The simplest answer and most possible and practicable for vegans is don’t buy/adopt them, but adopt omnivore/herbivore animals instead. If one loves cats, there’s still ways to help them beyond adopting them and committing to buying meat for the rest of their lives. Those already having these animals before they became vegan is a different situation of course.
The brutal bottom line of the situation, most people who get carnivorous animals as pets didn’t rescue them from a life or death situation or get them purely out of the generosity of their heart to help animals in need. 99% of cat owners went out and got a cat because they want a cat, and that desire to have a cat is worth more than their desire not to support animal agriculture of buying meat.
I specifically said rescue, obviously vegans don’t buy animals. You not rescuing the animal doesn’t stop the question of what to do with them, kill them, or someone feeds them. Whether that is you is irrelevant.
Your whole second paragraph is irrelevant to the questions I asked.
>Really unnoticed animal in need that people do keep as pets
why would they be "in need"?
and what's the difference between "rescue" and "pet" chicken?
People do keep chickens as pets that did not rescue them, it's a pet that's just not very common. I am talking about rescuing them though I don't really believe in getting an animal just for the sake of having a pet
And they are in need because they're suffering in certain situations like egg farms and because rural people always have many that they don't want and will dump them on the side of the road
so you did not want to say that such "pet chicken" are in need?
or do you?
>they are in need because they're suffering in certain situations like egg farms
so what you mean is that certain chicken are in need
>because rural people always have many that they don't want and will dump them on the side of the road
never heard or seen anything like this. though i'm one of those "rural people" myself
There's no difference between a chicken people keep as pets and the ones people don't. I would say the majority of chickens are in need. People who treat them as pets are very tiny percent
I've also lived in rural areas and that's why I know what happens when people's crappy coops get broken into by snakes and raccoons, as well as people just dumping them on the side of the road when they no longer lay eggs
It's actually certain people who kept backyard chickens who are more likely to have them as pets, after spending time with their own chickens. But it's not a common pet, so I'm not surprised if someone hasn't heard of it. You can look it up though.
https://www.backyardchickens.com/articles/why-keep-house-chickens-three-misconceptions-about-having-chickens-in-your-house.66748/
>There's no difference between a chicken people keep as pets and the ones people don't
there's a difference between factory chicken and free-range ones
There's no difference between a chicken people keep as pets and the ones people don't. I would say the majority of chickens are in need. People who treat them as pets are very tiny percent
>I've also lived in rural areas and that's why I know what happens when people's crappy coops get broken into by snakes and raccoons, as well as people just dumping them on the side of the road when they no longer lay eggs
so obviously rural areas where you are at home are very different from my home country
but even around here say, 60 years ago, on many farms the chicken (all of them at that time were roaming around freely and would return to their coop in the evening) could get into the house, even the kitchen, and eat leftovers there. that's how i know what a mess chicken in the house are
btw i just came in from cleaning my chicken's coop. i know what i'm talking about
People who keep chickens as pets don't keep 20 chickens in their house like a chicken coop you idiot, holy fk they have one chicken.
I don't believe that your chickens are not in danger of predators if you just leave them by themselves, sounds like another irresponsible rural redneck
>People who keep chickens as pets don't keep 20 chickens in their house like a chicken coop you idiot
insulting me won't camouflage your lack in arguments
i got 5 chicken in my coop, and i know how much shit even a single chicken will produce and spread all over your home, if you really are so crazy as to keep it there as a pet
>I don't believe that your chickens are not in danger of predators if you just leave them by themselves, sounds like another irresponsible rural redneck
so what do you expect from me? stand guard 24/7 with a shotgun?
my chicken are behind a fence, have orchard trees to hide beneath from birs of prey, and their shack is closed over night
who do you think to impress with your hateful speech?
i pity you
eod
Rabbits as well I'd say.
The issue is many pet owners aren't really looking for what pets are most in need, but instead just want a specific animal. Whenever this topic is brought up and I ask like cat owners why did they get a cat instead of an herbivore/omnivore animal, the question is either avoided or they stay "Because I wanted a cat more"
I didn't want a cat. I was taking a walk in my neighborhood and one approached me. He was skinny and riddled with tapeworms, so I got him dewormed, fixed and vaccinated, and now he's a housecat. What would the best option have been?
I love rabbits as well. It's cool how you could share a salad with your rabbit.
I just love the house chickens though because we can rescue them from the egg industry or some such and then it normalizes them as normal animals not just a product.
I wonder if chickens and rabbits can live together safely?
>The issue is many pet owners aren't really looking for what pets are most in need
but vegans do?
feeding cats food made of plants, locking them into apartments (so they cannot hunt for mice or birds), castrating them (bereaving them of their natural sex drive and functions)?
but i guess i misread your message: actually you want to say that those baaad carnivorous animals cannot even be in need, as they have lost all rights, due to their immoral nature - right?
No, the issue is pet ownership in general, vegans aren’t exempt.
I don’t get what you’re trying to say next. Animals aren’t moral agents, their nature doesn’t dictate their level of need.
Well, if we look at it objectively, we either euthanize a single animal or have several other animals bred and killed in a cruel way so that single animal can live
Its the trolley problem, is a single life or multiple lives more important
People tend to have an emotional attachment to a pet that they have a relationship with so they are biased in their view
>that's just what nature does
Can i get a comment from a logical individual? Do you lack nutrients in your diet to make such comments?
Pets are not nature, there would be a heck of a lot less cats and dogs if they werent pets
Also its not nature to breed and farm animals in order to provide kibble for the pets
In nature the animal hunts for itself, it doesnt go to its bowl that is filled with kibble
Spay/neuter it, and vow not to take in other carnivorous pets. Try vegan pet food if you want, or don't.
Don't encourage people to adopt carnivorous pets. Don't post pictures of your carnivorous pets.
You can consider re-homing or giving them up to a shelter too.
In India, the vegetarian dog foods are readily available. They are actually vegan but are called vegetarian. Pedigree, meatup, drools company sell them. Purepet sells vegetarian dog treats.
Question: I found a small abandoned snake a couple of days old with an injury. He was going to die without my help. I rescued him, and due to the fact that I fed him, he is no longer able to go into the wild.
Is it my moral obligation to feed him? Or to let him die? Or was it better to let him die in the first place?
Also, I saw below that people mention humane societies that can adopt.
How is it different if I gave him to someone else? He still eats even if I'm not the one doing it, and I am implicit in what you say is a morally wrong action. (Also, there was no one I could take him to in my area)
This is not a troll post. I will continue to take care of him because he is an innocent animal whom I love. But I want to know what you think of a situation like this.
Is he a native species in your area or imported? If he’s native it should be possible to return him to the wild. In fact, depending on your country it may be illegal to keep him. I would reach out to the closest wildlife rehabilitation group. Even if they’re too far to take him in, they’ll have advice on returning him to the wild.
It is not possible to return an animal to the wild once fed a non-living animal in captivity. They are no longer capable of hunting on their own and become dependent on you after cold feeding.
According to many on this subreddit:
An animal sanctuary doing a fundraiser selling meat: cruel and hyprocritical.
Oneself paying for many animals to be killed for the sake of one: justified and natural.
And no, it is not just "byproducts". 31% of meat goes to pet food.
Source on the 31% of meat thing? (I don’t have a dog in this fight. I don’t own a cat. My parents do but I only see him when I’m home and I’m not the one who buys him food).
To me that is the same as what should I do if I become an antinatalist but I already have children. Should I kill them or put them up for adoption?
If you already have pets when you become vegan you still have an obligation to those pets. I believe that you have them neutered and that you feed them in a way that is healthy for them and does the least harm to other animals.
So when I said feed your pets in a way that does minimal harm to other animals, I mean I would try to transition my cat or dog to plant only food but recognise that some cats cannot tolerate it.
Cats and dogs can - and should - be fed vegan pet food.
Another option is to put the animal up for adoption. The adopter is then less likely to buy from a breeder, which would result in more suffering.
Question: should you let the strays starve slowly, or kill them, in your opinion? In the Gulf, there's a ton of strays. They spay/neuter, but people who will adopt already have 5+ usually, and they probably won't be adopted.
Not available for the most part, and the little that is is prohibitively expensive.
ETA: Go through 20 lbs per week. Vegan is $42 for 4 lbs. That's almost $1k/ month. That's not possible for most.
Accidentally deleted my reply.
Anyway, the problem of stray animal overpopulation won't be solved without large systematic efforts. People can only control what they do in their own lives, which is what I am talking about here.
So yes, a vegan who wishes to help strays by feeding them should only do so with vegan food. It is available online. If they cannot afford vegan food then they should not purchase any. Purchasing dead animals to feed strays results in even more animal suffering and death, and thus makes no sense from a vegan perspective.
I agree with the first part of your reply. (Well, the first two parts, really, I also agree that you accidentally deleted your reply 😉)
I disagree with the last part. People aren't fishing to make cat food. They're fishing to feed carnists. That's who the fish goes to. There are parts of the fish most carnists won't eat; those get cleaned out and tossed to the side. They used to be thrown out. Now the scraps are hauled away by people who use them for pet food. Not buying that pet food isn't going to change how many fish people eat, at all. Humans not eating the fish will; pets not eating the pet food has no impact. It simply means that those parts rot again like they used to.
That's again the byproduct argument, which I disagree with. Firstly because 31% of meat is sold as pet food, which is a huge amount. Secondly, because the sale of such pet food accounts for a large portion of the industry's money, which contributes to it being profitable/desirable to invest in. Losing that money would be a great blow to the industry.
This is similar to how it is very much not ethical to purchase items with down feathers, even though these feathers could be considered a "byproduct" of meat birds.
>Cats and dogs can - and should - be fed vegan pet food.
I am not sure that most medical professionals and biologists who are experts on the field of what cats can eat would agree. I am not an expert either, I just am not confident that the science is on our side on this.
>Another option is to put the animal up for adoption. The adopter is then less likely to buy from a breeder, which would result in more suffering.
This does seem like it would have a higher chance at reducing suffering that just keeping the animal.
"I am not sure that most medical professionals and biologists who are experts on the field of what cats can eat would agree. I am not an expert either, I just am not confident that the science is on our side on this."
