Vegan Bodybuilding & Fitness

I am reading a PETA magazine, it says each vegetarian saves an acre of trees every year. Can someone explain this?
I don't get how PETA thinks, becouse when one person doesn't eat meat that amount of meat is ordered by someone else or trown away after the expiration date. I know that a vegetarian isn't contributing money to meat companies, but how is a vegetarian saving an acre of trees? It is not like the meat companies are going to produce less meat becouse one person is vegetarian, or is it?

The one thing I learned in statistics, is that NOTHING is actual! Everything depends on research methods and research doesn't prove anything...it only shows that a correlation exists. Don't ask me how PETA figures stats...the same way anyone does to determine something in their favor. It's great to think of when it's actually in your favor - as in - "oh boy I'm saving trees...I must be awesome...." but then sucks when the meat industry comes up and says something contradictory.

I'm only concerned about the ethics. Numbers lie.

_________________
Making Prudish Americans Uncomfortable - one photo at a time.

DOnt know about the trees, but here are some interesting "Stats".

Raising animals for food requires more water than all other industrial uses combined, is responsible for 85% of all top soil erosion in the US and causes 130 times the excrement of the entire human population.

Stats may not be bang on, and the numbers you get may depend on your research methods, but it seems logical that raising animals for food - and certainly factory farms - are simply not environmentally friendly. I agree veganmadre that it is the ethics of it that really should matter - but common sense is also on the animals' side!!

AT and any rate, I have yet to hear "stats" that call into question the stats above.

Reason I save trees, is because I recycle From soap boxes, toilet paper roll covers (the paper that covers new toilet paper), to CDR/DVDR insert paper. Also, I don't buy paper (havent in a long time)

I agree about the stats, it seemed strange to me what PETA said about trees and stuff.
So you can't rely on numbers, but is there any reason to believe you actually reduce animal suffering by not eating meat? The reason I ask is becouse it seems to me that only one person has a small impact and is not going to get slaughterhouses to slaugther less animals by not eating meat.

You actually don't to tell you the truth, which is why it is a joint effort. However by not eating meat, you are not resposible for their suffering and such. If you eat, then you are a direct cause for it. People have demand for meat, which is why there will always slaughter animals. Hopefully over time, or through law, this will be a banned practice.

If I don't buy blood diamonds going to stop the civil war? Nope. But its a joint effort as well as well as responsibility issues. Same with child labor, etc.

You are right Kollision, and I am glad to tell you that there are 16.000 vegans and 300.000 vegetarians in The Netherlands(or so I have read on a ducht vegan site). And I am trying to get more people to stop eating meat, so far 1 person has stopped it becouse of me.
But it is just those PETA folders that have stuff in it like you save an acre of trees a year I find that really strange. I really hoped someone could explain how they got that idea, and if it was realistic.

But the joint effort thing is indeed reducing the demand for animal corpses.

Congratulations on that person, and congratualtions to them getting out of that dangerous cycle.

As for the tree thing, I really do not know and I would take it as a grain of salt right now since I know nothing about it. All I know is that it is possible since Vegans are SUPPOSED to be (and I stress the word "supposed") even more concious of their choices and actions.

I suspect that they got that by determining how much forest is cleared for grazing land for a certain amount of cattle, and then factoring the amount of cattle that a vegetarian doesn't eat. I know that large amounts of Amazonian rainforest were being cleared for grazing land.



Of course it is. Grocery stores and butchers don't buy meat just to throw away. If the demand goes down, they buy less. If they buy less, the ranchers breed fewer cows for slaughter.

Dan,

I cannot believe that what you said about clearing trees for graazing cattle did not occur to me. I think you are probably right on about how peta got that figure. TO graze cattle, you need land without trees. Good point skinnydipper.