Vegan Meals for Austin Firefighters (Was: radio programs about food)

[Guest guest]

http://www.engine2.org/

 

See above for the Austin Firehouse Engine Number 2's web site

explaining the story of how they started serving vegan meals. They

posted the Paul McCartney Enchilada Recipe on their web site, along

with a bunch of amazing pro-veggie photos (firefighters posing with

broccoli and showing off their lower cholesterol levels, etc). They

even said they might create a " Vegetarian Firefighters " calendar, wow!

 

Thanks, Peter, for sending the NPR link ... I couldn't believe my

ears when I heard it, or my eyes when I saw the web site. It gives

me hope to see mainstream role models like firefighters making such

a positive change.

 

One other note: I think this really ties in with the discussion that

had been going on here at BAYAREAVEG about whether it is better to

promote ethical/animal rights over the health and/or environmental

benefits of veganism. Apparently, these firefighters got motivated

to make this change purely for health reasons, and they are now

bragging about their lowered cholesterol levels and how they " feel

much better " on this diet, etc, meanwhile inspiring and motivating

other people to follow suit. All of this, without ever acknowledging

for one minute, what many would consider the most compelling reason

for change, i.e., the animal suffering they are preventing through

the change in their diet!

 

I find this story especially interesting after reading Erik Marcus'

book " Meat Market " last summer. From what I understood from the

book, Marcus was saying that the vegetarian movement would be better

off focusing on the ethical benefits of veganism. This was partly

because specific claims about health and environmental benefits have

often been exaggerated or downright false. And, it can be difficult

to prove that a plant-based diet has less negative effects than a

meat-based diet (e.g., " fast food vegans " may NOT be healthier

than " fast food meat-eaters, " and rain forests cut down for soy

plantations may NOT be more " environmentally friendly " than

industrial chicken sheds housed on land that was never a

rainforest). By contrast, the enormous magnitude of animal

suffering involved with animal agriculture simply cannot be

refuted. So the idea from the book was that vegans should not focus

too much on promoting health and environmental reasons and just go

for the one undeniable ill effect of animal agrictulure: animal

suffering.

 

The above reasoning (as I understood it) seemed quite logical,

but I think the story of Engine #2 in Austin shows that it may not

be wise to let go of the health and environmental connections for

vegan eating. I think it's because people are not motivated so much

by logic as by emotion. Yes, it would make MORE SENSE, in terms of

the amount of suffering prevented, for the firefighters to start

serving vegan meals to help the animals, instead of to help

themselves, but that's NOT what motivated them. Instead, it appears

that they were motivated simply by the excitement of trying a " new

diet " that might improve their health. Truth be told, they could

have reduced their cholesterol levels without going vegan (exercise,

whole-grains, oatmeal, and celery, actually, would go a long way,

even if they kept eating some amount of lean meat and skim milk,

etc). But I suspect the novelty of going vegan (and the ease of

drawing a line between what they COULD and COULD NOT eat) appealed to

them, and that's why they stayed on the diet. (This is all

speculation, of course!) No matter how it happened, now that these

firefighters see that they are healthy with a vegan diet, I believe

they will begin to understand that the animal suffering caused by

animal agriculture is actually UNNECESSARY. This would be a big

step! Once they make that step, their minds may open up to hear and

process the facts about animal suffering.

 

To explain why I think this way: I have some friends who don't care

how much ANY ANIMAL suffers as a result of animal agriculture. This

is because they firmly believe that they and their children would

not be as healthy, would not grow as big and strong, etc, without

animal products, so whatever has to happen in order for them to

get " the best nutrition possible, " so be it. Why deprive their

children of what they believe is essential nutrition, just so a cow,

chicken, or pig, doesn't have to suffer? They'll choose suffering

for the animal over decreased nutrition for their child, any day of

the week. For people with this kind of belief system, it seems that

the goal of " reducing animal suffering " is simply not enough to

convince them to budge an inch. First, they need to know and

experience for themselves that a vegan diet is healthy ... healthy

for everyone (not just for people with a certain " blood type " or

astrological sign or whatever), and that the vegan diet is not

DEFICIENT in any way. Bottom line: If we want to reach lots of

people and open up their minds to a vegan diet, I think it is a

mistake to neglect the HEALTHY part of the equation ... as (I

believe) the story of Engine Number 2 showed us!

 

In closing, I think these Firefighters are doing a great job of

dispelling the I'd-be-unhealthy-if-I-became-vegan myth. For that, I

say BRAVO! I hope PETA or someone will give them some kind of AWARD

for Great Publicity for Vegetarians. I hope you all find some

inspiration in Engine #2's web site, and that you get a chance to

listen to the truly remarkable publicity piece which aired on NPR and

was forwarded by Peter Sigrist in his earlier message below.

