Commuting - what is the best animal-friendly saddle? My gel seat aint working out!

As a vegan I am finding it a bit challenging to find a good quality, extremely combfortable seat. I bought the Terry Liberator for my wife and the sales person assured me that it was not made of leather. Six months later I am on that companys' online catologue website and I notice that the Terry Liberator is listed as having leather. Very frustrating.

I have been using a gel seat for a while, but no matter how i configure it there always seems to be a bit of chaffing. Is it the way I am configuring it or is it because its a gel seat?

Anyone know of a good quality, combfortable (combfort is a necessity!), non-leather saddle?

Thanks!

I have a Brooks on my cross bike. I find it very comfortable. The trails to my favourite deer hunting spots are long so comfort is very important.

I have a Brooks on my cross bike. I find it very comfortable. The trails to my favourite deer hunting spots are long so comfort is very important.


and I should reply how?... "please let me be so macho and cool as you?" jerk.

I have a Brooks on my cross bike. I find it very comfortable. The trails to my favourite deer hunting spots are long so comfort is very important.

Wow, that's a d*ck response. I too have brooks saddles - got my first when I was vegetarian (I've slipped up recently and as for my first Brooks.. I decided to rationalize it as - "well, if the heathens are going to eat their steak, I might as well make use of what's left")... however, I understand your position Vegan... I found that all these new gel saddles and everything are quite uncomfortable... so I got a 2 dollar vinyl used saddle (like found on old old road cycles) from the Broadway Bike School here and found it quite comfortable actually - for commutng and riding around <shrug>... its just plastic, some thin foam padding I think and a vinyl cover... a little narrower than a B17. I say check the used box bins... you might be quite surprised...

Maybe you should just drive your hybrid car to the local PETA offices.

Maybe you should just drive your hybrid car to the local PETA offices.

Maybe you should just drive your Ford Excursion to the SHUT THE HELL UP! :rolleyes: :mad:

(sorry everyone)

Maybe you should just drive your hybrid car to the local PETA offices.

Why do veganheart's decisions bother you so much? The way I see it, people who react this way when there is no threat to them are either very insecure, immature, or both.

bah! hushup and take it to the polotics forum.. this is a butt thread! not a "why are ya vegan thread".

Why do veganheart's decisions bother you so much? The way I see it, people who react this way when there is no threat to them are either very insecure, immature, or both.
Agreed. Can't we all just get along? :)

veganheart - I use an animal-unfriendly saddle, so can't really recommend it to you! One bit of advice I can offer is to stay away from gel saddles. I've never found them to be comfortable, no matter how I position them. I've always found the saddles with the least possible cushioning to be the most comfortable, as it seems to allow the sit bones to support you properly and takes the pressure off the flesh.

My Specialized Body Comp Geometry saddle is quite comfortable. I'm pretty sure it is all synthetic. Construction is a little cheezy - plastic.

Gel sucks

I use an ergo seat funny looking but it is the most comfortable seat I have ever used. It is available in vinyl

http://ergotheseat.com/

I'm sure there isn't an ounce of anything animial in this one:

http://www.performancebike.com/shop/Profile.cfm?SKU=18504

For only $269 US (on sale).

Just trying to lighten things up a bit - pardon the pun.

http://www.trekbikes.com/accessories/product_detail.jsp?product_id=2446&category_id=276

I use this saddle on my MTB, and this along with a nice pair of baggy shorts with a chamois and it feels like riding a cloud, with the performance of something else. It is made of a synthetic leather like surface, NOT real leather.

Get a seat with the width at the back matching your wife's sit bones, minimal padding and narrow at the front so they dont chaff the inside of the thighs when pedalling. I got mine at Canadian Tire for $15, but they dont sell that model now. Since seat comfort is such a personal thing I dont think other peoples experiences can have much bearing on what you should get for your wife. When shopping for a saddle ask them about their return/exchange policy. Another thing to consider is the handle bar position - too much weight on the butt can contribute to discomfort.

I have tried at least a dozen synthetic saddles and hated every last one of them. The Specialized Body Geometry was the worst of the lot. They only got a five star rating from Bicycling Magazine because Specialized buys lots of advertising. The mag writers probably didn't even test ride the saddle.

I have found only two saddles that I like:
1) the Brooks b.17 and
2) the San Marco Rolls which is leather stretched over a plastic shell and has the same shape as a brooks b.17

I am mostly vegetarian, meaning that I eat fish, eggs and dairy but not beef, pork, or poultry. I do it for the dietary benifits not because of any moral or political reason. I see nothing wrong with using animal products if they make my life better. If I were to have a moral crisis one day and decide to never use leather again I think I would have to quit riding bicycles. A comfortable ride without it is just not possible.

