Anti-GMO Group Throws Feces and Rotten Eggs At Plant-Breeding Conference

Imagine being so upset that a group of plant breeders and botanists are talking about agriculture that you storm in wearing a mask and throw urine, cow poop, and rotten eggs everywhere. Imagine being so influenced by the cult of fear at a harmless substance that you result to throwing a thuggish temper tantrum and smear sh*t all over the walls. You don’t have to imagine anymore because this is exactly what happened at Swiss university ETH Zurich (What is it with university students and acting violently towards people they disagree with?).

This childish act of terrorism was directed at the European Society for Plant Breeding Research, which was supported by many pro-GM (Genetic Modification) companies. As a result of the actions, the conference had to be postponed. 300 people were evacuated from the conference room as it had to be cleaned. The conference did continue as planned later on that day.


This is not the first time that Anti-GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms) proponents acted violently because they have no evidence to back up their irrational claims. One pro-GMO group was bombed last year, just one instance of tons that are coming into the light. Anti-GMO people fervently believe that GMO’s are untested, harmful, dangerous, and hurts small farmers. None of these have any proof at all. They use pictures of vegetables with syringes in them, children and minorities with look sick and zombified, and they make up words like Frankenfood, and Killer Tomatoes. They do this because no sound scientific research agrees with their conclusion that GMO’s are harmful. When you can’t beat them with facts, scare them!

It’s like a vaccines and Autism debate. Non-existant. There is no evidence that genetic modification is harmful, and it is about time we accepted the science over the fear-mongering. And no, Monsanto STILL has not paid me.


8/30/2016 Eucarpia themselves released a statement on the issue. “Shit on technology” was written on the walls, and the suspects were followed by members of the speech and were arrested. As far as I know no group has come forward to take credit for the crime.

Eating Vegetarian At: Wally's Gyros

I have been to Wally’s Gyros a few times as a vegetarian, and while the selection is not very big, it is a pretty good restaurant altogether. Just going to get that out there because their score isn’t going to be very high. It is a small restaurant, situated in Hammond, Indiana.

Critiquing a restaurant that specializes in meat, like Gyros often tend to do, or hamburgers, might not seem to make much sense to the outsider, but this isn’t a review of how bad the restaurant is, it is simply a review of their menu and whether or not they carry options for a specific eating style, which in this case is Vegetarianism. So without further ado:

Wally’s has a few sides which are good for vegetarians, of which includes:

  • Fried Battered Okra
  • Fried Battered Mushrooms
  • French Fries
  • Onion Rings
  • Jalapeno Poppers
  • Cole Slaw
  • Cheese Sticks
  • Garden Salad (Comes with cheese, but might be able to request it without it)
  • Nachos and Cheese

Out of all of those, there is only one vegan option, and those are, of course, the french fries.

They do have fish as well, for those of you who are Pesceterians.

I did call the restaurant in order to get further information, and the kind lady on the phone did let me know that the oil they use to fry with is indeed vegetable oil. Which is good, because as someone who once worked for Rally’s, I am glad that many places are frying their foods in things other than Lard or Tallow.

For vegetarian options there does seem to be a good variety when it comes to lacto-vegetarianism. For vegans or for those who cannot consume dairy, like usual, there is not that many options. Also, just as a reminder, most battered foods do contain egg products in them, so be aware of that if you want to order them as a veggie option.

A thing they can do to help would be to add a vegetarian gyro or burger option, and add more sides, like maybe steamed broccoli or something like that. But for a gyro restaurant, what they have really isn’t that bad.

Death Threats, Bad Arguments, and Political Correctness

Ok, so you know what I think about death threats already if you read my blog, I only mention it here, here, and here. But for those of you who missed my stance on it, death threats are wrong and sending them only harms the cause you claim to be for, no matter how passionate you are about the cause, or no matter how oppressed you claim to be.


Aryanna Gourdin, a 12 year old hunter, posted pictures of a giraffe she killed on social media, and then donated the meat fro the giraffe to feed a local village. Note that Giraffe is often eaten as meat and sold by commercial hunters native to Africa, so giraffe meat is not rare there. I will not condone the hunting of Giraffe though unless it is by the villagers and they don’t have any other source of food. I also would NEVER condone taking a picture and being prideful of such a thing. But Gourdin received multiple death threats as a result.

Among the death of the giraffe came many bad arguments from Gourdin’s hunting guide, including the all known “Man has done this since the beginning of time.” argument. Hunting is unnecessary in 2016 in the first world but is perfectly OK to uselessly take the life of another living being because it’s “tradition”. Ugh. We have done many things since the “beginning of time” that we probably shouldn’t do, such as genocide, and warring of land, and idk, slavery?

