Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 186

Thread: Clams, oysters, scallops and mussels

  1. #1
    ChartT
    Guest

    Default Clams, oysters, scallops and mussels

    .
    Last edited by ChartT; Apr 18th, 2008 at 04:51 PM. Reason: Delete post

  2. #2
    Seaside
    Guest

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Hi ChartT! There is a lot that can be learned here. The animals you consider okay to eat are trapped in one place for their lifespan, with the exception of scallops and some clams. Scallops can escape attack by clapping their shells together rapidly and pumping water through their valves, and thus they can "swim" away from predators fairly quickly. Clams can rapidly burrow into soft sediments to get out of reach of predators. This to me indicates that they have enough of a brain and central nervous system to be aware of danger and interested in preserving their own lives, and I'm sure the ones who cannot escape capture are just as interested in continuing to exist. Vegans acknowledge that all animals are entitled to continue their lives as unmolested by human beings as possible. We are all responsible for unavoidable deaths; it is our duty to make sure we do not voluntarily choose to use, harm or kill other beings, regardless of how complex they may or may not seem to us.

  3. #3
    Ratbag Cal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    A Land Down Under
    Posts
    175

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Quote ChartT
    I adopted the approach that understands vegan as doing what I can to remove animal products from my life. On that basis, I do not eat meat, poultry, fish, dairy products, eggs or honey. (I do eat clams, oysters, scallops and occasionally mussels, on the basis that they do not have a brain or a centralized nervous system capable of processing thought. To understand this, I talked at length with a friend who is a vegetarian and a biologist.)
    Welcome ChartT. Perhaps you could explain how you rationalise eating clams, oysters etc when you say you are doing what you can to remove animal products from your life? Are these not animals by your definition?
    A bit rattled

  4. #4
    Imapeach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    in the desert
    Posts
    176

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Hi ChartT, it's great to have a new face around here and it's nice to see you seem to have a thoughtful view of the world

    I also battled with the question of clams, muscles etc while I was a lacto-ovo for the exact same reasons you've cited. However, as a vegan I cannot condone their consumption. Molluscs and shellfish do not photosynthesise, therefore they are not plants, therefore they will not be a part of my diet.

    As for the intelligence question, I know a lot of "people" who have brains and vertebrae who do not seem to be capable of processing anymore rational thoughts than the average mollusc

    Also, you may wish to visit this site, if you haven't already http://www.pcrm.org/health/reports/fish_report.html

    Welcome to the forums!

  5. #5
    Stu
    Guest

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Hi ChartT. That's amazing that you've started a mass debate (oo-er) with your very first post.

    It made me laugh that you're so specific: "I describe myself as 96% pure". Good one!

    Anyway, welcome to the site. You're obviously a very intelligent bloke. Nice to have you around.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    155

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Hmm... I don't know. I don't eat oysters etc. for basically two reasons: 1) it would remind me of the meat of 'higher' animals, and 2) I can't imagine that in the process of catching these simple animals, no higher animal gets hurt (although I do realize, of course, that growing the soybeans etc. that I eat involves hurting both a number of sentient beings and the environment). I don't know the details, but I don't imagine that people go into the oceans to pick oysters one by one, making sure that nothing else gets hurt. Speaking of which, I prefer just leaving the oceans alone as much as possible. We (humans) are causing enough (global, environmental) harm as it is...

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    155

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Quote Imapeach
    Molluscs and shellfish do not photosynthesise, therefore they are not plants, therefore they will not be a part of my diet.
    Well, neither do fungi, I believe. And yet, vegans don't normally have issues with eating mushrooms. As the matter of fact, I do believe that fungi were classified as animals at some point, I guess it has something to do with their tissue structure or whatever (any biologists here?), and now they are classified as - fungi. Neither animals nor plants.

  8. #8
    Seaside
    Guest

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Posted by ChartT:
    Prove that clams, etc., think. Prove that they sense is some fashion other than stimulus-response. Prove that they possess the desire to continue their existence. Prove that they are sentient.

    That's exactly the point. They are not animals by my definition. They don't think or feel in any way that I can figure.

    They are not capable of thinking, much less having an interest in continuing to exist. They do not feel. They do not process any sense of danger.

    If you're going to eat plants, eat clams, etc. From a vegan perspective there is no difference.
    Since you've already got it all figured out, what are you doing here?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by John
    I'm going to state the obvious here. You are neither vegan nor vegetarian.

    By the way, this is not a place to argue the definition of vegan.

    Posted by ChartT:
    The problem is, it is not obvious - as good people do disagree. But if you like, we can sidestep the definition.
    John is right, and it is very obvious. We at this forum are vegans, and I'm sure none of us wish to sidestep the definition. The definition of a vegan is one who does not harm, exploit, or kill animals.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    155

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    You know guys, I don't understand how one can refuse to eat clams on the basis of compassion, and yet be pro choice. (Just to clarify: I am very much pro choice, and I don't eat clams etc.) Isn't one of the pro-choice arguments that a fetus at the stage at which it is aborted is no more sentient than a clam? So, what I'm saying is, give the guy a break! We are getting too caught up in definitions. Now, as I said before, I don't think that eating these animals is a great idea, but if you're not eating them in order to avoid their own suffering, then I think you're missing the point.

