The ecological impact from animal harvesting is a big one. It takes massive amounts of land to produce the current consumtion of meat and it can lead to deforestation, land clearing and the destruction of other animal habitats.
The meat industry also uses huge amounts of energy and produces large amounts of greenhouse gases becuase of it.
No, Buddhists are strictly vegetarian
It probably wasn't a bee because they are strictly vegetarian. It was probably a wasp.
The longest word consisting strictly of alternating consonants and vowels is 27 letters long.That 27 letter word is honorificabilitudinitatibus.It is a medieval word which translates to "the state of being able to achieve honours". It most famously appears in Shakespeare's work "Love's Labour's Lost".
the advantages are economical and simple to use the disadvantages not strictly vegetarian and product made can be lumpy if not used propper
Honorificabilitudinitatibus - characterized by honor
Prince Charles, now King Charles III, has advocated for sustainable farming and environmental practices but is not strictly vegetarian. He has shown a preference for organic and locally sourced foods and has reduced meat consumption in his diet. However, he does consume meat and has not publicly identified as a vegetarian.
No, bunny's also known as rabbits are herbivours. That means they do not eat meat, including frogs.
Yes.However if the pesto recipe has cheese which is classed as non-vegetarian i.e curdled from the stomach of an animal then strictly speaking no.
Mel Brooks has expressed a preference for a vegetarian diet, particularly in his later years, but he is not strictly vegetarian all the time. He has mentioned enjoying vegetarian meals and has been an advocate for animal rights. However, he has also acknowledged enjoying certain non-vegetarian foods in the past. His dietary choices seem to reflect a more flexible approach rather than strict adherence to vegetarianism.
Einstein was not a vegetarian during the most productive years of his life. Rather, it appears from his writings that he was a proponent of vegetarianism for some uncertain number of years but only practiced it himself for the last year of his life."Although I have been prevented by outward circumstances from observing a strictly vegetarian diet, I have long been an adherent to the cause in principle. Besides agreeing with the aims of vegetarianism for aesthetic and moral reasons, it is my view that a vegetarian manner of living by its purely physical effect on the human temperament would most beneficially influence the lot of mankind." Translation of letter to Hermann Huth, December 27, 1930. Einstein Archive 46-756
If the rabbit is alive, then this is not likely, However, if the tortoise is not strictly vegetarian (which is not), then if it finds pieces of dead rabbit perhaps it will eat it
Are non-vegetarians strictly non-vegetarian? That's kind of a philosophical question. The straightest answer, based on what they eat, would probably be no. Most non-vegetarians are not pure carnivores, they're omnivores, meaning: they eat just about everything, some of it [the non-vegetarian stuff] made from animals, and [the vegetarian stuff] not made from them. But if you want to talk about vegetarianism in terms of thought and not simply appetite then, of course, all non-vegetarians are non-vegetarian. They have no compunction about using animals for their intake whatsoever. They do not identify as vegetarians, they do not act as vegetarians, they are not vegetarians. So you have two choices: thought or strict deed. I would say that yes, they are non-vegetarian. But in our world of shifting identities and shifting identity politics I guess I will leave your choice about how you would call this weird little call up to you.