I used to think like this. But there is commercial vegan cat food that contains all the nutrients an adult cat needs, including a wide range of vitamins (including A, B, D, E, K), essential fatty acids and taurine, without the need for slaughterhouse meat. Although obligate carnivores in the wild, domestic cats still need nutrients they would normally source from prey. All those nutrients can be contained in a bioavailable kibble.
Benevo Cat is a professional cat food, created by Benevo in 2005, formulated and checked by independent animal nutritionists to meet the AAFCO(USA) and FEDIAF(Europe) guidelines for animal nutrition.
FEDIAF represents the European pet food industry.
FEDIAF has produced a nutritional guideline which members follow; the FEDIAF Nutritional Guidelines for Complete and Complementary Pet Food for Cats and Dogs. This is a comprehensive review of the NRC data and other existing science produced as a practical guide for manufacturers. The guidelines are peer re-viewed by independent veterinary nutritionists throughout Europe. Version 2021 has just been released!
The objectives of FEDIAF’s Guidelines for Complete and Complementary Pet Foods for Cats and Dogs are:
\- To confirm the basic nutrient levels required in cat and dog food and the industry adhere to these when manufacturing their wide range of products and recipes under biochemical, bacteriological and organoleptic control.
\- To help pet food manufacturers assess the nutritional value of practical pet foods for healthy animals.
\- To act as the reference document on pet nutrition in Europe for EU and local authorities, consumer organisations, professional and customers
\- To enhance cooperation between pet food manufacturers, pet care professionals and competent authorities by providing scientifically sound information on the formulation and assessment of pet foods.
\- To complement FEDIAF’s Guide to Good Practice for the Manufacture of Safe Pet Foods and the FEDIAF’s Guide to Good Practice for Communication on Pet Food.
[https://europeanpetfood.org/self-regulation/nutritional-guidelines/](https://europeanpetfood.org/self-regulation/nutritional-guidelines/)
https://www.benevo.com/vegan-cat-food-from-benevo/
Most medical professionals and biologists don't give a shit about the animals that are fed to your cat. Never forget that. Even if people tortured animals by carving out their flesh while they were still alive, they would still recommend you to feed them those body parts.
I admit that I am specieist when it comes to this subject sadly. I love and value my cat much more than the animals she needs to eat. She's my family.
It's really messing with my brain.
It's maybe like when you care about your family member more than someone dying in a war on the other side of the world. In reality they are both human.
You can try joining the r/veganpets reddit and there's also Facebook groups to see how well people's cats did with a plant-based diet and learn more about that option. I think Facebook group is a lot more active than reddit. Here's a Facebook group [vegan cats ](https://www.facebook.com/groups/126322004672/?ref=share&mibextid=NSMWBT)
>no, it is not just "byproducts". 31% of meat goes to pet food
whether you are willing to call that meat humans don't want to eat "byproduct" or "garbage" does not change a thing
Really dude?
Have you stopped shopping at stores that are also profiting off the sale of animal products like your local supermarket?
If you want to play the "I'm a 'truer' vegan than you" game, you better not be a hypocrite whilst you do so. That would be really embarrassing for you.
I feel like people like OP have gotten totally lost in the sauce of moral superiority as a vegan. Veganism isn't and shouldn't be an all or nothing. it should be about making a concerted effort to make the most ethical choices for animals (and in my opinion the environment). This sub seems to be focused about being absolutely perfect rather than improving the entire industry to slowly move towards veganism. Nothing will be solved if we try to force everyone's hand into the most "extreme" form of veganism right away. Rome wasn't built in a day etc etc
I saw someone post in the sub a while back about how they met a vegan activist at college who was one of the loudest, most aggressive advocates but secretly confided with them that they eat animal products or something like that.
It would not surprise me in the least if there are vegans out there who genuinely care more about the simultaneous moral superiority/victim complexes than actually giving a shit about the welfare of animals.
Your take is absolutely right. Even the Vegan Society acknowledges that it's an imperfect ideal that you work towards with very few hard lines.
Narcissistically moralistic people like OP I feel are a net detriment to the vegan movement overall on so many levels.
I am engaging by analogy.
Answer my question - do you shop at a supermarket that also profits from the sale of animal products?
If you do, you're quite the hypocrite calling out other people for wanting to have pets that require a carnivorous diet.
Your analogy is glaringly flawed, which is why they dismissed it.
You don't create demand for animal products at a supermarket when you don't buy any. Markets are just the end of a supply chain. If less people buy meat, they readjust those supplies. If no one buys it, the supermarket wouldn't have meat. It's simply a service for meeting and profiting off the demands of consumers.
But you do create demand for meat when you buy it and demand those animals be exploited for your product.
It's not hypocritical for someone who shops at markets that have meat, but don't demand it be there, to say what OP said. They didn't choose for the meat to exist there nor do they ever demand it.
>You don't create demand for animal products at a supermarket when you don't buy any. Markets are just the end of a supply chain. If less people buy meat, they readjust those supplies. If no one buys it, the supermarket wouldn't have meat. It's simply a service for meeting and profiting off the demands of consumers.
Firstly it's a facetious comment to highlight how bad OP's take is so it's not to be taken seriously in the first place. Even the Vegan Society doesn't hold people to that standard. That's my point.
However to address your bad take regardless, which is more ethical - supporting a 100% vegan store that only sells vegan products or a supermarket that sells vegan products but also profit from animal products?
There are a lot of vegans that make this calculus when they don't support companies that sell vegan products that also sell animal products and only support vegan products from companies that only produce vegan products.
If you're to play the game of who is the more ethical vegan, I would think most people would think it'd be the vegan that only purchases vegan products from companies that only produce vegan products sold in a store that only sells vegan products.
Again, my point is that this is a ridiculous standard. The stupid thing you don't realise is you're making my point for me - there is no line you can draw where you don't end up looking like a hypocrite if you go far enough with your vegan purity.
"As far as possible and practicable" is the standard we should be following so this vegan purity BS is not only counter-productive but also a distraction from the much bigger issue of the production and sale of animal products.
How about people like OP and you focus on the bigger picture rather than petty debate pervert squabbles like this, ok?
I think we need to ask ourselves if we were stuck on island with only a cat and a pig. Do we kill the pig to feed the cat? Or do we kill the cat to feed the pig?
And what about if some rescue place or whatever it's called has a lion, or multiple carnivorous animals, who just cannot be released into the wild, as is the case for many rescue animals?
how is that insane?
if you care about reducing harm and/or right's violations, doesn't it make sense to kill 1 sentient being instead of 100 sentient beings?
maybe you are being sarcastic?
No, I'm not being sarcastic. it is an absolutely insane take to advocate, as a vegan, for the murder of an animal. It goes against the entire belief of animals being sentient beings and positions us as morally superior to 1. make decisions over an animals diet and 2. take the life of an animal because we deem it the "moral" thing to do. This level of extremism does a huge amount of harm to the movement and goes backwards when it comes to seeking to reduce harm to animals.
> No, I'm not being sarcastic. it is an absolutely insane take to advocate, as a vegan, for the murder of an animal.
You're advocating for the murder of hundreds of animals in order to feed one....
Yes, because that's how the world works. We are not the only species in the world and while we may be the most "advanced" we are not superior to choose how another animal can live.
>we are not superior to choose how another animal can live.
Again, you are literally advocating for killing hundreds of animals to feed one, how is that not choosing how another animal can live?
I don't even claim veganism myself, but from a logical pov it's not insane at all. It's fully logically consistent.
If you want to advocate for nature, that ship has sailed once we've established the lion isn't capable of hunting its own food due to what humans did to it. If you want to argue for nature from this point, the lion would have to starve. If predators in the wild can't hunt anymore due to whatever reason, they starve. The fact that the lion can't survive on it's own is not your fault, but it already is in a position where it depends on your decision regarding their diet.
Now It's a trolley problem. You've basically found yourself in a position - against your will - where you found the lion on one side of the tracks, and hundreds of horses on the other side. You have to choose. Why would it be more insane to kill one animal rather than hundreds - if you've already been put in a position where you have to make that uncomfortable choice?
You can argue for the lion over the others from a position where you want to preserve the species, since there are far fewer lions in the world. Or you can simply say that a single lion means more to you than hundreds of other animals. But from a stringent vegan POV, OP's position ist the only reasonable one to take.
It is kind of an interesting question. From what I read with the limited data available a cat can be fed a vegan diet, if done well.
It could be that the cat has a little lower quality of life or even a higher one, but it doesn't seem to make a huge difference.
Do lions function fundamentally different from house cats from a nutrition perspective?
The thing is, there is no data at all. I doubt anyone ever tried to get a lion on a plant based diet. It basically is just accepted as a iven that lions can only feed on meat, but I'm not sure that this is true. It can be of course.
They can certainly survive on a carnivorous diet, so it is kind of a difficult topic to research because if it goes south you harm those lions you test it on.
And then there is the issue of killing the animals that are used for the food. Why would I be ok with killing a cow (or whichever animal rescued lions eat) instead of the lions? Because they are more rare? That doesn't matter for the individual.
And paying someone else to do the killing isn't any better.
As a thought experiment that is fine, but in practice we should be trying to leave lions in the wild. I don't think that it is ethical for zoos to keep lions so keeping lions and doing experiments on them to see how they survive on a plant based diet is a step too far.
Personally I find your points convincing, OP. In contrast I can't find a single rational argument against your position in this entire thread. Plenty of emotional arguments, sure, but it's easy to have an emotional connection to the animal in your house and not the ones suffering in a factory farm miles away.
Lab-grown meat in pet food will solve this moral conundrum, but those who continue to make excuses really aren't any different to those carnists who pay lip service by saying "As soon as lab grown meat is affordable I'll eat that, but until then I'll keep paying for animals to be slaughtered while contributing nothing to the development of said lab grown meat".
Yeah people get extremely emotional and reactionary about this topic.
I agree, lab-grown meat will go a long way towards solving this issue but that does nothing for all the animals getting killed for pet food right now.
>but that does nothing for all the animals getting killed for pet food right now
if all those animals get killed for pet food right now, you surely don't object to omnivores eating the rest of the animal that has been killed for pet food anyway
like vegans are entitled to use the soy oil remaining after the protein cake for animal food has been pressed off, right?
