I see this type of thinking a lot - where someone assumes that 'in a good natural environment' all animals are just peacefully living their lives and thriving. And to some extent, sure, animals in a rain-forest are gonna thrive better than in an industrial wasteland.
People have a romantic view of nature. Nature is fucking _brutal_, unforgiving, and horrific. Starving to death, living with severe infections, broken limbs, chunks of flesh missing, and hopefully reproducing before you meet your fate - that's how most animals in nature live out their lives.
As humans, we've gained the unique ability to greatly control not only our environment, but also other living creatures' environments, and 'unnatural' is not inherently bad. Nature is, more often than not, extremely horrific for living things.
Could we live in a decent environment, where the food paste we eat tastes pretty good and keeps you at optimal health - somewhere between starving and overweight? certainly possible, some pet owners do this. But that's not natural, that's just 'optimal for long-term health' - which is only one input to life happiness.
> For a wild animal, the default state is health. In normal times, wild animals are an appropriate weight. In the wild, animals don’t become obese. They don’t become depressed or suicidal. They don’t exhibit behavioral disorders. Animals inhabiting their evolved, ancestral environment are healthy — by default.
Excluding the ones that are rapidly killed I guess
> For a wild animal, the default state is health. In normal times, wild animals are an appropriate weight. In the wild, animals don’t become obese. They don’t become depressed or suicidal. They don’t exhibit behavioral disorders. Animals inhabiting their evolved, ancestral environment are healthy — by default.
I disagree, animals starve if there are too many due to overpopulation and will get fat if they find an easy source of food. They often die from infections, collect tons of diseases, have many parasites.
It's easy to see animals be sad and mourn the loss of a pack member or child in certain species.
America is the second fattest OECD country in the world. Blaming the individual completely denies the partial culpability that for-profit agribusiness socializes the costs through addiction design of ultra-processed foods. Perhaps mega agribusiness revenue should be taxed proportionally to the exponent of the average caloric density of their total products sold. Proceeds of such should be specifically earmarked for nutrition supplementation, effective fitness programs, healthcare costs, and a myriad of preventative and curative interventions.
the only things that have changed is edicts by the government (some good, some bad). So either the government or the individuals are to blame. companies produce goods within the rules of the government that people are willing to buy. 'mega agribusiness' grows food that sells. people buy things they want, these have never changed. The only thing that changes is the government taxing and banning goods and services, thus, the reason we have gotten fat is likely the governments fault. But good luck waiting for them to accept the blame, as the government is the judge, jury, and executioner of sorts.
those edicts include forcing companies to use less animal fats, forcing people to stop smocking, etc.
> Perhaps mega agribusiness revenue should be taxed proportionally to the exponent of the average caloric density of their total products sold.
Rice is among the highest caloric density foods grown.
> Animals in captivity are another story. These animals are often obese, develop tics and other neuroses, and engage in self-harm. In the famous case of Hugo at SeaWorld, an orca repeatedly rammed his head into the side of his pool until he had a brain aneurysm and died1. This phenomenon (known as “Zoochosis”) describes the unnatural coping behaviors that arise when you cage a wild animal.
This is wildly incorrect. I volunteer at our local zoo. The animals there are given highly regulated diets that are tuned to their medical needs. They are stimulated often and receive plenty of exercise and care. This isn't the case for every zoo, but 95% of them operate this way.
Animals can be in zoos for many reasons. Many of them come to us due to sustaining injuries that would have otherwise killed them. Others come to us to avoid illegal poaching or the exotic pet trade. Others still come to us to participate in breeding programs that will, hopefully, accelerate that specie's repopulation. Zoos used to keep animals for entertainment but many of them are moving away from this model, and rightfully so.
This flagrant accusation was enough for me to stop reading.
The oil diagram is pretty misleading. Steps like "blending" or "fractionation" happen with olive oil[1]. Not to mention that a lot of "cheap" (i.e. grocery store) olive oil is heavily processed[1].
I think his point was that olive oil when done right is a result of crushing fruit. The bastardization of that product is a travesty but it is still possible to get the real stuff.
> With food, the rule of thumb is to eat like your ancestors ate. Avoid ultra-processed foods, and avoid (or dramatically cut down on) the big 3: corn, soy, and wheat. These crops are in everything and are often the most processed, most pesticide-laden, and most fertilizer-intensive crops in our entire agricultural system.
Or you could buy (or grow, if you're hardcore enough) organic wheat, corn, and soy in their unprocessed forms and learn to cook. You know, like your ancestors did for thousands of years.
The problem is pesticides. Gluten intolerance only became a thing after they started dousing crops in round-up prior to harvest ("crop dessication").
Readit News
the default state is “multiple parasitic infections and permanent semi-healed injuries”
Any wild-caught reptile basically needs rehabilitation: de-worming, mite treatments, and in many cases anti-fungal treatment.
People have a romantic view of nature. Nature is fucking _brutal_, unforgiving, and horrific. Starving to death, living with severe infections, broken limbs, chunks of flesh missing, and hopefully reproducing before you meet your fate - that's how most animals in nature live out their lives.
As humans, we've gained the unique ability to greatly control not only our environment, but also other living creatures' environments, and 'unnatural' is not inherently bad. Nature is, more often than not, extremely horrific for living things.
Could we live in a decent environment, where the food paste we eat tastes pretty good and keeps you at optimal health - somewhere between starving and overweight? certainly possible, some pet owners do this. But that's not natural, that's just 'optimal for long-term health' - which is only one input to life happiness.
Excluding the ones that are rapidly killed I guess
I disagree, animals starve if there are too many due to overpopulation and will get fat if they find an easy source of food. They often die from infections, collect tons of diseases, have many parasites.
It's easy to see animals be sad and mourn the loss of a pack member or child in certain species.
those edicts include forcing companies to use less animal fats, forcing people to stop smocking, etc.
> Perhaps mega agribusiness revenue should be taxed proportionally to the exponent of the average caloric density of their total products sold.
Rice is among the highest caloric density foods grown.
This is wildly incorrect. I volunteer at our local zoo. The animals there are given highly regulated diets that are tuned to their medical needs. They are stimulated often and receive plenty of exercise and care. This isn't the case for every zoo, but 95% of them operate this way.
Animals can be in zoos for many reasons. Many of them come to us due to sustaining injuries that would have otherwise killed them. Others come to us to avoid illegal poaching or the exotic pet trade. Others still come to us to participate in breeding programs that will, hopefully, accelerate that specie's repopulation. Zoos used to keep animals for entertainment but many of them are moving away from this model, and rightfully so.
This flagrant accusation was enough for me to stop reading.
[1] https://exauoliveoil.com/blogs/olive-oil/how-extra-virgin-ol...
[2] https://seloolive.com/en-ca/blogs/olive-oil/are-cheap-extra-...
Or you could buy (or grow, if you're hardcore enough) organic wheat, corn, and soy in their unprocessed forms and learn to cook. You know, like your ancestors did for thousands of years.
The problem is pesticides. Gluten intolerance only became a thing after they started dousing crops in round-up prior to harvest ("crop dessication").