going you are going to need to produce foods that the human body requires anyway or to be healthier and they will have an impact on the environment so it's a matter of weighing which one is which so again in northern climate it can be worse but I'm honestly more curious about you supporting the position which I believe you said we can feed more people in a system with animals and I want to know how that works when for example we can talk about protein how you can't create extra protein from animals they have to take that nitrogen from plants fixed from the atmosphere I understand that you're using thermodynamics as your guiding principle so in terms of protein and nitrogen just you can't make more nation right so I understand that you're using thermodynamics as like the principle in which you one like organize production but I think it's a little more complicated than that I'll get like the store the reports that talk about having aquaponic or having an animal agriculture as a more sustainable alternative to like a pure vegan or like yet did you're vegan or like non Anna based production setup one second it'll depend on the model that you're putting up essentially I think there's some like very specific modeling where you can have an animal that eats some like you know byproducts that humans can't do anything with but it's going to be essentially an almost vegan diet things like aquaculture so hood can be very can be very efficient as well but that's if you're gonna compare I guess aquaculture is some sort of aquaculture versus a vegan diet maybe you can produce something but yeah that that's still probably going to be a mostly vegan diet I'd say another day like the ideal part would be if I had my way everyone would be vegan right that would be like my ideal however in lieu of like certain physical constraints like the world we live in seems like that might be too idealistic right that's why I'm getting it in what way actually the aquaculture is something that they're still developing so that's possibly more idealistic whereas if people just use the car model and just switch to being and odd that seems fairly doable well that wouldn't make her but my climate change right even to everyone so that would have a massive that actually have a change so if we worked as far we're like stop like having cow I was cetera even with the the met the black paint a production like in carbon emissions like that's like the biggest source of climate change and we're sorry yeah you sound like a robot and tunnel yeah okay I think what you were saying something like something like if we even if we get rid of obviously is you're just conceding the cows and going for the lower with a smaller animal so that's obviously going to be less impactful as well but quite often people will replace calorie for calorie with these sort of I guess methods so they'll they'll replace one animal with another animal generally calorie for calorie and that brings its own problem so something like a chicken you know if you replace a calorie for calorie what they often do is that what that will the effect it will have quite often is that it will increase factory farm chickens and like that you I mean I don't even know how to say it seems like you said to everyone she'd be honest you can diet so it's closely yeah I mean that's not I said that like right off the bat but okay and that if it was the case that a vegan diet wasn't sustainable like I would bite the bullet and say all right well looks like we're gonna have to murder some animals or something because we're gonna have to do that anyway well we have a vegan diet and I would go further and add that in virtually any situation that you are getting animal calorie is it can be would be more efficient to be growing plant calories you know if you have just an amount of land you can grow vertically and so forth that you know no matter what you need to get that calorie from the Sun you need to get that night you take out of air so maybe we should by the way here's the here's the paper I was looking at about global food production or global impacts of food production and one of the things with vegan diets tarek uh if you're trying to farm the same plot of land that's not gonna be sustainably dead like places that you farm from right like the way Native Americans used to do it was a lot of one that would be when the pilgrims came by right they saw this pristine land they might they were marked about in all sorts of journals turns out most that land is if that actually cared for and Native Americans they would move in five year increments so it's not taxed to land over a hawk deigned way right yeah yeah so this guy is actually funnily enough the guy the article that you posted is the guy that I was talking about so Joseph Paul or Jay Paul is this is the guy that I was talking about who has basically he has gone vegan so if you I'll put up the Guardian article again and it's him saying that he's he's chained he's cut animal products out of his diet just because he just can't justify having it having done the UM the study that he that you actually post it up but you can't justify what he can't justify having animal products in his diet oh yeah I heard that problem I'm pretty sure heard a radio interview with that same scientist he's been doing a kind of promotional tour discussing his findings and how he basically became vegan after doing the math yes that's an article and at the end of it he states that he's cut animal products out of his diet purely from the research studies done so I don't think he's particularly concerned about the ethics of of animal and has animals and how they trader and all that it's just purely from the ethics of the land use and the effect on the environment he's cut it out so he yeah like I was saying he he seems to be have gone around done a bit of interview work as well I heard him do an interview where they discuss gonna do yeah so where they discussed um I think sort of regenerative farming that you're talking about in somewhere in Colombia where they have cattle farmers and they've managed to regenerate some of the the the land and the farm and I've done one of the farmers has managed to do it but even by their own admission it requires an enormous amount of labour work and what Joseph Paul has said is that it might be feasible and given that it's difficult to get some people to or get some amount of people to quit animal products that might be a