Ted Nugent, 70’s rocker turned hunting advocate, went on the Joe Rogan podcast to explain why animals need us to hunt them and that vegans kill more animals than meat eaters do! And the combine harvesters though!

Support the channel with a Happy Healthy Vegan tee or tank — or the new or Keep It Carbed, Baby! cookbook in print or ebook format — at http://shop.happyhealthyvegan.org

AS NATURE INTENDED SHOES:
USE code HAPPYVEGAN at http://anibrand.com and ANI will donate $5 to Mercy For Animals

CONNECT WITH HHV:
http://shop.happyhealthyvegan.org
http://facebook.com/happyhealthyvegan
http://instagram.com/happyhealthyvegan
https://www.patreon.com/happyhealthyvegan

🎶 👩‍🎤 🎸 🎹 🎧

MUSIC:
by Lovespirals (Ryan & Anji)
Available at http://lovespirals.bandcamp.com
Or iTunes, Amazon, Google Play or Spotify

Please subscribe for more healthy vegan recipes, health and fitness tips, interviews with vegan authorities, and much more from Anji and Ryan of Happy Healthy Vegan!

🍌 🍓 🍑 🌽 🍚 🍞
Click this link to GET ====>>>
Destroy Depression

38 COMMENTS

  1. Both sides annoy the hell out of me. Technologicaly we just aren't there yet. Another 10 to 20 years… Yes. But right now (unfortunately) all farming practices effectively destroy the ecosystem. Its not even how they practice there art. It's mostly in the sheer size and scale that it's done. Truth be told… The number of humans is the problem. Regardless of what global issue you have. Reducing our numbers dramatically would go a loooooooong way to correcting the balance

  2. you are full of s***. you're an outrageous liar. It is hunters and the NRA that push to protect lands and habitats wild animals. Is 100% the hunters and the Outdoorsman in a wildlife enthusiasts. It's not vegans protecting anything but their own Idiocracy

  3. Any over or under consumption of a "resource" seems like it would fall under the "potentially bad consequences" category.
    So whether it's a bear, a rabbit or an avocado, the same rule of thumb applies.

    The question is, how much "better" is the alternative? Would it be more environmentally conscious to go "full" vegan? Meaning, we abstain from the usage of any animals for any reason, medicinal or not. Would it be economically better? How are we measuring "better"? Better for who?

    These are the issues I find with veganism. The prevention of suffering and the treasuring of life. But life is competitive by nature. The place we inhabit is not infinite, it is temporary. We cannot save everything, we often have to prioritize what we will rescue/save/preserve, and what we won't. Veganism tries to defy a natural law.

    We should be more focused on restoring balance rather than devoting our lives to other lives. Killing/hunting an animal for food is not evil, it is survival. Hoarding animals in breeding grounds to turn a profit, is greed. The problem is, not everyone is a hunter and not everyone can be a hunter. We live in a different era. So I believe that societies have to slow down and reevaluate what's more important. Research, technology, convenience, expansion OR Conservation, preservation, stability, longevity.

  4. Yes, Im convinced that starting right off the bat with attacking the character of the person by brining up "shitty music career" from the past and ridiculing him before you even get to what he has said.
    Just look at yourself. You are a vegan? You are thin. You look week. You contribute to the downfall of our species by making us week.
    I will eat a steak today and when I do, I will think of you people and LAUGH

  5. Hey I know this is a old video and you will most likely never see this. I am a vegan and a member of the NRA. I also understand that due to human involvement In the echo system we need to hunt as a way to control populations since we have removed natural predators.

  6. yeah talk and talk ,when i was working in tenerife at the veg farm i saw a lot of dead animals that where killed to protect the crop like salad etc,you know nothing and you just showing that vegan attitude (we know everything better,we are better people)

  7. Your reasoning of him talking about hunting is incorrect. He is stating that part of bears increase in population is due to implemented regulation of hunting, something which is clearly written in your article you provided. Never does he say hunting increases population. I also find it interesting how you cut off his points after he says something that suits your argument

  8. I may have been interested in what you had to say, but when you start with an irrelevant attack on his music from 30 years ago I realised it was going to be a waste of 10 minutes of my life.