  10. #10
    snivelingchild's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Lafayette, Louisiana, United S
    Posts
    1,022

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    I find that almost offensive that you compare a woman who chooses to end a fetus's life out of some need to someone who eats a clam. What good reason could someone possibly have to "need" to eat a clam, and bringing a child into the world has far greater consequences than not eating a clam.

    I hope that noone is being to hard on him. There is no reason to attack a person for what they do, but I'd like to think that whether or not it is ethical to eat a clam a pertinant subject for discussion of a vegan forum. However, if CharT is offended that it is discussed in his welcoming thread, I'm sure we can move this somewhere else.

    And the only reason that the arguement for being pro-choice is that a fetus is not sentient or feeling is that the mother is, and you must choose between the interests of the two. I don't think someone's interest in eating a tasty clam compares to a pregnant woman's.

  11. #11
    snivelingchild's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Lafayette, Louisiana, United S
    Posts
    1,022

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    And the main subject of this post I think applies to this, as any situation where the exploited animal does not feel pain or does not physically seem to "suffer".

  12. #12
    tails4wagging
    Guest

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Anything that has a heart, brain, circulation is a living, breathing being therefore has a right to life like any other creature in this world.

    Any living being responds to painful stimuli so they feel pain!!. So who are we to inflict pain on another living creature??

  13. #13
    John's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    NJ USA
    Posts
    714

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    CharT, I'm sure that you are a nice person, most meat-eaters are, but you are not a vegan. Not in practice and not in spirit.

    Even though clams have a nervous system and some mollusks like the octopus are intelligent, I can't prove to you that clams, etc. feel pain. I'm not a biologist. Regardless, we vegans believe that clams and other mollusks own their own bodies. They do not belong to us.

    We try our best not to kill or exlpoit animals. Of course, a situation may arise where we must kill an animal but there is no need to go out into the ocean and kill shellfish. We can get all of the nutrients from non-animal sources.

    For decades vegans have been creating a new lifesyle. One free from animal products. We vegans can say that we are healthy and thriving without eating animal products. You can't say that you are healthy without meat, CharT.

    Whether an animal feels pain during death or not, a vegan won't eat an animal. If the animal were unconscious, or even feeling pleasure during death, a vegan would not eat an animal.

    I know that you are almost vegan and that's cool. If you were almost vegan and had the goal of giving up meat you would be "vegan in spirit" so to speak. Instead, you try to pull the definition of veganism closer to your lifestyle.

    There are people who eat meat who are concerned about the suffering of animals. I commend their compassion but they are not vegan.

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    155

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Quote snivelingchild
    I find that almost offensive that you compare a woman who chooses to end a fetus's life out of some need to someone who eats a clam. What good reason could someone possibly have to "need" to eat a clam, and bringing a child into the world has far greater consequences than not eating a clam.
    What exactly is your point, Sniv? That both a fetus and a clam are sentient beings, but ending the life of a fetus is justifiable while ending the life of a clam isn't? Or that a clam is sentient, while a fetus isn't? Or something else...?

    And for the record, I'm not being nasty or anything, I'm just trying to understand what you're saying.

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    155

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Quote tails4wagging
    Anything that has a heart, brain, circulation is a living, breathing being therefore has a right to life like any other creature in this world.

    Any living being responds to painful stimuli so they feel pain!!. So who are we to inflict pain on another living creature??
    But the question is whether clams etc. can feel pain at all.

  16. #16
    Zool
    Guest

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Quote Seaside
    Hi ChartT! There is a lot that can be learned here. The animals you consider okay to eat are trapped in one place for their lifespan, with the exception of scallops and some clams. Scallops can escape attack by clapping their shells together rapidly and pumping water through their valves, and thus they can "swim" away from predators fairly quickly. Clams can rapidly burrow into soft sediments to get out of reach of predators. This to me indicates that they have enough of a brain and central nervous system to be aware of danger and interested in preserving their own lives, and I'm sure the ones who cannot escape capture are just as interested in continuing to exist. Vegans acknowledge that all animals are entitled to continue their lives as unmolested by human beings as possible. We are all responsible for unavoidable deaths; it is our duty to make sure we do not voluntarily choose to use, harm or kill other beings, regardless of how complex they may or may not seem to us.
    I wouldn't eat these animals simply because I don't think they taste that great but I do feel ChartT has a point. No brain & no central nervous system=doesn't know suffering=safe to eat. People shouldn't be so hung up on a definition without questioning the ethics of what they're deciding first. That's where religions go so horribly wrong. They start with a good idea, place a rigid belief structure around it, and blindly enforce it without ever questioning anymore. I'd hate to see veganism head that direction.

    By the same reasoning quoted above, you could conclude that since plants will lean into sunlight or bleed sap to protect their "wounds", that they are also very interested in continuing to exsist. Yet we all cruelly devour them every day .

    My favorite example is the venus fly trap. They act on stimuli to ensure their continued existence, yet they eat flies which I think we all here agree are sentient beings. How can we let such an atrocies take Place? We should rally for a carnivorous plant holocaust. After all, we'd sooner bite the head off a live plant than ever harm a fly. Just food for thought.

  17. #17
    Astrocat
    Guest

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    I wonder though, whether CharT would also be quite happy to to eat a person who was in a vegetative-state coma....

    When people who are in long-term comas are referred to as being in a "vegetative" state, it is for a good reason - it is because they have lost their awareness of the self - thus not having "ownership of themselves" nor sentience, and are not expected to recover.