As a vegan I am finding it a bit challenging to find a good quality, extremely combfortable seat. I bought the Terry Liberator for my wife and the sales person assured me that it was not made of leather. Six months later I am on that companys' online catologue website and I notice that the Terry Liberator is listed as having leather. Very frustrating.

I have been using a gel seat for a while, but no matter how i configure it there always seems to be a bit of chaffing. Is it the way I am configuring it or is it because its a gel seat?

Anyone know of a good quality, combfortable (combfort is a necessity!), non-leather saddle?

Thanks!

Maybe you could e-mail companies that you are interested in purchasing from and find out if they have any saddles made with vinyl instead of leather. Unless your wife just rides a few miles here and there I would NOT get a gel saddle with the fuzzy surface like they put on stock comfort bikes. I don't think that would really be as comfortable as you might think for a decent length ride.
I think the reason most companies use leather is that it tends to "mold" to our individual shape just a bit as the leather soaks up our perspiration.
I had a thought, and checked their website, and I was correct. Try Wilderness Trail Bikes website. They have several saddles, and some models have synthetic or vinyl covers. They say which ones have leather covers. With your level of concern about any animal parts, you might want to e-mail the company to find out if anything under the cover is something you don't want. I use the WTB Rocket, and like it. I only touch it at two small points on my bones. My commuter has the WTB Speed V. I don't like it as much as the Rocket, but hey, got to wait to get a matching saddle for all the bikes. Check out all the saddles on their website. REI here in the U.S.,(not sure if they're in B.C.) sells them. You might just have to cross over and inspect them if you're ever down this way. Good luck with your search.

The synthetics all come from petroleum base stocks. The polution and habitate degregation that comes from the petroleum production and refining takes as big of a toll on the well being of animals as using their remains for saddles and other leather products does. So, as Cycletourist says, get a leather seat and be comfortable.

The way I see it. If you walk into a bike shop and they have leather saddles, regardless of if you buy one or not, the animal is already dead, this isn't going to bring it back to life. Buy the leather saddle, your body will be thankful for the comfort. Even if you don't buy one, beacuse you don't want support leather saddles, they'll keep making them for centuries.

CHEERS.

Mark

The way I see it Dutchy is that after the purchase of the seat the store would want to restock it thus creating the demand for more leather. I agree that people will continue to manufacture leather saddles and they are most likely better but you need a balance. Mass consumerism and animals aren't a good mix imo.

Most leather saddles are more expensive anyway so that balances things out somewhat.

Blwyn, good point.

As far as saddle comfort goes I found that a narrow seat is actually better (for me) for long rides as I get little or no chaffing at all (please no jokes here ok ;)). Narrow seats look uncomfortable but are worth a try.

hey Veggie do you use synthetics? Well of course you do. Everything you buy has synthetics in it, and that new saddle will have a abundance of synthetic material in it. By the way did you know that it takes only about 1 year for animal product based things to break down? And what becomes of that? It makes the ground fertile! Now do you know how long it will take for synthetics to break down? Only about a 10,000 years while it kills the soil. Oh wait I know what your going to say, you would recycle it right? Well that's good for you but only 8% of all synthetic material gets recycled! So I would think that the animal hide would be a better use of resources. And lets not forget that manufacturing of Synthetic products creates a great deal more pollution than animal hide cutting.

hey Veggie do you use synthetics? Well of course you do. Everything you buy has synthetics in it, and that new saddle will have a abundance of synthetic material in it. By the way did you know that it takes only about 1 year for animal product based things to break down? And what becomes of that? It makes the ground fertile! Now do you know how long it will take for synthetics to break down? Only about a 10,000 years while it kills the soil. Oh wait I know what your going to say, you would recycle it right? Well that's good for you but only 8% of all synthetic material gets recycled! So I would think that the animal hide would be a better use of resources. And lets not forget that manufacturing of Synthetic products creates a great deal more pollution than animal hide cutting.

Have any figures as to the chemicals involved in the tanning process and other processes of making the leather products? Did you account for this as well? I'm sure the petrolium-based products are still worse, but let's take everything in account. So - for example a Brooks saddle - let's find out what their process is for the preparing of the leather and the metal for the rails and such and disposal of the chemicals left over. And also - the production of Proofide. Further - how the leather breaks down since it is no longer as natural as it once was - we can assume it has been treated with chemicals of some sort, no?

Well, well... haven't we got a nice little discussion goin' on here... I usually try not to get on my soapbox, but since the carnivores have gotten on theirs.... lets get down to brass tacks shall we?

Most of the millions of cows, pigs, sheep, and goats slaughtered for their skin endure the horrors of factory farming—overcrowding, deprivation, unanesthetized castration, branding, tail-docking, and de-horning. At the end of their short, miserable lives, they are stunned, skinned, hung upside down, and bled to death.