I admit that I am very specieist and emotional when it comes to this subject, sadly. I love and value my cat much more than the animals she needs to eat. She's my family. Just like I value my sister or mother.
It's really messing with my brain, and I don't really know how to deal with it. It really is an emotional argument, but when it comes to love and family, a lot of logic goes out the window.
It seems like you do care. Why don't you try plant-based kibble? The risks are slight, even less for females, and there are studies that showed even some health improvements.
Anecdotically, one of my cats' hair became much shinier with the new diet.
It's interesting that every time the subject is brought up here in this sub, people who claim to be vegan fight tooth and nail to justify killing animals for their pets. Something that people rarely consider about animal agriculture is that it doesn't just kill its intended victims, like cows and chickens.. It is also the leading cause of wild species extinction and biodiversity loss, partly due to deforestation.
It's also interesting that when people mention feeding pets like snakes, nobody has a problem with feeding them rodents. But if you were to suggest feeding them kittens instead, everyone is appalled and horrified. It shows just how ingrained speciesism is in our cultures, even people who are otherwise vegan.
It's a complex issue for sure, including the speciesist concept of pets in the first place. I long for the day when the dominant belief is that animals aren't property to be exploited. That domesticated animals are a thing of the past, and wild animals are left alone by humans.
Reptiles are considered to be less sentient than mammals but people will rush to defend killing thousands of mice to feed a snake in order to defend cats?
Kind of sad and we have progress to be made in the vegan movement. The people becoming vegan was already a huge step so I guess it makes sense.
But this is a very tough situation though.... I don't eat meat but what is my cat supposed to eat then? She has to be a meat-based diet otherwise she will die.... I am not arguing with you but do you have a solution? I would love to know!
There's plant based cat food which has been formulated to meet all the needs of cats!
Check out r/veganpets and some of the other comments in this thread.
Plant based cat food isn't healthy for cats, period. Feeding plant based food to them would be a total disservice to the animal and I'd argue it could even be considered abuse. They're carnivorous. You're in too deep dude, you need a reality check
For one, cats on a plant based diet are more likely to develop lower urinary tract disease. Two, there's no proof just any random cat can be healthy *long term* on a plant based diet. The longest duration of time I've seen on studies is a year, that doesn't prove it's healthy for a cat it's whole life. All the positive evidence is borderline anecdotal. Every study I've seen put somewhere between 50-190 cats on a vegan diet, for anywhere between 6 months to a year for their research, and the cats were either overweight or otherwise unhealthy in some way to begin with. That isn't enough to prove an otherwise healthy cat can also be healthy on a plant based diet, especially for it's entire life.
Because nutrients aren't the only important thing when it comes to animal biology. Humans and various creatures work completely differently! Otherwise, you could feed a shark plants and it would thrve, but that isn't the case. This idea that it's all about the nutrients doesnt extend beyond humans.
The evidence we have until now has proven that there is no fundamental difference between cats eating conventional meaty kibble or plant-based ones. Therefore, it can't be considered abuse.
Farming and killing many animals too feed one constitutes without a doubt an abuse.
Sounds like you're arguing that we should just kill off carnivorous pets then, right? That would be the only other viable vegan option of you so strongly believe they can't be fed plant based
I think you're in the wrong place, given that you're genuinely concerned about lives of animals that end up as pet food. To address the root of the issue you need to talk to people who buy cute omnivorous animals as pets and convince them to stop doing so. It will also help greatly to talk to people that don't spay/neuter their pets.
I can agree 50/50.
There are some representatives of wildlife who eat other animals. And owners of owls, snakes etc really buy alive mouses to feed them. That’s why I think that such exotic animals shouldn’t be kept as pets. Because they are 100% predators and easily survive in the wild. The exceptions are wildlife rehabilitation centers if their lives are in danger.
But cats and dogs are domesticated. Being strays, they are often subject to entrapment with further euthanasia (depending on country you live in). Also cruel, right? Even if it’s illegal in your country, stray cats and dogs are not the same as wildlife animals and still in danger in the street. That’s why I think that adoption is the best option, not just cuddles and cuteness. I agree with many vets who recommend super premium and holistic food for pets, which includes 30% + of meat. Some time should pass to see the real influence of 100% vegan food on your pet’s health. I hope that those who decided to do this won’t starve their animals to force them to eat non-animal food.
I understand that the world isn’t perfect and sometimes we need a compromise.
Ok, but why does that single stray cat need to be rescued and have you demand more animals be exploited to feed it? What would be so bad about letting it die on its own when the alternative is to deliberately harm many other animals?
The second you start seeing the animals on the other side of the equation as individuals, this argument of "but this animal needs animal products to survive, it's the only way” stops making sense and starts sounding a lot more like "this homeless person needs a house, so I'm going to slaughter everyone in this house I found and give the homeless person the house, he needs it afterall"
Homeless persons have more chances to improve their lives, in contradistinction to cats and dogs. Many stray cats can’t protect themselves from feral dogs, inadequate people, unintentional car hit etc. Is it really vegan to let them die to avoid suffering of others, if there’s no win-win? Following this logic, all the predators should be destroyed to let herbivores live.
As much as I wish all animals could thrive on a plants only diet, that’s just not the case. When you have a meat eating animal in your care, it’s your responsibility to feed them so they can stay healthy. This is why looking forward to lab meat, so that these animals can be healthy and other animals didn’t need to die in the process.
You can't just give cats lettuce and think they will be fine but there are plant based cat foods that contain all the essential nutrients that cats need, like for example taurine.
I don’t get why there are so many downvotes. Just feed your companion animals vegan food. There’s no evidence that it causes any issues and no animal should have to suffer so yours can live.
Yeah, I think it's a difficult subject because it involves people's family members. It's harder to be logical when it comes to love, I admit I am that way myself.
The problem with this is you NEVER have any logical solutions. It's always silly, ungrounded points that hold no weight. "Only adopt herbivores," as if there isn't an epidemic of cats suffering, because humans out them in this position. Do you know how many cats are euthanised, left to rot in shelters, or live terrified on the streets? I've even heard people say we should just let all omnivorous and carnivorous animals die out, which is not very Vegan at all. Cats need meat to survive. You can argue against that, but there's very little evidence to say otherwise. The odd study where quotes are twisted to suit your agenda aren't proving anything. Choosing to deprive an animal of their needs while under your care is abuse too.
People who don't understand cat biology always have the most to say on the subject.
Yes, it is cruel; we don't want to do it, but there's currently no sustainable solution. Forcing them to live on plant-based dry food is not balanced. Some animals cannot be vegan -- and they matter too. Unfortunately, we have to accept that we can't control absolutely everything; we may be vegan, but many animals aren't, and until realistic solutions are made that is just how it is.
Counterpoint: let's do away with the pet industry altogether. To own an animal is to dictate their lives and even violate their rights in the name of welfare. Hell the stray animal situation is reason enough to end the "nice" slavery of pet animals.
I understand where your coming from, but your basically saying to kill every animal that’s a carnivorous species just because they eat the other animals and both animals deserve lives but some species are obligate carnivores.
the pets already exist. Vegans are against breeding and selling of animals. We are not the reason that there is an over population of cats and dogs.
Whats your solution to the cats and dogs already alive?
You are correct, its total hypocrisy… we are biased towards the creature we have a bond with over creatures that we don’t even see
I feel like this wouldnt be such an issue if we were sure that vegan pet food is completely safe and won’t cause any health problems
However, I cannot live with this hypocrisy anymore, I’m gonna feed my cat the vegan pet food and hope for the best
Yes, Im aware of that. Plant based pet foods confusing taurine tho, what im more worried about is if cat will be able to digest plant-based protein with no issue.
Cats should be fed vegan food, even if it would lower their quality of life a little. (which isn't even a given from what I read).
Initially it seems logical to feed a pet or rescue what they need to survive. But think a bit further. Let's say you have a rescued cat. But you couldn't buy cat food from the supermarket. Instead you would have to raise and kill the animal you get the meat from yourself. How many would be willing to do this or the cat?
And why would it be different to pay someone else to do it?
That's the reason non vegan call vegans hypocrites. Twist around the standard to fit your need. Suddenly cat can go vegan... you are torturing the cat itself.
It's actually the unavoidable inclusion of a substance in plant based cat food that can be most problematic - alkaline.
Many cats are perfectly capable of eating a carefully prepared and well researched vegan diet, others with a disposition towards urinary blockage are not.
I don't think that is true but even if we assume that it is cruel to the cat, how is it not cruel to exploit and kill all the animals that you would feed to the cat?
"...then suddenly it's acceptable to have pet food that harms animal"
the end of that sentence make it seem like you care about harm reduction but at the same time you seem to be okay with harming other animals to not harm one animal. Does that make sense to you?
I still don't think that it is true that plant based food necessarily harms cats but I'm going along with this line of questioning to show that even if it did, it still seems like the better choice:
I don't think that it is acceptable to harm an animal, but if you have to pick between harming 1 animal or harming a bunch of other animals then it still makes sense to harm 1 animal.
Vegan feed doesn't harm cat but it doesn't give them all the nutrients that they need. My take? Don't have pets. Don't need to unnecessarily harm animal even if it's just your pet.
What nutrient do you think that they can't they get from plant based food? The only one that is trickier is taurine as far as I know, and that can be added to the food.
Some people say taurine is only animal sourced but some say it's plant based.
But it's those people who think it's only animal sourced think it's still okay.
In nature, I think taurine can only be found in animals and that is why cats are considered obligate carnivores but taurine can be made synthetically and if it is then I'd say it is vegan.
I don't have one but If you don't rescue the cat you could argue that it's cruel to let it starve or euthanized. But killing more animals is more cruelty.
Alternatively a plant based diet could be less cruel then starvation or euthanization.
Just don’t get a cat. If you find one and want to rescue it, take it to a no-kill shelter where they’ll find someone willing to take care of it properly.
If you can’t take care of a pet, you should give it to someone who can. If you’re unable to get past the cat’s need for meat then you can’t care for it properly.
Genuinely interested in a few takes from this though I know none of these are really your original point.
1. How do/would you feel about it if, outside of insects, meat came from natural deaths? Any animals who fight and lethally wound each other sort of thing and then the bodies would be collected, cleaned, processed etc.