    Clams etc. have bodies made of flesh just like vegetative-state humans do.... so if sentience is your benchmark for what you are happy to consume, then really what is the difference ?

  18. #18
    Zool
    Guest

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Quote Astrocat
    I wonder though, whether CharT would also be quite happy to eat a person who was in a vegetative-state coma....
    I wouldn't. I'm trying to watch my cholesterol.

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    155

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    I'm with Zool here. Both about the clams and about humans in coma.

  20. #20
    John's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    NJ USA
    Posts
    714

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Quote ChartT
    This has already been discussed and dismissed. Merely repeating previous statements with a condescending opening adds nothing to the quality of the discussion.
    I'm not condescending to you, CharT. In fact I am doing opposite. I am trying to communicate that I do not believe that non-vegans like yourself are evil people. I do not claim that veganism is the only legitimate lifestyle in this world. I do not believe that vegans do no harm or necessarily do less harm than flesh eaters. I'm not judging your lifestye but you are not a vegan if you eat flesh.

    Saying that no one is vegan because we are forced to use animal products to some extent in our lives is silly. There are the basic items that vegans swear off. If you can go past these basic items that's great but not essential.

    Allow me to digress. I have a great respect for pacifists. I believe that they are highly evolved people. Part of me would really like to be a pacifist but I do not totally agree with pacifist philosophy. Maybe someday I will be a pacifist but I am not one yet. Therefore I do not call myself a pacifist. I do not say that I am 96% pacifist. I do not argue that no one is a pacifist because everyone pays taxes, hurts animals, lives on stolen land, blah, blah blah. I respect how pacifists wish to define themselves and do not call myself a pro-war/fist-fighting/only-for-a-good reason pacifist.

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    155

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    John, while I can see advantages to keeping the purity of definitions, I think that saying that ChartT wasn't 'vegan in sprit' was unwarranted and condescending. It is my understanding that ChartT seeks to minimize the suffering of sentient beings by not eating them and otherwise not using their products. (He eats clams etc. because he believes - and I tend to agree - that these beings are not sentient.) To me, that makes him look very much like someone who is 'vegan in spirit'. Also, I hope you have read Zool's post. Let's remember what veganism is essentially about before we start getting into each other's faces with the 'I'm a vegan and you are not!' type of comments.

  22. #22
    Ratbag Cal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    A Land Down Under
    Posts
    175

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    John said about ChartT:

    If you were almost vegan and had the goal of giving up meat you would be "vegan in spirit" so to speak. Instead, you try to pull the definition of veganism closer to your lifestyle.
    and I agree with John as I feel this exactly sums up ChartT's approach to a vegan lifestyle.
    A bit rattled

  23. #23
    snivelingchild's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Lafayette, Louisiana, United S
    Posts
    1,022

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Quote Hasha
    What exactly is your point, Sniv? That both a fetus and a clam are sentient beings, but ending the life of a fetus is justifiable while ending the life of a clam isn't? Or that a clam is sentient, while a fetus isn't? Or something else...?

    And for the record, I'm not being nasty or anything, I'm just trying to understand what you're saying.
    I understand. I meant that I believe they are both on the same level, without sentience, but that I do not think the two situations were comparable because one does not kill a fetus just to satify their taste buds (at least I hope not). I meant that a clam and a fetus can be viewed as basically the same thing, consciousness-wise. I think the important difference between the two situation is that a woman who chooses an abortion views it as necessary, and choosing between herself and the fetus is necessary because her needs are different than that of the fetus. Meanwhile, someone who eats a clam does so out of want, not out of need, or at least what they feel they need (unless they think their lives will be readically changed without eating clams or other such creatures). Does that make what I was saying clearer?

    And CharT, I'm sorry if it bothers you I talk about a subject there is a different thread about, but I think what I am saying has more pertenance to this discussion that to the issue of abortion, since that is not what I am trying to debate. I am just saying that the comparison made between the two didn't make sense to me.

    I do wish that this discussion would stick to the issue that CharT brought up, and not the person who partakes in it. This really has no relevence to our opinions and can lead to misconceptions and assumptions is we're not careful.

    That being said, I realized with this thread just how civilized people on this forum are, even in heated debate, especially compared to most. It feels so nice to be able to have meaningful discussions without the distraction of attacks seen in massive amounts elsewhere. Sorry for going off-topic. No more, I swear.

    Anyway, I think it is a good point that how can we say they deserve rights when they don't have sentience like other animals and are more comparable to plants, which we do not give these rights to, or at least say we cannot live without. Of course, I am saying this with no knowledge of these particular animals, so I think I will try to learn more about the subject. Things like this never entered my mind before because I never thought of things like this as food, ewwwww. Too gross for me. If we grant something rights just because it is technically classified as an animal, then that is no better than not eating meat simply because that's what a vegan does, with no reason behind it. We should decide for ourselves things such as this.

    *off exploring biology*

  24. #24
    spo
    Guest

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Oh boy!! Here I go again --- Geez guys, I hate doing this again: you know, coming off as the "Big Authority". But what should I do here-keep quiet, when I have some info that could clear this up?
    When I got my nursing degree, I also got a minor in biology, specifically microbiology, but I sure did take a lot of Bio courses that included the study of life forms under the "Standard Taxonomy" or Classification System of Biologists. That whole classification thing can clear this up, for sure.

