Epistemic disclaimer: I consider myself to be rationally ignorant about veganism as a lifestyle. Mainly because 1) it's basically impossible for me to begin and sustain veganism at the moment, even if I wanted to 2) I have a significantly increased risk of experiencing symptoms of nutritional imbalances, and it feels like anything short of spending thousands of hours reading about choices and getting regular professional advice would meaningfully reduce these risks. In short, I simply don't have the capacity/resources to sustain a vegan lifestyle, and potentially I won't ever in my lifetime.

Despite my disclaimer, I do want to learn more about the pros and cons about veganism, just minus the part where people might tell me I'm a bad person for not doing anything given the information presented to me.

One angle I'm particularly interested in (because I haven't heard it discussed in earnest in EA): Is veganism actually sustainable for the planet? My non-EA biologist friend claims, if 80% (or any high proportion) of the world suddenly became vegan, this would be a disaster for the planet. The fundamental problem, according to him, is that significant changes to the food chain of an ecosystem, such as eliminating one species, can lead to drastic and unpredictable outcomes for the whole ecosystem (including total collapse), and that experts have no way of predicting what those outcomes might be on the scale of a local ecosystem, let alone of ecosystems all around the world. My friend's second claim is that many vegan foods that are currently considered vegan staples have a worse ecological footprint than its non-vegan competitors. So there would need to be a major shift in crops that are grown, and probably what most vegans are eating is extremely unsustainable and would need to change, which then imposes restrictions on what is sustainable and ways to meet one's nutritional needs.

Part of my confusion about veganism, even within EA, is that it's often talked about though becoming veganism is "one thing". If the motivation behind veganism is purely to reduce animal suffering, then 1) switching to veganism is a simple heuristic, but 2) making specific switches (e.g. away from eggs) or advocating against factory farming might achieve a much better cost-benefit ratio. If we care about veganism AND the ecology of the planet, then everything gets complicated, because there are lots of vegan choices that probably do much worse harm then non-vegan choices, and suddenly it becomes impractical to evaluate all of these trade-offs happening in everyday lifestyle decisions. Veganism no longer makes sense as "one thing", compared to simply being a conscious consumer.

Are EAs having such discussions? Am I just in the wrong circles if I'm being asked "why aren't you vegan" (as though it's one thing that solves everything simultaneously)? If sustainability matters, what kinds of discussions are being held regarding harmful ecological footprints of vegan produce, and how to make it sustainable for more people to be on a vegan diet?

Hi guys,

I'm seeking for help here, i'm trying to help a family in Palestine and i would like to know what are my best options for direct fundings to them, is gofundme my only route or there are better out there.

Thank you very much🤲🏻

Life is a dynamic journey filled with ups and downs, laughter and tears, victories and lessons. To encapsulate the myriad of experiences we face, here is a collection of witty and insightful quotes that celebrate life’s diverse tapestry. Whether you're navigating the chaos, savoring the small joys, or confronting life's nuances, these quotes will bring a smile and perhaps a new perspective to your day. Feel free to carry these little nuggets of wisdom with you as you traverse life's path Joel1m001

Hi folks, I'm debating between earning to give now and earning to save (waiting for a more effective time to donate). Has average cost to save a life increased or decreased over the past 10 years?

I remember when i first started 10 years ago it was $2000 to save a life and now it's maybe $7000? But would appreciate it if folks here knew offhand or could point me in the right direction for research.

Giving Season has started on the EA Forum! 🎉 We’ve shared more details about our Donation Election, and the donation election fund is open for donations. After EA Forum users vote, the money will be distributed to the top three winners of the election.

Why donate to the election fund?

1. You can benefit from the collective knowledge of Forum users to donate more effectively than you may have on your own.
2. You can boost engagement with the event on the Forum, raising the profile of effective giving and moving more money to impactful projects (as happened last year).
3. For many people around the world, the online EA community is a key source of motivation for them to continue doing good better, and your support can make this a better event for the community.
4. Rewards! 😊

https://preview.redd.it/z9xd26dpeqzd1.png?width=900&format=png&auto=webp&s=de89eb42d05b1d6901546ba8f46be51485bacfe4

I am working with the non-profit Altruism Research Institute and am looking for some help.

We need to get as many people to answer a 1 question survey for part of our research. Please click on the link below...it should only take a min or two and will be relatively painless.

A Survey | Altruism Research

Here is a little about what we do:

Our research mission is to search for the answer to a single foundational question "How Humanity Views Itself?" The singularity of our preoccupation is global in scope. Our goal is to explore humanity's view of itself through the filters of altruism-centric questions.

