Thank you to everyone who put so much time and energy into this program as well as this summary and willingness to share something which may be deemed as not having the best outcome. Strong upvote for sure.
Very impressive and comprehensive work! Thank you for doing all of this research and the clear and well organized write-up.
The years of life affected is a great number to have, but as you note, how positive the effects are is less clear.
That said, just based on the cost effectiveness, it seems that even small welfare increases from these commitments results in a lot of reduced direct suffering.
A question I had that was prompted by the title and use of "AR" is to what degree do the survey respondents identify with "Animal Rights" vs. animal welfare, animal advocates, etc.
Was this 'AR' position something clarified in terms of identifying the individuals to survey, and were they asked what degree they identify with that terminology? I suspect it may have implications for the WAS related questions so I am more curious about that process.
Cowspiracy seemed to have caused a lot of dietary shifts in individuals, but I'm a bit worried that the environmentalist perspective might cause vegans as a group to shift even more towards ecosystem conservation, which might be bad for wild animals. Even excluding WAS, the film's environmental messaging can often lead to people cutting out/back on beef consumption and instead eating more chickens, which is probably more harmful.
Interesting. I have a similar post about this issue where I make the suggestion that vegans with cats should make a type of "factory farming offset" by donating to Animal Charity Evaluators.
My math was a bit off as I used slaughter weight for broiler chickens and not market weight, so thanks for bringing up that distinction.
That seems like a very flimsy argument to support their pretty questionable policy.
Thank you to everyone who put so much time and energy into this program as well as this summary and willingness to share something which may be deemed as not having the best outcome. Strong upvote for sure.
Very impressive and comprehensive work! Thank you for doing all of this research and the clear and well organized write-up.
The years of life affected is a great number to have, but as you note, how positive the effects are is less clear.
That said, just based on the cost effectiveness, it seems that even small welfare increases from these commitments results in a lot of reduced direct suffering.
That would be pretty convenient for those in a similar position as myself!
Thanks, I agree more centralized is probably good. (providing the search and organizational features are reliable).
Thanks for doing this survey and write up, Joey.
A question I had that was prompted by the title and use of "AR" is to what degree do the survey respondents identify with "Animal Rights" vs. animal welfare, animal advocates, etc.
Was this 'AR' position something clarified in terms of identifying the individuals to survey, and were they asked what degree they identify with that terminology? I suspect it may have implications for the WAS related questions so I am more curious about that process.
Thanks!
Cowspiracy seemed to have caused a lot of dietary shifts in individuals, but I'm a bit worried that the environmentalist perspective might cause vegans as a group to shift even more towards ecosystem conservation, which might be bad for wild animals. Even excluding WAS, the film's environmental messaging can often lead to people cutting out/back on beef consumption and instead eating more chickens, which is probably more harmful.
Interesting. I have a similar post about this issue where I make the suggestion that vegans with cats should make a type of "factory farming offset" by donating to Animal Charity Evaluators.
My math was a bit off as I used slaughter weight for broiler chickens and not market weight, so thanks for bringing up that distinction.