method to reduce environmental effects and environmental damage of animal products I would argue that he really obviously sorry yeah lab bromine Michaels mushroomy but there you know I continue but what he said was that it's really feasible in somewhere like maybe Colombia where the labor cost is gonna be quite low but then once you go to anywhere pretty much like Europe America Australia that's just not going to be feasible because the amount of work and organization that's required the the cost scale is just going to go way up he would be hostile clarification have to make I just I don't mean in hostile way so you guys may not be familiar with this much a vegan and mr. president but you know the already at the United Nations water footprint report makes it clear the ecological impacts of small-scale cool down quote more ethic cow cattle farming and pig farming any of those ruminants it is worse than high-efficiency factory farming factory farming genuinely is an efficient and that's why the price is lower so among the many many factors in both is simply how much water is used up how much pollution is produced per pound of meat as a finished product and the most of this right the most ecological in terms of all the measurable impacts is like the high efficiency factory farming done in the Netherlands and then when you look at the numbers the same math done for like third world country where it's still small plot traditional factory farming it is much much worse again per pound of output so that's an ethical as well as ecological clarification but a lot of these things um quick question if filling that if the more we factory farm the more thermodynamic it is does that mean the more suffering we give the animal the barriers for that argument well in theory but in theory factory farming could have less suffering for the animals in theory in practice everyone's horrified by factory farming but there's no reason why an animal will necessarily suffer less on a small family farm versus a large factory farm the conditions the animal the conditions of slaughter if you compare from farm to farm some are going to be better and some are gonna do worse it's the same thing with the hospital I can't say to you that large hospitals always treat people worse than small hospitals our small independent doctors offices some are going to be adding some reviewers but the optimize the space right like a reason the next factory farming bad for chickens it's because they need an optimum I like area that's there for fun need to cram as much chickens as they can in there as a farm they're not fine it's like optimize per like square footage right they're just optimized here but actually when you read the studies it is a shocking and horrifying sight picking up the staff the links list yeah I do of course I do like why don't you let me finish my sentence why is it not at all why interrupt me mid-sentence with them because it's like the third thing why don't you not interrupt me mid-sentence you troll it was shocking to me personally when I first read in plain terms the well-being of the chickens raising them in high-density cage Lots is actually better because for interment providers they endure because why don't I finish my sentence one of the major factors we have chickens that have more room and are running around is that they actually attack and kill one another they trample each other some starve some are injured so even though it seems like a horrifying spectacle to look at chickens and cages when you do the math when you read the studies you come to the paradoxical conclusion that the reason why human beings invented these more efficient large-scale farms where each chicken has its own little cage what it is not just more efficient fewer the chickens die fewer the chickens died horrible deaths suffering being pecked to death by other chickens chicken nature like human nature is not as pretty easy I want to think it is they are dull just friends when they have that room to run around so it is more efficient and fewer chickens have to be born and die to produce the same amount of meat and the actual lifecycle psychoanalysis of suffering paradox Lee actually does favor modern methods I'm morally opposed to all of it but it is really interesting if you actually do reading which is something I do did I interrupt you and ask if you have a study when you were making your horseshit claims of the value of better pretend was that you knew that there was a pun in there newer piece of now drop the link you're talking about you off-topic question this is a completely different branch but if the word was to go V and animals such as cows sheep do you think they would go extinct as as a I did a lot of this in-depth analysis so obviously we breed these animals and it really depends on how you want to do it if you want to keep slaughtering them you can basically bring them down to whatever level you want and you could obviously just keep them alive in sanctuaries and so forth they present but if the vegan if the world went vegan obviously vegans who care a lot about animals would be the ones in control of what happens to the animals and so you can either do a fast or slow scenario fast scenarios within a few years if you can st. continue slaughter at the current rate you know it's basically dairy cows making it up to four years on average before they're spent after that basically every animal we slaughtered all 70 billion almost all 70 billion Atlanta and also we have on earth we slaughtered or you can let them live out their natural lifespan which again longest is cows which is about 20 years so in about 20 years you can have whatever level of animals you want so you can just dedicate however much animal sanctuary space you want my thing with that is well I didn't think all the numbers every single you know the life expectancies of all these I would I am on my phone if I leave this I can't hear you that's fast is there any any more questions that I know no um you said mark that live limb the vet natural lifespan is being hunted or killed by another predator part of the natural life cycle I mean people would have to decide how much they would want to re wild I mean you could rewilding corridors from the 2007 land you study from the USDA about half of the lower 48 land is used for animal agriculture so that would free up a ton of land so you can decide how much you want to rewilding I as a vegan at least I'm not