Haileyelianasmom, I totally agree that Mercola is off his rocker a lot. Plus, the whole point of the site is to sell you stuff, so he usually inflates the importance of actual studies and twists them to show that you "NEED" some supplement. I'm not a fan. That having been said, he does get some stuff right now and then.

I don't think you can discount the information there completely, but there are definitely better sources.
I think the whole factory farming industry is a complete tragedy. Not just for the animals, although when I think about the billions of lives lived in pain and ended coldly and mechanically, it makes me feel kind of ill - but also because it's made pretty much the whole of western civilization equate rearing animals for food with suffering and death. Part of the whole point of traditional foods, for me, is that rearing animals for food does not need to be a source of suffering in the world, and that factory farming isn't the only way or even the best way to do it. Factory farming as a concept is just not a valid argument for avoidance of meat, unless the only meat available IS factory farmed.
In the past, on more traditional farms, death was the smallest part of it, the natural end of a partnership, a symbiotic relationship. Farmers provide protection, food, and frankly EXISTENCE for their animals; their lives were essentially courtesy of the farmer, they lived for the most part comfortably, were treated with respect and lived their lives without much stress and suffering and were generally killed quickly and without fuss. Moreover, children were not raised to be "sheltered" from the realities of eating as they are today, nor were they inundated with the anthropomorphic view of animals as portrayed by Disney et. al., and as such were not traumatized in the least by the idea that an animal died for their roast chicken or mutton chops.
The thing is, when most of your exposure to animals is through childrens' entertainment, OF COURSE you are going to identify with them far too much to enjoy eating them, because that's your reality - talking, cute animals that have very human emotions. It's hard for a person to conceive of a cow that really just wants to eat grass, have babies, wander around and moo when the only cow you've really experienced is Ferdinand. Likewise, when the only deer you have personal experience with is Bambi and his poor illegally poached mommy, venison doesn't sound so good either.
I'm rambling a bit. But my point is that a lot of vegetarianism is a product of our culture - both the part that hides animals away in feedlots and tortures them until they're almost ready to be sick, then lines them up and lets them watch one another be killed, and the part that turns animals into furry humans and puts them on TV for our children to soak in. Neither of these treatments does animals any justice, and our increasing urbanization means that generally, we have a major lack of familiarity with actual real animals.
I don't know if this is making sense, exactly... but I think, given the lack of higher reasoning and intellectual pursuits in most domesticated animals, their needs are simply to exist, to procreate, and to live comfortably. They can do none of these, really, without human involvement and stewardship, and by eating the animals, we can afford to host more of them, increasing their numbers and their success as a species - a drive we all, as mothers, understand!
Suffering should NEVER have been a part of what we know as animal husbandry. Factory farming is so far removed from what farming should be, I just don't think it should be part of a discussion on the ethics of meat eating. It's a large, nasty red herring and frankly I get really angry when people bring it up as a reason not to eat meat. It's like giving the MIC toy recalls for lead as a reason for not letting your children play with toys.
I hope this makes sense - I'm trying to write it while I'm being pestered by my toddler and asked to find the babies in all my breastfeeding books.

: So I apologize if any of this is too garbled or inadvertently offensive. If it is, I probably didn't mean it.
ETA: I forgot what I was actually responding to. My brain is SO not firing on all cylinders today.
Quote:
| I just skimmed it, but I know The Omnivore's Dilemma brings up this issue, that people generally can't look an animal in the eyes and kill it. They either don't look or become a vegetarian. |
I'm sorry, but this just isn't true. I was raised in a hunting-fishing-gathering-gardening family, and I've always known where food comes from, and I have no problem looking an animal in the eye and then killing it, nor, I think, do most ethical farmers. It is not the most pleasant part of a day, to be sure, but it is not the soul-destroying act that people who were NOT raised in close proximity to the reality of their meat like to think. I am, by most accounts, a reasonably concientious, compassionate, caring individual with no psychopathic tendencies (you'll just have to believe me on that one) and I have been called upon to dispatch friends' chickens and have done so with no moral quibbles and no more trauma than a mild disturbance at the lingering burnt-feather smell from singeing off the pinfeathers. I have looked rabbits in the eye and shot them, admired moose and yet rejoiced when my father's gun felled them, and met pigs and felt little remorse eating their bacon later. Am I some sort of monster? I don't think so. I abhor cruelty to animals, I cringe - and intervene, if I don't have DD with me - when I see someone doing something like beating their dog for a lack of obedience. I can't stand to hear babies cry, or see puppies left alone, or even see the sad little betta fish in those nasty tiny tanks at the pet store. Cruelty IS a very different thing than ending a life - I have seen both, and the quick end to an animal's life is NOT traumatic. The two concepts are not inextricably linked, death is not the same as suffering.