I like your point that many people are not really working out and thus really just need the minimum-ish amount of protein in that case.
I am no longer veg for 2 reasons, in case my 2 cents means anything (tho maybe they are more personal to me than prevalent):
+ Processed food concerns (my specific examples):
-- Daily pea protein intake makes my stomach hurt... not sure if this is definitely related to processing or something else but chicken doesn't do this to me. -- I have trouble getting enough protein from purely unprocessed vegan sources like organic tofu, and organic rice and beans, and peanut butter on wheat bread. I can only eat so much of these 3 things every single day, especially as I lift weights and don't want just the minimum amount of protein. Are there other good unprocessed vegan sources of protein? EAG events and other events don't give me that impression.... lots of pea protein fake meat, and sometimes full set ups with very little protein at all for an entire meal.
-- Products like Soylent that are not organic, have glyphosate, a known carcinogen, and possibly other chemicals. Soylent has readable levels of glyphosate in it, but some think it's too much while others think it's an okay amount. However I'd like to avoid carcinogens in any amount at least when it's easy to.
+ Missing nutrients:
-- Why do so few vegans eat omega-3s from algae oil? Omega-3's from flax etc need to be converted and it seems this doesn't make the cut in what's needed for many people, because it's not the straight up DHA and EPA that the body best uses. "The trouble is that people vary dramatically in their abilities to convert ALA to DHA and EPA. So the only way to ensure that your body receives sufficient amounts of these latter two nutrients is to supplement." Not getting straght up DHA and EPA, impairs long term brain function of at least some vegans. Vegans should supplement with very specifically, algae oil, such as what VivoLife and Dr. Fuhrman sell. (-- Some vegans don't even supplement b12 which is more known). -- I can only wonder if there are additional nutrients that will come to light as time goes on, that vegans seem to be unaware of or careless about in their highlighting of animal suffering.
Something I do like about EA is that while the main ideas that many hold do have value, as you say... there also are some people who find their own way in EA on whatever topic most interests them even if their ideas are NOT held closely by many. (For example, while I am really concerned about AI, 95% of my interest in EA is global poverty, and teaching others some EA basics alongside non-EA ideas... and I mostly just link up with people who have those specific interests.)
That said, EA would be way better off as a whole if more diversity was present, from the high-income country world and especially from the low-middle income country world.
That's a fair point except that I certainly did not say nor mean "the median beneficiary" should be within the conversation at EAG and EAG-type contexts. I said that orgs like GiveDirectly and Fistula Foundation could be contacted to see which outstanding people they are in contact with might be ideal to bring to EAGs.
The people I speak of, don't even necessarily need to be be beneficiaries at all. They should just be, as I said, "people who grew up and/or currently live/work in these places." They might indeed be beneficiaries who now also work with these orgs in some capacity, or maybe they are not beneficiaries at all. Such people who grow up in a place, generally have way better understanding, and even sometimes out of the box thinking, about problems and solutions, etc.
I have met a very few such people at EAGs, so they sometimes are there in numbers of like 1-3 per conference, they are fairly easy to find and I sometimes wonder if I'm the only one who seeks them out, and if I have met more of these people than anyone else, even though I don't go to too many conferences overall. Personally I really enjoy speaking to them and have learned a lot from them. (But the fact that I think not too many people seem to care to find them and talk with them, makes me wonder if they themselves would find it worth it to visit an EAG in the first place from their own perspective.)
[edit 2 min after posting: "if you choose exceptional beneficiaries to represent the class of beneficiaries as a whole, that leads to a different set of problems." - I'm not sure what you meant by this part. surely it seems better to me to have some representation than zero representation.]
Just ideas, thank you so much for commenting back with your thoughts !!
All makes sense Geoffery and glad it's not just me who thinks about these things, especially on the 80k advice.
I agree that this list that Julia presents is very impressive and way better than what a lot might do, in some contexts. Your point is well taken and your initial comment was good too, I maybe could have read the meaning a little better so maybe it was me that boxed it in.
Thanks so much, these threads I am posting on here, are I think the first time I am having productive back and forths on the forum so that's kinda cool :)
To the 2 people who marked "disagree", and anyone else, again I am looking for feedback on this, so please take a moment to explain why you disagree with this, if you dare :)
Are you arguing that EA is "above-the-curve" on DEI stuff? Or you agree with me that it is not, but you just think my evidence for the point is lacking?
Are you comparing my public school, after-school program, to a donkey sanctuary? And/or do you believe that aiming to make EA more accessible to the general public, and more diverse, is akin to supporting donkey sanctuaries?
(on the other hand you have a point that my anecdote is not the best... as plenty of people in EA do like my ideas for broadening out EA to the general public... so it's not like many people hate on me for this, although actually you seem to think this is a waste of time yourself?)
The 80k hours article you are pulling is simply detailing that one can make a difference in general and all the reasons why one should pursue this, generally speaking.- My point was different... my point was that their actual concrete advice from there applies mostly to a specific elite kind of people who want to go to grad school and/or do certain types of studies/activities which about 88+% of people are not going to be into for one reason or another, starting with the fact that only about 12% of people go to grad school in the first place. Yes money is one main factor why many people won't even think to go grad school but sure that reason doesn't apply to everyone like you mention.