 Our hypothesis is anchored on the bedrock perspective that objective analysis of altruism in human behavior could significantly contribute to enlightened economic decision-making. We hope to become the subject matter center-of-excellence on the intersection of Behavioral Economics and the Science of Altruism. A more precise way to look at our areas of research inquiry would be to ask: 

"Do the majority of humans view personal economic gain as a zero-sum pursuit?"

​Our biases reflect a hypothesis that a positive-sum economic model is rooted in altruism as the fundamental core value thus a prerequisite for economic progress globally, therefore symbiotic.  Conversely, a zero-sum economic model i.e. zero-sum thinking  is rooted in parasitic tendencies in the economic decisions individuals make. Assuming our research succeeds in gathering statistically significant critical mass of data we hope to ultimately create a field of study exploring the epistemological basis of zero-sum thinking among humans.

I won't give all the lengthy reasons, but I believe the Trump presidency will cause a global decline in environmental protections and climate change mitigation. Assuming this to be true, climate will be an even more effective domain for charitability.

What are your favorite articles on effective climate and habitat protection charities? Favorite charities? Why?

I need a new car. I could afford electric, hybrid, old gas guzzler. I don't know if I could do better by just getting something cheap and donating to a top environment charity. What's the best balance of car vs donation? If you had top tier environmental charity focusing on reducing climate change effectively let me know :)

Because all miscarriages see classified as spontaneous abortions, how can we increase the rhetoric when we talk about "having miscarried" to having "had an abortion".

I think if we can normalize the medical terminology for the ending of pregnancy, it could eventually do a lot to change the perception of the word abortion to just the acceptable yet serious connotation it should have.

Instead of trying to rename the procedure to pro-choice or women's health, we try to equate all pregnancy loss to it.

Is this making sense? Would it be doable with political campaigning?

Also- I'm not sure where to put this. Redirect me?

Hey, r/EffectiveAltruism! My name is Erin Hogan, I am the Volunteer Recruitment Manager at ENGin, a nonprofit that connects English speakers around the world to Ukrainian learners for online conversation practice and cross-cultural exchange.

I want to share our mission with this community for a few reasons. First, we’ve welcomed many volunteers over the years, and our program continues to grow to over 23,000 volunteers, ages 13-80+. We’re proud of the way our volunteers and students create powerful, mutually beneficial bonds that foster empathy and global connection. Our strong community not only brings the benefit of English fluency to individuals, but also effects change on a national scale. Our vision is to create a generation of English-fluent, globally engaged Ukrainians who can support Ukraine's reconstruction post-war and propel Ukraine towards a prosperous future. In the coming years, we hope to repeat this model with other emerging democracies.

Second, ENGin is a low-commitment, high impact organization. Volunteering with ENGin is an easy process - our program does not require any special skills or experience and is designed to be as flexible as possible. Volunteers meet 1-on-1 or in small groups with matched learners for 1 hour a week, online, for a minimum of 3 months. We provide resources, tips, and tools to make the experience simple and enjoyable. Since 2020, ENGin has matched over 25,000 students with over 23,000 volunteers. 99% of students improve their English, 79% form lasting friendships, and 42% of those who are seeking professional growth get new jobs, promotions, or salary increases within a year. 

Our impact, scale, and collaborative spirit align with many of Effective Altruism's principles, and I hope our opportunity will interest you. If you’re interested in learning more about ENGin, please visit our website at www.enginprogram.org/volunteer or feel free to message / comment with questions!

Hey guys I want to donate to Palestine and help with what’s happening but I heard that funding isn’t the issue and a lot of aid doesn’t even make it to the people who need it. Should I still donate or how can I help in other ways? Thank you in advance 🙏🏻

X-risk skeptic: Maybe it’d be a good thing if everybody dies.

Me: OK, then you’d be OK with personally killing every single man, woman, and child with your bare hands?

Starting with your own family and friends?

All the while telling them that it’s for the greater good?

Or are you just stuck in Abstract Land where your moral compass gets all out of whack and starts saying crazy things like “killing all humans is good, actually”?

X-risk skeptic: God you’re a vibe-killer. Who keeps inviting you to these parties?

---

I call this the "The Visceral Omnicide Thought Experiment: people's moral compasses tend to go off kilter when unmoored from more visceral experiences. 

To rectify this, whenever you think about omnicide (killing all life), which is abstract, you can make it concrete and visceral by imagining doing it with your bare hands. 

