consent is not mentioned in the vegan society definition.

given the labyrinthine website you linked it’s hard to tell where the referenced papers are.

I’m only interested in the truth

calling me names doesn’t change the truth

I do. do you need help with them?

until we live in a society where being pregnant and giving birth does not endanger your health, security, and social status, prohibiting abortion simply can’t be an option.

no one is killing anyone for meat

I’m trying to make sure people aren’t taken in by cherrypicked data masquerading as science.

I don’t know where you think I’ve consumed any disinformation, but I know what an oil press is. if we didn’t feed the byproduct to livestock, it would mostly be industrial waste

can you substantiate this?

both are easy to justify. humans share (food, culture, stories, songs, tools, etc). piracy is natural. laws that prohibit it are immoral.

as for eating meat, there is cost, convenience, and culture: for many people eschewing meat simply isn’t reasonable given their circumstances.

I didn’t say he is trying to get rich fast

it is a byproduct. when you put soy beans in an oil press, you get soybean oil, and a byproduct.

selling books, I think.

soy isn’t grown, for the most part, for livestock.

cherrypicking data to push an agenda isn’t science.

I’m fighting a people pushing agendas with bad science.

Harriet Hall, writing for Science-Based Medicine, said that the book had references that do not support directly the claims made by the authors and that it did not explain the exceptions to his data, such as high rates of stomach cancer in China.

Stephan Guyenet reviewing the book for Red Pen Reviews commented that The China Study is a “scholarly and well-written book” but three of its key scientific claims are “not very well supported overall”.

he still touts the china study.

he’s a biased quack