The meat industry relies on skin sales to remain profitable. Buying leather directly contributes to factory farms and slaughterhouses since skin accounts for 55 percent of the byproduct value of cattle.

Every time you choose to buy a leather saddle, jacket or leather shoes, you sentence an animal to a lifetime of suffering. Join the millions of consumers who are realizing that "hairless fur" is something we can do without.

Some say yeah but the animals are already dead; why not use their skins?

The animals are dead because there is a demand for their flesh and skin. Once the demand for meat and leather decreases, fewer animals will be killed. By buying leather, you make inhumane treatment of animals profitable, and you "vote" for cruelty with your consumer dollars.

Leather production reaks havoc on the environment and is much worse than synthetics. These are the facts:

Until the late 1800s, animal skin was air- or salt-dried and tanned with vegetable tannins or oil, but today animal skin is turned into finished leather with a variety of dangerous substances, including mineral salts (chromium, aluminum, iron, and zirconium), formaldehyde, coal-tar derivatives, and various oils and dyes, some of them cyanide-based. More than 95 percent of leather produced in the U.S. is chrome-tanned. All wastes containing chromium are considered hazardous by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Tannery effluent also contains large amounts of other pollutants, such as lime sludge, sulfides, and acids.

Although leathermakers like to tout their products as "biodegradable" and "eco-friendly," the process of tanning stabilizes the collagen or protein fibers so that they actually stop biodegrading.

People who work in and live near tanneries are dying from cancer caused by exposure to toxic chemicals used to process and dye the leather. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that the incidence of leukemia among residents near one tannery in Kentucky was five times the U.S. average. According to a New York State Department of Health study, more than half of all testicular cancer victims work in tanneries.

The leather industry uses massive amounts of energy. The Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology states, "On the basis of quantity of energy consumed per unit of product produced, the leather-manufacturing industry would be categorized with the aluminum, paper, steel, cement, and petroleum-manufacturing industries as a gross consumer of energy."

Additionally, to raise the animals whose skin eventually becomes leather, trees are cleared to create pastureland, vast quantities of water are used, and feedlot and dairy farm runoff create a major source of water pollution. Huge amounts of fossil fuels are consumed in livestock production. (By contrast, plastic wearables account for only a fraction of 1 percent of the petroleum used in the U.S.)

Maybe non-leather saddles are not as combfortable as Brooks etc, but given the foregoing, I would rather have a clear conscience and a sore butt.

There you have it folks. That's why I won't buy leather.

Suggestions and advice on the best non-leather saddle(s) still welcome.

I think the Performance Forte lineup has a few synthetic saddles in their line... performancebike.com They are reasonably priced and extremely high quality from what I've seen. But then again I have a vinyl Mongoose saddle on my roadbike. Also, Specialized has some nice synthetic saddles. The BG series is very comfortable for me. The previous poster who had said they are crap and horribly uncomfortable didn't take into account that no two people will most likely ever agree on the comfort of a saddle, its purely subjective.

Saddle fit is such an individual thing that I suppose no recommendation I might give would be sure to work for *you*, but I'll give you my opinions anyway.

It may be the gel that is causing you your discomfort. It seems counterintuitive that a nice plush and cushy saddle would be uncomfortable, but oddly, most people find a firmer saddle to be more comfortable on a long ride.

Also tipping your saddle fore or aft changes the fit of the saddle. Some experimentation is usually required to find the right fit. If you are a guy and you dress to the left, orienting the saddle 5 degrees off center to the right might make the saddle more comfortable as well.

My LBS has a good policy on saddles: If I want to buy a saddle, I bring in my bike, the owner then hands me a multitool and tells me to ride a few minutes on each saddle until I find one that suits me. This policy is the result of many previous saddle returns. It works quite well for both the LBS and the customers.

If your LBS is not similarly enlightened, then I would suggest a cheapo BMX saddle. These are 100% synthetic, reasonably firm, and very inexpensive. If it doesn't work out, then you are not out much anyway.

Dan

Great post veganheart.

But, generally, we can arrive at the age old saying: "Damned if you do, damned if you don't"

Ok I'm ********... TOTALLY forgot about SDG saddles... good quality and I dont think they make ANY leather models. Lots of cool color choices too.

Having read many a saddle thread, I believe that the only saddles that are widely accepted as comfortable are Brooks. I know that's not the answer you want, but that's what I have seen here. You may need to try a lot of other saddles before you find one that fits you well enough to be acceptable. 'There's a butt made for every saddle,' is a true saying. I think you are going to have to go by trial and error.

May I suggest you spend time visiting thrift stores in search of bikes with old saddles. I got an old Raleigh (1980 vintage) that has an Avocet Condor saddle. It's a vinyl saddle but is much more comfortable than most non-Brooks saddles I have used. I think that modern saddle manufacturers have fallen into the trap of making saddles that are either extremely light weight, or that complement the sleek look of the bike. An older saddle might work for you.