The argument that they donated the meat, therefore it was OK also doesn’t make sense. The ends almost never justify the means in cases of hunting. Although I will state that hunting is far more ethical

When asked why they posted the pictures online when they obviously cause outrage, the answer was “I’m tired of this political correctness. I’m not about to cower down from doing something we’ve always done.”

I will agree that Political Correctness has indeed gone too far, but there is a stark difference between political correctness and what is going on here. It would be considered “Politically Incorrect” to criticize the rioters in Milwuakee, Furguson, and Baltimore, who burned down their own neighborhoods and destroyed their own livelihoods for “justice.” It would be considered “Politically Incorrect” to state that America is one of the best places to live in, in terms of equality, ability, opportunity, safety, and kindness, which it is.

However. It is not “politically incorrect” to post a picture of yourself next to the body of a dead animal in pride, it’s Morally Incorrect, it’s flat out sadistic and narcissistic. And I have noticed this a lot in the political realm when it comes to labeling anything PC:

I once had a guy come up to me at work and while we were talking he said that Native Americans were savages. I told them they were not, they were a fairly civil people, if anyone was uncivil it was the Europeans who killed them off and stole their land. The next thing out of his mouth was “Why do you have to be so Politically Correct?”

The facts of history are not “Politically Correct,” they are “Literally Correct,” regardless of whether or not they might be “Liberal” or “Conservative” in nature. Animals feel pain and they suffer, they want to live, this is another thing that is seen as “Politically Correct” but is actually correct. The Federalist had this to say:

It seems an animal—a non-rational, soulless creature—is more important than a girl who is living out her dreams, refusing to be bound by her sex or age, and spending quality time with her father.

A non-rational, soulless creature? First of all, let’s get into rationality. Animals can mathematically judge distances, determine is something is a threat or a friend, and they can determine whether it would be smart to do something before they do it. They can even have belief systems so complex that ritualistic behavior can occur. This idea that animals simply run on instinct is flawed and pseudoscientific, as science has concluded that animal rationality is indeed a thing, even if it is not as complex as our own.

I am not even going to get into whether or not animals have souls. It’s not my job to prove the existence or non-existence of souls, I can simply state that no evidence exists as of this date that they are present in any living being, including humans.

Hunting is OK when you are in poverty and it is a significant source of food in your diet. Hunting is not OK when you are simply doing it for fun, or to look edgy, or when you don’t need to do it. And saying such is not “Politically Correct” it should simply be the reality of it all.

Vegan? But What If Grocery Stores Shut Down? The Survivalist Argument.

I often don’t talk about dumb arguments that I hear, but I have started to recently. And this has been one that I heard on a few occasions. This is a fallacy that I have seen that I dub The Survivalist Argument. It often goes like this:

“If all the grocery stores shut down, would you hunt for meat to survive?”

grocery stores


Or as otherwise worded like:

“If the Zombie Apocalypse occurred…”

“If a nuclear warhead hit and you were left with little to no plant life…”

“If you were stranded on a deserted island….”

You know, THAT argument. The one that has almost no chance of actually coming into fruition.

In reality, I think most vegans would try to remain vegan for awhile, stop when they realize they can’t without severe nutrient deficiencies, and then sadly start hunting and trapping. But many might go back vegan once they find a way to safely commit to agriculture and grow their beans and leafy greens.

The thing is, veganism is only able to be done “as far as possible and practicable.” If you cannot be vegan because you live in a situation where hunting is the only way to get food, which is extremely rare in the first world mind you, than it is understandable to most vegans that you eat meat.

However, you don’t live in those conditions, and won’t for a long time. Most people can’t trap or shoot an animal anyways due to lack of skill and experience, but hey, it’s great for many people to think they have so much experience about wilderness survival from The Zombie Survival Guide and from playing Tomb Raider and Minecraft and rarely ever going outside.

The conditions we live in right now, and for all of the foreseeable future so far, is that we have grocery stores and gas stations, and fast food places because we failed to learn how to even properly cook anymore, so we have instant noodles and 5 minute rice. So as of right now, in 2016, we have the ability to be vegan because animal products are not necessary for survival and we have a wide array of food choices.

So unless you are planning on living in a forest and shooting, skinning, cutting, preserving, and cooking your own squirrels and raccoons, I see no point of this argument instead of trying to bait vegans into being in a situation where they would eat animals. It serves no purpose. It is a complete non-argument. You don’t even have to answer it if it pops up. It’s that useless.