    Clams and oysters are classified as Phylum Mollusca or Mollusks, a group of over 100,000 species that also includes snails, octopus species and squid. I'm sure you already see where I'm going here: there are not many people who would say an octopus or snail is not a life form, with a nervous system, and capable of directed independent movement, with the ability to feel pain and seek to avoid it.

    Clams are capable of opening and closing their shell at will. Clams generally live beneath the surface, in the bottom sand. They can extend or retract a muscular foot from inside their shell. They use that foot to burrow deeper under the sand to avoid danger. If they are capable of independent movement to avoid danger, then they must be able to perceive such danger and take a meaningful action intended to "avoid" that threat. Perception is one of the indicators of consciousness, and I would like to ask ChartT if he thinks plants have these biological qualities of "danger avoidance"?

    In addition clams have a siphon that reaches out from their shell when they are beneath the sand and is used by them, much like we would use a straw, for sucking in and discharging water from their body cavity to maintain equilibrium--this is another conscious action taken to preserve their life functions.
    Should I really go on further? The intention here is not an academic discussion of sea ANIMALS, but rather the ethics of vegans. If you are a vegan, you do not harm sentient beings, and you do not consume them for food because you practice compassion. I think I clearly showed that clams possess a type of sentience, and to me, they are deserving of being accorded the compassion we vegans extend to all conscious beings.

    Thanks all, for reading this--I hope this will shed some light, and not add to more heat. I really believe that a person who truly is practicing a vegan ethic would know this instinctively.
    spo

  25. #25
    snivelingchild's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Lafayette, Louisiana, United S
    Posts
    1,022

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    I understand and appreciate your post, spo, but a point was made earlier I believe that such actions are merely reflex, not coming from consciousness, and that no sentience can exist without a brain. I am not saying I agree with this, because I don't know yet, but do you have any input on these opinions?

    Though there is something that really bothers me and I do not understand. I don't understand how such an animal could recognize danger without being able to percieve. Also, some mollucks have eyes. How can they gain information from such senses of they don't have a brain? How could such organs work without thinking or something to process the information taken in?

  26. #26
    Seaside
    Guest

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Thank you spo! I always enjoy your posts!
    I forgot to mention before that scallops also have eyes, which are pretty complex structures. ChartT did not mention actually eating octopi, but I recall a story about one that was kept at the Monterey Bay Aquarium. Critters kept vanishing from other tanks, and it was a mystery until this octopus was caught escaping from its tank at night, entering the other tanks to feed (octopi are not vegan ) and returning to its original tank before morning. Octopi are considered the most intelligent invertebrates, (and this one had the most intelligent vertebrates fooled for a while!) and clams, mussels, oysters and scallops are their cousins, so who can tell what they may be capable of?

  27. #27
    spo
    Guest

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Hey, hi to two of my favorite people on the forum, Seaside and Sniv. How are you guys doing? I hope all is well.

    To talk to you first, Seaside, I agree 100% with both your posts!!
    Pretty much par for the course with us, yes? You kind of answered some of Sniv's concerns, too, I think -- but, of course, that is for her to say.
    I saw a television program about 5 yrs. ago where a marine biologist was studying two octopi and had them in separate tanks facing each other. When he looked at the nighttime camera trained on them, he saw them making a series of complicated moves. He then studied the tape and found that one octopus was teaching the other how to move in order to learn his specific "language". Before too long, the researcher could see them communicate with their movements, such things as "pick up the pink shell and throw it into my tank"!!! Wow!! Thank God the guy came to his senses and he let the two octopi go free - back out to sea!

    Anyway Sniv, clams have a nervous system and it is not true, from a biological standpoint, to say a brain is needed for perception-- all you need is a network of neurological tissue to send info across from one cell to another. I admit it is a less complex form of perceptual ability, but serves as a clam's "brain" if I might be so bold as to name it that.
    A reflex must, by its definition, be a simple and rapid "cause and effect" behavior. Example: you put your hand up to poke my eye, and I blink- that's a reflex, and occurs too fast to be processed by our brains-- it occurs in the sensory neurons of the eyelids--no brain there.
    But if you execute a series of directed and different behaviors, such as burrowing into and out of sand, opening and closing your shell for food and to extend the siphon for water expulsion - that is more than one series of behaviors, not just reflexive avoidance of danger. Remember, too, that if it was a reflex to avoid danger, then they would just close their shell. But clams extend their muscular foot and move away, and they also use the foot to bring themselves closer to a food source. That is a series of behaviors that have multiple goals and require directed perception. Anyway, the "Taxonomy Classification System" call Mollusks 'sea animals', and that should put them "right out" as a food source for vegans.
    Anyway isn't it a sort of "specie-ism" to think of a brain as only being the type of complex neurological structure mammals possess? Just more food for thought

    Anyway Sniv, just to get a little off topic -- I thought you expressed the abortion versus "eating a clam" argument so well and very insightful as to the different variables involved.

    Hey, what can I say? I think the two of you contribute truly stimulating intellectual discourse in all your posts, without being rude or nasty.
    Many thanks to both of you for your ideas, which I really value
    love-spo

  28. #28
    snivelingchild's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Lafayette, Louisiana, United S
    Posts
    1,022

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Thanks spo! I tried to search for very simple explanations of mollusk biology, but all I seemed to find were things telling me where all the organs are, and I couldn't seem to find much about their nervous system. (though I, admittedly, didn't look very hard)

    If only I was still seeing an ex of mine, all my questions would be answered immediately. He was a vegan (though I heard he recently ate cheese ) who was obsessed with mollusks, and whose girlfriend (don't ask) was a zoology major, and knew all sorts of stuff.

