this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2025
872 points (99.0% liked)

World News

51431 readers
2768 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Boiling lobsters while they are alive and conscious will be banned as part of a government strategy to improve animal welfare in England.

Government ministers say that “live boiling is not an acceptable killing method” for crustaceans and alternative guidance will be published.

The practice is already illegal in Switzerland, Norway and New Zealand. Animal welfare charities say that stunning lobsters with an electric gun or chilling them in cold air or ice before boiling them is more humane.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Yes.

Start with prohibiting animal farming, then ban animal murder alltogether.

It is the only solution, it is not actually that difficult, and it is an inevitable outcome of human development.

In a few centuries, humans will look at today's animal explotation the same way we look at cannibalism and slavery.

[–] MrFinnbean@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago

Im always supriced how many people think huntings only reason is to kill the animalls and eat the carcasses.

There are many places where humans have killed the natural predators for some animals and in those places animal population is in danger to grow uncontrollably spreading disaeses and dangering natures balance even further. Herbivores without carnivores can and will destroy the forest floors and growth if let unchecked, wich can cascade to further destroy enviroment for different species like small mammals, bugs and birds.

Most obvious fix (and best for enviroment) would be introducing the big predators back in the area, wich is very easy to say when you live in a big city and your, children, pets or livelyhood is safe and sound. People dont want wolfs on their backyards any more than people want lions on the streets of NY. Also i dont see much difference for the animal if they get shot by a rifle or tearn down by a pack of predators.

Other solution for protecting the animals would be capturing and shipping hunted animals to wildlive reservois where they could live with the predators without any interactions with humans, but that would again leave the nature where they were transported from in a unbalanced state where for example plants like vines could spread suffocating other plants.

Then there are exotic animal trophy hunting that many people seem to hate. Most places that offer that have chosen the hunted animal preforehand. Like old male lion that are not fertile anymore, but still tries to kill other lions cubs, or elephant that has started to showing extreme aggression. With that money source safaries can fight against illegal poachers and protect endangered animals like black rhinos, while they keep the other animal population healthy. Those animals would need to be killed anyway and if somebody is willing to pay for doing it I dont see how that is bad.

I personally live in rural area. This year wolfs have killed few dogs and livestock like chickens from the yards of my neighbors. Do i wish all the wolfs to be killed? No. Do i wish childrens could walk or bike to school without fear of being attacked. Yes. I have also lost family in accident where moose ran in front of their car. I definedly dont wish for uncontrolled moose population making accidents like that more common.

But i agree with your sentiment that we need to move away from animal farming. Not because reason i personally find naive and childish like "cows are friends" but because its bad for enviroment and we as a humankind are eating meat in our meals more than we need.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 day ago

In a few centuries, humans will look at today's animal explotation the same way we look at cannibalism and slavery.

some already do, but most people who have heard this argument are not convinced of it, so I doubt this is how things will turn out

[–] remon@ani.social 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Start with prohibiting animal farming, then ban animal murder alltogether.

That certainly would be an interesting civil war.

[–] aesviation@lemmings.world 1 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

It doesn't even require a war.

Meat is heavily subsidized and benefits from economies of scale. Once enough people stop eating meat on their own, more people will follow suit because it will be too expensive.

It's one of the big reasons why there's such a huge cultural resistance to veganism. Meat abstinence will make meat more expensive for the ones who keep eating it, and of course cut into the profits of the shitty companies making it.

[–] remon@ani.social -1 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

It doesn’t even require a war.

Try banning it (or pricing it out of existence) and you will get one.

[–] Coleslaw4145@lemmy.world 0 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Start with prohibiting animal farming, then ban animal murder alltogether

What do you do with livestock animals that make up 62% of all mammals on Earth?

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Stop forcefully reproducing them, sterilize as necessary, let them live out the rest of their lives. It's not too complicated.

[–] anarchaos@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

sterilize

sounds like you don't actually care about their autonomy.

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

I do care about the planet actually surviving this. We've created way too many animals, the natural ecosystems won't be able to sustain them all if we release them into the wild and let them reproduce. The outcome will be devastated ecosystems and a lot of animals dying due to starvation. Sterilization is the least inhumane way out of this mess.

[–] Coleslaw4145@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

We've created way too many animals

Thats not the animals fault though. Why should they pay the price for our mistake?

Sterilization is the least inhumane way out of this mess.

You're bascially suggesting that we wipe out entire species of livestock because humans deem their existance is no longer necessary.

Ecosystems can't accomadate them in the wild yes, but without farming neither can the human economy.

So the only option left is extinction via sterilization.

And that just sounds like animal murder with extra steps.