  9. The protein argument is not bs. Only meat has complete protein so if you get your protein from plants, you have to eat the correct combination of incomplete proteins every day or you will be protein deficient. Vegans are also naturally iron deficient resulting in permanently weakened immune systems.

  10. Pretty petty argument on your part. You fence in your private gardens. Those fields are are in the open. You may not like it, but yes it happens. And all the studdies you want to present, doesn't mean that animals aren't dying to harvest all foods grown in the fields. Just accept it, it happens, move on. It's your choice to eat want you want, I eat what I want. You bitching about Ted, a horrible person, makes you no better. You push your agenda, just like religion, and politicians.

  11. Veganism in itself is not a problem. Problems exist where there are people arguing that one way of life is inherently better than another based on their own perceptions of right and wrong. Nugent and this Healthy Vegan character are both the same. Each of them in their own way believe that they "right" and the other is "wrong". Neither person in my mind make any sort of sense in their arguments. It almost sounds like they belong to clashing religious groups.

    Biggest difference is that Joe Rogan and Ted Nugent have charisma and I don't want to throw my computer out the window listening to them talk………… while others…..

  12. Animal foods contain important nutrients that simply cannot be found in plant foods. The list includes carnitine, creatine, carnosine, conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), vitamin B12 and (in the case of fatty fish) the critical long-chain omega 3 fatty acids EPA and DHA. Vegetables, nuts and fruits, meanwhile, typically feature antioxidant contents that cereal grains could not even dream of matching.

    Contrary to the claims of health authorities, cereal grains, whether whole or refined, are nutritional weaklings. They contain no vitamin C, no vitamin D, no B12, no vitamin A and (with the sole of exception of yellow maize) no beta-carotene. Cereal grains and legumes also contain high concentrations of substances that researchers refer to as anti-nutrients.

    Among these are phytate (a substance that binds to minerals and reduces their absorption by the body), pyridoxine glucoside (which has been shown to reduce the availability of vitamin B6 by 75-80 percent), substances that impair vitamin D absorption, and lectins (which may impair healthy immune function and promote leaky gut syndrome).
    For almost our entire 2.4 million-year history, humans lived as hunter-gatherers. We lived on foods that could be eaten either raw or with a minimum of preparation. Think freshly killed meats, wild vegetables, fruits, berries and nuts. Around 10,000 years ago, human history changed forever. With the adoption of farming, the human diet underwent a massive and fundamental change in a relatively brief space of time. It went from a high-protein regimen based on meats and wild vegetation to a high-carbohydrate pattern based on cereal grains. Remember, this food source was essentially alien to the human digestive tract in its natural state.

    Fructose causes insulin resistance. Some people think the body needs carbohydrates, but that is not the case. The body is made, healed and maintained entirely by the protein and fat in the diet. The daily requirement for carbohydrate is ZERO. You will not die without carbohydrate. In fact, you will achieve optimum health without it. Scientifically, carbohydrates should not be classified as a macronutrient, because they are not an essential for life or good health. You will die without protein and fats which are essential to build and maintain the body.

    The body can maintain a perfectly normal level of blood glucose (a process called gluconeogenesis) by making it from either dietary protein or fats. The process is reversible and can go either way, allowing the body to maintain the proper blood glucose level without eating any carbohydrates.

  13. Stopped listening the second you suggested he said black bears are thriving because they're being hunted. He didn't. He said due to hunting regulations. I.e. regulations ensuring the sustainability of the bears… You lost the argument at the first hurdle by hearing what you wanted to hear to peddle your argument… Shame as I was 2+ minutes in before you lost me.

  14. This comment section is full of butt hurt vegans who cant except the fact that someone has another opinion. He may be wrong he may be right. If he's so wrong then go on with your day.

LEAVE A REPLY