We can discuss the pros and cons of EA not being diverse. I think there are pros to its focus on the things it does, and I don't mean to sound like I'm bashing it 100%. But I think it's pretty clear that EA is not diverse as is, and doesn't resonate with people outside the general Ivy League world too too much.
Something specific I would like to see... looking for feedback on the concept:
More outreach to bringing in specific people from low and middle income countries to EAGs. Most obviously on the topic of global health and global poverty. (But also for other topics.)
For example, Fistula Foundation, Give Directly, and many other orgs work with people who grew up and/or currently live/work in these places. These orgs could be contacted to see who they thought was ideal to bring in to EAGs, and I'm sure they would have many recommendations.
The people we are aiming to help should be well within the conversation. Or at least slightly in it. Rather than just be the helpers/(elites) meeting amongst themselves.
I do see this happen a bit; I've sought out and met with a number of people who were born in various low-income countries. They are always so insightful and have a lot of ideas about complex root problems etc that EA can gloss over in just looking at the straightforward fixes / band-aids.
(However to be honest I do also wonder if people in these cases think the long trip was worth it, because I don't know if many EAs really care to hear from such people as much as they care to hear from people more similar to themselves.)
Personally I would love for such people to not just be present, but also giving lots of talks.
I could personally find a bunch of these people if anyone thought it was worth my while; I already have a few ideas and specific people in mind.
No, EA is the only place in the entire world I have been (and I have been many varied places) where I - a white straight male - am considered diverse, or at least semi-diverse... simply because I come from a typical white background that's not super wealthy; I'm the first to go to college in my family (and not ivy league); etc. (Or at least, there are "socioeconomic diversity" meetups at EAGs where they list me as diverse for these reasons. So I'm going off their definitions.)
And EA is aimed in many ways at maintaining exclusivity, even while incredible people like Julia make great strides in making it more inclusive. For example, some people in EA think my EA-oriented after-school program is a waste of time because it's not directed at the highest achievers. And indeed, there are few EA-oriented programs that are not directed at the highest achievers. Even 80,000 hours career advice applies not at all to the average person, but is oriented only to those who are already going to spend 6+ years shelling out money for undergrad and grad school, etc (at least last I checked).
By the way Simon, thank you for taking the time to read and respond to my thoughts!!
These people you talked to outside of the EA community...
+ Did most of them go to Ivy Leagues?
+ Did they know what malaria was already?
+ How many people is this?
+ What percentage of them do you know for sure ended up donating to malaria charities?
Idk, no one I personally know has any idea what malaria is. Whereas they all know what cataracts are.
Personally, I have raised $62,000 for Fistula Foundation, almost exclusively from non-EAs, by talking to hundreds of people about them.
I think they are WAY easier to talk about to ordinary people.
You think chemoprevention for malaria is as easy to talk about to ordinary people, as cataract surgery?
I like your point that many people are not really working out and thus really just need the minimum-ish amount of protein in that case.
I am no longer veg for 2 reasons, in case my 2 cents means anything (tho maybe they are more personal to me than prevalent):
+ Processed food concerns (my specific examples):
-- Daily pea protein intake makes my stomach hurt... not sure if this is definitely related to processing or something else but chicken doesn't do this to me. -- I have trouble getting enough protein from purely unprocessed vegan sources like organic tofu, and organic rice and beans, and peanut butter on wheat bread. I can only eat so much of these 3 things every single day, especially as I lift weights and don't want just the minimum amount of protein. Are there other good unprocessed vegan sources of protein? EAG events and other events don't give me that impression.... lots of pea protein fake meat, and sometimes full set ups with very little protein at all for an entire meal.
-- Products like Soylent that are not organic, have glyphosate, a known carcinogen, and possibly other chemicals. Soylent has readable levels of glyphosate in it, but some think it's too much while others think it's an okay amount. However I'd like to avoid carcinogens in any amount at least when it's easy to.
+ Missing nutrients:
-- Why do so few vegans eat omega-3s from algae oil? Omega-3's from flax etc need to be converted and it seems this doesn't make the cut in what's needed for many people, because it's not the straight up DHA and EPA that the body best uses. "The trouble is that people vary dramatically in their abilities to convert ALA to DHA and EPA. So the only way to ensure that your body receives sufficient amounts of these latter two nutrients is to supplement." Not getting straght up DHA and EPA, impairs long term brain function of at least some vegans. Vegans should supplement with very specifically, algae oil, such as what VivoLife and Dr. Fuhrman sell. (-- Some vegans don't even supplement b12 which is more known). -- I can only wonder if there are additional nutrients that will come to light as time goes on, that vegans seem to be unaware of or careless about in their highlighting of animal suffering.