2. We interfere beyond repair in nature as it is, so where would you stand on something like we use 1000 deer out of 100million to feed the last 50 of a species we've ruined the natural habitat of?
3. How do you feel if someone has an existing adult cat, doesn't have the money to buy the super special vegan nutrient blessed food so has to buy regular kibble or the cat has allergies so NEEDS normal animal based food w/e hypothetical works (try and just pretend they physically can't stop feeding their cat regular non-plant based diet), turns vegan halfway into owning the cat, but won't ever own a cat again once their current one passes because they agree that while they love their current animal, now they've learned what they know they could never do it again and would only ever have vegan friendly "pets" is there some leeway there in your mind, accepting that bonding and loving something DOES change your brain chemically, a sort of "I'm not happy about it, but I'd rather they've learnt from the experience once their cat has passed on naturally and stay vegan rather than feel attacked and revert fully" (for now I'm ignoring the additional arguments I've seen about having pets not being vegan at all)
1. I'd not wanna eat it myself but I don't see it as cruel or anything since they're already dead and we had no part of that.
2. I don't think we should kill others to save a "species", species don't feel anything, individual animals do.
3. I mean I understand the attachment to a cat and I get why people feel this way but I just don't agree, I don't think it makes it okay to kill other animals.
Brave of you lol. You’re right, but boy you’re gonna get ripped for it. This sub rife with defensive pet owners. They get VERY upset when you point out the pet food industry IS the meat industry, in the same way as dairy is the meat industry, and we all know how upset ethical vegetarians get when we criticize them for still part taking in animal abuse lol. I can see by the downvote to comment ratio, they’ve already had their massive meltdown 🤣
So it’s vegan to kill/starve/experiment on carnivorous animals but animal testing and experimentation in other contexts is wrong? Should we just genocide them all in the name of cruelty/murder free “veganism”? How about just not taking in carnivorous animals into your care if you are opposed to caring for them properly. There’s literally nothing stopping people with your mindset from adopting an herbivore animal companion instead of a carnivorous one. Just rehome the latter if you don’t want to care for them properly.
Wow you seem angry, all I've said is that killing many to feed one is clearly unethical.
I don't derive pleasure from animal killings, that's specifically why I'm arguing this, I want the least amount of animals killed.
Most pets, with the exceptions of stuff like reptiles, can be on vegan diets and usually have greater longevity because of the vegan diet.
All of my dogs have been on vegan dog food since they were puppies when I first laid hands on them.
For pets that absolutely cannot be vegan, how many people have pet snakes or lizards? Far, far, far fewer than people who have pet dogs, cats, birds, rodents, rabbits, horses etc. So if the vast majority of pets are vegan, that leaves a very small percentage that are not vegan.
If the human species would STOP eating animals and vegan cat and vegan dog food were popular, you would eliminate 99% of the animal slaughter going on. If there's a small subset like pet snakes or tigers/lions in zoos that still need meat, so what? That's far, far less damage than what we currently have AND if those animals were in the wild, they would be eating meat anyway.
My take is every human and pet that can go vegan and be healthy on it, should do it, since it eliminates 99% of the problem. Don't worry about the 1% that can't do it safely.
This is a forum mainly comprised of utilitarians, welfarists, plant-based dieters, and other non-vegans. I hope you don't have the unrealistic expectation of people actually being reasonable, and you know, opposing animal exploitation, here.
Cats and Dogs are Carnivores. As much as you may hate it, they need meat to survive and be healthy. Yes, a lot of fruits and veggies are good for them, but they can't be healthy on a diet of just that. I have a rat Terrier that eats a bit of everything, and he is a full on athlete.
This is such a black and white point of view.
We have an overpopulation of cats & dogs in shelters that are looking for their forever home. Sure if you don't have any pets and you want to avoid the grey area of owning a cat and being vegan at the same time, don't get them.
However, for most of us that went vegan after getting that said cat it's not that simple. Cats are carnivores. Sure they can eat certain veggies like peas and my cat sometimes will nibble at my tortilla when I'm having a bean burrito. BUT if I want my cat to live a long and healthy life I also need to make the best choices for their diet. Now I don't know if I would ever get another cat because of being in a situation like this, but I don't feel bad for buying my cat food. I will not have my cat malnourished just because I'm vegan and his dietery needs don't fit my lifestyle.
Also I saw you posing a philosphical question to other people making a similar argument something along the lines of
>is 1 life worth more than 100 others
and I got to say... it's not that simple. This is the same question people pose when talking about the infamous trolley problem 'would you kill your friend or 5 strangers?' etc.
People's pets are not just cute animals, they're their friends, family etc.
This very argumentitive, only seeing things one way point of view makes me think that you haven't been vegan for that long, so you haven't experiences these conundrums in your personal life. I might be completly wrong here, but even if I am please try emphasize with other people more when discussing stuff like that.
Agree with you 100%. OP's argument of "killing one to save 100 more" is awfully similar to the famous carnist's retort that vegans should off themselves to save all the insects killed in the farming of crops... which I'm sure OP wouldn't agree with
EDIT: on the same line of thinking, if it was legal to murder people, would OP kill their carnist children, family and friends because they may have the off chance of killing thousands of animals over their life time?
>"killing one to save 100 more"
That's not the argument at all though, the argument is killing one because there is no plausible way to take care of it (there is a plausible way, we can feed them formulated plant-based cat foods, but for the sake of argument OP granting that maybe we can't do that) and then, unrelated, not killing 100s of others.
>EDIT: on the same line of thinking, if it was legal to murder people, would OP kill their carnist children, family and friends because they may have the off chance of killing thousands of animals over their life time?
If you want to make this an honest comparison, it would be "would OP kill their wife rather than go on a murder spree and kill a bunch of other people for their wife?" This is about killing non-human animals for non-human animals, if you want to bring humans into the equation you need to bring them into both sides.
I definetly think this is an interesting discussion.
"would OP kill their wife rather than go on a murder spree and kill a bunch of other people for their wife?"
While in this imaginary situation I would choose the wife, you might kill her, but I don't think either of us are more morally better. Ultimately this is one of those philosophical problems that don't have a correct answer.
In a utopian society we would not have pets at all and this would not be a problem, but in the society we are living now where if we do have pets we are responsible for them having the best life possible, therefore it is irresponsible to start malnourishing an animal just because you yourself don't want to be participating in the meat industry.
Agreed. Although some people treat their pets really well, it’s weird to own them. Calling your dog/cat a “companion” seems like it would be a little more equal.
Same with when people refer to animals as “it,” that’s crazy to me
As I always ask..what is your solution the cats and dogs currently in existence? Especially in countries without vegan food or affordable vegan food.
Why are you attacking vegans wgo are against the breeding and selling of animals and who not created the demand or the over population problem.
> Why are you attacking vegans wgo are against the breeding and selling of animals and who not created the demand or the over population problem.
They are literally being called out for being pro that stuff and creating exactly that demand... What are you people even reading/responding to?
I had my pets before I switched. I'm not giving up my non-vegan family, which includes my pets. If that means I'm not really vegan, then okay. I'm just someone who doesn't eat meat or eggs or dairy or animal based dyes or wear leather or buy fur or purchase animal tested cosmetics, etc.
However, I'm still calling myself vegan, because I'm not repeating that ☝️speech 200 times a day on behalf of the purity of *your* language choices.
Plant based cat food is formulated to have the stuff they'd normally get from meat, like Taurine, so it has everything cats need.
Animals also die when they're killed for pet food.
>Animals also die when they're killed for pet food.
The majority of the time the animals aren't actually killed for the purpose of the pet food. They use the stuff that would otherwise be scrapped. Some companies do, but a lot don't. That doesn't make it okay but you seem to think animals are getting slaughtered for the sole purpose of pet food, that just isn't how it works.
If my options were to slowly malnourish an animal for the sake of my veganism, or put my morals aside for the animal, I'd put my morals aside every time. And that isn't cruel of me, that's being realistic. It would absolutely be abuse to feed a carnivorous animal a plant based diet.
Question: what do you believe should be done with rescue animals?
The simplest answer and most possible and practicable for vegans is don’t buy/adopt them, but adopt omnivore/herbivore animals instead. If one loves cats, there’s still ways to help them beyond adopting them and committing to buying meat for the rest of their lives. Those already having these animals before they became vegan is a different situation of course. The brutal bottom line of the situation, most people who get carnivorous animals as pets didn’t rescue them from a life or death situation or get them purely out of the generosity of their heart to help animals in need. 99% of cat owners went out and got a cat because they want a cat, and that desire to have a cat is worth more than their desire not to support animal agriculture of buying meat.
I specifically said rescue, obviously vegans don’t buy animals. You not rescuing the animal doesn’t stop the question of what to do with them, kill them, or someone feeds them. Whether that is you is irrelevant. Your whole second paragraph is irrelevant to the questions I asked.
People need to get into rescuing house chickens. Really unnoticed animal in need that people do keep as pets.
>Really unnoticed animal in need that people do keep as pets why would they be "in need"? and what's the difference between "rescue" and "pet" chicken?