This helps you more viscerally get what omnicide entails, leading to a more accurate moral compass.n

These 2 charities are strongly reccomended by givewell.org. see here: https://www.givewell.org/charities/amf

Here are some things that certain me. I'm not saying these are bad charities, but this seems kinda suspicious Does anyone have a good explainaion for this?

Malaria Consortium:

Financial Statements - None

Whistleblower Policy - Missing

Document Retention and Destruction - Missing

Tax Form Distributed to Board Before Filing - Missing

https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/980627052

Against Malaria Foundation:

Financial Statements - None

Document Retention and Destruction - Missing

https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/203069841

I definitely know of most of the websites/orgs that regularly update a list of the MOST recommended organizations to donate to, but I'm wondering if there are ways to identify at least one or a few particularly effective or recommended organizations to donate to in even more "common"/less neglected causes?

My thought process here is that we all know that we're very far off from living in a world where everyone thinks like an EA, and more specifically that many people will always feel most compelled to donate towards orgs that either matter most to them personally or otherwise are just more popular. Acknowledging this reality, wouldn't it be great if we could at least introduce SOME of the real measures of effectiveness without potentially needing to convince everyone to donate for entirely different causes?

Shout-out to whoever made the post about TB. I've had this thought before, but that's what motivated this post (not that there isn't a strong case for donating to some orgs addressing TB, as they mentioned)

Not Yet Gods by Nate Soares

You probably don't feel guilty for failing to snap your fingers in just such a way as to produce a cure for Alzheimer's disease.

Yet, many people do feel guilty for failing to work until they drop every single day (which is a psychological impossibility).

They feel guilty for failing to magically abandon behavioral patterns they dislike, without practice or retraining (which is a cognitive impossibility). What gives?

The difference, I think, is that people think they "couldn't have" snapped their fingers and cured Alzheimer's, but they think they "could have" used better cognitive patterns. This is where a lot of the damage lies, I think:

Most people's "coulds" are broken.

People think that they "could have" avoided anxiety at that one party. They think they "could have" stopped playing Civilization at a reasonable hour and gone to bed. They think they "could have" stopped watching House of Cards between episodes. I'm not making a point about the illusion of free will, here — I think there is a sense in which we "could" do certain things that we do not in fact do. Rather, my point is that most people have a miscalibrated idea of what they could or couldn't do.

People berate themselves whenever their brain fails to be engraved with the cognitive patterns that they wish it was engraved with, as if they had complete dominion over their own thoughts, over the patterns laid down in their heads. As if they weren't a network of neurons. As if they could choose their preferred choice in spite of their cognitive patterns, rather than recognizing that choice is a cognitive pattern. As if they were supposed to choose their mind, rather than being their mind.

As if they were already gods.

We aren't gods.

Not yet.

We're still monkeys.

Almost everybody is a total mess internally, as best as I can tell. Almost everybody struggles to act as they wish to act. Almost everybody is psychologically fragile, and can be put into situations where they do things that they regret — overeat, overspend, get angry, get scared, get anxious. We're monkeys, and we're fairly fragile monkeys at that.

So you don't need to beat yourself up when you miss your targets. You don't need to berate yourself when you fail to act exactly as you wish to act. Acting as you wish doesn't happen for free, it only happens after tweaking the environment and training your brain. You're still a monkey!

Don't berate the monkey. Help it, whenever you can. It wants the same things you want — it's you. Assist, don't badger. Figure out how to make it easy to act as you wish. Retrain the monkey. Experiment. Try things.

And be kind to it. It's trying pretty hard. The monkey doesn't know exactly how to get what it wants yet, because it's embedded in a really big complicated world and it doesn't get to see most of it, and because a lot of what it does is due to a dozen different levels of subconscious cause-response patterns that it has very little control over. It's trying.

Don't berate the monkey just because it stumbles. We didn't exactly pick the easiest of paths. We didn't exactly set our sights low. The things we're trying to do are hard. So when the monkey runs into an obstacle and falls, help it to its feet. Help it practice, or help it train, or help it execute the next clever plan on your list of ways to overcome the obstacles before you.

One day, we may gain more control over our minds. One day, we may be able to choose our cognitive patterns at will, and effortlessly act as we wish. One day, we may become more like the creatures that many wish they were, the imaginary creatures with complete dominion over their own minds many rate themselves against.

But we aren't there yet. We're not gods. We're still monkeys.

I was just wondering if anyone knew an effective charity that does good work preventing or treating TB - it has recently returned to being the deadliest infectious disease in the world.