John Myers
There are no convincing arguments for eating meat. An international team of researchers investigated the arguments meat lovers use to defend their meat consumption. They came up with the same four justifications over and over again. We present these four and five other reasons for meat eaters and show them from a completely different perspective: There is no reason to eat meat.
Why do you eat meat
why do you eat meat This is the question scientists at Lancaster University’s psychology department asked 192 adults (including students) who enjoy eating meat.
The results were published in the journal Appetite under the title “Rationalizing Meat Consumption. The 4 Ns”.
The researchers around Dr. Jared Piazza examined the psychological mechanisms that kick in when people try to justify their meat consumption, even though deep down they know that it is neither ethical nor ecologically okay to do so and therefore it would be better to eat less or not at all no more meat to eat.
dr Piazza speaks of the meat paradox when he describes this conflict between meat eaters.
As expected, the meat eaters surveyed did not come up with a single compelling reason for their meat consumption. Up to 91 percent of those surveyed limited their arguments to the four usual pseudo-arguments, which are now referred to as the four Ns in English-speaking countries: Natural, Necessary, Normal, Nice (in German: natural, necessary, normal, tasty/pleasant).
The 4 N arguments for eating meat
dr Piazza said:
“The 4Ns are a common strategy used by meat eaters to allay guilt they would otherwise feel about eating animal products.”
Natural
I eat meat because the meat is and always has been man’s natural food. Humans are naturally omnivores.
Necessary
I eat meat because the meat is necessary, even vital. It provides me with essential nutrients.
Normal
I eat meat because the meat is normal for me. I grew up with it and I’m used to eating meat.
Nice
I eat meat because eating meat is fun and meat is delicious.
Meat tastes good – everything else is a distraction
Arguably argument 4 is the main, if not the only, reason for most meat eaters to eat meat. All other arguments are just for camouflage. So you try to somehow justify the consumption of meat scientifically and thus distract from your own moral reprehensibility – according to Dr. Piazza’s analysis.
However, all of this happens mostly unconsciously. Hardly any meat eater would ever admit that their actions or food are morally reprehensible – not even to themselves.
Ethical criteria do not exist for many meat eaters
Moreover, according to Dr. Piazza have certain characteristics in common that clearly distinguish them from vegetarians. For example, they like to degrade animals to “things” and also credit them with far fewer mental abilities than vegetarians do.
They hardly ever use ethical criteria when choosing food, and they rarely think about supporting animal rights or animal welfare in any way. Unless it is your own pet.
Animals to cuddle and animals to eat
When it comes to pets, completely different rules apply to almost all animal owners among meat eaters and they act as if the child’s dwarf rabbit is something completely different from the roast rabbit that is on the table on Sundays. According to these people, even their own dog or cat seems to have nothing to do with the animals they eat every day.
While everything is done for dogs and cats to enable them to live as comfortably and as long as possible, it doesn’t matter a bit how cows, pigs, and hens fare in factory farming.
So that this strange and inconsistent behavior does not attract attention, one keeps telling oneself and others the 4 Ns in order to be able to continue to indulge in a diet that has long since passed its zenith – at least in the modern world.
Meat eaters have known that for a long time – also rather subconsciously. Therefore, the mere presence of a vegetarian or vegan living person is often perceived by them as a kind of moral reproach, according to Dr. Piazza. And even if vegans don’t say a word about the subject, meat eaters never miss an opportunity to talk about vegetarian or vegan diets – mostly with amusement.
The 4 Ns: Only bogus arguments for meat consumption
So what is there to say about the 4 Ns? Since there is no arguing about taste – the fourth N – and the third N says nothing more than that the person concerned is apparently stuck in the wheel of his acquired habits without ever having thought about it, we will only deal with the first two below Ns closer one:
Natural meat consumption looks different
Natural: It may well be that meat was part of man’s natural diet in ancient times. In fact, humans are omnivores.
However, it is more likely that prehistoric man, as the main collector, resorted to easily obtainable food whenever possible: fruit, wild plants, roots, and leaves, but also eggs, insects, maggots, snails, etc. All that is significantly less dangerous than exposing yourself to the dangers of a big game hunt.
So modern man absolutely wants to eat as his ancestors did in primeval times, but insects, maggots, and the like are strangely out of the question.
And even if a prehistoric man – as far as meat is concerned – lived exclusively on mammoth steak, deer fillet, and elk goulash, this meat would probably have been of a significantly different quality than what is generally on the market today. However, very few modern meat eaters fall back on the game – which could most likely be considered original.