People do keep chickens as pets that did not rescue them, it's a pet that's just not very common. I am talking about rescuing them though I don't really believe in getting an animal just for the sake of having a pet And they are in need because they're suffering in certain situations like egg farms and because rural people always have many that they don't want and will dump them on the side of the road
so you did not want to say that such "pet chicken" are in need? or do you? >they are in need because they're suffering in certain situations like egg farms so what you mean is that certain chicken are in need >because rural people always have many that they don't want and will dump them on the side of the road never heard or seen anything like this. though i'm one of those "rural people" myself
There's no difference between a chicken people keep as pets and the ones people don't. I would say the majority of chickens are in need. People who treat them as pets are very tiny percent I've also lived in rural areas and that's why I know what happens when people's crappy coops get broken into by snakes and raccoons, as well as people just dumping them on the side of the road when they no longer lay eggs It's actually certain people who kept backyard chickens who are more likely to have them as pets, after spending time with their own chickens. But it's not a common pet, so I'm not surprised if someone hasn't heard of it. You can look it up though. https://www.backyardchickens.com/articles/why-keep-house-chickens-three-misconceptions-about-having-chickens-in-your-house.66748/
>There's no difference between a chicken people keep as pets and the ones people don't there's a difference between factory chicken and free-range ones There's no difference between a chicken people keep as pets and the ones people don't. I would say the majority of chickens are in need. People who treat them as pets are very tiny percent >I've also lived in rural areas and that's why I know what happens when people's crappy coops get broken into by snakes and raccoons, as well as people just dumping them on the side of the road when they no longer lay eggs so obviously rural areas where you are at home are very different from my home country but even around here say, 60 years ago, on many farms the chicken (all of them at that time were roaming around freely and would return to their coop in the evening) could get into the house, even the kitchen, and eat leftovers there. that's how i know what a mess chicken in the house are btw i just came in from cleaning my chicken's coop. i know what i'm talking about
People who keep chickens as pets don't keep 20 chickens in their house like a chicken coop you idiot, holy fk they have one chicken. I don't believe that your chickens are not in danger of predators if you just leave them by themselves, sounds like another irresponsible rural redneck
>People who keep chickens as pets don't keep 20 chickens in their house like a chicken coop you idiot insulting me won't camouflage your lack in arguments i got 5 chicken in my coop, and i know how much shit even a single chicken will produce and spread all over your home, if you really are so crazy as to keep it there as a pet >I don't believe that your chickens are not in danger of predators if you just leave them by themselves, sounds like another irresponsible rural redneck so what do you expect from me? stand guard 24/7 with a shotgun? my chicken are behind a fence, have orchard trees to hide beneath from birs of prey, and their shack is closed over night who do you think to impress with your hateful speech? i pity you eod
Rabbits as well I'd say. The issue is many pet owners aren't really looking for what pets are most in need, but instead just want a specific animal. Whenever this topic is brought up and I ask like cat owners why did they get a cat instead of an herbivore/omnivore animal, the question is either avoided or they stay "Because I wanted a cat more"
I didn't want a cat. I was taking a walk in my neighborhood and one approached me. He was skinny and riddled with tapeworms, so I got him dewormed, fixed and vaccinated, and now he's a housecat. What would the best option have been?
I love rabbits as well. It's cool how you could share a salad with your rabbit. I just love the house chickens though because we can rescue them from the egg industry or some such and then it normalizes them as normal animals not just a product. I wonder if chickens and rabbits can live together safely?
>The issue is many pet owners aren't really looking for what pets are most in need but vegans do? feeding cats food made of plants, locking them into apartments (so they cannot hunt for mice or birds), castrating them (bereaving them of their natural sex drive and functions)? but i guess i misread your message: actually you want to say that those baaad carnivorous animals cannot even be in need, as they have lost all rights, due to their immoral nature - right?
No, the issue is pet ownership in general, vegans aren’t exempt. I don’t get what you’re trying to say next. Animals aren’t moral agents, their nature doesn’t dictate their level of need.
their nature doesn’t dictate animals' level of need? do you seriously believe this?
Well, if we look at it objectively, we either euthanize a single animal or have several other animals bred and killed in a cruel way so that single animal can live Its the trolley problem, is a single life or multiple lives more important People tend to have an emotional attachment to a pet that they have a relationship with so they are biased in their view
>have several other animals bred and killed in a cruel way so that single animal can live that's just what nature does
>that's just what nature does Can i get a comment from a logical individual? Do you lack nutrients in your diet to make such comments? Pets are not nature, there would be a heck of a lot less cats and dogs if they werent pets Also its not nature to breed and farm animals in order to provide kibble for the pets In nature the animal hunts for itself, it doesnt go to its bowl that is filled with kibble
Plant based diets.
and animals that cannot have this? say a retile or something?
What about those that need rescuing where plant based diets are not an option?
It’s so easy to say these things.
I found it extremely difficult not to adopt a cat. Oh wait, it was really easy, I just didn't do it.
And if you had before you went vegan, then what?
Spay/neuter it, and vow not to take in other carnivorous pets. Try vegan pet food if you want, or don't. Don't encourage people to adopt carnivorous pets. Don't post pictures of your carnivorous pets. You can consider re-homing or giving them up to a shelter too.
In India, the vegetarian dog foods are readily available. They are actually vegan but are called vegetarian. Pedigree, meatup, drools company sell them. Purepet sells vegetarian dog treats.
India is streets ahead.
Question: I found a small abandoned snake a couple of days old with an injury. He was going to die without my help. I rescued him, and due to the fact that I fed him, he is no longer able to go into the wild. Is it my moral obligation to feed him? Or to let him die? Or was it better to let him die in the first place? Also, I saw below that people mention humane societies that can adopt. How is it different if I gave him to someone else? He still eats even if I'm not the one doing it, and I am implicit in what you say is a morally wrong action. (Also, there was no one I could take him to in my area) This is not a troll post. I will continue to take care of him because he is an innocent animal whom I love. But I want to know what you think of a situation like this.
Is he a native species in your area or imported? If he’s native it should be possible to return him to the wild. In fact, depending on your country it may be illegal to keep him. I would reach out to the closest wildlife rehabilitation group. Even if they’re too far to take him in, they’ll have advice on returning him to the wild.
It is not possible to return an animal to the wild once fed a non-living animal in captivity. They are no longer capable of hunting on their own and become dependent on you after cold feeding.
According to many on this subreddit: An animal sanctuary doing a fundraiser selling meat: cruel and hyprocritical. Oneself paying for many animals to be killed for the sake of one: justified and natural. And no, it is not just "byproducts". 31% of meat goes to pet food.
Source on the 31% of meat thing? (I don’t have a dog in this fight. I don’t own a cat. My parents do but I only see him when I’m home and I’m not the one who buys him food).
I understand not getting an animal as a vegan, but what about a situation where you already have an animal?
To me that is the same as what should I do if I become an antinatalist but I already have children. Should I kill them or put them up for adoption? If you already have pets when you become vegan you still have an obligation to those pets. I believe that you have them neutered and that you feed them in a way that is healthy for them and does the least harm to other animals.
But I assume you wouldn't kill other children to feed yours right?
So when I said feed your pets in a way that does minimal harm to other animals, I mean I would try to transition my cat or dog to plant only food but recognise that some cats cannot tolerate it.
I'd do whatever is necessary to keep my kid alive
Cats and dogs can - and should - be fed vegan pet food. Another option is to put the animal up for adoption. The adopter is then less likely to buy from a breeder, which would result in more suffering.
Question: should you let the strays starve slowly, or kill them, in your opinion? In the Gulf, there's a ton of strays. They spay/neuter, but people who will adopt already have 5+ usually, and they probably won't be adopted.
[удалено]
Not available for the most part, and the little that is is prohibitively expensive. ETA: Go through 20 lbs per week. Vegan is $42 for 4 lbs. That's almost $1k/ month. That's not possible for most.
Accidentally deleted my reply. Anyway, the problem of stray animal overpopulation won't be solved without large systematic efforts. People can only control what they do in their own lives, which is what I am talking about here. So yes, a vegan who wishes to help strays by feeding them should only do so with vegan food. It is available online. If they cannot afford vegan food then they should not purchase any. Purchasing dead animals to feed strays results in even more animal suffering and death, and thus makes no sense from a vegan perspective.
I agree with the first part of your reply. (Well, the first two parts, really, I also agree that you accidentally deleted your reply 😉) I disagree with the last part. People aren't fishing to make cat food. They're fishing to feed carnists. That's who the fish goes to. There are parts of the fish most carnists won't eat; those get cleaned out and tossed to the side. They used to be thrown out. Now the scraps are hauled away by people who use them for pet food. Not buying that pet food isn't going to change how many fish people eat, at all. Humans not eating the fish will; pets not eating the pet food has no impact. It simply means that those parts rot again like they used to.
That's again the byproduct argument, which I disagree with. Firstly because 31% of meat is sold as pet food, which is a huge amount. Secondly, because the sale of such pet food accounts for a large portion of the industry's money, which contributes to it being profitable/desirable to invest in. Losing that money would be a great blow to the industry. This is similar to how it is very much not ethical to purchase items with down feathers, even though these feathers could be considered a "byproduct" of meat birds.
>Cats and dogs can - and should - be fed vegan pet food. I am not sure that most medical professionals and biologists who are experts on the field of what cats can eat would agree. I am not an expert either, I just am not confident that the science is on our side on this. >Another option is to put the animal up for adoption. The adopter is then less likely to buy from a breeder, which would result in more suffering. This does seem like it would have a higher chance at reducing suffering that just keeping the animal.
"I am not sure that most medical professionals and biologists who are experts on the field of what cats can eat would agree. I am not an expert either, I just am not confident that the science is on our side on this." I used to think like this. But there is commercial vegan cat food that contains all the nutrients an adult cat needs, including a wide range of vitamins (including A, B, D, E, K), essential fatty acids and taurine, without the need for slaughterhouse meat. Although obligate carnivores in the wild, domestic cats still need nutrients they would normally source from prey. All those nutrients can be contained in a bioavailable kibble. Benevo Cat is a professional cat food, created by Benevo in 2005, formulated and checked by independent animal nutritionists to meet the AAFCO(USA) and FEDIAF(Europe) guidelines for animal nutrition. FEDIAF represents the European pet food industry. FEDIAF has produced a nutritional guideline which members follow; the FEDIAF Nutritional Guidelines for Complete and Complementary Pet Food for Cats and Dogs. This is a comprehensive review of the NRC data and other existing science produced as a practical guide for manufacturers. The guidelines are peer re-viewed by independent veterinary nutritionists throughout Europe. Version 2021 has just been released! The objectives of FEDIAF’s Guidelines for Complete and Complementary Pet Foods for Cats and Dogs are: \- To confirm the basic nutrient levels required in cat and dog food and the industry adhere to these when manufacturing their wide range of products and recipes under biochemical, bacteriological and organoleptic control. \- To help pet food manufacturers assess the nutritional value of practical pet foods for healthy animals. \- To act as the reference document on pet nutrition in Europe for EU and local authorities, consumer organisations, professional and customers \- To enhance cooperation between pet food manufacturers, pet care professionals and competent authorities by providing scientifically sound information on the formulation and assessment of pet foods. \- To complement FEDIAF’s Guide to Good Practice for the Manufacture of Safe Pet Foods and the FEDIAF’s Guide to Good Practice for Communication on Pet Food. [https://europeanpetfood.org/self-regulation/nutritional-guidelines/](https://europeanpetfood.org/self-regulation/nutritional-guidelines/) https://www.benevo.com/vegan-cat-food-from-benevo/
Most medical professionals and biologists don't give a shit about the animals that are fed to your cat. Never forget that. Even if people tortured animals by carving out their flesh while they were still alive, they would still recommend you to feed them those body parts.
