[Aside from] the ethical argument to eliminate meat from one's diet, the environmental impact of factory farming has all but devastated the environment and its natural resources. The unnatural influence of hormone injection, multiple breeding and complete disregard for the animals' quality of life have left not only these animals to suffer but the earth's resources to be nearly depleted in the attempt to produce more. Even if one is adamantly against altering their diet, a change in the companies they choose to deal with and buy from could reduce not only the strain on the land but that on the human body. Organic meat farming allows the animals to at least live somewhat naturally before they are used in food production. Hormone injection and forced breeding is eliminated, less range is ravaged and the compromising of the earth is less, though still significant. Apart from adopting a vegetarian, if not vegan diet, to ultimately leave as small a footprint as possible, one should invest in organic farming overall.

A Japanese whaling ship that triggered a high-seas showdown with environmental groups and suffered a deadly fire was due back in port [March 23] with a catch of 508 whales, despite having to cut its annual hunt short after the accident. The Nissin Maru's return brings an early end to this year's hunt in the icy waters off Antarctica, which had been scheduled to continue through the end of March. It was the first time in 20 years that Japan had to abort its whaling mission. Still, the six-vessel fleet managed to kill 508 whales out of a target of 860. After scientific research is conducted on the animals, the meat will be sold to market where it is snapped up as a culinary delicacy by the Japanese. The hunts are allowed by the International Whaling Commission, but environmental groups have long condemned the hunts as a pretext for keeping commercial whaling alive after the practice was banned by the IWC in 1986 [to protect endangered whales].

Animal activists and ethical vegetarians often talk about the 10 billion farm animals slaughtered for human consumption each year in the U.S. Yet the majority of our campaigns don't shed enough light on the roughly 17 billion aquatic creatures Americans eat annually, not to mention the countless others discarded as bycatch. Last fall a report in Science warned if current fishing trends continue, the world's fish supply could be depleted by 2048. Aquaculture is also on the rise worldwide with the weight of farmed fish exceeding the amount of beef produced globally. Not only are pollution concerns present, but it can require up to five pounds of wild fish to feed one pound of farmed fish! Despite the impending collapse of our aquatic ecosystems, marine conservation groups, seafood purveyors and guilt-ridden fish eaters are still finding ways to embrace seafood consumption.

While the efforts and literature promoting sustainable seafood genuinely attempt to address the emptying of our oceans, it seems like some of the biggest proponents simply want to ensure their livelihoods. There is a bizarre logic with "ocean-friendly" seafood, that we can actually save these animals while eating them, and the only reason to save them is so people can continue to eat them. Unfortunately, fish are not always seen as beings but rather resources: seafood, fish stocks and filets. But whether wild-caught or farmed, sustainable or not... it is clear that someone with eyes, gills and fins is dead on the plate. Sure, this is a partnership - between business and the idea that we can keep eating whomever we please forever. As for respect, the truth is, we as a species have rarely treated the planet and the animals we share it with, with respect. And the rapid emptying of our oceans to fill our bellies is testimony to this.

High consumption of red meat and heme iron from the diet may increase the risk of coronary heart disease amongst diabetics by 50 percent, says new research from Harvard. The research looked at the effects of red meat and dietary iron intake on the incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD) among the 6,161 women with diagnosed type-2 diabetes enrolled in the Nurses Health Study. "The major importance of this finding is that, high consumption of heme iron and red meat may be a more dangerous cardiovascular risk factor for diabetic patients compared with the general population," [said] lead author Lu Qi.

Diabetics are already at an increased risk of subsequent CHD, explained the researchers, but the new study, published in the journal Diabetes Care, reports that this risk may be increased further with high intakes of red meat and heme iron. Dietary iron intake is either heme iron, from red meat, poultry, and seafood, or non-heme that can be found in both animal and plant foods. After adjusting the results for confounding factors such as age and BMI, the researchers report that high intake of heme iron from red meat, poultry and seafood was associated with a significantly increased risk of CHD for these diabetic women.

Sons born to women who ate a lot of beef during their pregnancy have a 25 percent below-normal sperm count and three times the normal risk of fertility problems, researchers reported. The problem may be due to anabolic steroids used in the United States to fatten the cattle, Shanna Swan of the University of Rochester Medical Center reported in the journal Human Reproduction. It could also be due to pesticides and other environmental contaminants, she said.