<shrug> I had a vegetarian friend who rationalized the purchase of leather products at thirft shops and used shops... used leather was more acceptable than new leather... because she wasn't supporting the fresh slaughter I guess.

Vegan your wrong about the tanning process stops biodgrading processes. Most tanning processes are all natural components...remember they have been tanning leather before your greatgrandfather was a twinkle in his daddys eyes! Way before "bad" chemicals were invented to make your synthetics that you so proudly wear! And those synthetic chemicals bleed into the ground water and guess who drinks it? Your poor little animals you so valantly yak about, and they DIE or have young ones with birth defects, and is one of the reasons why there is a huge animal die off going on. And if your such an animal worshipper than sell your car, motorcycle, lawn mower, stop using your gas and electric at home because all of that is contrubuting to your beloved animals demise. And your clear conscious for not using or eating animals had gone back to your parents and beyond you won't exist today! In India there are thousands of starving people roaming the streets alongside of cattle they cannot eat because they are considered holy, where is the "right" in that? You would probably say the animal has more rights than us? hmm...I had a neighbor that molested his own child and served 2 months in jail, while another neighbor stomped a stray cat to death in his yard in front of some school kids and got 6 years with 3 years served. Where's the justice in that? I can force my girlfriend to have an abortion and she goes along with it and it's ok because the fetus is not yet born so it's not murder, but kill an unborn eagle in it's egg and I can get 25 years! San Francisco a drunk kills another person gets 1 year, 2 years after he is released he's drunk again and kills another, now he gets 5 years, 1 week after being released he is drunk again and kills a family of 5, he gets 15 years! A man killed a porpose off of San Francisco while fishing and gets 15 years.

These animal rights people have gone too far. The animal “rights” terrorists are like the Unabomber and Oklahoma City bombers. They are not idealists seeking justice, but nihilists seeking destruction for the sake of destruction. They do not want to uplift mankind, to help him progress from the swamp to the stars. They want mankind’s destruction; they want him not just to stay in the swamp but to disappear into its muck.

Don't get me wrong, I think preservation of species is important. I think certain rules of engagement should be practiced. I believe that every 7 years all fishing in all oceans should stop to allow time for the fish to reproduce. And sport fishing should not be allowed to use any technology to catch fish such as sonar-thats not fishing.

I also disagree with rich people going to large 1,000 acre+ ranches to go hunting for whatever animal they want when these animals have been fed by man so they don't fear man-thats not hunting.

I also think that chemicals being leaked into the ground water and into the air should stop. Unfortunatly big business has more power than even goverments-but don't forget the goverments need big business tax money.

But I also don't worship animals or the earth, it was all placed here for man to use and to manage...we are failing at the management part. Only man has the power to deal with other members of his own species by voluntary means: rational persuasion and a code of morality rather than physical force. To claim that man’s use of animals is immoral is to claim that we have no right to our own lives and that we must sacrifice our welfare for the sake of creatures who cannot think or grasp the concept of morality. It is to elevate amoral animals to a moral level higher than ourselves-a flagrant contradiction. Of course, it is proper not to cause animals gratuitous suffering. But this is not the same as inventing a bill of rights for them-at our expense.

Take a look at the SaddleCo Flow. Shouldn't have any animal products, but a bit pricy. Should also be rather comfortable...

Vegan your wrong about the tanning process stops biodgrading processes. Most tanning processes are all natural components...remember they have been tanning leather before your greatgrandfather was a twinkle in his daddys eyes! Way before "bad" chemicals were invented to make your synthetics that you so proudly wear!

This is plain wrong... originally they used MERCURY to treat animal hydes which is why tanners had a reputation for being freaking nuts, because their nervous systems were destroyed after being exposed to it for years. Mercury, though a natural element, is by no means a safe chemical as I'm sure you know.

This is plain wrong... originally they used MERCURY to treat animal hydes which is why tanners had a reputation for being freaking nuts, because their nervous systems were destroyed after being exposed to it for years. Mercury, though a natural element, is by no means a safe chemical as I'm sure you know.

No originally they used acorns and urine. The hides were chewed and chewed soaked in the acorn water mix then urinated on to soften and chewed some more.