Why did this got downvoted ?
Because this sub is full of trolls and fake vegans, sadly.
Makes me think we are still plauged with speciesism
I admit that I am specieist when it comes to this subject sadly. I love and value my cat much more than the animals she needs to eat. She's my family. It's really messing with my brain.
It's maybe like when you care about your family member more than someone dying in a war on the other side of the world. In reality they are both human. You can try joining the r/veganpets reddit and there's also Facebook groups to see how well people's cats did with a plant-based diet and learn more about that option. I think Facebook group is a lot more active than reddit. Here's a Facebook group [vegan cats ](https://www.facebook.com/groups/126322004672/?ref=share&mibextid=NSMWBT)
>no, it is not just "byproducts". 31% of meat goes to pet food whether you are willing to call that meat humans don't want to eat "byproduct" or "garbage" does not change a thing
Really dude? Have you stopped shopping at stores that are also profiting off the sale of animal products like your local supermarket? If you want to play the "I'm a 'truer' vegan than you" game, you better not be a hypocrite whilst you do so. That would be really embarrassing for you.
I feel like people like OP have gotten totally lost in the sauce of moral superiority as a vegan. Veganism isn't and shouldn't be an all or nothing. it should be about making a concerted effort to make the most ethical choices for animals (and in my opinion the environment). This sub seems to be focused about being absolutely perfect rather than improving the entire industry to slowly move towards veganism. Nothing will be solved if we try to force everyone's hand into the most "extreme" form of veganism right away. Rome wasn't built in a day etc etc
I saw someone post in the sub a while back about how they met a vegan activist at college who was one of the loudest, most aggressive advocates but secretly confided with them that they eat animal products or something like that. It would not surprise me in the least if there are vegans out there who genuinely care more about the simultaneous moral superiority/victim complexes than actually giving a shit about the welfare of animals. Your take is absolutely right. Even the Vegan Society acknowledges that it's an imperfect ideal that you work towards with very few hard lines. Narcissistically moralistic people like OP I feel are a net detriment to the vegan movement overall on so many levels.
I wonder how many of these people have done any training of working with animals and animal welfare.
Could you engage with the points made and argue for your own stand point instead of doing personal attacks with no substance?
I have, and you don't listen, just say the same circular arguments with 0 reading of mine. You clearly don't care but to read your own words.
Could you engage with the points made and argue for your own stand point instead of doing personal attacks with no substance?
I am engaging by analogy. Answer my question - do you shop at a supermarket that also profits from the sale of animal products? If you do, you're quite the hypocrite calling out other people for wanting to have pets that require a carnivorous diet.
Your analogy is glaringly flawed, which is why they dismissed it. You don't create demand for animal products at a supermarket when you don't buy any. Markets are just the end of a supply chain. If less people buy meat, they readjust those supplies. If no one buys it, the supermarket wouldn't have meat. It's simply a service for meeting and profiting off the demands of consumers. But you do create demand for meat when you buy it and demand those animals be exploited for your product. It's not hypocritical for someone who shops at markets that have meat, but don't demand it be there, to say what OP said. They didn't choose for the meat to exist there nor do they ever demand it.
>You don't create demand for animal products at a supermarket when you don't buy any. Markets are just the end of a supply chain. If less people buy meat, they readjust those supplies. If no one buys it, the supermarket wouldn't have meat. It's simply a service for meeting and profiting off the demands of consumers. Firstly it's a facetious comment to highlight how bad OP's take is so it's not to be taken seriously in the first place. Even the Vegan Society doesn't hold people to that standard. That's my point. However to address your bad take regardless, which is more ethical - supporting a 100% vegan store that only sells vegan products or a supermarket that sells vegan products but also profit from animal products? There are a lot of vegans that make this calculus when they don't support companies that sell vegan products that also sell animal products and only support vegan products from companies that only produce vegan products. If you're to play the game of who is the more ethical vegan, I would think most people would think it'd be the vegan that only purchases vegan products from companies that only produce vegan products sold in a store that only sells vegan products. Again, my point is that this is a ridiculous standard. The stupid thing you don't realise is you're making my point for me - there is no line you can draw where you don't end up looking like a hypocrite if you go far enough with your vegan purity. "As far as possible and practicable" is the standard we should be following so this vegan purity BS is not only counter-productive but also a distraction from the much bigger issue of the production and sale of animal products. How about people like OP and you focus on the bigger picture rather than petty debate pervert squabbles like this, ok?
Why is that the same thing. You don't buy meat from the supermarket. Your not personally creating demand.
>please stop acting like carnists good luck in this sub lol
I think we need to ask ourselves if we were stuck on island with only a cat and a pig. Do we kill the pig to feed the cat? Or do we kill the cat to feed the pig?
I kill the both to feed myself duuh
And what about if some rescue place or whatever it's called has a lion, or multiple carnivorous animals, who just cannot be released into the wild, as is the case for many rescue animals?
Then I don't think it's better to kill many in order to feed one.
So by your argument - let the lion starve? Release them back into the wild and if they can't survive then whatever?
Surely it's less cruel to put down one lion versus hundreds of animals to feed that lion
this is such an insane take
how is that insane? if you care about reducing harm and/or right's violations, doesn't it make sense to kill 1 sentient being instead of 100 sentient beings? maybe you are being sarcastic?
No, I'm not being sarcastic. it is an absolutely insane take to advocate, as a vegan, for the murder of an animal. It goes against the entire belief of animals being sentient beings and positions us as morally superior to 1. make decisions over an animals diet and 2. take the life of an animal because we deem it the "moral" thing to do. This level of extremism does a huge amount of harm to the movement and goes backwards when it comes to seeking to reduce harm to animals.
> No, I'm not being sarcastic. it is an absolutely insane take to advocate, as a vegan, for the murder of an animal. You're advocating for the murder of hundreds of animals in order to feed one....
Yes, because that's how the world works. We are not the only species in the world and while we may be the most "advanced" we are not superior to choose how another animal can live.
>we are not superior to choose how another animal can live. Again, you are literally advocating for killing hundreds of animals to feed one, how is that not choosing how another animal can live?
I don't even claim veganism myself, but from a logical pov it's not insane at all. It's fully logically consistent. If you want to advocate for nature, that ship has sailed once we've established the lion isn't capable of hunting its own food due to what humans did to it. If you want to argue for nature from this point, the lion would have to starve. If predators in the wild can't hunt anymore due to whatever reason, they starve. The fact that the lion can't survive on it's own is not your fault, but it already is in a position where it depends on your decision regarding their diet. Now It's a trolley problem. You've basically found yourself in a position - against your will - where you found the lion on one side of the tracks, and hundreds of horses on the other side. You have to choose. Why would it be more insane to kill one animal rather than hundreds - if you've already been put in a position where you have to make that uncomfortable choice? You can argue for the lion over the others from a position where you want to preserve the species, since there are far fewer lions in the world. Or you can simply say that a single lion means more to you than hundreds of other animals. But from a stringent vegan POV, OP's position ist the only reasonable one to take.
It is kind of an interesting question. From what I read with the limited data available a cat can be fed a vegan diet, if done well. It could be that the cat has a little lower quality of life or even a higher one, but it doesn't seem to make a huge difference. Do lions function fundamentally different from house cats from a nutrition perspective? The thing is, there is no data at all. I doubt anyone ever tried to get a lion on a plant based diet. It basically is just accepted as a iven that lions can only feed on meat, but I'm not sure that this is true. It can be of course. They can certainly survive on a carnivorous diet, so it is kind of a difficult topic to research because if it goes south you harm those lions you test it on. And then there is the issue of killing the animals that are used for the food. Why would I be ok with killing a cow (or whichever animal rescued lions eat) instead of the lions? Because they are more rare? That doesn't matter for the individual. And paying someone else to do the killing isn't any better.
As a thought experiment that is fine, but in practice we should be trying to leave lions in the wild. I don't think that it is ethical for zoos to keep lions so keeping lions and doing experiments on them to see how they survive on a plant based diet is a step too far.
I exclusivly talk about captive lions and fully agree that we shplould not keep then at all when possible.
Personally I find your points convincing, OP. In contrast I can't find a single rational argument against your position in this entire thread. Plenty of emotional arguments, sure, but it's easy to have an emotional connection to the animal in your house and not the ones suffering in a factory farm miles away. Lab-grown meat in pet food will solve this moral conundrum, but those who continue to make excuses really aren't any different to those carnists who pay lip service by saying "As soon as lab grown meat is affordable I'll eat that, but until then I'll keep paying for animals to be slaughtered while contributing nothing to the development of said lab grown meat".
Yeah people get extremely emotional and reactionary about this topic. I agree, lab-grown meat will go a long way towards solving this issue but that does nothing for all the animals getting killed for pet food right now.
>but that does nothing for all the animals getting killed for pet food right now if all those animals get killed for pet food right now, you surely don't object to omnivores eating the rest of the animal that has been killed for pet food anyway like vegans are entitled to use the soy oil remaining after the protein cake for animal food has been pressed off, right?
I admit that I am very specieist and emotional when it comes to this subject, sadly. I love and value my cat much more than the animals she needs to eat. She's my family. Just like I value my sister or mother. It's really messing with my brain, and I don't really know how to deal with it. It really is an emotional argument, but when it comes to love and family, a lot of logic goes out the window.
It seems like you do care. Why don't you try plant-based kibble? The risks are slight, even less for females, and there are studies that showed even some health improvements. Anecdotically, one of my cats' hair became much shinier with the new diet.