    And I've always had such a respect for octopi. I love reading about them because they really are the smartest non-human animal I can think of. Dolphins, eat your heart out! There was this gret article once in Discovery, and not only is their muscular system amazing, so is their intelligence in the way they use it. In the one octopus they were talking about, a man opened up a jar with food inside it in front of an octopus, and the octopus figured how to open the jar quite with ease just from watching. But that isn't nearly the most impressive thing I've heard of octopi doing.

    Sorry, maybe I should create a thread on octopi!

  29. #29
    Seaside
    Guest

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    ChartT and Zool, you might be interested in the thread entitled "Eating Fish: Is veganism only about not causing physical pain?" in the Not a Vegan Yet forum.

  30. #30
    Astrocat
    Guest

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Prove that clams, etc., think. Prove that they sense is some fashion other than stimulus-response. Prove that they possess the desire to continue their existence. Prove that they are sentient.
    Prove that they don't.

    CharT is a "vegan who eats meat" due to using questionable foundation to support consuming meat despite saying that he is a vegan, so I'd say that the ball is in his court to prove that his claims are true before demanding that they be disproven by others as if they are true.
    Which so far, he has not done.

    Let's remember what veganism is essentially about before we start getting into each other's faces with the 'I'm a vegan and you are not!' type of comments.
    Hasha, not everyone discusses veganism in a primarily comparative or competitive way, as I'm sure you must already understand.
    As can clearly be seen John is not making any comment of the sort, he is just noting that CharT isn't vegan. Which he isn't.

    Using abstract vegan philosophy like "sentience defines whether something is vegan or not" could go a step further and technically also include vegans who eat eggs and cheese, since an egg isn;t considered to be sentient, and for obvious reasons neither is a block of cheese.
    They are both animal products - but obviously the cheese and eggs don't have sentience themselves.

    And again, how do people here feel about vegetative-state people ?
    Do those who would condone vegan consumption of those not proven to have sentience condone consumption of these people for vegans who feel urges to consume them, since they don;t have any more sentience or potential for thought , concern for their welfare, etc, than clams do ?

  31. #31
    John's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    NJ USA
    Posts
    714

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    I started off just wanting to briefly state the obvious and I got drawn in, repeating and clarifying myself. People often ignore the value and power of semantical issues. That is, meaning.

    Concerning compassion, I believe that it is possible that clams, etc. feel pain. I know that they at least suffer by being killed. Many people do not believe that any non-humans feel pain. The best thing to do is give the clams the benefit of the doubt.

  32. #32

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    155

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Quote Astrocat
    Using abstract vegan philosophy like "sentience defines whether something is vegan or not" could go a step further and technically also include vegans who eat eggs and cheese, since an egg isn;t considered to be sentient, and for obvious reasons neither is a block of cheese.
    They are both animal products - but obviously the cheese and eggs don't have sentience themselves.

    And again, how do people here feel about vegetative-state people ?
    Do those who would condone vegan consumption of those not proven to have sentience condone consumption of these people for vegans who feel urges to consume them, since they don;t have any more sentience or potential for thought , concern for their welfare, etc, than clams do ?
    There's a big difference between clams and cheese/eggs. In order to obtain cheese and eggs, a great deal of suffering needs to be deliberately imposed on beings that are most definitely sentient, namely cows and chickens. This does not seem to be the case with clams. The only two objections to eating clams that I can think of (other than the 'it's gross!' argument) are that 1) in the process of catching clams, higher beings are hurt, and 2) it disrupts the oceans. As for 1), well, this is comparable to hurting, say, frogs on rice fields; it is considerably different from raising cows/chickens for milk/eggs. Still, I think that the two reasons against eating clams are fairly good reasons; at least, they're good enough to me (although, in my case, there's the 'gross factor', too).

    As for humans in vegetative state... Well, no, I wouldn't eat one. There, the 'gross factor' would be even higher for me, and besides, I can't imagine that that could possibly be healthy (the human form of BSE comes to mind). But if the vegetative-coma-person's relatives wanted to let wild animals eat him/her, that would be fine by me...

  33. #33
    Zool
    Guest

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Since this thread started I've been reading about the nervous systems of mollusks. It's very important not to compare squids & such to clams. Though they're in the same phylum they are in different classes entirely. The entire nervous system of bivalves (clams, scallops, etc...) seems to consist of nothing more than 3 sets of ganglia. (nerve bundles) They're in the front, back, and foot of the animal. It's also been determined that they typically only respond to touch, light, and chemicals. The few who have eyes have very simple ones that can only sense & react to light. Bivalves probably can't feel pain, instead the nerves just make the body react to do what's the most favorable to the animal's survival. (Move where there's a higher food concentration, get away from physical touch, etc...) It's really not unlike how some flower blossoms will shut when you touch them. I found this article fascinating: http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/...r/br-jvmj2.htm Squids and octopusses however have very complex brain structures and are a huge step up in evolution.