And the meat of so-called old breeds of domestic animals is not much in demand, since it is too expensive in the era of cheap mania and, moreover, its fat content is too high for dieters.
It is therefore interesting that only those aspects of primeval life that fit into the image of one’s own habits are allowed to serve as role models. After all, meat eaters don’t live in caves without heating. Nobody wants to be without a car, smartphone, or computer either, although none of these existed in prehistoric times and therefore do not fit the “Paleo” style.
In the meantime, modern methods of analyzing primeval tartar have also shown that our ancestors preferred to eat plant-based foods and that the current paleo hype with lots of meat, therefore, has no archaeological or scientific basis – as archaeologist Dr. Christina Warinner explains in detail here: Paleo nutrition – trend without scientific foundation
Of course, the animal is no longer slaughtered. Hardly anyone today has the necessary know-how, not to mention the necessary overcoming. Instead, people thoughtlessly reach for the anonymous and hygienically packaged piece of meat, which can be bought in the supermarket in minutes and at a ridiculous price without any effort. There is no longer any trace of hunting, as was usual in primeval times.
The natural diet of prehistoric man also included plenty of wild plants. But the most passionate meat eaters in particular want to know next to nothing about this, because their brain, which is so well developed (through the meat), signals to them that this must be “rabbit food”.
Finally, a question that is particularly important in this context: if something has been done for millions of years, does this mean that it must remain so and that we must continue to do it? Does it mean that we can’t change and we can’t evolve? In almost all other areas of life, we have long since differed from our ancestors. Why do we have to stick to eating meat? Especially since meat is demonstrably not essential for life.
Meat is neither necessary nor essential
Necessary: Many people still believe that meat is essential to life. Yet millions of vegetarians around the world show that this is not the case. And numerous vegetarian and vegan athletes show that there are obviously completely different sources of strength.
While most meat eaters can’t really say much about this second N-argument, except that meat contains incredibly great protein, the scientifically interested among you list other nutritional properties that are said to be hidden in meat:
Iron, zinc, and vitamin B12 are mentioned immediately after protein. It is said that iron and zinc are more bioavailable in meat than in plant-based foods since in the latter (e.g. in cereals and legumes) the so-called phytic acid is said to reduce the bioavailability of these minerals.
Almost everything is correct: Meat undoubtedly contains great protein, because it is known to be a piece from a perfect animal body that is lying there on the plate. An animal body is of course much more similar to us in terms of protein composition than a lettuce leaf, a nut, or a raspberry.
However, given that the perfect carcass on the plate came from nothing more than plant-based foods, it should make sense that we should be able to do the same. And so we know today that a purely plant-based diet is wonderfully supplied with protein and that protein deficiency really only occurs if someone – as is common in countries with famines – would only live on millet porridge or only on polenta, for example, or simply has nothing to eat.
Meat also contains iron and zinc – but not in higher amounts than in good vegetable sources of iron and zinc. Unless you would only use offal (which has an above-average trace element content), which nowadays hardly anyone does and likes anyway.
As far as the better bioavailability of said minerals in meat is concerned, this is not worth mentioning. Firstly, iron deficiencies or anemia also occur quite frequently in meat eaters, secondly, studies have shown that vegetarians have the same high zinc levels as meat eaters and thirdly, vitamin C increases iron absorption so well and compensates for the supposed absorption-inhibiting effect of phytic acid so comprehensively that it the allegedly poorer bioavailability of minerals from plant foods is eliminated.
At the same time, a vegetarian/vegan diet is automatically very rich in vitamin C, so it does not even require a great mental effort or special cooking skills to use this effect for oneself.
According to official opinion, vitamin B12 can only be found in foods of animal origin. Whether or not this is actually the case remains to be seen, as more and more vegans are experimenting with a wide variety of plant-based foods to find purely vegan B12 sources. We have written a detailed article about vitamin B12 in food.
Basically, however, there has never been a purely vegan diet. This has only become possible in the modern, ultra-hygienic world. Because apart from mammoths, eggs, and snails, our ancestors always ate plenty of microorganisms containing vitamin B12, even with their plant diet. Small beetles sit on berries, small maggots stick in roots, etc. Today, however, such foods are of course no longer on the market – and a hundred percent vegan diet can be practiced.
