My vegitarian friend said that if you are a vegetarian that you can save 9 animals a year by not eating meat?

Question

Is that true? If so, people should def try harder to cut back... If it is, I know I will.

Mighty_power - Its supply and demand if everyone doesnt eat meat there would be no need to kill the animals. There for the more vegetarians the less the demand is... Im not even a vegetarian. Yet.

Answer 1

You cannot "save" the animals, anymore than you will save trees by recycling paper. Trees used for paper are not from the rain forest and are not threatened species, they are raised like corn and wheat in tree plantations amounting to thousands of acres. These trees are crops, if they were not to be used for paper, they would not exist in the first place. The animals raised for food would not exist in the first place if they were not to be used for human food. Another thought, the food eaten by vegetarians takes food away from the very animals they think they are saving. There has to be some sense of reality brought to bear here. Everything alive must consume some other living in order to survive, there is no perfect world. You should not be ashamed that you are alive and wish to remain alive. The vegan movement is a political one, not rational one.

Answer 2

Yes, the more people who commit to vegetarianism, the fewer animals will be raised and slaughtered. It's a group effort, but it takes individuals like you, one by one, to make a difference.

I work in a restaurant. We have lentil burgers and beef burgers. We sell more beef burgers than lentil burgers. But if more individuals ordered the lentils instead of the beef, we would order less beef. Therefore, our supplier (or grocery store, wherever) would have extra meat that did not get sold. It would go bad. So they would not order as much next time. Then, say, the butcher wouldn't butcher as many cows, so the rancher would have a few left over.

So, you see, this would take time, and some meat would get wasted, but it would definately pay off in the long run for you physically and for the planet.

I would strongly urge you to either become vegetarian or cut back to almost no meat; and, if you must have meat, get it free-range, grass-fed, and locally if possible. It's more expensive (which means you won't feel like you need to buy it that often) tastes way better, and you can have the peace of mind that you're eating a happy cow, not one factory-raised. Same goes for poultry, eggs, etc.

If individuals like you are enlightened in this area, we can make this world a happier, healthier place!

Answer 3

You, alone, wouldn't "save" any animals by choosing not to eat meat. The reason is that meat is produced in the United States by supply and demand. If the demand is about the same, the supply will be about the same.

In other words, to make an impact on the number of animals killed for food, a significant number of people would need to stop consuming meat (alternatively, an even larger number could eliminate some meat from their diets).

Unfortunately, one or two people's choice to eat less meat won't make a big dent in the demand for meat.

I realize how cold this reasoning sounds, but it's the truth.

God bless.

Answer 4

This would depend on how large the animal is. It would be healthier for us if we eat less meat. It would be less taxing on the environment if we eat less meat. There are more calories in the grain the cow eats than in the cow.

On the other hand there are people that would be adversely affected if we all became vegetarians. These folks would be the farmers, markets, and folks that are dependent on animal products.
If hunting were banned there would be no need for wildlife conservation and no funds. You could forget about seeing most wild animals unless you go to a zoo.

Answer 5

I believe what your friend told you could be correct, depending on the type of meat you eat. If it's beef, I doubt very seriously if you could eat one steer a year. Rabbits, chickens and other small animals, yes you could save at least 9 animals a year, probably many, many more. Besides, being a vegetarian is good for you. Years ago, I wouldn't eat meat at all, but do now. I still eat more veggies than meat and feel great.

Answer 6

What animals are slaughtered is determined by supply and demand. So if enough people stop eating meat, demand will go down, and then the supply will be cut by the manufacturers. However, the notion that you alone not eating meat will save 9 animals is not true.

Answer 7

More like 82 animals per year
All the fish, chicken, pigs and cows add up.
Going without meat does save lives.
If you buy a package of meat, the factory farm will replace it.
You are paying the store which pays the "farm" to kill a replacement animal and bring another one into a life of misery.
You are innocent only if you salvage meat you eat from the trash.
Otherwise, you are paying someone to kill for you.

Answer 8

No- the way you are putting it is if YOU don't eat meat 9 animals will be save. One person does not effect the meat market AT ALL. If you don't eat the meat, those "9" animals will still be killed and consumed by others. It's impossible for one person to effect the meat market that drastically.

I am not trying to effect your final decision in become a vegetarian because I am respectful of your opinions, but I would advise you not. You will be lacking many nutrients that are only found in meats. This means an unhealthy and potentially unhappy you. Humans were meant to eat meat. That's why we have canine (ripping and tearing) teeth. If we were not meant to eat animals, we would have developed different teeth.

Answer 9

About half my family is vegetarian but nobody tries to "guilt-trip" any of us meat eaters into not eating animals.

I was raised in Michigan on venison (yes, Bambi), pheasant, partridge, raccoon, bear, just about anything my dad shot, and my mom had a huge garden and raised the fruit and vegetables we canned or froze.

To answer your question: it would be impossible to estimate the number of "animals" a person consumes in a year, and yes, as so many have pointed out, if you don't eat it, someone else will so it won't "save an animal's life" by boycotting meat. After all, nine animals could be nine chickens or nine cows!

Answer 10

nicely, on account that they are so nicely-studied on the situation, they could desire to be responsive to that one vegetarian or some thousand vegetarians do no longer make a difference, yet hundreds of thousands of vegetarians and hundreds of thousands of those that a great deal shrink their intake of animal products make a tremendous difference. So, with all of those human beings at present in action or ought to I say abstinence, each and each added individual at last does have an result. i assume no person ought to vote because of the fact one individual won't make a difference, eh? i'm afraid your individuals stay in very small packing containers. ========================= applicable me if i'm incorrect, yet while all the vegetarians began ingesting meat like all human beings else they might sell greater meat and in turn breed greater animals. however if we are a small proportion, i'm quite advantageous that hundreds of thousands greater human beings starting to be a call for for some thing might get observed. particular, our objective is for animals to in no way be born in the 1st place, i do no longer see why absolutely everyone might see a situation with that as quickly as ninety% of those animals' lives are thoroughly lacking in excitement. isn't that why there's a tremendous pass with hundreds of companies that sell sterilization of cats and dogs, to avert animals from being delivered into this international. this is one element that animal welfare has in user-friendly with animal rights.

Answer 11

I bet it is way more than 9 animals. Think of a regular diet that involves meat at almost every meal. More like 9 animals a month!