Dropping Vegan; A Personal Review Of Vegan Advocacy

Many companies are starting to not use the term Vegan due to the horrific stigma that comes from the word, and even animal rights organizations such as Mercy For Animals is using terms other than vegan for a lot of their rhetoric. And I think I am going to do the same.

Instead of just vegan, I will try to incorporate more terms such as Vegetarian and Plant-based into my discussions. Vegan will also be used, but not to the same extent as it has been.

The main issue I personally have with using the term Plant-based, is that Plant-Based is not synonymous with Vegan. For one, vegan’s do not add to the use and exploitation of animals for clothing, food, etc, as Plant-based ONLY refers to one’s dietary choice. Another is that plant-based does not even mean a diet devoid of animal products. According to the acclaimed documentary Forks Over Knives:

“A whole-food, plant-based diet is centered on whole, unrefined, or minimally refined plants. It’s a diet based on fruits, vegetables, tubers, whole grains, and legumes; and it excludes or minimizes meat (including chicken and fish), dairy products, and eggs, as well as highly refined foods like bleached flour, refined sugar, and oil.” 

Excludes or minimizes… which means that you can have a diet that is mostly vegan, but also contains some cheese, and a small piece of chicken once a week and still be plant-based. You can also have a diet completely devoid of these products and still be plant based. Some people claim that in order to be plant-based, you MUST eat vegan, but this is honestly not true. A non-whole food but still plant based diet can contain processed foods and oil, but reducing them is pretty beneficial. I still eat veggie burgers though.

Starting tomorrow I will be Vegan again. I don’t wear wool, or leather, or silk, or eat gelatin, or anything of the like. I will be as vegan as I can be. But I am not sure I am going to call myself vegan… I am going to call myself plant-based, and vegetarian. I might consider myself vegan from time to time, but I really don’t want to be associated with all of that drama and crap that has been going on in the vegan community. I do not want to connect myself with these overly dramatic hateful pseudo-scientific people that make up the most popular of the vegan community right now.

I am going to eat far more vegetables and fruit than before, and a lot more beans, which I am going to buy dry to save on some money. Mostly frozen vegetables, fresh and canned fruit, and the like. So wish me luck again!

But personally, I think steering away from veganism and focusing more on reducing meat consumption and stepping away from the elitist a-holes is better in the long run for both MY sanity, as well as for animal welfare and advocacy. Just remember, the animals come first.

Italy Seeks To Make Vegan Children Illegal?

Feeding your kid a vegan or vegetarian diet may be against the law in Italy, as a law maker proposes that vegan diets are somehow harmful to children. Now don’t get me wrong, there have been instances where negligent parents feed their kid a diet lacking in nutrients and as a result the child can develop severe deficiencies, such as in this case of a child being fed nothing but almond milk and as a result developing scurvy.

But in every case where a child on a vegan diet is made sick, it has nothing to do with the fact that the diet is vegan, and more to do with the fact that the diet is inadequate. As I have mentioned in the case of the child fed only one brand of almond milk for like, 11 months.

Now in Italy, 10% are Obese while at least 40% are overweight, as of statistics in 2014. The rate of consumption of animal products is on the rise alongside the rise in obesity. The reason the rates are not higher is due to Italy having more of a cultural emphasis on walking and bike riding, as well as traditional Italian cuisine of foods with less meat in them and more dairy, as opposed to the United States. Even then, the rates of Childhood Overweightness and Obesity is higher in Italy than in the US. That said, Italy is still feeling the growing effects of a wide nutritional deficiency.

Aside from high rates of being overweight, which can increase your rate of all cause mortality significantly, a study on the dietary pattern in central Italy in 2008 showed that the Standard Italian Diet is deficient in Calcium, Vitamin B1, Vitamin D, Folate, Fiber, and Vitamin E.

If Italy is going to make it illegal for a parent to “force” their vegan diet on children, even a perfectly healthy vegan diet, on the assumption that vegan diets are “inadequate,” than the same law should put in prison every parent with an overweight or nutritionally deficient child, otherwise known as at least half of the Italian population.

It is also now known that red meat is a carcinogen, eggs are unhealthy in large intervals, egg yolks are unhealthy altogether, dairy increases the risk for ovarian and prostate cancer, fish has Mercury, and even chicken cooked at high temperatures contain a carcinogen. All of the most rigorous of scientific research has proved this to be true. But even if it was not, there is no reason to make feeding your child a vegan diet illegal. This just preys on the fear that makes allowing children to play outside unsupervised illegal, it’s dumb.

Veganism isn’t even a radical option. Back in the day where supplements were rare and veganism was only possible by eating nothing but beans, I’d understand the fear more. But today there are highly vitamin fortified vegan meat and dairy replacements, ranging from black bean burgers to Seitan. Vegans are fine. It takes very little to no effort to be a vegan, even on a low budget.