    After reading the article referenced in the paragraph above and a few related resources, I realize that there has to be a point where you draw a line. A point where you say, "I will give all potential foods due process." Be it plant, animal, fungus, bacteria, mineral, etc... After all isn't it discrimination to lump foods into categories? Even as broad as "plant" or "animal"? Hell even yeast is an organism. I find it inherent that ALL life wants to continue existence. For us to continue our own, things have to die. It's a fact of nature. People have to look at their individual ethics though. Vegans especially have to admit that there is a grey area where not everybody (even fellow vegans) will all agree. Reality is not all black & white. Many things are obvious but there's a point at which you can't tell if you're causing damage & suffering or not. Then it's a judgement call. But if you do your research and weigh the facts and make the best, most ethical decision you can, then you most definitely have the "vegan spirit". Someone shouldn't be told they're flat out not vegan because they've chosen to listen to their own conscious. We all learn more about making the right choices every day. It's not all one hardcore leap saying, "You're either for us or against us." The fact you care, keep your self aware of the world and how you affect it, and do your absolute best to not cause harm is what being vegan is all about. It's called compassion. Everybody on this forum has it or they wouldn't be here.

    Incidently, I also read about how clams & such are "harvested". It's a process called dredging where large metal screens or cages are dragged across the ocean floor to scrape them up. Possible ecological damage was suggested before and sure enough it causes quite a bit. For that reason I personally feel it's wrong to eat these things. But that's just me.

    (Sorry about the rant, my brain gets spun up pretty easily. )

  34. #34
    John's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    NJ USA
    Posts
    714

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Quote Zool
    Someone shouldn't be told they're flat out not vegan because they've chosen to listen to their own conscious.
    Don't worry, I'm not tired of repeating myself. I'm not putting CharT down for his opinions. The truth is, eating a piece of meat from any animal might not be a cruel act at all. If a bird flew into your kitchen and died of old age next to the oven, why not eat that animal? Give up? Because vegans don't eat meat. There are people who think that it is impossible to survive and be heathy without meat or animal products. We vegans prove them wrong. If you want to eat that bird, by all means, go ahead--but a vegan wouldn't.

  35. #35
    Seaside
    Guest

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Posted by Astrocat:
    And again, how do people here feel about vegetative-state people ?
    Do those who would condone vegan consumption of those not proven to have sentience condone consumption of these people for vegans who feel urges to consume them, since they don;t have any more sentience or potential for thought , concern for their welfare, etc, than clams do ?
    That did occur to me, Astrocat, when the level of sentience was brought up. After 20 years of being vegan, I would have to stop thinking of myself as a vegan if I developed an urge to ingest any sort of flesh, whether it was my own placenta, wild duck eggs in an abandoned nest (ducks used to nest in my front yard when I lived on dry land), road kill, or brain-dead people! If genetic scientists one day manage to clone animal bodies without brains and nervous systems in order to provide cruelty-free flesh to the starving masses I will not eat it because flesh is not food.

    Starfish are natural predators of mollusks. They have five powerful arms with hundreds of suction-cup feet that pull apart the valves of the mollusk just far enough to insert their digestive organs and devour the flesh inside. There are predatory snails with very coarse mouth parts that they are able to move in a rotating fashion to essentially drill a tiny hole in the shell and prey upon the soft body parts of the mollusk. Humans have no such natural tools to use to attack these creatures and obtain their flesh. Our teeth, digestive systems, fingernails, inability to breathe underwater, etc. indicate that mollusks are not intended to be available to us a source of food. Our dna is not aware that we are able to use technology to prey upon organisms that are not our proper food. We are biologically designed to be herbivores (and don't ask why we have sharp canine teeth; gorillas are basically fruitarians and use their well developed canines for display rather than function) and we have been conditioned to believe wrongly that animals are food to us. Animals, regardless of their level of sentience or ability to feel pain, are no more food for humans than sawdust or tree bark.

  36. #36
    spo
    Guest

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Quote Seaside
    After 20 years of being vegan, I would have to stop thinking of myself as a vegan if I developed an urge to ingest any sort of flesh, whether it was my own placenta, wild duck eggs in an abandoned nest (ducks used to nest in my front yard when I lived on dry land), road kill, or brain-dead people! If genetic scientists one day manage to clone animal bodies without brains and nervous systems in order to provide cruelty-free flesh to the starving masses I will not eat it because flesh is not food.
    This is so right and to the point, thanks again, Seaside. I am going to steal this line of yours: "flesh is not food". Believe me, it will save me a thousand words, at least.

    Quote Seaside
    Our dna is not aware that we are able to use technology to prey upon organisms that are not our proper food. We are biologically designed to be herbivores (and don't ask why we have sharp canine teeth; gorillas are basically fruitarians and use their well developed canines for display rather than function) and we have been conditioned to believe wrongly that animals are food to us. Animals, regardless of their level of sentience or ability to feel pain, are no more food for humans than sawdust or tree bark.
    Boy, I have to steal this whole paragraph. It is logical and states the vegan ethic in one of the best ways. Thanks, again for these two insights!!
    spo

  37. #37
    Happiness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    in the surf of the oregon coast
    Posts
    53

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    I'm deeply enjoying this thread and everyones input. I'm new here and a bit shy of talking on such a hot topic but as a marine biology student I thought I'd throw in my two bits:

    Oysters are part of the phylum molluska (as we've determined) and while they have no brain they do have three pairs of ganglia. Ganglia is a grouping of nerve cells essentially. They also have a heart. And blood. And gills. They are acually towards the top of phylogenetic tree for inverts. Species of bivalves have been found in fresh water, salt water and even thermal vents where they rotate from areas of high sulfur concentrations (for feeding) to low (to keep from poisoning their blood). Damn that's cool, these animals have my respect.