I was just arguing a few days ago on here that your very perspective is needed in EA: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/6FLvBaEwiiqf9JGEJ/history-of-diversity-efforts-and-trends-in-ea?commentId=Egczucx2c3uX4qEMo
Something I do like about EA is that while the main ideas that many hold do have value, as you say... there also are some people who find their own way in EA on whatever topic most interests them even if their ideas are NOT held closely by many. (For example, while I am really concerned about AI, 95% of my interest in EA is global poverty, and teaching others some EA basics alongside non-EA ideas... and I mostly just link up with people who have those specific interests.)
That said, EA would be way better off as a whole if more diversity was present, from the high-income country world and especially from the low-middle income country world.
Cheers and thanks for writing this !!!!
That's a fair point except that I certainly did not say nor mean "the median beneficiary" should be within the conversation at EAG and EAG-type contexts. I said that orgs like GiveDirectly and Fistula Foundation could be contacted to see which outstanding people they are in contact with might be ideal to bring to EAGs.
The people I speak of, don't even necessarily need to be be beneficiaries at all. They should just be, as I said, "people who grew up and/or currently live/work in these places." They might indeed be beneficiaries who now also work with these orgs in some capacity, or maybe they are not beneficiaries at all. Such people who grow up in a place, generally have way better understanding, and even sometimes out of the box thinking, about problems and solutions, etc.
I have met a very few such people at EAGs, so they sometimes are there in numbers of like 1-3 per conference, they are fairly easy to find and I sometimes wonder if I'm the only one who seeks them out, and if I have met more of these people than anyone else, even though I don't go to too many conferences overall. Personally I really enjoy speaking to them and have learned a lot from them. (But the fact that I think not too many people seem to care to find them and talk with them, makes me wonder if they themselves would find it worth it to visit an EAG in the first place from their own perspective.)
[edit 2 min after posting: "if you choose exceptional beneficiaries to represent the class of beneficiaries as a whole, that leads to a different set of problems." - I'm not sure what you meant by this part. surely it seems better to me to have some representation than zero representation.]
Just ideas, thank you so much for commenting back with your thoughts !!
All makes sense Geoffery and glad it's not just me who thinks about these things, especially on the 80k advice.
I agree that this list that Julia presents is very impressive and way better than what a lot might do, in some contexts. Your point is well taken and your initial comment was good too, I maybe could have read the meaning a little better so maybe it was me that boxed it in.
Thanks so much, these threads I am posting on here, are I think the first time I am having productive back and forths on the forum so that's kinda cool :)
To the 2 people who marked "disagree", and anyone else, again I am looking for feedback on this, so please take a moment to explain why you disagree with this, if you dare :)
(on the other hand you have a point that my anecdote is not the best... as plenty of people in EA do like my ideas for broadening out EA to the general public... so it's not like many people hate on me for this, although actually you seem to think this is a waste of time yourself?)
We can discuss the pros and cons of EA not being diverse. I think there are pros to its focus on the things it does, and I don't mean to sound like I'm bashing it 100%. But I think it's pretty clear that EA is not diverse as is, and doesn't resonate with people outside the general Ivy League world too too much.
Something specific I would like to see... looking for feedback on the concept:
More outreach to bringing in specific people from low and middle income countries to EAGs. Most obviously on the topic of global health and global poverty. (But also for other topics.)
For example, Fistula Foundation, Give Directly, and many other orgs work with people who grew up and/or currently live/work in these places. These orgs could be contacted to see who they thought was ideal to bring in to EAGs, and I'm sure they would have many recommendations.
The people we are aiming to help should be well within the conversation. Or at least slightly in it. Rather than just be the helpers/(elites) meeting amongst themselves.
I do see this happen a bit; I've sought out and met with a number of people who were born in various low-income countries. They are always so insightful and have a lot of ideas about complex root problems etc that EA can gloss over in just looking at the straightforward fixes / band-aids.
(However to be honest I do also wonder if people in these cases think the long trip was worth it, because I don't know if many EAs really care to hear from such people as much as they care to hear from people more similar to themselves.)
Personally I would love for such people to not just be present, but also giving lots of talks.
I could personally find a bunch of these people if anyone thought it was worth my while; I already have a few ideas and specific people in mind.
EA is "above-the-curve" on DEI stuff?
No, EA is the only place in the entire world I have been (and I have been many varied places) where I - a white straight male - am considered diverse, or at least semi-diverse... simply because I come from a typical white background that's not super wealthy; I'm the first to go to college in my family (and not ivy league); etc. (Or at least, there are "socioeconomic diversity" meetups at EAGs where they list me as diverse for these reasons. So I'm going off their definitions.)
And EA is aimed in many ways at maintaining exclusivity, even while incredible people like Julia make great strides in making it more inclusive. For example, some people in EA think my EA-oriented after-school program is a waste of time because it's not directed at the highest achievers. And indeed, there are few EA-oriented programs that are not directed at the highest achievers. Even 80,000 hours career advice applies not at all to the average person, but is oriented only to those who are already going to spend 6+ years shelling out money for undergrad and grad school, etc (at least last I checked).