this is a leap of logic. there is not direct correlation, and your accusation of bad faith is, itself, bad faith.
this is a leap of logic. there is not direct correlation, and your accusation of bad faith is, itself, bad faith.
they have published a version of this position continually since the early '90s at least. if you look at the position paper that’s linked, you can see the specifics. this position has expired and not been renewed for years. that is good reason to believe that it will not be renewed and will no longer be the position of the academy.
it’s entirely true. they don’t care how it tastes, they care if they get paid
it’s not their current position, and linking it, and saying it is their position, is dishonest.
animals aren’t killed for taste. it’s usually for profit.
since the paper you linked expired
edit:
all current positions of the academy
double edit:
i see you are not the one who linked the expired paper. whoops.
it is no longer the position of the academy of nutrition and dietetics that vegetarian, including vegan, diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. it hasn’t been for years. you should stop spreading misinformation.
i wouldn’t rely on poore-nemecek 2018 for the chemical makeup of co2, let alone weighing ghg emissions from various sources.
…I don’t have to like it.
where do you think the equator is?
asia is part of the north
then there is no need to lie about the position the academy