Veg vs Non-Veg debate
If you like discussions and debates, then it’s pretty likely that you have been a part of vegetarian versus non-vegetarian debate, at least at one point of your life.
In this article, we will approach this topic from all the angles and critically analyze it. Be assured; you will get a lot of new veg vs non veg debate points. Our focus will be more on the philosophical, moral and anthropological aspects, rather than on the health pros and cons. Read on!
Table of Contents- Meaning of Vegetarianism / Definition of Vegetarianism
- Is man vegetarian or non-vegetarian?
- Veg vs Non-Veg debate points
- Some disadvantages of Non-Vegetarian food
Meaning of Vegetarianism / Definition of Vegetarianism
Vegetarianism is a practice wherein people completely abstain from eating meat or any by-product of animal slaughter.
By meat we mean all forms of animal, bird or fish flesh. Products gained from animals without slaughtering them (e.g. milk) are not considered non-veg items.
Is man vegetarian or non-vegetarian?
Before we dive into the veg and non-veg debate, we need to settle our own position. Are we herbivores or carnivores ?
Carnivorous animals are only capable of cutting action through their jaws. That is, they can only cut their food and swallow, they cannot grind (chew). In contrast, we humans have both a cutting action and also a grinding action. We have sharp incisors to cut our food, as well as molars to grind the food.
There is an enzyme in our saliva (called Ptyalin), which converts carbohydrates into sugar right in our mouth. So, we humans start digesting our food right there in our mouth. This is not the case with carnivores.
Another fact that proves that we are at best herbivores (or omnivores) and not carnivores is the length of the alimentary canal. In herbivorous it is five to six times the length of the body, while for carnivores it is just two to three times their own body length. Even with this yardstick, we humans do not fall in the category of carnivores.
Also, herbivorous need to eat daily, while most of the carnivorous animals only eat once in three to four days, or more. Humans also need to eat daily.
So, we are probably herbivores, or omnivores at best.
Veg vs Non-Veg debate points
Now, as we have clearly shown that humans are not carnivores, let us focus on the issue of food preference.
Should we opt for a vegetarian lifestyle?
What are the arguments that are generally put forward by people who are in favour of and against vegetarianism?
Non-Veg Argument 1: There will be scarcity of food if everyone becomes Vegetarian
Earth has a limited quantity of food resources. If all of us become vegetarians, then there will be a lot of load on agriculture and dairy products. People will start starving.
Veg Counter-argument 1
Of the available agricultural land on Earth, only 24% of the land is used to grow crops and feed humans. Rest of the land is used to raise and feed the livestock. So, we can increase the farm land to some extent, if majority of the people become vegetarians.
Also, around 33% of the farm produce gets wasted. If demand will increase, then this wastage will definitely reduce.
Non-Veg Argument 2: There will be population blast in animals if we stop eating them
If we all become vegetarians, then who will take care of animals like chickens, pigs, etc. We provide them food and shelter and in return we deserve to eat them.
Also, if we stop eating these animals, there will be no check on their population. For example, there will be over-population of chickens and sheep and they will destroy all crops and fields etc. Oceans will get over-crowded with fishes and crabs etc.
Veg Counter-argument 2
This is a typical thinking, wherein humans think too much about themselves. Life in this planet has been thriving since millions of years. Humans have become a major player only recently, say a few thousand years back, after their population became large enough.
But there have never been an imbalance in past. If there’s some imbalance, nature has its way to reinstall the equilibrium. Nature never needed us in the past for restoring balance, and it does not need us even now. On the contrary, we have done more damage than good. The ecological cycle and various food chains worked fine till humans came and destroyed and damaged a lot of them.
Just to give an example, Chinese under Mao in 1960s decided to kill sparrows in large numbers because they used to eat a lot of crops. They were killed in millions by left party comrades. But this led to a huge crop loss due to widespread pest problem. The sparrows used to eat these pests and in turn that used keep the crops healthy. All this led to a large-scale famine in China in 1960s.
Apart from this, these all animals do not need us to feed them or take care of them. We have domesticized some of them for our own self-interests; some for security, some for food, some just as showpieces etc.
Moreover, just have a look at the state of animals at butcher shops, the way these animals are kept in cages, how they are transported, how they are processed in assembly lines in factories. You can’t say that as “taking care”. That’s hell on Earth. These animals are in constant distress. In fact, many diseases like COVID-19 may have been caused by wild exotic species of animals in distress situation, in wet markets of China.
One more point to ponder. We have taken their reproduction in our hands to fulfil the huge demand. These animals are forcefully breeded and artificially produced in mass-scale to keep up with the demand of non-veg food. So, we humans are not eating these animals because they are in plenty and doing a service to nature. Rather, we are mass-producing them by unnatural methods. Such meat may not even be that healthy for humans. For example, do you know that many chickens are given hormonal injections to make them grow much faster. It’s too painful for them, and the meat is of inferior quality.
A sad fact!Around 80 billion animals are killed every year. That is more than 10 times the population of humans on this planet!
Non-Veg Argument 3: Survival of the fittest
Can you go to a lion or tiger and tell him to eat grass, rather than meat? You cannot.
Nature has made them carnivorous. How can nature be wrong? Carnivores kill and eat the weaker herbivores. It’s Darwin’s survival of the fittest.
Similarly, some animals like bears are omnivores. It’s their inherent nature. Similarly, humans can eat both vegetables, digest milk and eat meat too.
Veg Counter-Argument 3
Can you really compare animals, fishes and birds to humans?
Animals are slave to their survival instincts. They are driven by hunger and sex drive. They don’t have any choice. We do!
