Remember me
▼ Content

Sustainable diet of oats, lysine, & raw local veg, for ppl in UK


Sustainable diet of oats, lysine, & raw local veg, for ppl in UK27-04-2024 16:38
markjfernandes
☆☆☆☆☆
(16)
I've been concerned about changing my lifestyle to help tackle climate change (and also for Christian evangelical reasons).

In this regard, I've become mostly entirely vegan, after I watched the documentary Cowspiracy.

But I also have gone further. I try only to eat local vegetables so as to try to reduce my food mileage, and so also my carbon footprint, in my diet. I also generally only eat the vegetables raw, to save on carbon emissions associated with cooking.

In addition to the veg, I eat oats as a source of protein, carbohydrates, and fibre. Oats are supposed to have a relatively low carbon footprint. In order to make the oats become a good-quality protein, by making it a complete protein (so as to provide all the essential amino acids in the right proportions), I supplement with the essential amino acid of lysine, in synthetic vegan form (probably derived from corn). If there's a significant carbon penalty associated with the synthetic lysine, it would seem insignificant in the context of my diet, since I'm only supplementing half a teaspoon per meal. Due to the oats being organic and also due to them being from local UK (I'm based in the UK), the carbon footprint should be lower. I sprinkle the oats with water because otherwise they are a bit dry, and if I want to add some flavour, I may add spice mixes, or salt, etc. I try to source the dry powdered seasonings from ethical and sustainable suppliers. Also, I have a feeling that powdered seasonings may be more environmentally-friendly than other kinds of seasonings (such as sauces), in the sense of having long shelf lives, being in concentrated form, and because of these things, having lower carbon footprints associated with storage and transportation.

By having less variety in my diet, I hope to be more sustainable in the sense of avoiding needless diversification in producers and suppliers. By using an inexpensive diet, I am trialing a diet that can be mass adopted amongst the poor, who likely comprise most of society, and it can also be adopted by others too, perhaps with variations.

I have been having this diet probably for at least about one year, as a kind of trial and experiment. I've also tried eating just one meal per day, which if possible, could be even more sustainable.

Comments welcomed.

Edited on 27-04-2024 16:44
27-04-2024 18:25
keepit
★★★★★
(3330)
WOW !! Impressive.
27-04-2024 20:36
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22251)
markjfernandes wrote:
I've been concerned about changing my lifestyle to help tackle climate change (and also for Christian evangelical reasons).

In this regard, I've become mostly entirely vegan, after I watched the documentary Cowspiracy.


Well...if you like being malnourished...and having all the health issues associated with that.

Climate cannot change, so causing these problems for yourself won't 'save the planet' (it doesn't need 'saving').

Christianity has no such gospel or teaching. You can't use it as an excuse to harm yourself.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 27-04-2024 20:39
27-04-2024 20:38
keepit
★★★★★
(3330)
As i understand it, the only proven way to extend the human life span is with reduced caloric consumption.
27-04-2024 20:40
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14728)
markjfernandes wrote: I've been concerned about changing my lifestyle to help tackle climate change (and also for Christian evangelical reasons).

What is this "climate change" that you are trying to tackle?

Evangelical Christians are not called to be Vegan, and they don't worship any other god(s) besides Yahweh, which leads me to believe that you are not an Evangelical Christian.
27-04-2024 20:40
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22251)
keepit wrote:
As i understand it, the only proven way to extend the human life span is with reduced caloric consumption.

If you don't eat enough, and a wide enough variety, keepit, it definitely shortens life span.

While the Church of Green (and with it, the Church of Global Warming and the Church of Overpopulation and the Church of Vegan), council you to harm yourself, Christ never taught any such thing.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 27-04-2024 20:43
27-04-2024 20:42
keepit
★★★★★
(3330)
itn,
Where did you learn that data?
27-04-2024 20:44
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22251)
keepit wrote:
itn,
Where did you learn that data?

What data?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
27-04-2024 20:46
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14728)
keepit wrote: itn,Where did you learn that data?

keepit, where in the Bible are you claiming that God ordered man to be Vegan and to delay the release of CO2?
27-04-2024 20:47
keepit
★★★★★
(3330)
itn,
Let me put it in a more concrete way. Do you believe reduced caloric consumption increase the human lifespan?
27-04-2024 20:57
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14728)
keepit wrote: itn, Let me put it in a more concrete way.

You're not "putting it" if you are asking a question.

keepit wrote: Do you believe reduced caloric consumption increase the human lifespan?

