Public transit riders in Toronto have been coming face-to-face with farm animals thanks to an ad campaign that asks "Why love one but eat the other?" The 1,000 poster-sized ads juxtapose pictures of pets such as cats and dogs with images of animals most people equate with food, namely chickens, pigs, and cows.
I am co-coordinator of this campaign, with friend and fellow animal advocate Kimberly Carroll. Together we conceived of and mounted the campaign to encourage thought and discussion, along with support from the Toronto Vegetarian Association and a whole community of people concerned about animals.
We expected strong reactions to the campaign and we got them. Some accused us of mounting a propaganda campaign, although all of the information we provide is factual. Some asserted that people need to eat animals to survive, although it has been medically proven they do not. The American Dietetics Association and the Dietitians of Canada have both endorsed a well-planned vegetarian diet as perfectly healthy. Some accused us of promoting false teachings according to the Bible or compared us to Muslim extremists, all in spite of the fact that the campaign makes no mention of religion.
One might ask why an ad on a subway is capable of eliciting such strong reactions. In my day job, I am a professor who specializes in behavioural finance, or how economic decisions are influenced by human psychology. Our ad campaign borrows a concept from this field of study: cognitive dissonance. When a random transit rider sees the images of cows, pigs, kittens, chicks, and dogs on our posters, his immediate impulse is likely to think "Aww, how cute! I love animals!" As his attention shifts lower down the poster, he is confronted with horrifying photographs of common practices on factory farms: for instance tail docking, beak cutting, and teeth clipping without anesthetic, cows with inflamed udders due to mastitis, pigs in stalls so small they cannot turn, and chickens stuffed so tightly into cages that they cannot spread their wings. Standard treatment of cows, pigs, and chickens in the Canadian agricultural industry would be illegal is applied to a cat or dog.
So the transit rider is confronted with two conflicting thoughts: "I love these cute animals!" and "When I eat animals, I am complicit in their cruel treatment!" This is cognitive dissonance -- simultaneously holding two conflicting thoughts in one's head. A common and sensible way for an individual to resolve cognitive dissonance is to change his actions. Extensive feedback on this campaign (in the form of video testimonials, emails, tweets, and Facebook comments) suggests many Canadians have decided to resolve their internal conflict by becoming vegetarian and vegan. We have scores of testimonials from people who have decided to stop participating in the exploitation of sentient beings after seeing the ads. Of course the campaign has its detractors as well, with some folks choosing to resolve their cognitive dissonance by adopting or maintaining the mistaken belief that cows, pigs, and chickens are somehow different from other animals and therefore unworthy of compassion. Our past experience with people transitioning to a vegetarian diet suggests that many of these folks will continue to ruminate over the conflicting thoughts and may eventually decide that changing their actions will lead to greater mental comfort than attempting to maintain a belief that flies in the face of the documented facts about animals and factory farming.
A different ad campaign might have invoked cognitive dissonance using a different set of facts, for instance by highlighting the adverse environmental or health consequences of eating animals. Our planet suffers greatly as a consequence of factory farming. Additionally, medical research strongly suggests that meat-eaters can face a significantly higher risk of life-threatening conditions such as heart disease, obesity, diabetes, stroke, and cancer.
Overall, this campaign demonstrates the role behavioural economics and human psychology can play in shaping important decisions that ultimately help people, animals, and the environment. And what about the fact that the campaign unexpectedly led to us being called a few names? We won't let that ruffle our feathers.
You can learn more about the subway ad campaign, which runs through to the beginning of 2012, by checking out the campaign web site www.BeVeg.ca or the campaign video.
Follow Lisa Kramer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ProfLisaK
Charlotte Singmin: Allergic to Wheat and Dairy? Try These Tasty Alternatives!
"Be Veg" Toronto Subway Ad Campaign | Facebook
Toronto Vegetarian Association - BeVeg
Ontario vegetarians and ON vegetarian singles ads
"Why Love One But Eat The Other" Ads Stir Controversy in Toronto ...
Grain fed. Air chilled. Must taste good with all that megalomania in their veins. Thats the stuff that makes chinese food taste so good, right?
Sure, you can live without eating meat. Why would you want to? We are omnivorous creatures. Deal with it.
You are aware that fetuses and growing children require DHA, complete proteins and essential amino acids for proper development?
Do you want to impose your diet on them? You do realize how much you turn people off with your certitude? Vegetarians literally come across as cultish and judgmental in their speech. You'd get a lot more traction if you argued for humane farming practices, a lot more people might support you.
"Much of the growing demand for animal products worldwide is being met by concentrated animal feeding operations, or factory farms. Worldwide, some 56 billion animals are raised and slaughtered for food each year. Factory farms account for 67 percent of poultry meat production, 50 percent of egg production, and 42 percent of pork production. These facilities rely on commercial breeds of livestock, usually pigs and chickens, that have been bred to gain weight quickly on high-protein feeds. Factory farms are also very crowded, confining animals closely together-many of the world's 17 billion hens and meat chickens each live in an area that is less than the size of a sheet of paper. Cattle in feedlots often stand knee-high in manure and arrive at slaughterhouses covered in feces."
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5443
Give it time Jerry....give it time.
"ADA’s position, published in the July [2009] issue of the Journal of the American Dietetic Association, represents the Association’s official stance on vegetarian diets:
It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. Well-planned vegetarian diets are appropriate for individuals during all stages of the life-cycle including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood and adolescence and for athletes."
http://www.eatright.org/Media/content.aspx?id=1233
Nope, not biased at all and so much for the author of this article not "promoting false teachings according to the Bible".
http://www.andrews.edu/cas/nutrition/about/mission_statement.html
http://www.vrg.org/nutrition/2009_ADA_position_paper.pdf
By the way, the ADA recommends that vegetarians and vegans work with a dietician to make sure they're getting all their nutrients. Based on some of their other statements, it seems that they don't believe a vegetarian or a vegan diet are optimal diets but encouraging (or at least not discouraging) more people to adopt these diets could be good for business.
A healthy vegan diet is only possible for the most affluent of individuals integrated into a fully globalized free-trade consumer-based economy. You know, the very politico-economic system which is in the process of ravaging the entire planet of all it's natural resources.
So I live in New England. Say I want to eat healthy and vegan. Almost none of the staple foods I would need come from my region. I need hempseed from Canada, apples during early winter from Washington state, apples during late winter from New Zealand, bananas from Brazil, coffee from Cape Verde, algae oil from the middle of the ocean, coconut oil from the Phillipenes, olive oil from Italy, rice
I for one did not get raised on a farm, but I did work on a few farms throughout my life for the EXPERIENCE and EDUCATION that it brings. Hell, even in gradeschool we'd take trips to farms to learn about farm animals and agriculture... I'd like to know if there's even a (real)farm close enough to toronto for kids to go get some REAL education.
I love my cat, I loved my pet pig, I loved my dogs, my chickens... I'd still eat them, in the case of the chickens and pig, I did. I loved the moose I shot, killed, cleaned and ate.
Being in tune with nature, killing and eating your own prey and UNDERSTANDING them does not equate to disrespecting said animals. I've loved every animal I've ever consumed.
Likewise, the Oxford-Cornell-China Project (aka "The China Study") was an observational study. It is impossible to prove causality with such a study. The most you can do is look for correlations that may or may not warrant further study. For what it's worth, the raw data from this study doesn't support the claims that T. Colin Campbell made in his book.
And finally, a controlled intervention study in Kenya found that supplementing the diets of children between the ages of 6 and 9 with meat improved their growth rate, physical activity, cognitive function and leadership abilities.