Vegan your wrong about the tanning process stops biodgrading processes. Most tanning processes are all natural components...remember they have been tanning leather before your greatgrandfather was a twinkle in his daddys eyes! Way before "bad" chemicals were invented to make your synthetics that you so proudly wear! And those synthetic chemicals bleed into the ground water and guess who drinks it? Your poor little animals you so valantly yak about, and they DIE or have young ones with birth defects, and is one of the reasons why there is a huge animal die off going on. And if your such an animal worshipper than sell your car, motorcycle, lawn mower, stop using your gas and electric at home because all of that is contrubuting to your beloved animals demise. And your clear conscious for not using or eating animals had gone back to your parents and beyond you won't exist today! In India there are thousands of starving people roaming the streets alongside of cattle they cannot eat because they are considered holy, where is the "right" in that? You would probably say the animal has more rights than us? hmm...I had a neighbor that molested his own child and served 2 months in jail, while another neighbor stomped a stray cat to death in his yard in front of some school kids and got 6 years with 3 years served. Where's the justice in that? I can force my girlfriend to have an abortion and she goes along with it and it's ok because the fetus is not yet born so it's not murder, but kill an unborn eagle in it's egg and I can get 25 years! San Francisco a drunk kills another person gets 1 year, 2 years after he is released he's drunk again and kills another, now he gets 5 years, 1 week after being released he is drunk again and kills a family of 5, he gets 15 years! A man killed a porpose off of San Francisco while fishing and gets 15 years.

These animal rights people have gone too far. The animal “rights” terrorists are like the Unabomber and Oklahoma City bombers. They are not idealists seeking justice, but nihilists seeking destruction for the sake of destruction. They do not want to uplift mankind, to help him progress from the swamp to the stars. They want mankind’s destruction; they want him not just to stay in the swamp but to disappear into its muck.

Don't get me wrong, I think preservation of species is important. I think certain rules of engagement should be practiced. I believe that every 7 years all fishing in all oceans should stop to allow time for the fish to reproduce. And sport fishing should not be allowed to use any technology to catch fish such as sonar-thats not fishing.

I also disagree with rich people going to large 1,000 acre+ ranches to go hunting for whatever animal they want when these animals have been fed by man so they don't fear man-thats not hunting.

I also think that chemicals being leaked into the ground water and into the air should stop. Unfortunatly big business has more power than even goverments-but don't forget the goverments need big business tax money.

But I also don't worship animals or the earth, it was all placed here for man to use and to manage...we are failing at the management part. Only man has the power to deal with other members of his own species by voluntary means: rational persuasion and a code of morality rather than physical force. To claim that man’s use of animals is immoral is to claim that we have no right to our own lives and that we must sacrifice our welfare for the sake of creatures who cannot think or grasp the concept of morality. It is to elevate amoral animals to a moral level higher than ourselves-a flagrant contradiction. Of course, it is proper not to cause animals gratuitous suffering. But this is not the same as inventing a bill of rights for them-at our expense.


"Most tanning processes are all natural components...remember they have been tanning leather before your greatgrandfather was a twinkle in his daddys eyes!"


The way they tan leather today is drastically different than 50 years ago. Yes, it was much more natural then, but now they use all kinds of harsh chemicals. Same thing with factory farming; 50 years ago cows used to live a somewhat decent life… until slaughter that is. Now they are housed in huge buildings the size of airplane hangers. The green pastures and idyllic barnyard scenes of years past, which are still portrayed in children’s books, have been replaced by windowless metal sheds, wire cages, gestation crates, and other confinement systems—what is now known as “factory farming.”


Farmed animals have no legal protection from horrific abuses that would be illegal if they were inflicted on dogs or cats: neglect, mutilations, genetic manipulation, and drug regimens that cause chronic pain and crippling, transport through all weather extremes, and inhumane slaughter. Yet farmed animals are no less interesting, intelligent, or capable of feeling pain than are the dogs or cats whom we cherish as companions.


The factory farming system of modern agriculture strives to produce the most meat, milk, and eggs as quickly and cheaply as possible, and in the smallest amount of space possible. Cows, calves, pigs, chickens, turkeys, ducks, geese, rabbits, and other animals are kept in small cages or stalls, often unable to turn around. They are deprived of exercise so that all their bodies’ energy goes toward producing flesh, eggs, or milk for human consumption. They are fed drugs to fatten them faster and are genetically altered to grow faster or to produce much more milk or eggs than they would naturally.


Because crowding creates a prime atmosphere for disease, animals on factory farms are fed and sprayed with huge amounts of pesticides and antibiotics, which remain in their bodies and are passed on to the people who eat them, creating serious human health hazards. Both the World Health Organization and the American Medical Association have supported ending the use of antibiotics.(1,2) Although McDonald’s has announced that it will phase out growth-promoting antibiotics, the fast-food chain is not likely to decrease overall antibiotic use.(3) The industry simply cannot raise the billions of animals per year that it does in such gruesome conditions without the drugs that allow their bodies to survive conditions that would otherwise kill them.


All those injustices you are describing really have nothing to do with the issue at hand. Moreover, to claim that advocates of animal-well being are terrorists is grossly inaccurate. With every movement you are sure to find some small portion who are wingnuts. However, the vast majority are like me who abhor violence of any kind. So to call us terrorists is quite misinformed.