That depends entirely on what you mean by your currently undefined buzz term "reduced caloric consumption."

I think we both know that you are too stupid to ever define your terms, so you should probably stop expecting answers to your totally ambiguous questions.
27-04-2024 20:58
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22251)
keepit wrote:
itn,
Let me put it in a more concrete way. Do you believe reduced caloric consumption increase the human lifespan?

RQAA.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
04-05-2024 19:35
markjfernandes
☆☆☆☆☆
(16)
Into the Night wrote:
...
Well...if you like being malnourished...and having all the health issues associated with that.
....


I've begun to take a complete vegan multivitamin+mineral supplement. Hopefully that should significantly reduce any issues connected to lack of nutrition.

....
Climate cannot change, so causing these problems for yourself won't 'save the planet' (it doesn't need 'saving').
....


The climate has been constantly changing over the course of the earth's history, so I'm not sure what you are saying.

The consensus of scientists worldwide is that the climate has been dramatically changing over the course of the last hundred years, specifically due to human activity in respect to the release of greenhouse gases. The consensus is also that we need dramatically to reduce the release of greenhouse gases to avoid destabilizing the planet, with all the devastation that would wreak on present human civilization as well as other life on the planet. Are you saying that those scientists, who do have something of a vocation to scientific truth, are involved in a conspiracy, or that they are mistaken? Even simply for the sake of prudence, it is wise to follow their counsels. The governments of the world, in general, believe them.

My actions influence the actions of others. It may seem small what I'm doing personally, but ideas and inclinations can go viral, and have much greater significance.


....
Christianity has no such gospel or teaching. You can't use it as an excuse to harm yourself.
....


Pope Francis has highlighted the climate crisis in two important Church documents. I do not intentionally harm myself. I try to do good and avoid evil. Sometimes I might be hurt a little by doing so, just as a soldier may lose their life whilst trying to do something good in a war.
04-05-2024 19:42
keepit
★★★★★
(3330)
itn,
Reduced calorie consumption doesn't mean starvation diet. All it means is reduced. I know, i know, it's a little vague. Some people understand it.
RE: And I applaud your effort04-05-2024 19:57
Im a BM
★★★☆☆
(960)
markjfernandes wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
...
Well...if you like being malnourished...and having all the health issues associated with that.
....


I've begun to take a complete vegan multivitamin+mineral supplement. Hopefully that should significantly reduce any issues connected to lack of nutrition.

....
Climate cannot change, so causing these problems for yourself won't 'save the planet' (it doesn't need 'saving').
....


The climate has been constantly changing over the course of the earth's history, so I'm not sure what you are saying.

The consensus of scientists worldwide is that the climate has been dramatically changing over the course of the last hundred years, specifically due to human activity in respect to the release of greenhouse gases. The consensus is also that we need dramatically to reduce the release of greenhouse gases to avoid destabilizing the planet, with all the devastation that would wreak on present human civilization as well as other life on the planet. Are you saying that those scientists, who do have something of a vocation to scientific truth, are involved in a conspiracy, or that they are mistaken? Even simply for the sake of prudence, it is wise to follow their counsels. The governments of the world, in general, believe them.

My actions influence the actions of others. It may seem small what I'm doing personally, but ideas and inclinations can go viral, and have much greater significance.


....
Christianity has no such gospel or teaching. You can't use it as an excuse to harm yourself.
....


Pope Francis has highlighted the climate crisis in two important Church documents. I do not intentionally harm myself. I try to do good and avoid evil. Sometimes I might be hurt a little by doing so, just as a soldier may lose their life whilst trying to do something good in a war.


-------------------

Thank you, markjfernandez

You are absolutely right that climate has changed throughout the Earth's history.

You don't have to have lived thousands or millions of years ago to know that.

You are absolutely right that the climate change observed in recent decades is the unprecedented result of human activity increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

And our consumption of animal protein has been a big contributor.

Typically, much of our cropland is used to grow livestock feed.

The "middleman" takes a big cut in the transaction.

However, where livestock goes about feeding itself on land that is NOT used for crops, you get nearly a 90% reduction in associated greenhouse gas emissions.

I attended a lecture nearly fifty years that changed my thinking.

The biology instructor was pointing out that hunters sponsor the preservation of wildlands, paying for the right to harvest some of the animal protein.

I always hated that these guys went around killing animals for sport.

Suddenly, I understood them to be benefactors.

Without them, much of that wildland would have been encroached upon and developed in one way or another.