trying to stop nature like I'm about about reinstalling nature I dropped a link from 2019 about caring capacity for land it seems like that's the element to study I mentioned earlier yeah a vegan I think doesn't have the highest I think lacto-vegetarian had the highest and so that's where again I was responding to that the study is that how they look at a view is an accurate way I also have a whole video about this called why the vegan diet failed land you study but it's a matter of again they didn't look at like anything that wasn't currently growing crops which you could obviously grow crops on was not counted at all and so and there's just things like terracing like any any land that has tomb is too hilly has mountains is considered not arable places that you could not be graze thing you could be growing massive amounts and there so they were saying there's a large swath of land that can only be used for grazing which is completely inaccurate things you can grow like hemp and so many things I mean we also I could go further into this but just the fact that China is starting to green Korean the desert in reasonable amounts using like microbes and cross-hatching of wind barriers and growing up a ton a ton of plants and orchards and all these things I mean that just the idea of arable land that they have in that study is laughable again that's the study that showed that vegan diets use one sixth of land as on the worst I just sent links I was requested to provide articles which is totally reasonable to interrupt someone in mid-sentence it takes a few minutes to go on copy and paste lengths you piece of if you actually want to read and click on the links or you can watch my youtube video discuss all right thanks for links I'll go over and right now about and the just so I'm clear it the claims you're making was that it's actually better for like animal happiness to be on factory farms right well that's a totally reasonable summary of what I said why should I even bother talking when you're so first acacia sin abled somewhere cell welcome absolutely welcome dude have you been sincere in the discussion are you just wrong I mean you're just doing this to piss off a bunch of vegans like what what's it I don't pissed off any vegans you the way you keep moving the goalposts and changing the point of the debate I just I just don't get it mr. mr. president that I piss you off by a chance course not president schools an iceberg who else is here that I might pissed off mr. thermodynamics yeah I'll even start off being slightly sardonic you know she's not here at any point then will one of these issues fail you change your view right like you accepted you were presented with evidence eggs are not health food right these right but I google that she just sorry self conflict it's is the vent permission anyway it just seems to me like so many fundamental tenets you presented were refuted villainies was one of the fundamental where some of the fundamental tenets that were refuted go for it your claims about fertilizer your claims about health benefits that's generic my claims tell me a claim nothing I am not really interested in recapitulating my rhetoric taking the time I provide you with sources and considerations and I had seems to be literally all rhetoric or nonsense right now I'm still going over this link just to make sure whether you were saying before about chickens I haven't better lives and cages for example a nice day why would you give why is it conversation is that chicken eggs are so healthy that they justify this form of aeroplane when I say that now you're hired why wouldn't your argument collapse when that's been refuted now you're actively lying it's weird that you have to lie not look like the Forbes and Mike the vegan took the time to present you with all this everyone has Lynch as you said like Oh eggs aren't healthy why don't you have studies everyone has a ton of studies yes summary breath you see all post-its that why do you keep moving the goalposts and keep trying to literally write we were talking about the health of eggs we talked about the health of cholesterol and healthy diet right I've shown like there's a lot of conflicting information about and I posted all of these things right now for example you want to say here's I'll even throw you a bone that I was saying something like eggs are just bad and are just healthy to eat right now I didn't say that I said eggs in moderation can find Ryan you can eat them and as part of a healthy diet which is corroborated by like multiple like state but except for Australia apparently there might be the smartest one on this one multiple state-based Dietary functions right for example now it states that it's fine and it's part of a healthy diet to eat one to two eggs a day right let's do this let's do this ask yourself Steph let's do this logical spectrum talk if broccoli if every time I eat broccoli I had to kill a chicken just for no reason that was the rule on planet earth if ethically now broccoli is unbelievably healthy I was saying to you before like just look at the stats about how unhealthy eggs are compared to healthy and if you don't believe that just agree with me for the sake of hypothetical example that broccoli is a really healthy food if I had to kill it I use it if I had to kill a chicken every time I eat broccoli I would refuse to eat properly right but your beginning position seems to be that eggs had such extraordinarily positive nutritional value that it was justified to me but I say that wait one second um there you have to kill the broccoli to eat the broccoli though I know I've got a murder broccoli you wouldn't believe broccoli is a flower I don't need to kill the plant but they're delicious that broccoli in the link that you put up I think it was in debate Khrushchev all text so that's actually by someone called maria luz Fernandez and just to sort of put on the which ones can capacity one I know that the egg the eggs one okay yes so that one if you go and look at the author it's by someone called ml Fernandez so maria luz Fernandez she's a well to basically use tinfoil hat she's basically a shill for the egg industry I can get you I should be able to get you a set of letters or emails from the egg board where a article came out saying something bad about the egg industry and they named her as I think then they named her as their friend in the science community who can write a positive article in behalf of