 

Take care everybody,

Rachel

 

, Peter Sigrist <petersigrist@g...>

wrote:

>

> Austin Firehouse 2 goes vegan (on NPR)...

>

> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5028267

>

>

[Guest guest]

Rachel wrote: " I find this story especially interesting after reading

Erik Marcus' book " Meat Market " ...Marcus was saying that the vegetarian

movement would be better off focusing on the ethical benefits of

veganism...partly because specific claims about health and

environmental benefits have often been exaggerated ... "

 

I just finished reading T. Colin Campbell's " The China Study " , and the

evidence he presents for the health benefits of a whole foods plant-

based diet is very convincing. Like the firefighters, he doesn't

mention the ethical aspects either. The book is purely about research

and population studies that indicate that diseases of affluence

(cancer, heart disease, diabetes, obesity, etc.) would just about

vanish if we would all follow such a diet.

 

As has been said many times recently on this list, people become veg*n

for many different reasons. Whatever convinced them to make the shift,

I'm glad they made it.

 

Karen

[Guest guest]

Yeah, I've been wanting to read the " China Study " ... I've heard a

lot of people mention it, including Dr. Greger; from what I've

heard, it sounds like the " China Study " provides strong evidence for

promoting nutrition as a valid " reason to be vegan " rather than

focusing simply on ethics and animal suffering as suggested in " Meat

Market. "

Karen, thanks for the comment!

-Rachel

 

 

, " kmeldrum " <kmeldrum> wrote:

>

> Rachel wrote: " I find this story especially interesting after

reading

> Erik Marcus' book " Meat Market " ...Marcus was saying that the

vegetarian

> movement would be better off focusing on the ethical benefits of

> veganism...partly because specific claims about health and

> environmental benefits have often been exaggerated ... "

>

> I just finished reading T. Colin Campbell's " The China Study " , and

the

> evidence he presents for the health benefits of a whole foods

plant-

> based diet is very convincing. Like the firefighters, he doesn't

> mention the ethical aspects either. The book is purely about

research

> and population studies that indicate that diseases of affluence

> (cancer, heart disease, diabetes, obesity, etc.) would just about

> vanish if we would all follow such a diet.

>

> As has been said many times recently on this list, people become

veg*n

> for many different reasons. Whatever convinced them to make the

shift,

> I'm glad they made it.

>

> Karen

>

[Guest guest]

My two cents worth: Although I always loved animals, I didn't become vegan.

At age 34 I was 350lbs - I was out of breath when I walked more than

50feet, I had to wear depends because of incontinence, I was tired and

miserable and felt like I was in slow motion as life passed me by. Out of

desperation, I went vegan. Now, at age 41, I'm about 140lbs. This year I

ran 4 10k races for charity (My fastest time is 1:00:25 - I still hope to do

it under 1 hour) and cycled 3 metric centuries (100k - about 65 miles)rides

for charity. I no longer suffer from incontinence, have lots of energy, my

cholesterol went from 168 to 134. The animal rights/suffering issue and

philosophy came later and has given me another reason to stay vegan. When I

heard Erik Marcus speak, I disagreed with him. For me animal

suffering/rights had nothing to do with it. I think most people, especially

in the environment that we live in in this country, think " what's in it

for me? " " Looking out for number one " " I got mine -the hell with you " . For

some people the animal issues will turn them vegan, for others the

environmental issues will work, and for others, like me the health issues

will work. I think we should use all these reasons in our outreach to

omnivores, because - unless you know someone well and know where they are at

- you really don't know what will reach them. Why limit ourselves to only

one reason for going vegan?

Mary Anne

 

 

> " kmeldrum " <kmeldrum

>

> Re: Vegan Meals for Austin Firefighters (Was: radio

>programs about food)

>Tue, 29 Nov 2005 04:36:39 -0000

>

>Rachel wrote: " I find this story especially interesting after reading

>Erik Marcus' book " Meat Market " ...Marcus was saying that the vegetarian

>movement would be better off focusing on the ethical benefits of

>veganism...partly because specific claims about health and

>environmental benefits have often been exaggerated ... "

>

>I just finished reading T. Colin Campbell's " The China Study " , and the

>evidence he presents for the health benefits of a whole foods plant-

>based diet is very convincing. Like the firefighters, he doesn't

>mention the ethical aspects either. The book is purely about research

>and population studies that indicate that diseases of affluence

>(cancer, heart disease, diabetes, obesity, etc.) would just about

>vanish if we would all follow such a diet.

>

>As has been said many times recently on this list, people become veg*n

>for many different reasons. Whatever convinced them to make the shift,

>I'm glad they made it.

>

>Karen

>

>

>

>

>

 

_______________

Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!

http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/