Their consciousness and cognitive level are way below humans. Do you know even the smartest dog breeds are cognitively only as good as a two-year-old human baby?
There was a time when even humans were like that. But we have evolved. We have learnt to control our urges and move beyond. That’s how we created civilizations and developed values and morals.
As the most intelligent and dominant species on the planet, isn’t it our duty to act like a big brother. Treat other species with mercy, if not empathy!
Till just a few decades back, there used to be a lot of cannibal tribes in the world, including India (you can still find some in the world). What’s your take on cannibalism? Sounds disgusting, isn’t it. Probably that’s how a vegetarian person feels when he thinks about non-veg diet.
Cannibalism was banned and those cannibal tribes were hunted down and punished. Some of them evolved. Because that was considered barbarism. It was a lower form of human civilization. Rightly so!
As humans we should aim to improve our civilization. Probably all of us will agree that a more non-violent civilization is a better civilization. By this parameter, a vegetarian civilization will be considered as a better form of civilization than a non-vegetarian one. Isn’t it?
Non-Veg Argument 4: Essential nutrients
There are many nutrients that can only be got from animal food or they are more easily available in them, e.g. proteins, omega-3 fatty acids in fishes etc.
Even vegetarians consume a lot of animal products like milk and cheese. Isn’t it immoral to take milk from cows, which is for their own babies?
Also, there are many countries and regions where vegetarian food is not that easily available. Imagine all the communities living near the sea-shores. They cannot afford vegetarian food on a daily basis, especially if they are poor. Vegetarian diet in many such places lacks enough variety, essential minerals and vitamins. This will lead to malnutrition.
Veg Counter-argument 4
We should definitely eat meat, if there is no option. We do not expect all people to become monks!
But ask yourself, do we all eat meat because there are not enough good vegetarian options available?
Do we all eat meat just for nutrition or taste?
We understand that we should eat meat if it’s essential for one’s survival. But the sad truth is that most of us eat animal meat just for taste. Satisfying our taste buds is more important to us than the life of an innocent animal!
Believe me, vegetarian food provides us all the needed minerals. Specially, if you are eating home-cooked food, fruits, seasonal vegetables, pulses etc. and following Ayurvedic traditions to some extent.
Non-Veg Argument 5: Aren’t plants living beings too?
Are not plant and trees living beings?
Don’t they feel pain?
Aren’t vegetarians also killing living beings to eat.
Moreover, don’t many of the vegetarians consume cow or buffalo milk. Is it ethical to consume dairy products?
Veg Counter-argument 5
Sure, plants are living organisms. Some studies have shown that they even feel pain.
But one thing is for sure. Plants are at a much lower conscious level than animals. Just as humans are much more conscious than animals. Any nervous system they have is rudimentary as compared to animals, and so any pain they feel cannot be compared to what an animal will feel. Have you heard an animal’s scream of horror? If you have, you will understand.
As we said earlier, we are not monks. We need to survive. But we should do so as humanely as possible. Probably everyone will agree that getting milk from a cow in limited amount is much more humane that slaughtering it. If you have no good vegetarian option, there’s no shame in eating non-veg. Not at all!
We can’t deny the fact that eating veg seems much less cruel than eating non-veg. So, it’s relatively a better way of life, isn’t it? Nothing in life is black and white. It’s all different shades of grey.
Apart from all this, non-veg food habit of ours has some peripheral disadvantages too.
Some disadvantages of Non-Vegetarian food
Greenhouse gases: Around 18% of the greenhouse gas emissions (mostly methane) in the world come from livestock. Methane is a much worse greenhouse gas than Carbon Dioxide.
Water: Livestock consumes around 70% of the fresh water consumption in the world. Around 94% of the biomass generated by animals is generated by livestock. That is, wildlife generates much less biomass than our livestock. And most of this goes untreated into the oceans or fresh water bodies, causing massive water pollution.
Endangered species: Out of all the species of animals and birds which are endangered in the world, almost 80% are directly threatened by our livestock industry or the aquaculture industry.
There are many more disadvantages like the health issues of consuming non-veg food, animal brutality etc. But we will not go into that here.
Winding Up
So, we can say that vegetarian lifestyle seems much better than a non-vegetarian lifestyle, from various perspectives - morally, health-wise, etc. Let’s summarize what we discussed in this article.
- We humans are most probably herbivores, rather than carnivores.
- No matter what our ancestors used to eat, we need to constantly improve our civilization. Most of us will agree that an emphatic, non-violent civilization is probably better than a violent civilization.
- Most of us eat meat for taste, not for nutrients. Moreover, vegetarian diet can provide all the essential minerals and vitamins.
- There won’t be any population blast in animals or scarcity of food, if most of us switch to vegetarian diet.
But we live in a society where individual freedom is of utmost importance. We honour everyone’s choice, liberty and freedom. Anyone can eat anything he or she wants to.
So, vegetarian diet cannot be forced upon someone. The inspiration for it must come from within.
We should hope that one day our human civilization will evolve to such an extent that we start acknowledging the freedom, liberty and rights of animals too, even those that we eat.
Some scientists have recently developed meat in the laboratory. Maybe such a scientific advancement will prove to be a win-win solution and satisfy both the parties in this centuries old debate.
Indian culture believes in ‘Vasudhaiv Kutumbakam’ (World is one big family). Probably, our spiritually inclined ancestors included not only humans, but also animals in the world family they were talking about. That’s why vegetarianism was considered better.
But we must remember; there’s no absolute right or absolute wrong. There’s only relatively right and relatively wrong. Everything in this world is relative!
If you think we have missed something, you have a new argument in favour of veg or non-veg diet, or you think there’s some flaw in any of the arguments mentioned in this article, then do let us know in the comment section.