    And I know I am new to veganism and I still have the stars in my eyes but from what I have read veganism was founded on the principle of ahimsa (dynamic harmlessness) and that it is not "sufficient to simply avoid specific foods and products; it is neccessary to actively participate in beneficial selfless actions as well". And in my book that means every living creature is sacred in its own right. Brain or no brain. We are all connected and one.
    "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle"
    Irina Dunn :D
    "We are not human-beings, we are human-becomings"
    Roger Ames :D

  38. #38
    spo
    Guest

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Quote Happiness
    And I know I am new to veganism and I still have the stars in my eyes but from what I have read veganism was founded on the principle of ahimsa (dynamic harmlessness) and that it is not "sufficient to simply avoid specific foods and products; it is neccessary to actively participate in beneficial selfless actions as well". And in my book that means every living creature is sacred in its own right. Brain or no brain. We are all connected and one.
    Dear Happiness:
    Wow--it's great that you posted about this. I'm glad you put in your educated information. It is as I suspected -- there is good scientific evidence of clams' sentience. Thank you for this contribution!!

    As a Hindu convert, I totally agree with the above quote. IMO, Ahimsa is the foundation principle of a vegan ethic. You stated the principle of Ahimsa and its practice in veganism in a succinct and correct way. Again, I thank you for this!
    spo

  39. #39

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Not another meat-eater claiming to be a vegan. I will send Korn a PM about this. This thread should be in the "Not a Vegan Yet" section. Actually, I don't think this person ever intends on being a vegan (or vegetarian, for that matter).

    To be honest and upfront, you might want to describe yourself as an omnivore who doesn't consume dairy, eggs, and animal clothing items.

  40. #40
    Ex-admin Korn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    4,830

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    I do eat clams, oysters, scallops and occasionally mussels, on the basis that they do not have a brain or a centralized nervous system capable of processing thought.
    Scallops can escape attack by clapping their shells together rapidly and pumping water through their valves, and thus they can "swim" away from predators fairly quickly. Clams can rapidly burrow into soft sediments to get out of reach of predators.
    What would be a good reason to eat something that (having what we know as a brain or not) tries to escape attacks tries to get out of reach of predators?

    One thing is clear to me: I don't want to go to a vegan cafe and get a meal with clams, oysters, scallops and occasionally mussels because some persons who define themselves as vegans mean that research show that these 'beings' do not feel physical pain. There are other kinds of pain, some beings feel pain when someone from their group is being attacked. Please don't get this wrong, but I think it's important to distinguish between the definition of vegan and vegan ethics. I don't want any animals in my soup, not even those who died a natural death, not roadkill, not birds who are crashing into my kitchen windows. It's important to keep the definition of vegan food closely linked to plant based food, because finally, after 60 years, lots of people now understand what the word means. There will always be people who discuss if it's unethical to eat roadkill, or if it's wrong to eat a bird that died a natural death, just like there will be people who will discuss whether it's wrong in an emergency situation, like after a airplane crash, to eat humans, or if fish can feel pain or not. There will be new research.

    I don't want to base my life on which studies that currently are getting the top rankings at Google. I don't want to eat something that doesn't want to be eaten, or which feels and smells like living beings to me. Like John said, the best thing to do is give the clams the benefit of the doubt. There's just no reason to eat clams, oysters, scallops and mussels anyway.

    A while ago, I heard about an article that claimed that humans have two brains (http://www.boingboing.net/2002/02/06..._two_brai.html) 'Though few know about it, humans have a second brain that handles most of the body's digestive functions. Study of the enteric nervous system is a rapidly growing specialty, offering insight into malfunctions of the "gut brain" as well as the more complex cranial brain'. We know very little about what scientific studies will tell us in the future. If I ever come across an apple that tries to escape my 'attack', I won't eat it. It doesn't matter to me if this apple has a brain or nervous system or can feel physical pain. We know little about bonds between ie. fish, and we don't know if know all there is to be known about ie. clams or scallops. If a human or animal is capable of feeling pain isn't even important to me. I don't want to eat something/someone that feelslike a living being – I can't find a reason to do it.


    Clams, oysters, scallops and mussels have never been defined as vegan food (which is clear if you look at B12 research related to vegan food), and to expand the definition of vegan to include these 'beings' would be completely wrong.

    They don't think or feel in any way that I can figure.
    If this is valid definition for vegan food, I know of several politicians that could end up on our dinner plates!

    The inner content is: vegans do not exploit animals, as they are thinking and sensing beings to some extent or other.
    I believe this is the first time I actually see 'thinking' as a part of anyones definition of vegan.

    I don't believe I have it all figured out; nowhere do I indicate that I have it all figured out; that I have it "all figured out" is a faulty conclusion.
    If you don't have it all figured it out, why try to convince vegans to eat something vegans normally don't eat?

    Ownership requires some level of thought
    No. People in coma may not be able to think, but that doesn't give you the right to eat them.
    I will not eat anything that walks, swims, flies, runs, skips, hops or crawls.

