this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2024
657 points (97.8% liked)

Science Memes

10726 readers
3108 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.


Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Kinda tongue-in-cheek questions, but: Honey isn't an animal body part, it isn't produced by animal bodies, so if it is an animal product because bees process it, is wheat flour (for example) an animal product because humans process it? How about hand-kneaded bread? Does that make fruit an animal product because the bees pollinated the flowers while collecting the nectar?

[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Bees make honey for their hive. Honey also does indeed contain bodily fluids from the bees.

The bread making human consents to you taking the bread (presumably). Breast milk and other human bodily fluids can be vegan for the same reason.

And insects pollinate plants not because they use the fruit, but for the nectar. They don't care what happens after they leave the flower.

[–] clay_pidgin 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

I didn't want to go into it in the original comment, but yes. It is a relevant debate whether it's vegan to swallow another humans semen, or even saliva. And yes, it is, if the human consents. Consent is the more or less the basis of whether vegans find it moral to consume something. Humans can give consent to sharing their fluids. Other animals cannot.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Think about it as if its about consent. The bees don't consent to their honey being taken. Cows don't consent to be repeatedly impregnated and milked. Pigs don't consent to their butts becoming bacon. Chickens don't consent to their eggs being taken.

However, the miller and the baker both consented to milling/kneading, and later selling their wares.

Human breast milk can be vegan, though, if given freely. If you forcefully take human breast milk, then it is no longer vegan.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

Technically, yes.

Assuming the canabee is consenting freely, and likely has to be done in a way not violating other laws. Like some variety of a pain kink where people slice of small portions of each others meaty bits and eat them. That's probably a thing, though likely not very popular among vegans.

[–] Willy 2 points 1 day ago

if think so but once they get to the age of consent they are probably not very palatable.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 day ago

it isn't produced by animal bodies

Sure is, it's concentrated bee spit with sugar. And spit is made of water and body cells.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I've always found it interesting that using animals is a bad thing, but using plants in similar ways is fine. I guess there has to be a line somewhere, otherwise such a person would simply starve to death.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Animals aren't just used, they are tortured on a industrial scale. That's mainly why vegans oppose animal products.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Are bees tortured to get honey?

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

yea of course, never heard of the bee grinder? bee grinder

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We’ve been keeping them improperly in the winter since the mid 20th century, leading to unnecessary bee mortality within hives. Whether that’s torture or not is up to you, but it’s definitely unnecessary harm.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is suggesting that we should be using hive covers. What exactly changed in the mid 20th century?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

We stopped using hive covers because they’re more expensive than the increased mortality. They naturally nest in tree hollows in winter, whose thicker walls (and living material) allow the hive to maintain a higher internal temperature than uncovered hives (or covered hives).

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

One good argument for this: A vegan diet not only minimizes animal deaths but plant deaths as well, since livestock obviously has to be fed on many, many individual plants before they can get slaughtered. So even if we for some reason prioritized saving the lives of plants going vegan would still be the way to go.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There are varieties of Jainism that won't pluck fruits (will only eat what has naturally fallen) and many mainstream varieties of Jainism that won't eat any root vegetables (because digging them up would harm insects), or seeded vegetables (eating it harms the plants ability to reproduce).

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Well basically yes, tho would need to get into the topic of exploitation and all that if we are talking about if something is viewed as acceptable to consume.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Beekeeping is exploitation, but don't the bees benefit from it too vs. being in the wild?

[–] CountVon 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Is it exploitation? I'd argue slave or prison labor is exploitation because the workers have no freedom of choice. Bees are free to leave, and the queen will in fact do so if not content with the conditions in the hive. If the queen leaves, all of the bees will swarm with her and you'd be left with an empty box.

Beekeeping strikes me more as symbiosis. The beekeeper provides ideal conditions, far better than the average location that would be found in the wild, and can help protect the hive against threats like mites. In exchange the beekeeper receives a share of the honey produced by the hive.

No beekeeper takes all of the honey from the hive. Only the top box (the "honey super") of a typical hive stack is harvested. A grate below the top box (a "queen excluder") prevents the queen from entering it so no larva are laid in the top box. The workers bee are smaller and can pass through the grate to build out comb and produce honey. The comb and honey in the bottom boxes are left to the hive to feed its workers and produce the next generation of bees, ensuring the survival of the hive.

A queen excluder cannot be used to prevent swarming long-term as the drones that gather the pollen also won't for through the grate! An excluder might be used to delay swarming and buy time so the beekeeper can offer another solution, like adding more boxes to the hive or splitting it into two hives. Better beekeepers proactively manage their hives, e.g. by setting up an empty hive in advance to essentially offer a swarming hive a new ideal home whenever they're ready for it.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago

it's also important to differentiate between someone with a backyard hive, vs industrial scale beekeeping where they might do all kinds of terrible shit because $$$$$$$$$$$$

we live in an age where if you're willing to spend some dosh on a fancy hive, you don't even have to open it to drain honey, you can just turn a lever and it uncaps the back of the cells and the honey flows out through a pipe.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago

What's fair compensation to the honey bee? Humans aren't allowed to speak on behalf of the honey bees. We don't actually know if this is a fair trade on the side of the honey bee, we can only look at it from our very biased opinion.