I am pretty much an eco-freak so I do not own a car, lawnmower, or motorcycle. I don’t use gas in any way. I live in British Columbia and our energy comes from hydro-electric dams; although I still am very conscious about the energy I do use. Of course, I could live like a hermit in the woods and eat berries and bark, but I, like most people don’t think that’s a reasonable thing to ask of people.


Froze said,

“To claim that man’s use of animals is immoral is to claim that we have no right to our own lives and that we must sacrifice our welfare for the sake of creatures who cannot think or grasp the concept of morality. It is to elevate amoral animals to a moral level higher than ourselves-a flagrant contradiction.”


This argument simply does not make sense. There is simply no reason why humans cannot share the earth. Animals exist for their own reasons, not to serve humans. A 100 years ago it was thought that women and non-Caucasians were here to serve the white man, but now, of course, we know that is morally wrong. Humans do not need animals to survive. I have lived on a plant-based diet for over 8 years and I am very healthy. I know a whole family of vegans who have been vegan for over 25 years. Their son is 20 years old and has been vegan since the womb. He just finished an iron man triatholon last summer and is much healthier than most meat-eaters I know of. The American Dietic Association among many others has endorsed the vegetarian diet as one of the healthiest diets possible. So nutrition simply is not an issue.


Speaking of morality, if we are so superior why do we torture and eat those who are inferior to us? Shouldn’t we be their caretakers exactly because we are superior? Just like a parent is to a child? Based on your argument we might as well just round up all the mentally challenged people and eat them and use them for experiments. It’s the same logic.


Dude, we are never going to agree on this issue so I don’t see the validity in discussing it with you. However, as others are reading this, I feel obligated to offer up some counter-arguments to what I perceive as misinformation and propaganda.

peace and balance

Note that animals are raised very differently in Europe...

BTW, I did mention a saddle that is not made with leather that should be comfortable. (Flow)

Just making sure because this thread is moving off track again...

"Most tanning processes are all natural components...remember they have been tanning leather before your greatgrandfather was a twinkle in his daddys eyes!"


The way they tan leather today is drastically different than 50 years ago. Yes, it was much more natural then, but now they use all kinds of harsh chemicals. Same thing with factory farming; 50 years ago cows used to live a somewhat decent life… until slaughter that is. Now they are housed in huge buildings the size of airplane hangers. The green pastures and idyllic barnyard scenes of years past, which are still portrayed in children’s books, have been replaced by windowless metal sheds, wire cages, gestation crates, and other confinement systems—what is now known as “factory farming.”


Farmed animals have no legal protection from horrific abuses that would be illegal if they were inflicted on dogs or cats: neglect, mutilations, genetic manipulation, and drug regimens that cause chronic pain and crippling, transport through all weather extremes, and inhumane slaughter. Yet farmed animals are no less interesting, intelligent, or capable of feeling pain than are the dogs or cats whom we cherish as companions.


The factory farming system of modern agriculture strives to produce the most meat, milk, and eggs as quickly and cheaply as possible, and in the smallest amount of space possible. Cows, calves, pigs, chickens, turkeys, ducks, geese, rabbits, and other animals are kept in small cages or stalls, often unable to turn around. They are deprived of exercise so that all their bodies’ energy goes toward producing flesh, eggs, or milk for human consumption. They are fed drugs to fatten them faster and are genetically altered to grow faster or to produce much more milk or eggs than they would naturally.


Because crowding creates a prime atmosphere for disease, animals on factory farms are fed and sprayed with huge amounts of pesticides and antibiotics, which remain in their bodies and are passed on to the people who eat them, creating serious human health hazards. Both the World Health Organization and the American Medical Association have supported ending the use of antibiotics.(1,2) Although McDonald’s has announced that it will phase out growth-promoting antibiotics, the fast-food chain is not likely to decrease overall antibiotic use.(3) The industry simply cannot raise the billions of animals per year that it does in such gruesome conditions without the drugs that allow their bodies to survive conditions that would otherwise kill them.


All those injustices you are describing really have nothing to do with the issue at hand. Moreover, to claim that advocates of animal-well being are terrorists is grossly inaccurate. With every movement you are sure to find some small portion who are wingnuts. However, the vast majority are like me who abhor violence of any kind. So to call us terrorists is quite misinformed.


I am pretty much an eco-freak so I do not own a car, lawnmower, or motorcycle. I don’t use gas in any way. I live in British Columbia and our energy comes from hydro-electric dams; although I still am very conscious about the energy I do use. Of course, I could live like a hermit in the woods and eat berries and bark, but I, like most people don’t think that’s a reasonable thing to ask of people.


Froze said,

“To claim that man’s use of animals is immoral is to claim that we have no right to our own lives and that we must sacrifice our welfare for the sake of creatures who cannot think or grasp the concept of morality. It is to elevate amoral animals to a moral level higher than ourselves-a flagrant contradiction.”


This argument simply does not make sense. There is simply no reason why humans cannot share the earth. Animals exist for their own reasons, not to serve humans. A 100 years ago it was thought that women and non-Caucasians were here to serve the white man, but now, of course, we know that is morally wrong. Humans do not need animals to survive. I have lived on a plant-based diet for over 8 years and I am very healthy. I know a whole family of vegans who have been vegan for over 25 years. Their son is 20 years old and has been vegan since the womb. He just finished an iron man triatholon last summer and is much healthier than most meat-eaters I know of. The American Dietic Association among many others has endorsed the vegetarian diet as one of the healthiest diets possible. So nutrition simply is not an issue.


Speaking of morality, if we are so superior why do we torture and eat those who are inferior to us? Shouldn’t we be their caretakers exactly because we are superior? Just like a parent is to a child? Based on your argument we might as well just round up all the mentally challenged people and eat them and use them for experiments. It’s the same logic.


Dude, we are never going to agree on this issue so I don’t see the validity in discussing it with you. However, as others are reading this, I feel obligated to offer up some counter-arguments to what I perceive as misinformation and propaganda.

peace and balance


You are never going to agree for you refuse to see any other side but your own. You see what you see and anything else is what you last stated. This of course is sad that you cannot discus with others anything other than what you percieve to be true. You raise some good points but then stop, for there is far more to farming then you posted here, and there are many types. However I doubt you see this or you would have posted it. Also your comment on the status of animals and humans is wrong. I as well as millions of others agree with what the Holy Bible says on animals. This is my stand with animals.
Perhaps you should look into it if you can bring yourself to see another viewpoint.
However living in a hut in the woods and eating berries and bark is not a unreasonable thing people still do this all over the world. Matter of fact it is one of my comments when I see people like yourself. Id this is the way you think then go exist like that. Or do you feel it is unreasonable for it is too much of a sacrifice to let go of your worldly existence to be what you claim.
However back to your saddle. The Lycra cover on your gel seat if memory serves me correct was made by DuPont. If you know anything of DuPont then I question your reasoning in buying and owning a lycra covered saddle.

Did they rinse out the urine before chewing the leather again?

No they did not. If acts to softhen and preserve. The women who did this their dental health was bottom basement at best.

veganheart,
I want to add this as well. If you are runing teflon lined cable housing and teflon coated cables on your bike, then that very same teflon was made by DuPont. The tubes you use go through a chemical treating process so they do not shred to pieces under use. The rubber that your tires are made of goes through chemical treatments: http://www.rtvanderbilt.com/rubber_22.htm
The plastics and possibly the carbon fibre used in your bike, goes without saying chemically treated. The paint that covers your frame is not natural, it is man made, the fumes of which are dispersed into the environment. I could go on and on and on. I am just stating a point and raising an issue that I do not think you have considered I could be wrong though. Point is if you claim to be a big "eco freak" I do not understand how you can ride a bike with DuPont made materials knowing their history with the environment.

I have a Brooks on my cross bike. I find it very comfortable. The trails to my favourite deer hunting spots are long so comfort is very important.

Do you really think someone smart enough to eat certain foods based on their morals would be swayed by such a stupid comment? I'm a hunter, and my girlfriend is a vegetarian. What your doing is just making it easier for people to hate hunters. Someone being a vegitarian doesn't hurt you in any way. Way to show your IQ. Hey, maybe we can go hunting sometime and you could have an accident. :-D

Hunter et. al:

It is true that there are many pieces on our bikes that were produced using chemical processes. It is true that synthetics aren't biodegradable. But like veganheart stated, this is not the issue at hand.

I for one wouldn't really have any issue with animals used for food and bike seats if the conditions for them were the same as they were 100 years ago. As veganheart accurately pointed out, the current factory farming conditions are atrocious, and if witnessed would probably cause many here to choose not to support the industry. Choosing veg*ism is a simple act of using our capitalist system to reduce demand for a product. These efforts have not been in vain, as attention has been given to factory farms and many stores/restaurants are choosing to go with farms that have a better history of treatment toward the animals.

You are never going to agree for you refuse to see any other side but your own. You see what you see and anything else is what you last stated. This of course is sad that you cannot discus with others anything other than what you percieve to be true. You raise some good points but then stop, for there is far more to farming then you posted here, and there are many types. However I doubt you see this or you would have posted it. Also your comment on the status of animals and humans is wrong. I as well as millions of others agree with what the Holy Bible says on animals. This is my stand with animals.
Perhaps you should look into it if you can bring yourself to see another viewpoint.
However living in a hut in the woods and eating berries and bark is not a unreasonable thing people still do this all over the world. Matter of fact it is one of my comments when I see people like yourself. Id this is the way you think then go exist like that. Or do you feel it is unreasonable for it is too much of a sacrifice to let go of your worldly existence to be what you claim.
However back to your saddle. The Lycra cover on your gel seat if memory serves me correct was made by DuPont. If you know anything of DuPont then I question your reasoning in buying and owning a lycra covered saddle.

