The myth of the Indian vegetarian nation | Hacker News Reader

The myth of the Indian vegetarian nation

bbc.com

17 pointssridca19 comments

A thing to note is that "non-vegetarian" for Indians and say, the US is very different. Being non-vegetarian in the US means eating meat every day, pretty much every meal. In India, there are a lot of people that only occasionally eat meat, say about once a week, or a few meals a week. There are a ton of vegetarian only eating places which are very very popular with the so called non-vegetarians.

Another difference is that meat based meals in restaurants are more expensive than their vegetarian counterparts(like it should be), not subsidized like in the US(through the form of animal meal subsidies like corn).

It would be nice to see per capita consumption of meat products among non-vegetarians of different countries.

> Another difference is that meat based meals in restaurants are more expensive than their vegetarian counterparts(like it should be), not subsidized like in the US(through the form of animal meal subsidies like corn).

It's not just subsidies, it's the fact that in the US, 'vegetarian' (or vegan) happens to usually overlap other fad diets like gluten-free, low-carb, etc... Plus different cultural tastes. A typical vegetarian meal in India is made from some preparation of legumes, rice and wheat, plus a few vegetables. A typical vegetarian meal in the US is made from quinoa, avocado, cauliflower, almonds, etc... Not to mention, there's massive differences in the economics of restaurants between the US and India. In India, a 'restaurant' can be a stall on the side of the road with a few plastic chairs. Having an open fire on the side of the street is seemingly acceptable. In the US, you need a business license, commercial kitchen, the overhead is simply much, much higher and you need a certain amount of revenue per guest, so even if the vegetarian meal may cost less, you need to maintain your gross profit.

Outside restaurants, at the grocery stores, meat is often as cheap if not cheaper than vegetables, fruits etc.

> Being non-vegetarian in the US means eating meat every day, pretty much every meal.

Huh? No it doesn't.

In my experience it pretty much does. Look at the "meatless Mondays" movement to provide vegetarian meals in school cafeterias one day a week.

The article does not include any context or reference at which level it would include a region to be "vegetarian" and not a "myth" and is quite ... optimistic... in its conclusions.

For instance, it lists the percentage of vegetarians as

- Indore: 49% - Meerut: 36% - Delhi: 30%

To me this would indicate that the "myth" is true. Similarly, they report that about 15% of people eat beef instead of the official estimate of about 7%. While the factor is interesting, this is still very far from high and does not support their summary that "the extent of beef eating is much higher than claims and stereotypes suggest".

You forgot the cities of South India (which, incidentally, is the more literate part of the country):

Hyderabad: 11%

Chennai: 6%

Kolkata: 4%

Your comment on beef is not very interesting as we mostly eat goat if not chicken and seafood.

And of course eggs and dairy are part of daily staple.

Narendra Modi's ruling Hindu nationalist BJP promotes vegetarianism and believes that the cow should be protected, because the country's majority Hindu population considers them holy. More than a dozen states have already banned the slaughter of cattle. And during Mr Modi's rule, vigilante cow protection groups, operating with impunity, have killed people transporting cattle.

- This is a bit of a weird article, almost like its a point proving/scoring to prove India isn't vegetarian which a lot of people know that there are meat eaters in India. Forget politics, for anyone who is half educated about climate change, stopping cow slaughter for meat is one of the best ways to reduce our footprint, both in methane output as well as reducing the insane amount of crops used to fatten cattle.

Wait... I never thought that India was considered vegetarian? I know vegetarianism is more popular in India than in other countries, but I've always just assumed that it's easier to get a vegetarian meal at an Indian restaurant.

The beef thing, though, came as a surprise. (I always thought beef was so taboo that no one would ever touch it.) I felt so weird the time I ate a steak at a steakhouse in India.

Some people actually believe it be so. Here's a recent example from HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19927745

This reminds me of how I always associated South Indian food with vegetarian food growing up in Delhi, where the majority of South Indian restaurants are run by Brahmins. (As I now know) fish and meat are essential to southern cuisines, but my less adventurous or less informed friends still persist in that misconception to some extent.

I'm actually a bit surprised the number is estimated as high as 20%. I'd have expected much lower. The stereotype exists because a majority of the people who have emigrated West in the past have come from historically "upper castes" which have a much higher proportion of vegetarians.

Isn't India more vegetarian than any other country in the world?

Maybe? At 20%, it depends on how accurate Mexico’s numbers are. By absolute numbers, surely.

Reminds me of the last time I saw pork sausages in Islamabad

Beef curry is great in Goa (which, anyways, is more Christian than Hindu).

Maybe in the more tourist-y areas. AFAIK Goa state is 70% Hindu.

Oh ya, this was a seaside resort that we were sequestered at for a workshop.

I'm surprised that this rather uncontroversial article got flagged. Anyone have any theories as to why?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com