I don’t think seaweed is the microplastic source we should be fixating on:

Recent studies have found microplastics in bottled water (Gambino et al., 2022), food and agricultural products (He et al., 2021), beet sugar (Yurtsever and Cüvelek, 2024), takeout food containers (Du et al., 2020), beverages (Jin et al., 2021), and seafood (Garrido Gamarro et al., 2020; Al Mamun et al., 2023). Seafood is one among the primary sources through which humans can accumulate microplastics (Smith et al., 2018)

Since most animals eat plants, almost any problem you have at the plant level compounds or worsens at the animal level. Fish and “seafood” are the typical animal source of iodine, but they either eat algae, filter feed or eat animals who filter feed, so the microplastics accumulate. Generally, the lower down the food chain you eat, the fewer microplastics/heavy metals you’ll get.

About other animal based sources, land animals are not magical iodine producers, they also need to get it from their diet like us and are usually supplemented iodine. Just use some iodized salt for cooking, idk if it has different concentrations in the US but I’ve never heard a single person saying it tastes bad. Or eat some seaweed, the iodine is incredibly concentrated anyway and it probably has fewer microplastics than other dietary sources.

Source is Wikipedia:

The production of ethylenediamine dihydroiodide, provided as a nutritional supplement for livestock, consumes a large portion of available iodine

That’s because IRL the context of “but” s doesn’t usually go like this when there’s a legitimate argument. The point of the comic is not blindly following trans people.

“I support trans people, but X” tends to have transphobic sentiment, even if X could be valid. In your example, many medicines are animal-derived or tested on animals. Focusing on addressing trans prople on this topic is usually a choice.

If you have these views, the context you would usually express them is not addressing trans people, but your message would probably be “I oppose people taking animal-derived medicines even if it improves their health”.

Another simplified example. Let’s say there’s a grifter, scammer, scummy trans person, Alice. If you want to denounce Alice, you’d say “Alice is a scammer, xyz, don’t use her as positive trans representation” in a forum, discussion, post, etc. You’d probably not start with “I support trans people, but some of them are scammers like Alice”. Imagine how weird that would sound with other minority or opressed groups (women, black, gay, etc).

By the way: I don’t know if you’re vegan, but most vegans don’t share your views on animal-derived or tested medicine (even the Vegan Society definition accepts these medicines). I’d suggest you find another term so you don’t misrepresent veganism, like “ethical” or “[strict] animal rights” beliefs. I don’t want to invalidate or debate your beliefs but calling it veganism is just not accurate.

They enshittified the search so now using the chatbot is more useful. The search just returns slop and even fake slop forums.

It’s relevant since the US is an actual, current threat. Arguements don’t happen in a void, what about the fucking thing happening right now is a valid argument under a lazy irrelevant post like this one

No, it’s not all paid by our taxes, we literally have to pay insurance which is co-paid by our employer. The healthcare is universal because it’s mandatory to have insurance. If you’re unemployed you have to pay the full insurance yourself which is mind-boggling to me. The system is more similar to the US than true universal healthcare, because healthcare actors are private companies, doctors, and clinics getting reimbursed by insurances and the government.

Because they are manufacturing consent for closing the platform, calling installing apps from other stores “sideloading” and hiding the options behind “SUPERDUPERDANGEROUS” warnings, making you wait 24h for literally just installing software on your own phone. They know 99% of people won’t even bother. It’s obvious what they want to do, this is a step back because of the outrage, have no doubts that they’re gonna keep pushing it

When vegans promote a whole food, plant based diet: “I will only switch when there are drop-in meat and dairy replacements”

Ok then I guess we’ll develop drop-in meat replacements: “why emulate meat? So processed!”

It’s amazing if you’re into WFPB, it’s one of the healthier diets out there. You’re just not the target consumer of these meat replacements. But they’re useful for some people to have a better choice. They’re usually not unhealthier than the animal-based product they aim to replace (see meta analysis ).

It is the only mammal that has hollow structures of the pigment melanin, a trait normally found in birds, biologists said in a new study on Wednesday.

I have had my mind blown by some Asian tofu dishes, not very often but it’s happened.

Plus affecting children and the family

That’s quite an attractive price for a lifetime subscription, profitable from 15 months of use on.

koofr doesn’t seem to offer lifetime purchases anymore :(

Very visible hand of the market

Yes but using it though Molly is more secure

You can also use google maps from the browser

Agree, but I get the live traffic part. It’s pretty much a must in some areas. I think there was a wrapper/API but google killed it

When I was 10 I wished I was 7 again, so idk about that

*its

It’s way more sustainable and ethical (and possibly healthier too) to take b12 supplements (even if they’re not sustainably produced) than any amount of animal flesh (other than roadkill I guess).

• b12 deficiency is widespread even among meat eaters
• b12 is generally supplemented in animal feed or the animals themselves are supplemented. Skipping the middle man is clearly more sustainable.
• If the animals are not supplemented, you can’t know if you’re avoiding deficiency. Furthermore a tiny amount of a vitamin (milligram or microgram order of magnitude) takes way fewer resources to produce than 500g of meat/fish.
• no matter how “humanely” they treat the animals they still get killed, unlike with the supplement. For dairy and eggs the slaughter is more indirect but it is still a fact that animals in the industry end up getting killed.
• In terms of sustainability, it doesn’t matter that much if a product is local, the most impactful thing is the mode of production or the product itself (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/food-emissions-supply-chain)

I agree with your overall point that from a population perspective it’s way more practical and impactful to change as many diets as possible instead of focusing on changing diets to 100% plant-based. And I think we should focus on that, broader society interventions instead of advocating for individuals to change their diets.

But if someone who reads this is facing the choice of taking a supplement versus some animal flesh, there is no ethical or sustainability grounds for choosing the flesh. Also probably no health grounds unless there are compounding issues (eg deficiency + allergies, interacting conditions, etc). I focused on B12 but this applies to many nutrients.

It’s just not true that a tiny amount of animal flesh will spare you deficiency. It’s also not true that deficiencies are “tough to avoid” on a plant-based diet, especially protein deficiency.

Based