If the sperm deficit is related to the hormones in beef, Swan's findings may be "just the tip of the iceberg," wrote biologist Frederick vom Saal of the University of Missouri in an editorial accompanying the paper. In daughters of the beef-eaters, those same hormones could alter the incidence of polycystic ovarian syndrome, the age of puberty and the postnatal growth rate, he said. Six growth-promoting hormones are routinely used in cattle production in the United States and Canada. At slaughter, not all of these hormones have been metabolized.

A new study provides more evidence that animal-derived foods increase the risk of endometrial cancer, while foods from plant sources reduce it. Women who received the most calories from animal protein had twice the risk of the disease compared to those who took in the fewest calories from animal sources, Dr. Wang-Hong Xu of Fu Dan University School of Public Health in Shanghai and colleagues found. High levels of calories from animal fat boosted the risk by 50 percent. However, the women who ate the most protein from plant sources cut their endometrial cancer risk by 30 percent. The results suggest that it's the source of fat or protein, not the macronutrients themselves, that is related to endometrial cancer risk, Xu and his team conclude.

Eating red or processed meat is linked with an increased risk of breast cancer, a British statistical study [by the University of Leeds] says, and the highest risks are associated with the greatest consumption of the meat. The study published in the British Journal of Cancer "indicates relationships with certain meats and breast cancer in both pre- and postmenopausal women." The researchers gathered diet data on 33,725 British women between 1995 and 1998.

"The findings are most striking for postmenopausal women," the university said in a news release. "Those with the highest intake of red meat, the equivalent to one portion a day (more than 57 grams) run a 56 percent greater risk of breast cancer than those who eat none. "Women who eat the most processed meat, such as bacon, sausages, ham or pies, run a 64 percent greater risk of breast cancer than those who eat none."

V.G. Burgers [in Colorado, U.S.], uses strictly plant-based ingredients. What it doesn't use anywhere on its menus or marketing materials is the "v" word. "The word 'vegan' tends to scare people - and to exclude people," said [co-owner] Gargiulo, a retired competitive snowboarder and vegan for 16 years. "We're still developing the right language." Preferably, the language will promote the tasty food and environmental commitment without scaring anyone away, he said. About 2.3 percent of U.S. adults called themselves vegetarian last year, while 1.4 percent were vegan, according to a poll by the Vegetarian Resource Group.

"From a marketing point of view, trying to attract just those people would give you a tiny market, so it makes sense to broaden the appeal by not necessarily proclaiming your veganness," said Denver restaurant consultant John Imbergamo. At least half of American adults strive to eat at least two or three meatless meals per week, according to another poll by the trade group. It's that larger market that restaurants and food sellers must target if they're to stick around and grow - as the vegetarians will find them anyway. "About 80 percent of our customers now are nonvegetarians," [Gargiulo] said.

Always a little heavy, Scott Jackson gained about 50 pounds in his 30s, then saw his weight balloon from 200 pounds to over 300 after his second marriage in 1995. "I was one porky boy," he says. "I couldn't get behind the steering wheel of my van, and climbing stairs, I couldn't get up three steps, let alone three stories, without running out of breath." Worse, he was plagued by headaches, constant heartburn, high blood pressure, high cholesterol and other health problems. He tried dieting - "the Atkins Diet, the Zone, Richard Simmons, Weight Watchers, starvation" - but while he had some success, the weight always came back. Finally, fed up with his appearance and with being stared at by strangers, he decided to take a radical approach.

In December 2005, Jackson came across a magazine article on the benefits of eating fruit and other raw foods. Intrigued, he read everything he could on the subject. In six months, he went from 298 pounds to 190, and his waist size shrank from 56 inches to 38. And while it took a few weeks for his 5-foot-6 body to adjust to the new regimen, he says, "I felt great. My headaches went away, my heartburn disappeared, and my stats all improved." Inspired by his success, he went on to earn a certificate as a raw-food chef and now is sharing recipes in a class at Colorado Free University (freeu.com).

Setting up on street corners and in front of City Halls and fast food chains from Los Angeles to Latvia, Food Not Bombs serves almost exclusively vegan food, and attempts to ensure that most of its food is organic. [Founder Keith] McHenry explains: "For one, we want to show our stance of nonviolence against animals, that nonviolence means more than not fighting wars. The other reason is ecological - vegetarian food, and vegan food in particular, uses much fewer resources in terms of water, land and so on. Also," he points out, "this is mainly a poor people's movement, and we wanted the Food Not Bombs model to spread without needing a lot of money."

McHenry feels that Food Not Bombs is a lightning rod for government hostility [he has been dubbed "One of America's 100 Most Dangerous People" by the US State Department] because of its explicit political stance. Different from a soup kitchen or a church-based food drive, the goal of Food Not Bombs is not simply to feed the hungry, but to change the story of hunger that pervades the American psyche. By serving free food in public, Food Not Bombs not only addresses these issues directly - it forces the rest of us to confront them as well. "Giving away food under the banner of FNB makes such a strong impact that people might begin to think money should go to human needs and not to the military."

Emily Thurston is a category one cyclist. She is also a vegan. Thurston, a Berkeley resident, rides with Team Vegan, a cycling team working to change a perception that athletes need animal products to perform at their peak. The team, part of the nonprofit organization OrganicAthlete, is the first elite cycling team in the United States whose members exclusively follow a vegan lifestyle. OrganicAthlete is the creation of Bradley Saul, who is also a member of the cycling team. "We're trying to dispel the myth that you can't be health-based and fit," Saul said. Thurston said she feels better and healthier about her new [vegan] lifestyle. "I've been fine. I feel more clear, more healthy and energetic. I've been doing better than last year," she said.

Victoria's animal-protection law largely fails to protect animals. In fact, it institutionalises widespread animal suffering. Why? Because the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986, in effect, exempts the overwhelming mass of animals from its protection. How? By sanctioning "codes of practice" - usually favouring the interests of producers over animal welfare - as a defence or exemption from prosecution under the act.

For example, the Code of Accepted Farming Practice for the welfare of poultry permits the confinement of a battery hen on a floor area about three quarters the size of [a letter-sized] sheet of paper. Such enduring close confinement would ordinarily fall within one of the act's cruelty offences. As such confinement complies with the relevant code of practice, however, the act does not apply. Who is responsible for initiating and creating these "codes of practice"? In Victoria, it is the Minister for Primary Industries and his department - the very people charged under the act with its administration and enforcement. For the present, the legal regime is a public scandal. And this affront to the public interest is likely to continue as long as the fox remains in charge of the chickens.

The Sangguniang Panlalawigan [a Philippines province] is set to pass an ordinance to protect and promote animal welfare. Provincial Veterinary Office head Dr. Silvino R. Tedosio, Jr. said the [province] plans to enact this ordinance because the Philippines is one of the signatories to the groundbreaking of the Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare in San Jose, Costa Rica and recognizes that "animals are living, sentient beings and therefore deserve due considerations and respect." He added its principles declare that animal welfare "shall be a common objective for all nations" and that "all appropriate steps shall be taken by nations to prevent cruelty to animals and to reduce their sufferings." [You can click on the link at the bottom of VegE-News to sign the Declaration's "Animals Matter to Me" petition. There are over 450,000 signatures now, with a goal of one million by the end of 2007.]

The haunting sound of animal wailing fills the air. Dogs are crammed so tightly together into tiny metal cages they cannot even bark. Yards away the blood-spattered carcasses of others lie on the ground. This is Three Birds' Market in Guangzhou, China, officially described as a poultry market. But, as these exclusive pictures show [click on full story to view], many traders on the 60-acre site are doing brisk business selling dogs and cats to restaurants for slaughter and human consumption. Cages of dogs and cats - some of them bred as domestic pets - are piled high and when an animal is chosen for sale it is bludgeoned with an iron bar until it is close to death before, being handed over to the purchaser.

"When the dog dies slowly there is much more flavour in the meat. Some customers want the dog half-dead. Even in the absence of any animal rights legislation, Three Birds' owners are wary of plying their gruesome trade too openly, and advertising for the market refers only to poultry. At the entrance, there are cages full of ducks, geese, chicken and wildfowl. But further inside, away from the public, are the stalls trading in cats and dogs. The Three Birds' Market proves that despite China's bid to clean up its act before the Beijing Olympics next year, on the issue of animal cruelty it still has a long way to go.