Just in Time for St. Paddy's Day: PETA's Grossest Ad Ever?

LUDICROUS! I'd much rather attempt to drink a gallon of milk then let ANY alcoholic beverage come near my lips!

Jay Most of that crop goes toward feed for meat animals not into vegetarians' shopping bags.

Rojo I checked out your link to the Belfast study and also tried to get info on the methodology of that particular study which I could not find. The study's conclusion was based on the fact that the seminal liquid surrounding the slowermoving sperm contained chemicals called isoflavones. Were these isoflavones from soy products? Were they from processed soy isolated soy protein or wholebean products? Were they testing men that regularly ate soy products and if so how much? or men on a "regular" diet? There are research estimates that soya is present in 6070 per cent of all supermarket products and is widely used by most fast food chains so it is fairly omnipresent in everyone's diet. I'm unaware if Dr. Barnes did a study or not but the issues discrediting Dr. Chavarros' study are It was based on recollected intake of soyfoods and not on specific diets containing soyfoods. Dr. Chavarros himself speculates that his study found a link between soya and low sperm count because many of the participants were overweight or obese. Men with high levels of body fat produce more oestrogen than their slim counterparts. Dr. Chavarros also admits that many East Asian men consume much more soya than the participants in his trial and do not develop fertility problems. Chavarros' study conflicts with the large body of U.S. government and National Institute of Healthsponsored human and primate research in which controlled amounts of isoflavones from soy were fed and no effect on quantity quality or motility of sperm were observed. I'm not sure where verification for these studies could be foundPubMed perhaps? "This study is confounded by many issues thus I feel the results should be viewed with a great deal of caution" warned Dr. Tammy Hedland a researcher on male fertility issues including soy from the Health Sciences Center Department of Pathology at the University of Colorado. As described Dr. Hedland is a male fertility researcher and has researched soy herself so she should know of what she speaks I would say more research is needed on the soyfertility issue. Chavarros' study seems a bit of a research disaster and the Belfast study leaves me personally with too many unanswered questions to be convincing.

jay Wow I do not even know where to begin with your conglomeration of discovery channel snipets distorted interpretation of postmodernism and complete lack of ability to differentiate between evolutionary survival mechanisms and humanity's irresponsible exploitation of animals and the environment. None of your "Blue Planet" examples demonstrate true animal to animal cruelty. Now if the chimps raised another tribe of chimps for the sole purpose of eating them then I might be more inclined to agree with your point of view on that part of your discussion. What is the true definition of a cannibal? Muscle fibers are what one eats when biting into dead animal flesh...there are very few differences between human muscle fibers and those of a rat unless one is an expert in electron microscopy. But that is a discussion to have with a scientist which you clearly are not. The worn out question about what to do with all of the animals if slaughter houses were torn down would not even need to be answered if humans did not strive to breed as many animals as possible for a profit.

Hello Ana Dont get me wrong I dont support cruelty against animals I dont agree with zoos or circusses or hunting for pleasure etc.. But the fact is that this world is married to pain and I think that to imagine otherwise is naive. Herbivores do kill. Males in rut will kill each other. A male zebra will kill a lost calf to prevent it from attracting predators. Bears kill the young of other bears. And as for cruelty who is to say that animals should not be held accountable for their actions. Your very premise is that all live has equal value. Yet killer whales will follow a humpback whale for 6 hours drown it and only eat its lower jaw. Chimps cannabalize neighboring tribes. There are many examples of seemingly meaningless cruelty in the animal kingdom. Even in flora a fig tree grows by engulfing another tree and smothering it. So while the world seems cruel there is no hiding from it. Suffering is a part of life and even if you turn every person on earth into a vegan you will not change the condition of the human heart one bit. Have a look inside its black. From a pragmatic point of view what do we do with all the animals if we tear down all the slaughter houses. Maybe our role is similar to the carnivores in preventing overpopulation. I also think you misunderstood my point about human superiority my point is exactly that as per the theory of evolution humans are not superior just different and so should not as per evolution be judged differently. The alternative of course is that we are made entirely differently from animals with a spirit or a sole and a conscience and a moral law which is universal then you can judge cruelty.