Let's suppose I want to take things a step further than merely being vegan. Some examples I know of are almonds, chocolate, coffee, and palm oil.
Canned tuna is just the meat. Nothing else. Canned cat was a trip to open up, skin, bones, the whole spine, it kind of freaked me out.
The last time I asked this long ago on a long gone account, I got flamed hard. but it’s an honest question. People kept asking what else I would expect? I’ll tell you exactly what I’d expect, what I see in canned tuna, but cat instead. Why such a difference between the contents of the cans? I know Tuna get much larger than Cats, but that doesn’t quite feel like it’s sufficient for the answer…
So vegan is the next step after becoming vegetarian. Raw vegan is the next step. But what would the next step be after becoming raw vegan? Become fully photosynthetic?
If the goal is to avoid killing people, I understand that. If that's a boundary point blank, I get it. But why would this still be considered wrong to law-abiding citizens?
If I have a small homestead (not an industrial-sized farm) and raise people ethically, giving them a good life, what’s the issue with things like collecting hands from your own people, using milk from a well-cared-for human female to make cheese or ice cream, or raising humans for meat and eventually consuming them when they pass?
In this kind of setup, you control everything (to the extent you can) —organic feed, no antibiotics, no harmful practices—and the people live in a natural, low-stress environment on your own land. Their diet is plant-based, so arguments about environmental impact seem similar to a human eating vegan.
To hit on the health aspect, this seems healthier: eating a diverse diet that is as low-tox as you can make it, compared to the average man buying products from big, corrupt corporations and toxic food. I love bone broth, and you could ethically make human bone broth or cat bone broth, I guess, if your person dies, freeze it, and have 6-month storage.