I am grateful to the hunters who are footing the bill to keep those wildlands intact.
04-05-2024 20:25
markjfernandes
☆☆☆☆☆
(16)
Im a BM wrote:
....
Thank you, markjfernandez
....


I appreciate your positive and supportive reply



....
However, where livestock goes about feeding itself on land that is NOT used for crops, you get nearly a 90% reduction in associated greenhouse gas emissions.
...


IIRC, the Cowspiracy documentary indicated that whilst you might be right about your estimated reduction in greenhouse gases through ḿore natural forms of animal husbandry, the problem is that there's hardly any chance that we can feed the current quota of meat eaters, at its current rate of meat consumption, using such a model, because the model is very, very land intensive. So it's not really viable to switch to such a model without a huge reduction in meat eating.

Personally, for religious/moral reasons, I'm becoming more and more against killing animals, so for me, becoming almost entirely vegan was the option to follow.
RE: If we ate exclusively "free range" meats04-05-2024 20:34
sealover
★★★★☆
(1713)
markjfernandes wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
....
Thank you, markjfernandez
....


I appreciate your positive and supportive reply



....
However, where livestock goes about feeding itself on land that is NOT used for crops, you get nearly a 90% reduction in associated greenhouse gas emissions.
...


IIRC, the Cowspiracy documentary indicated that whilst you might be right about your estimated reduction in greenhouse gases through ḿore natural forms of animal husbandry, the problem is that there's hardly any chance that we can feed the current quota of meat eaters, at its current rate of meat consumption, using such a model, because the model is very, very land intensive. So it's not really viable to switch to such a model without a huge reduction in meat eating.

Personally, for religious/moral reasons, I'm becoming more and more against killing animals, so for me, becoming almost entirely vegan was the option to follow.





Correct. If the human population continues to consume as much meat as it does, it would be difficult to supply it exclusively with free range products.

On the other hand, this individual meat consumer can ensure that their personal impact is minimized by buying meats that were not fed cropland products that might otherwise been used for human consumption.
04-05-2024 20:55
keepit
★★★★★
(3330)
i can still sit up and take nourishment. I think i'll eat some fish today. Thank God.
05-05-2024 00:18
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22251)
markjfernandes wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
...
Well...if you like being malnourished...and having all the health issues associated with that.
....


I've begun to take a complete vegan multivitamin+mineral supplement. Hopefully that should significantly reduce any issues connected to lack of nutrition.

It doesn't.
markjfernandes wrote:
....
Climate cannot change, so causing these problems for yourself won't 'save the planet' (it doesn't need 'saving').
....


The climate has been constantly changing over the course of the earth's history, so I'm not sure what you are saying.

Climate cannot change. There is no value associated with 'climate' to change.
markjfernandes wrote:
The consensus of scientists worldwide

Science does not use consensus. There is no voting bloc in science.
markjfernandes wrote:
is that the climate has been dramatically changing over the course of the last hundred years,

Climate cannot change.
markjfernandes wrote:
specifically due to human activity

No human activity can cause climate to change.
markjfernandes wrote:
in respect to the release of greenhouse gases.

No such thing (except as a religious artifact). No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth. You cannot create energy out of nothing. You are ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics.
markjfernandes wrote:
The consensus

Science does not use consensus. There is no voting bloc in science.
markjfernandes wrote:
is also that we need dramatically to reduce the release of greenhouse gases

No such thing.
markjfernandes wrote:
to avoid destabilizing the planet,

Define 'destabilizing the planet'. Earth is in a stable orbit.
markjfernandes wrote:
with all the devastation that would wreak on present human civilization as well as other life on the planet.

What 'devastation'??? Void argument fallacy.
markjfernandes wrote:
Are you saying that those scientists,

Not scientists. Religious fanatics are not scientists.
markjfernandes wrote:
who do have something of a vocation to scientific truth,

Ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics as you and your religious leaders do is not science. Science is not a 'truth'.
markjfernandes wrote:
are involved in a conspiracy,

The Church of Global Warming is a conspiracy.
markjfernandes wrote:
or that they are mistaken?

Religion is not science. Yes...they are mistaken, just as you are. You cannot just set aside the 1st law of thermodynamics and ignore it.
markjfernandes wrote:
Even simply for the sake of prudence, it is wise to follow their counsels.

No, I won't join your religion. Don't ask again.
markjfernandes wrote:
The governments of the world, in general, believe them.

You don't get to speak for everyone. You only get to speak for you. Omniscience fallacy.
markjfernandes wrote:
My actions influence the actions of others.