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 hours ago

So, what is your proposal? This is not a rhetorical question, I've thought and read about it for a while and it seems to me like the least bad practical option, because the others are:

  • Kill them directly (way more suffering, seems worse)
  • Release them into the wild, ensuring most die from hunger or predators and destroy entire ecosystems (seems worse to me as well)
  • Keep them in the same hellhole farms where they already are, but stop insemination and ensure sex separation (seems the same as sterilization but with another way to remove autonomy)
  • Magically build shelters for them and let them reproduce freely while providing them with food. This is (1) pretty much impossible economically, (2) clearly not sustainable because it will just result in an explosion in their numbers, without a clear plan to provide food for them long-term.
[–] rbesfe@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I really don't think we'll ever stop eating animals. We've been doing it for hundreds of thousands of years, it's practically part of our DNA. Why would we stop now? Vegans haven't made a lot of progress convincing people, that's for sure

[–] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago

presumably there will be more suitable protein sources when space travel becomes a thing

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

We've done a lot of other awful things since forever: forced child "marriages" (or just sexual abuse before then), child exploitation, some form of slavery, have all been a thing for millenia. And yet many societies now frown upon those, punish the perpetrators and help the victims.

What makes you think this (or other awful shit we still do) will be any different?

All those actions are no more or less "in our DNA" then meat consumption.

And, well, vegans have convinced some non-trivial amount of people, as you can deduce by the fact that many companies put "vegan" stickers on their products, because they think it will increase their profits.

[–] little_tuptup@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

example, violence for entertainment. yes we've majorly turned against that which is good. child marriage, also good we got rid of that.

meat for food though, that is in our biology. our bodies need the nutrients that come from meat. we are biologically omnivores. yeah we can try to supplant that, but it's through an artificial means.

I'm all for it, but i don't think it's going to be frowned upon in the future and i don't think all humans can switch over to a plant based diet tomorrow. vegans are too much caught up in themselves to think of the practicality.

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

our bodies need the nutrients that come from meat.

This is definitely false. You can live as a vegetarian (i.e. stop eating meat) without any supplemental nutrients.

If you wanna go vegan, you will need to supplement your diet with B12. That's the only nutrient that can't be found naturally in plant-based sources. TBH practically speaking, if you're in the west, you'll probably be fine nowadays, because most prefab vegan foods (incl. vegan milks) are enriched with B12.

I'm vegan, all I do is take a B12 pills weekly, and all my vitamin levels were fine last time I got a check. I could probably skip the pill if I went out to eat more, or bought more prefab food, but I mostly cook for myself and so don't get many B12-enriched foods.

Most humans live in cities nowadays, and all of those humans can easily switch to a plant-based diet within a couple of years (which would mostly be redirecting the supply chains for plant proteins from animal agriculture to humans directly). There are some edge-cases where people really do depend on animals (subsistence farming, hunter-gatherer societies, etc). We can deal with those later.

[–] anarchaos@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

supplement your diet with B12. That's the only nutrient that can't be found naturally in plant-based sources

that's not true

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Yes it is. Everything except B12 can either be found in some plant-based foods, or produced by your body. B12 is the only supplement you need.

[–] anarchaos@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

you are spreading medical misinformation.

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, I guess I'm not entirely accurate, because you can get some tiny amount of B12 from plant-based sources (e.g. nori). But it's probably not enough, so vegans should supplement it. The rest is probably fine unless you're blasting junk food every day.

[–] anarchaos@lemmy.ml -1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I'm more concerned that you're asserting everything else is in plant based foods. it's not and you should stop lying to people before they hurt themselves.

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I'm asserting it because it's true. I'm vegan for over 7 years now, the only supplements I take is B12 (and occasionally D), I'm in good health. I'm friends with a vegan of 20 years, the only supplements she takes is B12 and iron, and she's in good health. The science backs it up as well, plants contain almost everything we need to exist.

In order to be healthy, you have to make sure your diet is varied and contains the sources for all necessary nutrients, but then it's exactly the same for omnivores.

[–] anarchaos@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

the opposite of anecdote is data. you are not a dietician. you should stop giving medical advice

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (2 children)

Ok, name me a nutrient and I'll give you either a plant-based source of it or evidence that your body or gut biome produces it itself

And yeah, I agree, if you want to have a healthy diet you need to read up on dietology and/or visit a dietologist. But this has nothing to do with veganism, omnivores need to do it too.

[–] anarchaos@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 hours ago

Retinol, DHA/EPA, heme iron, creatine, carsonine, and carnitine all must be synthesized, and the precursors are not nearly as bioavailable animal based sources of the real deal

of course this conversation started with a statement that every nutrient is available from plant sources, which you've already moved the goal posts on. you're not here in good faith, you're here to be right.

and even "plant based" b12 from spirulina is biologically inactive in humans.

[–] anarchaos@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 hours ago

you shouldn't be giving dietary advice to strangers on the Internet

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -3 points 1 day ago

ban animal murder

no such thing.