There is so much conflict in the world already. I dont want to add to it by arguing about what people base their values on. This will not get us any closer to peace and it definately wont change anyone's mind. Having made that qualification I will make two points;

1. I never knew that dupont had anything to do with bikes and I do find this troubling.

2. Humans need to be parasites on the earth for mere survival. Every single thing we do effects our ecological footprint. I believe I do more than most by not driving a car and not eating meat. Both of these have huge ramifications in terms of environmental impact. However, I certainly am not perfect. As your Bible says, He without sin, shall cast the first stone.

Farmed animals have no legal protection from horrific abuses that would be illegal if they were inflicted on dogs or cats: ....transport through all weather extremes, and inhumane slaughter
Just for the sake of argument you do realize that wild animals typically do live outdoors and are subject to all weather extremes and normally die by being ripped to pieces by natural predators or from starvation? You're perfectly right to live your lifestyle, but please don't pretend it's any way superior to anyone elses. How many of us would have to die if only ungenetically modified crops, grown without pesticides and herbicides were available to eat? How many of us would not have the comfort of electricity if only those lucky enough to have hydro-electric power (which you like, but I can find you plenty who disappove) in their backyards would deny the rest of us? I appreciate your desire to leave a small footprint, but I feel your opinions are at the very least a bit naive.

Why don't we end this nicely.

Go hug a f'ing tree you vegan moron.

No need to be nasty. That kind of comment could get you thrown off the board.

Saddles are far too personal to make sweeping statements about, sorry. Veganheart, as others have stated, you're likely to have try several different saddles. My arse seems to be perfectly shaped for a Brooks; there doesn't even seem to be a break in period, frankly.

A point: Veganheart has made a choice which in no affects the lives of other posters, or their ability to do as they see fit within the law. Insinuations have been made connecting decisions like Veganheart's to the Unabomber and other like minded luddite psychopaths, as well as various anti-technology luddites. These are nonsense connections, and do nothing to further the arguments of those positing them. In fact, they weaken the arguments the posters hope to make.

In addition, in this difficult and complex world we live in, it is hard to make decisions completely bereft of hypocrisy. We each choose a path we think makes the most sense, and do what we can with the contradictions in values inherent in modern life. Good luck leading the perfect life and never doing anything that conflicts with your moral stances. The next time someone lives a life like that, they'll be the first one to do so.

This isn't sad relativism or moral bankruptcy; it's just a statement of human failings. But better to aim high and miss your goal than to never aim at all.

Lastly, thanks to Merton, for reminding us this thread is about rear ends.

and I should reply how?... "please let me be so macho and cool as you?" jerk.

No doubt, what a jerk!

Maybe you should just drive your hybrid car to the local PETA offices.

Man, what the hell is your problem? This person posted a legit question. If you don't have a constructive answer, then shut up! Don't belittle him/her.

By the way, I'm a member of PETA. Why don't you show everyone how immature you are and start picking on me now?

:mad:

i had had a Specialized Body Geometry for 4 years now and find it very comfortable. i bought another 2 years ago for my 2nd mountain bike.

i do not know, but i think there are a lot of non-leather saddles out there. in general most of the cheap ones are not leather, although there are some high-quality synthetics like the Specialized.

as to the politics: i personally am not a vegetarian and think "humane" raising/killing of animals is ok (i am a hunter), but the "industrialized farming" of animals as well as uncontrolled use of chemicals and pollutants and all should be HEAVILY restricted and regulated -- preservation of the earth should come before the quick buck. and i do not think it is right for animals to be raised in small cramped cages and pumped full of drugs just so we can eat more cheaply (food is already incredibly CHEAP in the world which is why most family farmers are not able to make a living)

hey Veggie do you use synthetics? Well of course you do. Everything you buy has synthetics in it, and that new saddle will have a abundance of synthetic material in it. By the way did you know that it takes only about 1 year for animal product based things to break down? And what becomes of that? It makes the ground fertile! Now do you know how long it will take for synthetics to break down? Only about a 10,000 years while it kills the soil. Oh wait I know what your going to say, you would recycle it right? Well that's good for you but only 8% of all synthetic material gets recycled! So I would think that the animal hide would be a better use of resources. And lets not forget that manufacturing of Synthetic products creates a great deal more pollution than animal hide cutting.

Come on everyone! Veganheart is asking about a nice saddle for the bike that is animal-friendly. Not to be ridiculed like this. I really thought this forum was different than most others? Apparently not. I'm starting to feel like I'm on mtbr.com.