Yes they do...for good or evil.
markjfernandes wrote:
[quoteInto the Night:
Christianity has no such gospel or teaching. You can't use it as an excuse to harm yourself.
....


Pope Francis has highlighted the climate crisis in two important Church documents.[/quote]
Putting buzzwords in church documents is meaningless.
markjfernandes wrote:
I do not intentionally harm myself.

Yes you do.
markjfernandes wrote:
I try to do good and avoid evil.

Apparently you don't know the difference.
markjfernandes wrote:
Sometimes I might be hurt a little by doing so, just as a soldier may lose their life whilst trying to do something good in a war.

Now you consider the Church of Global Warming an army?? Are you planning with others of your kind in starting a civil war?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
05-05-2024 00:19
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22251)
keepit wrote:
itn,
Reduced calorie consumption doesn't mean starvation diet. All it means is reduced. I know, i know, it's a little vague. Some people understand it.

Yes it does. Redefinition fallacies don't work, keepit.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
05-05-2024 00:25
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22251)
Im a BM wrote:
Thank you, markjfernandez

You are absolutely right that climate has changed throughout the Earth's history.

Climate cannot change.
Im a BM wrote:
You don't have to have lived thousands or millions of years ago to know that.

Climate cannot change.
Im a BM wrote:
You are absolutely right that the climate change observed in recent decades

No such observation. Climate cannot change.
Im a BM wrote:
is the unprecedented result of human activity

You cannot watch all humans. Omniscience fallacy.
Im a BM wrote:
increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

No such thing. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth. You are still ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics.
Im a BM wrote:
And our consumption of animal protein has been a big contributor.

It doesn't contribute to your religion, Sock.
Im a BM wrote:
Typically, much of our cropland is used to grow livestock feed.

So?
Im a BM wrote:
The "middleman" takes a big cut in the transaction.

What 'middleman'??? What 'transaction'??? Cliche fallacy.
Im a BM wrote:
However, where livestock goes about feeding itself on land that is NOT used for crops, you get nearly a 90% reduction in associated greenhouse gas emissions.

No such thing as a 'greenhouse gas' (except as a religious artifact).
Im a BM wrote:
I attended a lecture nearly fifty years that changed my thinking.


The biology instructor was pointing out that hunters sponsor the preservation of wildlands, paying for the right to harvest some of the animal protein.[/quote]
Nope. They DO farm the animals they hunt, though.
Im a BM wrote:
I always hated that these guys went around killing animals for sport.

You just hate.
Im a BM wrote:
Suddenly, I understood them to be benefactors.

Without them, much of that wildland would have been encroached upon and developed in one way or another.

I am grateful to the hunters who are footing the bill to keep those wildlands intact.

You need to get out more.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
05-05-2024 00:30
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22251)
markjfernandes wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
....
Thank you, markjfernandez
....


I appreciate your positive and supportive reply



....
However, where livestock goes about feeding itself on land that is NOT used for crops, you get nearly a 90% reduction in associated greenhouse gas emissions.
...


IIRC, the Cowspiracy documentary indicated that whilst you might be right about your estimated reduction in greenhouse gases through ḿore natural forms of animal husbandry,

No such thing as 'greenhouse gases'. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth. You cannot create energy out of nothing. You are ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics again:

E(t+1) = E(t) - U where 'E' is energy, 't' is time, and 'U' is work (force over time).

The presence of any gas or vapor is not a force.

markjfernandes wrote:
the problem is that there's hardly any chance that we can feed the current quota of meat eaters, at its current rate of meat consumption, using such a model, because the model is very, very land intensive. So it's not really viable to switch to such a model without a huge reduction in meat eating.

So you choose to harm yourself.
markjfernandes wrote:
Personally, for religious/moral reasons, I'm becoming more and more against killing animals, so for me, becoming almost entirely vegan was the option to follow.

So you consider Veganism to be a religion. I agree.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan




Join the debate Sustainable diet of oats, lysine, & raw local veg, for ppl in UK:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Are made-to-order, sourced-to-order, and ordered-to-order, more sustainable commerce models?226-05-2024 02:45
Is using food concentrates and food powders a sustainable practice?105-05-2024 00:02
Sustainable drink alternatives to coffee and tea524-04-2024 15:34
The Technology Team & Some Entities Was, Are Preventing The Messiah To Save The World1702-08-2023 06:23
UK Council for Poor Nations2920-04-2023 13:15
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact