>>221203>Educating people against their will is a pointless enterprise.
I asked you before that I was interested in learning more about a topic and I asked you for reading material. You told me to just "google it" as if what you claimed was common sense. The only one here that wants to pointlessly argue–with no basis in material reality–is you.>muh "IARC classifications"
this is irrelevant to the topic at hand and a shift of the goalposts. For the sake of argument, I will point out that you admitted yourself that meat is carcinogenic. >about processed meat
I.e., most meat that people consume. Again, I was never
arguing against eating meat completely. Either you have poor reading skills or are intentionally constructing strawman after strawman because you have no argument with a factual basis.
Once again, you post zero substance and argue against a strawman. Truly a worthless poster.
Since you are incapable of reading, here is my position in clear terms for everyone to see:
The meat and fishing industries are responsible for a litany of problems ranging from biodiversity collapse to global warming. Furthermore, the products of these industries are deleterious to human health. As I have shown, meat–especially processed ones–can be carcinogenic if overconsumed. Additionally, fish can be harmful as well (e.g., microplastics, mercury, etc.), though not to the extent of meat. People who have the means to do so should at least attempt to not overconsume meat and fish for at least health reasons if not anti-capitalist reasons.
Furthemore, "dunking" on vegetarianans and vegans is counterproductive at best and reactionary at worst, as such arguments are not only unscientific but they promote positions that aid the industrial capitalists. Accordingly, leftists should not defend overconsumption of meat and fish.
If you disagree with these positions, then provide an argument and factual basis against them. Any further "arguments" from you should be directed towards these statements and not towards strawmen.