However, since B12 supplements are neither expensive nor difficult to take and only a few micrograms of vitamin B12 are required daily, this vitamin is not a reason for meat either.
Even vitamin K2, which is also, but rarely, mentioned in connection with the “necessity” of meat, is no reason for meat since vegetarians and vegans do not show any vitamin K2 deficiency symptoms.
Aside from the 4 Ns and the results of Piazza’s study, there are of course other arguments that are used to defend meat consumption.
Argument 5: Animals eat meat too
It is particularly interesting how the lack of compassion for meat-producing animals is explained. It is often said that it is so common in nature not to show any emotional impulses, especially when it comes to food. After all, no one has yet seen a lion howling and eating the antelope that has just been killed, or losing his appetite from grief and pangs of conscience.
It is hard to believe: but the animal world is actually used as a model here. You look to an animal to justify your own behavior. On an animal! And that when, as a human being, you want to be so superior to the animals! He again emphasizes that man is the crown of creation above the animal.
After all, it is the human being who is blessed with brains, reason, and intelligence, while the poor animal world staggers through life purely instinct-controlled.
And now the omnivorous human suddenly, most voluntarily, puts himself on the same level as instinct-driven beings – and not only in terms of the lack of compassion. The consumption of meat itself is also justified by the existence of carnivorous animals: animals also eat meat. Or the food chain thing comes into play:
Argument 6: Man at the top of the food chain
It is often said that humans are at the end of the food chain and are therefore allowed to eat everything that crawls and flees. That doesn’t seem to have been thought through either. Because if you believe this, you can go on a safari in the predator enclosure and try out who is at the end of the food chain.
Argument 7: Indigenous peoples also eat meat
Equally irritating are the references to shamanic teachings, from which one can learn “a lot about nature worship, ritual killing, respect for all living things”. All living things are involved in the cycle of eating and being eaten, explains Christian Rätsch, who, by his own admission, has lived with shamans for a long time.
However, only those who are sure that nobody will come and eat them can calmly talk about eating and being eaten – simply because everyone could have been exterminated or imprisoned long ago.
Also, the victim probably doesn’t care whether they are ritually or non-ritually killed. A death as quickly as possible, or even better: living without any rites, would probably be what he loves most.
Rätsch continues to argue in the spirit of the shamans: “Everything we eat – regardless of whether it is plants or animals – we have to kill. We can only live through the death of other living beings.”
Argument 8: Plants must also be killed
Yes, that’s right. But everyone knows that the number of plants killed increases when they first have to be used to fatten an animal. It is assumed that around 15 kilograms of grain are required per kilogram of meat. If the animals were given their species-appropriate green food, there would be even more plants per kilogram of meat.
A kilogram of meat might fill you up for two days, 15 kilograms of grain will certainly fill you up for a month. The plant-based diet is therefore the one that minimizes suffering.
Nevertheless, in the former world of shamans, the life and survival of people must have been very different. And if primitive peoples kill free-living animals for their survival, then hardly anyone will be able to compare such behavior with the agony of billions of animals who suffer a lifetime and have to die without any respect just for the enjoyment of a luxury people.
And here, too, the same question arises as above with the imitation of the primeval way of life: Why is only the recommended meat consumption taken from the life of primitive peoples and shamans? Why not their abstinence from TV or their life in nature without a toilet and bathroom?
Argument 9: Without meat, there is no highly-developed brain
This is another argument that is becoming increasingly popular. Because without meat – according to some researchers – our brain would have remained that of a great ape. (Sometimes it is also said, without cooked food.) However, whether the human brain would not have developed in its special way without meat (and without cooked food), as it did with meat (and with the help of the cooking pot), no one can judge. Scientists have now been able to prove the opposite.
However, who prevents us from using this wonderful brain, however created? And to realize that the era of meat-eating is ending, yes, it must be ending, if we care about the earth and even think a little bit about those who will populate the planet after us. Because hardly any other human habit leads to such a strong ecological burden, climate damage, and environmental destruction as meat consumption – and that without any necessity
Our great brain also lets us know that time never stands still, that evolution is always progressing, and that people are changing with it – slowly but surely. They’re evolving away from the species that only eat meat because their ancestors did, because it tickles the palate so nicely, because it smells so good, because it’s so quick to prepare, toward humans who are actually different than instinctive beings. People with compassion for all creatures of this earth. People with foresight, are people who consciously shape their lives and consciously decide that neither animals die nor the entire planet has to suffer for their existence.
May all beings be happy!
