The current trend in labeling a manufactured food, that CONTAINS NO ANIMAL PRODUCTS (CNAP), is to label it PLANT-BASED rather than VEGAN, or ANIMAL-FREE. Some worry about the negativity associated with animal rights groups, so veer from the usage of the word vegan on their product even though it might be vegan.
Remember now that all over Facebook and other social media platforms we often see claims by vegans that VEGAN is a lifestyle not a diet. So companies not especially keen on associating their product with a lifestyle shy away from that connection.
Many times a company, that produces products made from flesh, blood and milk also offers a vegan option, so in their effort to satisfy the animal-eaters who are the main source of their customer base, vegan gets deleted and plant-based becomes the preferred wordage for labeling. They don’t want any of it to be political or social or debatable. They’re in business to make money, not social policy.
Face it. The government and slaughter industries have done a great job in demonizing vegans. Vegans have also contributed to that. PETA (People For The Ethical Treatment of Animals), probably was the biggest contributing factor by focusing on vivisection for so long, when nobody in the general population even knew what the word meant.
I recall many years ago, when memberships were sent through the mail, on the form I had to fill out it asked if I would break the law for animal rights? Or something like that. Would I break the law was the main component of the question.That in itself alerted me to the possibility that PETA wasn’t all it claimed to be, and that just maybe the government was running that organization as a silent entity, and wanted to know in advance who would break the law, so they could monitor them.
I mean why would anybody ask that? I have to wonder too why PETA got into the rescue and kill business of animals. They didn’t need to do that. You can’t be everything. So Ingrid Newkirk (long-time president of PETA) reportedly said, “but people always call us”. So what? Do you have a license and the permit to euthanize animals in your PETA office?
I still think that the CIA has a foothold and influence in that organization and as long as they do, they will be associated with terror. The CIA is the largest terror organization in the world.
They gave the food companies a pass for a long time, probably to stay in existence, which is understandable given the climate of the time. However, their continued persistence in not caring who they exploit as long as they get their pro-animal voice heard continues to make investors and manufacturers skittish when putting their money on a product that carries prejudice against all animal-eaters and even some plant-eaters.
How many times I saw the sexual exploitation of the female human used as justification for the cause? You need to be consistent across all lines if you want to be considered valid in your views.
Humans are animals. You can’t hate one species and love all the others. If you love the predator species too, which you claim to do, then humans fall into that category – not by DNA design but by choice and in some instances survival. Non-vegans expect vegans to be compassionate to all species, including the human, and this often is not communicated on social media. It is the non-vegan that vegans accuse of species-selection when caring about animals.
Turning love into a requirement for animal welfare isn’t rational. Respecting an animal’s right to live out their lives in absence of enslavement, torture and slaughter elevates their right to exist for themselves not others. Being dependent on your love objectifys them.
Then again, vegan has become associated with gluten-free, GMO free, processed food free and on and on, so rather than deal with what has become the cumbersome vegan word, they prefer to go with plant-based.
All well and good. So what, as long as it doesn’t contain any animal products – at least for now. I’ve often used it myself.
The vegans, rightly so, also want to make the process vegan – anything to do with the manufacturing of the product. For example, they don’t want the habitats of animals destroyed to harvest a plant to make an animal-free product. Once a product passes all those tests, then they don’t want any testing of plant products on animals.
However, the ‘for now’ part is the pitfall. Even though most people will connect plant-based with no animal in it, meaning only plants, it doesn’t actually mean no animal, since it can also mean in addition to plants the product also contains some animal.
When you order a bowl of soup in a restaurant, you’ll ask if the broth is vegetable based or animal based. If it’s vegetable, you’re happy and can order the soup in relatively good conscience. But wait, you forgot to ask about those tiny meatballs floating in it, thinking if the broth is plant-based, then everything else in the soup must be also.
If it’s a large company with factories all over the world, then recipes change based on availability of ingredients.
Not so. It’s the ‘based’ word that allows for flexibility. Maybe not now, but eventually someone will use that loophole to put animals where animals weren’t supposed to be. That’s the primary reason companies and manufacturers prefer it, in addition to the activism they consider baggage.
In sum: Labeling preferences by food companies and manufacturers are based on the meaning of the word based when it comes to vegan or animal-free products. Plant-based could mean made of mostly plants in some or all instances.