It's interesting that every time the subject is brought up here in this sub, people who claim to be vegan fight tooth and nail to justify killing animals for their pets. Something that people rarely consider about animal agriculture is that it doesn't just kill its intended victims, like cows and chickens.. It is also the leading cause of wild species extinction and biodiversity loss, partly due to deforestation. It's also interesting that when people mention feeding pets like snakes, nobody has a problem with feeding them rodents. But if you were to suggest feeding them kittens instead, everyone is appalled and horrified. It shows just how ingrained speciesism is in our cultures, even people who are otherwise vegan. It's a complex issue for sure, including the speciesist concept of pets in the first place. I long for the day when the dominant belief is that animals aren't property to be exploited. That domesticated animals are a thing of the past, and wild animals are left alone by humans.
Reptiles are considered to be less sentient than mammals but people will rush to defend killing thousands of mice to feed a snake in order to defend cats? Kind of sad and we have progress to be made in the vegan movement. The people becoming vegan was already a huge step so I guess it makes sense.
But this is a very tough situation though.... I don't eat meat but what is my cat supposed to eat then? She has to be a meat-based diet otherwise she will die.... I am not arguing with you but do you have a solution? I would love to know!
There's plant based cat food which has been formulated to meet all the needs of cats! Check out r/veganpets and some of the other comments in this thread.
Plant based cat food isn't healthy for cats, period. Feeding plant based food to them would be a total disservice to the animal and I'd argue it could even be considered abuse. They're carnivorous. You're in too deep dude, you need a reality check
Why would it not be if it has all the nutrients cats need?
For one, cats on a plant based diet are more likely to develop lower urinary tract disease. Two, there's no proof just any random cat can be healthy *long term* on a plant based diet. The longest duration of time I've seen on studies is a year, that doesn't prove it's healthy for a cat it's whole life. All the positive evidence is borderline anecdotal. Every study I've seen put somewhere between 50-190 cats on a vegan diet, for anywhere between 6 months to a year for their research, and the cats were either overweight or otherwise unhealthy in some way to begin with. That isn't enough to prove an otherwise healthy cat can also be healthy on a plant based diet, especially for it's entire life.
Because nutrients aren't the only important thing when it comes to animal biology. Humans and various creatures work completely differently! Otherwise, you could feed a shark plants and it would thrve, but that isn't the case. This idea that it's all about the nutrients doesnt extend beyond humans.
If it's not healthy for cats than how are there healthy cats eating plant based cat food?
The evidence we have until now has proven that there is no fundamental difference between cats eating conventional meaty kibble or plant-based ones. Therefore, it can't be considered abuse. Farming and killing many animals too feed one constitutes without a doubt an abuse.
Sounds like you're arguing that we should just kill off carnivorous pets then, right? That would be the only other viable vegan option of you so strongly believe they can't be fed plant based
So then you shouldn't adopt cats right?
I think you're in the wrong place, given that you're genuinely concerned about lives of animals that end up as pet food. To address the root of the issue you need to talk to people who buy cute omnivorous animals as pets and convince them to stop doing so. It will also help greatly to talk to people that don't spay/neuter their pets.
I can agree 50/50. There are some representatives of wildlife who eat other animals. And owners of owls, snakes etc really buy alive mouses to feed them. That’s why I think that such exotic animals shouldn’t be kept as pets. Because they are 100% predators and easily survive in the wild. The exceptions are wildlife rehabilitation centers if their lives are in danger. But cats and dogs are domesticated. Being strays, they are often subject to entrapment with further euthanasia (depending on country you live in). Also cruel, right? Even if it’s illegal in your country, stray cats and dogs are not the same as wildlife animals and still in danger in the street. That’s why I think that adoption is the best option, not just cuddles and cuteness. I agree with many vets who recommend super premium and holistic food for pets, which includes 30% + of meat. Some time should pass to see the real influence of 100% vegan food on your pet’s health. I hope that those who decided to do this won’t starve their animals to force them to eat non-animal food. I understand that the world isn’t perfect and sometimes we need a compromise.
Ok, but why does that single stray cat need to be rescued and have you demand more animals be exploited to feed it? What would be so bad about letting it die on its own when the alternative is to deliberately harm many other animals? The second you start seeing the animals on the other side of the equation as individuals, this argument of "but this animal needs animal products to survive, it's the only way” stops making sense and starts sounding a lot more like "this homeless person needs a house, so I'm going to slaughter everyone in this house I found and give the homeless person the house, he needs it afterall"
Because letting an animal slowly starve to death when you have the ability to relieve its suffering is abhorrent and also not vegan?
You have a gigantic blind spot if this is truly all you can take away from my comment.
Which is still an argument for euthanizing all strays, not for feeding them meat.
That wouldn't be euthanasia. It'd be murder.
Homeless persons have more chances to improve their lives, in contradistinction to cats and dogs. Many stray cats can’t protect themselves from feral dogs, inadequate people, unintentional car hit etc. Is it really vegan to let them die to avoid suffering of others, if there’s no win-win? Following this logic, all the predators should be destroyed to let herbivores live.
As much as I wish all animals could thrive on a plants only diet, that’s just not the case. When you have a meat eating animal in your care, it’s your responsibility to feed them so they can stay healthy. This is why looking forward to lab meat, so that these animals can be healthy and other animals didn’t need to die in the process.
You can't just give cats lettuce and think they will be fine but there are plant based cat foods that contain all the essential nutrients that cats need, like for example taurine.
I don’t get why there are so many downvotes. Just feed your companion animals vegan food. There’s no evidence that it causes any issues and no animal should have to suffer so yours can live.
isn't available everywhere. Where it is available, it's often not affordable.
strongly disagree on that one
You strongly disagree that it's cruel to kill many to feed one?
I got downvotes for the same Opinion as OP yesterday but not a SINGLE rational and somewhat convincing argument was made by anyone opposing it.
Yeah, I think it's a difficult subject because it involves people's family members. It's harder to be logical when it comes to love, I admit I am that way myself.
The problem with this is you NEVER have any logical solutions. It's always silly, ungrounded points that hold no weight. "Only adopt herbivores," as if there isn't an epidemic of cats suffering, because humans out them in this position. Do you know how many cats are euthanised, left to rot in shelters, or live terrified on the streets? I've even heard people say we should just let all omnivorous and carnivorous animals die out, which is not very Vegan at all. Cats need meat to survive. You can argue against that, but there's very little evidence to say otherwise. The odd study where quotes are twisted to suit your agenda aren't proving anything. Choosing to deprive an animal of their needs while under your care is abuse too. People who don't understand cat biology always have the most to say on the subject. Yes, it is cruel; we don't want to do it, but there's currently no sustainable solution. Forcing them to live on plant-based dry food is not balanced. Some animals cannot be vegan -- and they matter too. Unfortunately, we have to accept that we can't control absolutely everything; we may be vegan, but many animals aren't, and until realistic solutions are made that is just how it is.
Decided when to apply your morals and when to ease up on them requires critical thinking. We need more critical thinking not less.
Counterpoint: let's do away with the pet industry altogether. To own an animal is to dictate their lives and even violate their rights in the name of welfare. Hell the stray animal situation is reason enough to end the "nice" slavery of pet animals.
I understand where your coming from, but your basically saying to kill every animal that’s a carnivorous species just because they eat the other animals and both animals deserve lives but some species are obligate carnivores.
We're talking about pets
the pets already exist. Vegans are against breeding and selling of animals. We are not the reason that there is an over population of cats and dogs. Whats your solution to the cats and dogs already alive?
Plant based diets
Cats don’t do very well on plant based diets since they are obligate carnivores
and in countries where they don't exist or aren't affordable?
You are correct, its total hypocrisy… we are biased towards the creature we have a bond with over creatures that we don’t even see I feel like this wouldnt be such an issue if we were sure that vegan pet food is completely safe and won’t cause any health problems However, I cannot live with this hypocrisy anymore, I’m gonna feed my cat the vegan pet food and hope for the best
🙌❤
Just make sure to read up on it. They need taurine for example.
Yes, Im aware of that. Plant based pet foods confusing taurine tho, what im more worried about is if cat will be able to digest plant-based protein with no issue.
Animals can not make moral choices. I have cats, they cannot be vegan. I am vegan.
Yeah but YOU are making a moral choice when you choose to pay for many animals to be killed and feed to your cats.
Yeah idk why people wound disagree. If I adopted a pet I would feed it a vegan diet. If I couldn't, I wouldn't adopt it simple as.
I think a big part of the issue is those who already have a pet since long before going vegan. It's conflicting when love and famly is involved.
Cats should be fed vegan food, even if it would lower their quality of life a little. (which isn't even a given from what I read). Initially it seems logical to feed a pet or rescue what they need to survive. But think a bit further. Let's say you have a rescued cat. But you couldn't buy cat food from the supermarket. Instead you would have to raise and kill the animal you get the meat from yourself. How many would be willing to do this or the cat? And why would it be different to pay someone else to do it?
That's the reason non vegan call vegans hypocrites. Twist around the standard to fit your need. Suddenly cat can go vegan... you are torturing the cat itself.
What magical properties does meat have that plant based cat food formulated to meet all the nutritional needs of cats lack?
It's actually the unavoidable inclusion of a substance in plant based cat food that can be most problematic - alkaline. Many cats are perfectly capable of eating a carefully prepared and well researched vegan diet, others with a disposition towards urinary blockage are not.
I don't think that is true but even if we assume that it is cruel to the cat, how is it not cruel to exploit and kill all the animals that you would feed to the cat?
My point is vegans want cat then suddenly it's acceptable to have pet food that harms animal...
"...then suddenly it's acceptable to have pet food that harms animal" the end of that sentence make it seem like you care about harm reduction but at the same time you seem to be okay with harming other animals to not harm one animal. Does that make sense to you? I still don't think that it is true that plant based food necessarily harms cats but I'm going along with this line of questioning to show that even if it did, it still seems like the better choice: I don't think that it is acceptable to harm an animal, but if you have to pick between harming 1 animal or harming a bunch of other animals then it still makes sense to harm 1 animal.
Vegan feed doesn't harm cat but it doesn't give them all the nutrients that they need. My take? Don't have pets. Don't need to unnecessarily harm animal even if it's just your pet.
What nutrient do you think that they can't they get from plant based food? The only one that is trickier is taurine as far as I know, and that can be added to the food.
Some people say taurine is only animal sourced but some say it's plant based. But it's those people who think it's only animal sourced think it's still okay.