This legislation seems only to focus on vegans, and not any other practitioner of any other diet forced on children, including forcing children to eat all the food on their plates, which is known to make children have a higher future risk of eating disorders. Other diets forced on children are Gluten Free diets, juice cleanses, Paleo, etc. Here is a cookbook that was pulled after health professionals expressed fear over the fact that some practitioners are Paleo are forcing their babies to consume formula mixed with raw chicken liver and bone broth.

But stuff like this is ignored, only the malnourished vegan diet, that is not based on guidelines and is not healthy, are the ones that are mentioned. But healthy vegan kids are having their parents locked up regardless, because of a few bad parents who are ignorant about how nutrition works.

Banning vegan children diets is authoritarian, and only harms the people who are not harming anyone by letting their kids eat vegan. If we are going to do anything, arrest ONLY vegans who’s diet leads to the harm of their children.

Unnatural Vegan V. Jen Journey. Is Telling The Truth Harmful To Veganism?

For those of you who read this blog often, I try not to mention too much drama here. I try to simply talk about plant- based health, and fast food places. However, since this is a topi in relation to holistic quackery, I decided that it is about time for me to make a post about it.

So Jen Journey is a vegan YouTuber who has stage 4 cancer and the doctors told her she only had a certain amount of time to live. As a last ditch hope, Jen Journey went to her fans and e-begged for tens of thousands of dollars to pay for a therapy known as Gerson Therapy, who runs its operations out of the country because the United States has deemed it to be a sham therapy.

Dr Michael Greger, even though I dislike the guy, along with many other vegan researchers has done research into this therapy, and concluded that it is harmful. Juice cleanses and coffee enemas, which the therapy is known for, does nothing to cure cancer, but they lured in Jen with the promise of being able to cure her cancer. Having family who have died of cancer myself, it pisses me off to think that companies are scamming fragile worries people in their last months of life with bullsh*t claims of being able to cure stage 4 cancer.

Unnatural Vegan made a video telling people that if they donated to Jen, they are being directly responsible for her uncomfortable death, and telling people that Gerson Therapy is a scam therapy, and if someone wanted to donate money to make her last months as comfortable as possible, that would be a great cause to donate to.

Jen got enough money to pay over 5000 a week out of pocket for this therapy, which I remind you is coffee enemas and juice cleanses, so the price is awfully high. And despite what the witch doctors might have said, Jen was getting sicker in that sham clinic. I know that because Juice does not cure cancer. There is no “Holistic” way to cure cancer. Period. Injecting cow liver directly into the bloodstream also doesn’t sound very vegan.

Jen later died a few weeks after her donations dried out and she was kicked from the clinic. Now a lot of people, who already had hate for Unnatural Vegan for being honest about veganism, is getting hate for simply telling the truth about Gerson therapy. Many people even going as far as to tell people that it is Unnatural Vegan’s fault Jen died, and that she is directly responsible and is a murderer for the fact that people who donated to Jen ran out of money or did research into it and stopped donating.

If Jen died in that clinic, people would probably just think she was too far gone or whatever. Let’s do everything but point out the massive elephant in the room!

So is being honest and open about sham therapy harmful to veganism? No.

I have no issue with pointing out that Jen worked entirely on the emotion of fear and refused any conventional cancer treatment or comfort treatment. Jen honestly believed that fruit cleanses for over 5000 a week would cure her cancer. Now if she spent her own money nobody would care, but she begged her followers to donate for her to take this obviously scam therapy. Informing the public is not a crime, and the actions that arise from the public for being told the truth is not the fault of the messenger.

This emotionally-driven anger at someone who simply mentioned facts is harmful to veganism. Who is going to think of veganism as the logical step to take when vidoes claiming “Logic VS Empathy – Why Unnatural Vegan’s Video About Jen Journey Set Veganism Back” come out, implying that veganism is no place for the logical?

I am sure nobody who is into reality and care about animal rights is going to be influenced by accusations of a vegan telling the truth. The reaction to her being honest is what is hurting veganism.

For anyone who is reading this, here is the only thing that you should take away from this: Juice and Coffee will NEVER cure cancer, and telling people that it won’t isn’t “murder.” Anti-pseudoscience is not pro-murder. Jen was going to die in that clinic, or out of it, and if you think that Jen Journey would have been cured on Gerson Therapy, this blog is not something you should be reading.

You are not helping Jen or honoring her death by accusing someone of killing her by mentioning facts. Empathy is good for veganism, yes, but these temper tantrums are far from helpful to the movement.