• lexiw@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Breast milk is the only milk that can be vegan. It’s all about consent.

        • PunnyName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          To which authority? Because I know the milk conglomerate has been staunchly fighting for that very definition.

          The lack of consent is more viable as a disqualifier.

          • Turun@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think the main distinction is lactose. And/or the proteins that are present in milk.

            While oat milk and consorts can be used in a lot of use cases it’s not a one to one replacement and it’s dishonest to claim it is.

          • Pulptastic
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Depends on the definition of milk. They are opaque liquids but the similarities don’t go much past that. Animal milk has all the nutrition and nutrients needed to be a sole food source, these plant based juices and purees do not.

    • PorkRollWobbly@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Which would mean there’s the possibility of this new short horror story I just wrote:

      I noticed two new options in the dairy aisle today: human breast milk, vegan and non-vegan.

      • BachenBenno@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        1 year ago

        Technically yes. But of course they would (and can’t really) do that. But you could also eat stuff like roadkill and it’s vegan. Veganism as a moral philosophy has nothing to do with food, it’s about respecting and granting animals the same rights as humans (as far as applicable, not stuff like voting).