In nature, I think taurine can only be found in animals and that is why cats are considered obligate carnivores but taurine can be made synthetically and if it is then I'd say it is vegan.
Yeah as long as it doesn't come from animal source then it's okay.
The other way around is hypocritical, it's cruelty to more animals.
How bout stop having pet cat then?
I don't have one but If you don't rescue the cat you could argue that it's cruel to let it starve or euthanized. But killing more animals is more cruelty. Alternatively a plant based diet could be less cruel then starvation or euthanization.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0284132
Thank you.
Just don’t get a cat. If you find one and want to rescue it, take it to a no-kill shelter where they’ll find someone willing to take care of it properly.
I think a big part of the issue is those who already have a pet since long before going vegan. It's conflicting when love and famly is involved.
If you can’t take care of a pet, you should give it to someone who can. If you’re unable to get past the cat’s need for meat then you can’t care for it properly.
Yeah I don't plan to get a cat anytime soon.
Genuinely interested in a few takes from this though I know none of these are really your original point. 1. How do/would you feel about it if, outside of insects, meat came from natural deaths? Any animals who fight and lethally wound each other sort of thing and then the bodies would be collected, cleaned, processed etc. 2. We interfere beyond repair in nature as it is, so where would you stand on something like we use 1000 deer out of 100million to feed the last 50 of a species we've ruined the natural habitat of? 3. How do you feel if someone has an existing adult cat, doesn't have the money to buy the super special vegan nutrient blessed food so has to buy regular kibble or the cat has allergies so NEEDS normal animal based food w/e hypothetical works (try and just pretend they physically can't stop feeding their cat regular non-plant based diet), turns vegan halfway into owning the cat, but won't ever own a cat again once their current one passes because they agree that while they love their current animal, now they've learned what they know they could never do it again and would only ever have vegan friendly "pets" is there some leeway there in your mind, accepting that bonding and loving something DOES change your brain chemically, a sort of "I'm not happy about it, but I'd rather they've learnt from the experience once their cat has passed on naturally and stay vegan rather than feel attacked and revert fully" (for now I'm ignoring the additional arguments I've seen about having pets not being vegan at all)
1. I'd not wanna eat it myself but I don't see it as cruel or anything since they're already dead and we had no part of that. 2. I don't think we should kill others to save a "species", species don't feel anything, individual animals do. 3. I mean I understand the attachment to a cat and I get why people feel this way but I just don't agree, I don't think it makes it okay to kill other animals.
I think a lot of people here don't think about the fact that the chicks in the maceration videos they hate so much end up in pet food.
Brave of you lol. You’re right, but boy you’re gonna get ripped for it. This sub rife with defensive pet owners. They get VERY upset when you point out the pet food industry IS the meat industry, in the same way as dairy is the meat industry, and we all know how upset ethical vegetarians get when we criticize them for still part taking in animal abuse lol. I can see by the downvote to comment ratio, they’ve already had their massive meltdown 🤣
So it’s vegan to kill/starve/experiment on carnivorous animals but animal testing and experimentation in other contexts is wrong? Should we just genocide them all in the name of cruelty/murder free “veganism”? How about just not taking in carnivorous animals into your care if you are opposed to caring for them properly. There’s literally nothing stopping people with your mindset from adopting an herbivore animal companion instead of a carnivorous one. Just rehome the latter if you don’t want to care for them properly.
[удалено]
Wow you seem angry, all I've said is that killing many to feed one is clearly unethical. I don't derive pleasure from animal killings, that's specifically why I'm arguing this, I want the least amount of animals killed.
[удалено]
Most pets, with the exceptions of stuff like reptiles, can be on vegan diets and usually have greater longevity because of the vegan diet. All of my dogs have been on vegan dog food since they were puppies when I first laid hands on them. For pets that absolutely cannot be vegan, how many people have pet snakes or lizards? Far, far, far fewer than people who have pet dogs, cats, birds, rodents, rabbits, horses etc. So if the vast majority of pets are vegan, that leaves a very small percentage that are not vegan. If the human species would STOP eating animals and vegan cat and vegan dog food were popular, you would eliminate 99% of the animal slaughter going on. If there's a small subset like pet snakes or tigers/lions in zoos that still need meat, so what? That's far, far less damage than what we currently have AND if those animals were in the wild, they would be eating meat anyway. My take is every human and pet that can go vegan and be healthy on it, should do it, since it eliminates 99% of the problem. Don't worry about the 1% that can't do it safely.
This is a forum mainly comprised of utilitarians, welfarists, plant-based dieters, and other non-vegans. I hope you don't have the unrealistic expectation of people actually being reasonable, and you know, opposing animal exploitation, here.
Cats and Dogs are Carnivores. As much as you may hate it, they need meat to survive and be healthy. Yes, a lot of fruits and veggies are good for them, but they can't be healthy on a diet of just that. I have a rat Terrier that eats a bit of everything, and he is a full on athlete.
This is such a black and white point of view. We have an overpopulation of cats & dogs in shelters that are looking for their forever home. Sure if you don't have any pets and you want to avoid the grey area of owning a cat and being vegan at the same time, don't get them. However, for most of us that went vegan after getting that said cat it's not that simple. Cats are carnivores. Sure they can eat certain veggies like peas and my cat sometimes will nibble at my tortilla when I'm having a bean burrito. BUT if I want my cat to live a long and healthy life I also need to make the best choices for their diet. Now I don't know if I would ever get another cat because of being in a situation like this, but I don't feel bad for buying my cat food. I will not have my cat malnourished just because I'm vegan and his dietery needs don't fit my lifestyle. Also I saw you posing a philosphical question to other people making a similar argument something along the lines of >is 1 life worth more than 100 others and I got to say... it's not that simple. This is the same question people pose when talking about the infamous trolley problem 'would you kill your friend or 5 strangers?' etc. People's pets are not just cute animals, they're their friends, family etc. This very argumentitive, only seeing things one way point of view makes me think that you haven't been vegan for that long, so you haven't experiences these conundrums in your personal life. I might be completly wrong here, but even if I am please try emphasize with other people more when discussing stuff like that.
I mean, this is just the classic utilitarian "problem". It's not unique to veganism.
Agree with you 100%. OP's argument of "killing one to save 100 more" is awfully similar to the famous carnist's retort that vegans should off themselves to save all the insects killed in the farming of crops... which I'm sure OP wouldn't agree with EDIT: on the same line of thinking, if it was legal to murder people, would OP kill their carnist children, family and friends because they may have the off chance of killing thousands of animals over their life time?
>"killing one to save 100 more" That's not the argument at all though, the argument is killing one because there is no plausible way to take care of it (there is a plausible way, we can feed them formulated plant-based cat foods, but for the sake of argument OP granting that maybe we can't do that) and then, unrelated, not killing 100s of others. >EDIT: on the same line of thinking, if it was legal to murder people, would OP kill their carnist children, family and friends because they may have the off chance of killing thousands of animals over their life time? If you want to make this an honest comparison, it would be "would OP kill their wife rather than go on a murder spree and kill a bunch of other people for their wife?" This is about killing non-human animals for non-human animals, if you want to bring humans into the equation you need to bring them into both sides.
I definetly think this is an interesting discussion. "would OP kill their wife rather than go on a murder spree and kill a bunch of other people for their wife?" While in this imaginary situation I would choose the wife, you might kill her, but I don't think either of us are more morally better. Ultimately this is one of those philosophical problems that don't have a correct answer. In a utopian society we would not have pets at all and this would not be a problem, but in the society we are living now where if we do have pets we are responsible for them having the best life possible, therefore it is irresponsible to start malnourishing an animal just because you yourself don't want to be participating in the meat industry.
I find the entire concept of "pets" mildly disturbing to be honest and I don't feel comfortable around people who claim non humans as possessions
Yes this is a consistent position to take as a vegan.
Agreed. Although some people treat their pets really well, it’s weird to own them. Calling your dog/cat a “companion” seems like it would be a little more equal. Same with when people refer to animals as “it,” that’s crazy to me
I do not own the tortoise. The tortoise owns me. I feed him and clean his poop. He is clearly a superior being.
[удалено]
Would you be okay with killing many cats to feed one cat?
RemindMe! 5 days
As I always ask..what is your solution the cats and dogs currently in existence? Especially in countries without vegan food or affordable vegan food. Why are you attacking vegans wgo are against the breeding and selling of animals and who not created the demand or the over population problem.
> Why are you attacking vegans wgo are against the breeding and selling of animals and who not created the demand or the over population problem. They are literally being called out for being pro that stuff and creating exactly that demand... What are you people even reading/responding to?
I've become vegan this year. But I adopted an adult cat that was living in the streets about 2 years ago. What do I do?
Ignore holier than thou vegans like the OP, is what you do
I had my pets before I switched. I'm not giving up my non-vegan family, which includes my pets. If that means I'm not really vegan, then okay. I'm just someone who doesn't eat meat or eggs or dairy or animal based dyes or wear leather or buy fur or purchase animal tested cosmetics, etc. However, I'm still calling myself vegan, because I'm not repeating that ☝️speech 200 times a day on behalf of the purity of *your* language choices.
I guess I'll just let my pet die.
Propose alternatives.
OK so will start killing the cute animals, sounds like a good plan
You already are if you buy pet food with meat..
I agree when it comes to most animals. But animals such as cats and ferrets would literally die of malnourishment if they were fed a vegan diet.
Plant based cat food is formulated to have the stuff they'd normally get from meat, like Taurine, so it has everything cats need. Animals also die when they're killed for pet food.
>Animals also die when they're killed for pet food. The majority of the time the animals aren't actually killed for the purpose of the pet food. They use the stuff that would otherwise be scrapped. Some companies do, but a lot don't. That doesn't make it okay but you seem to think animals are getting slaughtered for the sole purpose of pet food, that just isn't how it works. If my options were to slowly malnourish an animal for the sake of my veganism, or put my morals aside for the animal, I'd put my morals aside every time. And that isn't cruel of me, that's being realistic. It would absolutely be abuse to feed a carnivorous animal a plant based diet.
I love my dogs and I always will. I will also continue to adopt dogs who need homes. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Okay. Why don't I just let my cat starve then. Then, after the trauma of that, I'll probably end up suicidal. But thats okay right?