eggs gotcha yeah that would I would I would find that like a disqualifying thing like if she's just a shell so let me go look at the other list of like there's like a bunch of articles like that would just seem to be the best written one in terms of lots of design just in terms of like presenting about the idea across so that's a vector pointing it's also worth reiterating something I typed in earlier before I talked where to legal to advertise eggs as healthy according to the FDA just based officer oh no way yes yes I mentioned that before to the PCR on pork case I did actually already cover that a lot of the substance said before and it is interesting reading about PCRM cases vest um with glass wine today is considered healthy but I don't think allow advertisers as such you can't advertise it bowls or wine as health food what's considered healthy stir a glass of wine a day but you're unable to actually listen to me Crucible want to take a look at this alright now this tell me if there's anything wrong with this particular day mr. president you if I open that I'll leave but it looks like it's actually just describing it as a food for animals maybe no this is a food for human health okay I was reading the first sentence because I can if I open educational value by our activities and emerging benefits for human health okay yeah literally it stops at emerging been so genetics I got you do you believe it's the egg that's our fault or just the dosage we are taking of eggs a single leg but team up to the table with eggs with the latest from of eggs is a contribution Lester oh he's like big bad in general right the case that big yeah ee fair or like people try to cut you off but you're you're very robotic weather like the correlation disease that's used to be Oh am i cutting out you were to start with but then you got good again as I interrupt you sorry alright it's just uh that eggs like if you if you're at risk for heart disease you want to avoid eggs well just completely cut off cholesterol entirely everyone's you're healthy without at risk if you're healthy and not at risk then you could sneak in eggs but it's probably better not traditionally how I believe we first got eggs would we would have to put a lot of effort into gathering it because they're either a hire a tree or defended by some kind of bird which means the energy we got from an egg would have counteracted the all the energy we got to get the egg nowadays were lazy so you I agree multiple eggs will be bad for you now just because we're not using that energy I'm not sure I think if you're going back that far those people wouldn't have had much much tea anyway so an egg is certainly better than stuff but overall I think it gives like that for like there's also time yeah yeah but if you know if your life spans 40 or 50 then it probably doesn't matter too much if you're eating eggs and bottom line I mean you can have negative things that you can eat in a certain amount and be healthy I mean I could do a line of cocaine and probably be okay and you know you can smoke a certain amount of cigarettes that won't increase in disease that doesn't mean that it's part of healthy diet in my opinion and that's why vegans only ones with average levels of cholesterol that don't progress have those you I can have a better look at I've just had a quick look over it seems to be saying and and linking a lot of the same previous studies I've seen before that you've the one that you put up I'm gonna have a better look at if you want and get that yeah make sure no likes like shells in this time they're one of the links that they've put in is actually maria luz Fernandez so I think she's not actually link number 6 so they're using one of her studies but yeah so like I'm not I don't want to say like because with a lot of studies there's even studies though that I put up that are like funded or at least partially funded or the researchers would have got funding in the past through pharmaceutical companies or something like that I don't want to say just like across the board that you know someone getting a funding from a certain group of whatever is necessarily something to just what to ignore immediately it's more no it's it's a bit of a pain in the ass with the egg industry because what they've done is a lot of the stuff that they've said pretty much everything that they've said with their studies is not incorrect it's just the way that they've framed it and that sort of the trick maria luz Fernandez I specifically highlight as being a bad person because she the egg industry I'll just I always it takes me a bit of time to find this set of emails but I think Michael Greger and bitesizevegan have done like a video on it and you can read their emails but they've I think named her directly as being one of their people so yeah I put up studies from that I liked statins and whatever else would show a certain result so it's not just that they're paid off or you know paid by also in the industry or whatever it's more how they've designed the study and what their purpose is I guess and it's always going to go a part of the evaluation of a source that's good to know you well let's draw conclusions why don't you guys wrap it up who do you think won should we all be eating chicken eggs for the value of the manure they produce or should we all go back to factory farming Li easel I miss them your argument for the egg sorry just the chickens tend to be good for like local farms right their manure is like pretty useful their high phosphate produced to maneuver or many herbs but especially can actually please in the ground so you gotta be like better and fix it or like faster or like things that are the kind for phosphate requirements if you're gonna have like a lot of chickens alright there's anything else you want to talk about I think any kind of covered all that all this I think we covered it so having been presented with this stuff the only name I know you by its eyes Oh Buster I don't know why you chose that name why you giving it but what how's your position change uh yeah okay glad to hear it dude I've never heard anybody say that before despite your best intentions I was able to change my position is something better thank you mostly was mr. president I guess there's a mic the vegans either third I'm sorry I couldn't actually give you research all right now because Ellie videos that like you didn't play a part in it but I appreciate talking to you Oh