  41. #41
    Happiness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    in the surf of the oregon coast
    Posts
    53

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    oh my i hope you are not talking about me aritchoke. I am a vegan! I promise. No meat or animal items here! I was just saying that veganism is ment to be more then just avoiding specific foods and items, its about respect. hahaha no no no...i'm vegan on that I can assure you.
    "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle"
    Irina Dunn :D
    "We are not human-beings, we are human-becomings"
    Roger Ames :D

  42. #42
    Happiness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    in the surf of the oregon coast
    Posts
    53

    Default Re: Clams, oysters, scallops and mussels

    wait...my bad. I just realized then was the first post for you artichoke on this thread. You more then likely weren't talking to me. hehehe sorry.
    "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle"
    Irina Dunn :D
    "We are not human-beings, we are human-becomings"
    Roger Ames :D

  43. #43

    Default Re: Clams, oysters, scallops and mussels

    No, I realize that you don't eat animals, Happy!

  44. #44
    Seaside
    Guest

    Default Re: Clams, oysters, scallops and mussels

    Posted by Happiness:
    I'm deeply enjoying this thread and everyones input. I'm new here and a bit shy of talking on such a hot topic but as a marine biology student I thought I'd throw in my two bits:
    Don't worry about that Happiness! I've only been here a few weeks myself!

    Posted by Korn:
    We know little about bonds between ie. fish, and we don't know if know all there is to be known about ie. clams or scallops. If a human or animal is capable of feeling pain isn't even important to me. I don't want to eat something/someone that feelslike a living being – I can't find a reason to do it.
    Though he is not a vegan, or even a vegetarian, I think, Dr. Andrew Weil says that lobsters mate for life!

  45. #45
    EcoTribalVegan
    Guest

    Default Re: Clams, oysters, scallops and mussels

    Hey this has got me doing a bit of research, and there's no conclusive evidence that these animals don't feel pain. And even if they don't they're obviously in extreme discomfort since they try to escape touch. Maybe Chart T could provide conclusive evidence they don't feel pain. I've heard a lot of, "they possibly don't," or "unlikely they do" feel pain. Yet nothing conclusive.

  46. #46
    pixeequeen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    nottingham, england
    Posts
    184

    Default Re: New to veganforum.com

    Hi ChartT and welcome. I have just found this thread and it has been an interesting read. While I personally dont agree with eating clams etc, there is one single important thing... A big welcome to anyone who cares about animals and does not wish to be part of their suffering. That is the fundamental point of this all I feel, and can get a bit lost in the stigma of definitions. While I may think that clams and co may suffer, if you don't but care about all the other animals then I praise what you are doing than criticise what you don't. I get the feeling you may be an active member, and there may be some interesting discussions to come! So enjoy ChartT
    www.myspace.com/natureworks1

  47. #47
    Seaside
    Guest

    Default Re: Clams, oysters, scallops and mussels

    Posted by pixeequeen:
    A big welcome to anyone who cares about animals and does not wish to be part of their suffering.
    That's just the point though, pixeequeen. ChartT claims that clams do not suffer when killed, stubbornly refuses to consider that there might be a small chance that they do and should be left alone in case this is true, and is way more interested in justifying his refusal to give these animals up as sources of food than in being convinced that vegans do not eat flesh, whether it can feel pain or not. He has even posted an argument with John in the "Insects" thread that asserts that if John thinks it is okay to kill termites it should be okay for ChartT to eat clams. He clearly is way more interested in arguing than in being vegan.

  48. #48
    pixeequeen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    nottingham, england
    Posts
    184

    Default Re: Clams, oysters, scallops and mussels

    it is just my opinion that caring about others should be encouraged, and while I agree that clams suffer, ChartT has shown that he has thought about it. Yes we may think him wrong, but there a a billion meateaters out there who dont give it a second thought. If we really want to ease animals suffering then we should be encouraging people to be thinking things through, it is the ignorance of people that I find hardest to deal with. However I dont want to get drawn into the debate, cos I can see your point too Seaside, and I dont wish to sound like i condone the flippancy towards eating clams. But I do want to make ChartT feel welcome, on my part. Plus he has inevitably questioned his clam-eating a hundred times being on this forum!
    www.myspace.com/natureworks1

  49. #49
    Seaside
    Guest

    Default Re: Clams, oysters, scallops and mussels

    Posted by pixeequeen:
    If we really want to ease animals suffering then we should be encouraging people to be thinking things through, it is the ignorance of people that I find hardest to deal with.
    That is a good point, too, pixeequeen.

    And I will welcome reading more of ChartT's thoughts as long as they do not involve justifying the eating of mollusks. Over half of the posts ChartT has made in this forum so far involve his reasons for why he thinks it is okay to eat them.

  50. #50
    tails4wagging
    Guest

    Default Re: Clams, oysters, scallops and mussels

    I guess he eats them because he enjoys them!!!.

    I, as a vegan, has had to give up such things as 'bacon' and cheese. If you are a commited animal lover and believes all things living are sentient then you have to make sacrifices.

    Just because clams etc,. are different physicalogically doesnt mean they have no thought processes, how do we know?. If these creatures have a heart, blood and ganglia and they obviiously would feel pain, they are 'flesh' therefore as vegans we should not eat them.

Similar Threads

  1. Oysters and Vegans
    By Ladygold in forum QUESTIONS FROM NON-VEGANS
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Dec 28th, 2011, 04:37 PM
  2. Is hunting scallops okay?
    By thatonechicgirl in forum QUESTIONS FROM NON-VEGANS
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: Aug 18th, 2008, 03:53 PM

Tags for this thread (If you see one or more tags below, click on them if you're looking for similar threads!)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •