Bye bye MEAT! How will the post-meat future look?

[JTG]

I bought Cathedral City’s plant-based cheddar today. It’s had a bunch of reviews suggesting it’s the best vegan alternative yet. Will report back tomorrow!

Wasn't all that imo.

 

[JTG]

Civil war amongst the human herbivores?

The death of the vegetarian

Veggies outnumber vegans by almost two million, but they’re in danger of being cancelled by a plant-based takeover of the nation’s menus

getpocket.com

Not arsed tbh but then I'm actively moving in the general direction of veganism anyway

Quite glad to be past the days of endless goats cheese and red onion tarts

 

[Agent Sparrow]

Going back to the premise of a world without meat, unless there’s a large scale event that practically limits the availability of livestock, the most effective way would be to widen the availability and range of good vegan and vegetarian food. This would increase non meat eating in those who share common concerns with veggies/vegans but find other issues take priority. It could also start normalising plant based foods as an option for people who wouldn’t dream of taking the whole plunge. I’d argue that greater acceptance of those trying to limit rather than cut out meat entirely would help.

But that increase of range would need to factor in things like food allergies and intolerances, the food palates and nutritional requirements of children (including those with disabilities), people with sensory issues including ARFID, people’s available resources for food preparation (be that financial, time, cognitive, practical, confidence or otherwise), cultural cuisine, conditioned food preferences and basic ability to maintain change.

There’s a sizeable proportion of people who eat meat and know the meat industry is shit, but won’t/can’t cut it out completely because of other issues that are more pressing for them. Some might argue that if you’re passionate (and I’d add if you’ve got various other things in your favour) then you’ll find a way. That’s probably true but not everyone is able to put it quite so high up their priorities, and to make change the potential areas of difficulty need to be identified and addressed.

Not sure if this is a “everyone let’s find a way to work together” or a “check your privilege” post.

 

[Aquamarine]

I've been surprised by how scrumptious some the meat free alternatives are and have been able to wean myself off my fast food addiction, more or less.

 

[Spymaster]

Somehow a CO2 chamber yields more profit than directly shooting ?

No. It’s always worth fact checking anything posted on these threads. It’s done out of a (possibly misguided) sense of welfare for the animals.

Here’s a less psychotic article than Jeff’s, from the RSPCA, who advocate using different gases: Is carbon dioxide stunning of pigs humane? – RSPCA Knowledgebase

 

[pseudonarcissus]

Going back to the premise of a world without meat, unless there’s a large scale event that practically limits the availability of livestock, the most effective way would be to widen the availability and range of good vegan and vegetarian food. This would increase non meat eating in those who share common concerns with veggies/vegans but find other issues take priority. It could also start normalising plant based foods as an option for people who wouldn’t dream of taking the whole plunge. I’d argue that greater acceptance of those trying to limit rather than cut out meat entirely would help.

But that increase of range would need to factor in things like food allergies and intolerances, the food palates and nutritional requirements of children (including those with disabilities), people with sensory issues including ARFID, people’s available resources for food preparation (be that financial, time, cognitive, practical, confidence or otherwise), cultural cuisine, conditioned food preferences and basic ability to maintain change.

There’s a sizeable proportion of people who eat meat and know the meat industry is shit, but won’t/can’t cut it out completely because of other issues that are more pressing for them. Some might argue that if you’re passionate (and I’d add if you’ve got various other things in your favour) then you’ll find a way. That’s probably true but not everyone is able to put it quite so high up their priorities, and to make change the potential areas of difficulty need to be identified and addressed.

Not sure if this is a “everyone let’s find a way to work together” or a “check your privilege” post.

Surely vegetables are fairly available in the supermarkets now? The problem is the food industry is pushing ultra-processed plant-based foods to replace processed animal based foods...these "meatless meat" products are likely to be just as unhealthy and sausages or bacon, just maybe different cancers. The premise of the above is that the availability of plant-based junk food is a prerequisite for action on climate change.

if it's a food you see advertised on the TV, it's bad for you!

 

[Agent Sparrow]

Surely vegetables are fairly available in the supermarkets now? The problem is the food industry is pushing ultra-processed plant-based foods to replace processed animal based foods...these "meatless meat" products are likely to be just as unhealthy and sausages or bacon, just maybe different cancers. The premise of the above is that the availability of plant-based junk food is a prerequisite for action on climate change.

if it's a food you see advertised on the TV, it's bad for you!

I was more thinking about any degree of eating outside home, whether that’s cafes and restaurants, pre-packaged sandwiches, provided lunches etc.* Yes you could always prepare your own food, never eat outside the home and so on but that places a practical limitation and unless you’re super committed to begin with, makes it harder to maintain. There are other factors that make it harder too. People with very little spare time will make it harder to pre-prepare food. Even when I had more time I really struggled with this - it later turned out I had ADHD, which doesn’t outright negate this sort of planning but makes it much harder.

But also part of my job is helping parents whose kids have feeding difficulties (from typical fussiness to very restricted sensory issues). Whilst there are things parents can do to gently help, a lot of it is down to the child you have. A lot of Autistic adults have made the point that you can never trust fruit and vegetables to be consistent in texture and taste, so they can’t manage to eat them. A processed burger however, whether veggie or meat, is consistent. You know what you’re getting each time. That’s why people with ARFID tend to eat a high proportion of highly processed foods.

I’m not saying that it wouldn’t be a good thing for both individuals and society to move towards eating much less meat and dairy, and less processed food when/if possible. What I am saying is that for certain groups it’s a lot more complicated than “just try harder”, and societal changes greatly help individual change.




*I remember once writing in my comments for some diversity training I attended that ironically the lunch was impossible for vegans and very limited for anyone who was veggie or could only eat meat prepared in specific ways for religious reasons.

 

[pseudonarcissus]

I was more thinking about any degree of eating outside home, whether that’s cafes and restaurants, pre-packaged sandwiches, provided lunches etc.* Yes you could always prepare your own food, never eat outside the home and so on but that places a practical limitation and unless you’re super committed to begin with, makes it harder to maintain. There are other factors that make it harder too. People with very little spare time will make it harder to pre-prepare food. Even when I had more time I really struggled with this - it later turned out I had ADHD, which doesn’t outright negate this sort of planning but makes it much harder.

But also part of my job is helping parents whose kids have feeding difficulties (from typical fussiness to very restricted sensory issues). Whilst there are things parents can do to gently help, a lot of it is down to the child you have. A lot of Autistic adults have made the point that you can never trust fruit and vegetables to be consistent in texture and taste, so they can’t manage to eat them. A processed burger however, whether veggie or meat, is consistent. You know what you’re getting each time. That’s why people with ARFID tend to eat a high proportion of highly processed foods.

I’m not saying that it wouldn’t be a good thing for both individuals and society to move towards eating much less meat and dairy, and less processed food when/if possible. What I am saying is that for certain groups it’s a lot more complicated than “just try harder”, and societal changes greatly help individual change.




*I remember once writing in my comments for some diversity training I attended that ironically the lunch was impossible for vegans and very limited for anyone who was veggie or could only eat meat prepared in specific ways for religious reasons.

thanks...that's interesting.

 

[DaphneM]

Oh wow, I always assumed that all animals are shot for meat. I always assumed that pigs are simply shot for pork. Why prolong the suffering and why not keep it simple?

Veterinarians disagree on what exactly to do about gas chambers. Most agree that compared with electrocution, which has to be performed on pigs one at a time, gas chambers are actually preferable in that they allow pigs to stay in groups, which reduces their stress.

 

[Karl Masks]

what is vegan cheese made out of?

 

[JTG]

what is vegan cheese made out of?

Depends. Usually it's nuts, coconut, tapioca or tofu

 

[Karl Masks]

 

[littlebabyjesus]

No. It’s always worth fact checking anything posted on these threads. It’s done out of a (possibly misguided) sense of welfare for the animals.

Here’s a less psychotic article than Jeff’s, from the RSPCA, who advocate using different gases: Is carbon dioxide stunning of pigs humane? – RSPCA Knowledgebase

That article links to Temple Grandin. She is a good source on this subject imo. While she may come across as cold (a symptom of being autistic more than anything else), her lack of sentimentality is always combined with an attempt to see things from the animal's point of view. She works towards better slaughter rather than no slaughter, which may place her beyond the pale for some people, but Grandin has done a lot of good over the years.

Carbon Dioxide Stunning of Pigs

 

[Silly Monkey]

No. It’s always worth fact checking anything posted on these threads. It’s done out of a (possibly misguided) sense of welfare for the animals.

Here’s a less psychotic article than Jeff’s, from the RSPCA, who advocate using different gases: Is carbon dioxide stunning of pigs humane? – RSPCA Knowledgebase

That was my understanding of it from the article

 

[Silly Monkey]

Veterinarians disagree on what exactly to do about gas chambers. Most agree that compared with electrocution, which has to be performed on pigs one at a time, gas chambers are actually preferable in that they allow pigs to stay in groups, which reduces their stress.

But electrocution is much faster. I can’t imagine them having the time to push back violently.

I feel like stress can be present in groups as they all fight for themselves and the other pigs. Seeing others tortured is never nice though I agree it would be worse if you suffer alone. Hence I don’t feel the “groups explanation” is a reasonable excuse I’m afraid.

 

[DaphneM]

But electrocution is much faster. I can’t imagine them having the time to push back violently.

I feel like stress can be present in groups as they all fight for themselves and the other pigs. Seeing others tortured is never nice though I agree it would be worse if you suffer alone. Hence I don’t feel the “groups explanation” is a reasonable excuse I’m afraid.

I would have thought nitrogen would be better tbh

 

[WouldBe]

I would have thought nitrogen would be better tbh

The body can't detect that unlike the carbon dioxide which produces stress symptoms iirc.

 

[editor]

Interesting developments in the Netherlands

The Netherlands is first to face questions scientists believe will soon come to all intensively farmed areas: how can we balance the needs of the environment with the way we farm and grow? Have we reached “peak meat”, like peak oil: so much livestock, so much local pollution, that the only sustainable future is in reduction? They’re questions the US, the world’s largest producer of beef, will also soon have to answer.

In November, the Dutch government announced the first part of a €24.3bn ($26.3bn) plan to buy out up to 3,000 farms and major industrial polluters near protected nature reserves – if necessary, through compulsory purchase, “with pain in our hearts”. It is hugely controversial and only initial outlines have been announced after a year of protests, tense negotiations and a report in October recommending buying out the top 500 or 600 polluters within a year.

The reason is that the emissions of ammonia, nitrogen oxides and nitrous oxide are damaging areas of unique, natural landscape known as Natura 2000 habitats, which the country is bound by EU law to protect. The government says this means reducing local nitrogen compound emissions from between 12% and 70%, including slashing the Netherlands’ 118 million farmed animals by 30% by 2030, according to Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency projections.

Countries such as Denmark and the US may soon face similar predicaments, according to Pete Smith, professor of soils and global change at Aberdeen University in Scotland. “We demonstrated last year that animal agriculture is responsible for 57% of greenhouse gas emissions from the food system,” he said. “It has a disproportionate effect on the climate. We have too many livestock for the climate to support, and it’s the intensity of farming that’s the issue. I’m not surprised the Netherlands is taking the lead as it has the biggest problem.”

The US, meanwhile, is the world’s largest producer of beef, chicken meat and cow’s milk, and is the second largest producer of pork. “If we compare foods in terms of their nutrient pollution impact per kilogram produced, nothing is higher than beef,” said Harwatt. “Two-thirds of all crop calories produced in the US are used for feed crops. But livestock production contributes less than 1% to US GDP, and at least twice as much food for humans could be produced on land currently used to grow feed crops for farmed animals.”

Have we reached ‘peak meat’? Why one country is trying to limit its number of livestock

Dutch farms are feeling the squeeze from EU rules and need to make sweeping changes to the farm system – could a huge producer like the US follow suit?

www.theguardian.com

 

[Funky_monks]

No. It’s always worth fact checking anything posted on these threads. It’s done out of a (possibly misguided) sense of welfare for the animals.

Here’s a less psychotic article than Jeff’s, from the RSPCA, who advocate using different gases: Is carbon dioxide stunning of pigs humane? – RSPCA Knowledgebase

Yes, it ought to have some inert gas in it somewhere, the idea is its more humane, but Ive only seen it in chicken and they certainly don't do much even in the way of post clonic activity.

 

[Funky_monks]

 

[Funky_monks]

No laughing matter – nitrous oxide emissions are higher from soils lacking organic matter

Seems adding manure to soils as opposed to synthetic fert reduces nitrous oxide emissions and is key to reducing emissions from crop production - published in journal "Nature Food".

 

[Jeff Robinson]

All systems of violent oppression require ideological justification to make the oppressors and those who side with them feel like the good guys. The ideology deployed by the animal exploitation industries and lapped up by its apologists are the fantasies of ‘humane slaughter’ and ‘humane use’.

When you strip away all the bullshit, this is what the animal ag apologists on this thread are saying:

‘Notionally, I believe that pigs should be gassed with argon rather than high concentrations of C02 but I’ll still keep paying for animals who are at least as emotionally and cognitively complex as dogs to die in excruciating agony because at least it’s better than the only alternative the industry are prepared to pay for’

 

[Spymaster]

‘Notionally, I believe that pigs should be gassed with argon rather than high concentrations of C02 but I’ll still keep paying for animals who are at least as emotionally and cognitively complex as dogs to die in excruciating agony because at least it’s better than the only alternative the industry are prepared to pay for’

This is the kind of mendacious pychopathy that we've come to expect from you, Jeff.

 

[Funky_monks]

This is the kind of mendacious pychopathy that we've come to expect from you, Jeff.

And rather, the point should be that they don't die in agony as per carbon monoxide poisoning.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

No laughing matter – nitrous oxide emissions are higher from soils lacking organic matter

Seems adding manure to soils as opposed to synthetic fert reduces nitrous oxide emissions and is key to reducing emissions from crop production - published in journal "Nature Food".

Almost like organic fertilisers form part of an evolved cycle.

And this points yet again back to the digging up of fossil fuels. Adding new chemicals to the system that have been locked away for millions of years is the root cause of global heating.

And it points yet again back to the point that systems need to be considered as a whole. How do we farm better? should be the question. There are lots of good answers, and most of them involve removing oil-derived products from systems. Digging up oil, gas, coal, etc, needs to stop. We now recognise the damage it is causing by adding these chemicals into various cycles, and need to change our ways completely and quickly. That is the challenge here.

There can be an arrogance in human activity generally, thinking that we can make artificial solutions to problems without causing damage. But our solutions are never anything like as good as the naturally evolved solutions. Evolution is a far more skilled engineer than we are. And there is usually something we haven't thought of that comes back to bite us.

 

[Spymaster]

Almost like organic fertilisers form part of an evolved cycle.

And this points yet again back to the digging up of fossil fuels. Adding new chemicals to the system that have been locked away for millions of years is the root cause of global heating.

And it points yet again back to the point that systems need to be considered as a whole. How do we farm better? should be the question. There are lots of good answers, and most of them involve removing oil-derived products from systems. Digging up oil, gas, coal, etc, needs to stop. We now recognise the damage it is causing by adding these chemicals into various cycles, and need to change our ways completely and quickly. That is the challenge here.

There can be an arrogance in human activity generally, thinking that we can make artificial solutions to problems without causing damage. But our solutions are never anything like as good as the naturally evolved solutions. Evolution is a far more skilled engineer than we are. And there is usually something we haven't thought of that comes back to bite us.

Nonsense.

It's all about championing animal torture, drinking cow juice, and being an apologist for the sexual abuse of farm animals!

 

[littlebabyjesus]

The notion of transhumanism comes in here. Monbiot is a very good example of this. Somehow we need to transcend our own evolutionary history because at root it is evil. And this can and should be done quickly and completely. It's a strange and contradictory combination of arrogance and self-hatred.

 

[friedaweed]

Nonsense.

It's all about championing animal torture, drinking cow juice, and being an apologist for the sexual abuse of farm animals!

"This week I have mostly been, wanking my pigs"

 

[Jeff Robinson]

The notion of transhumanism comes in here. Monbiot is a very good example of this. Somehow we need to transcend our own evolutionary history because at root it is evil. And this can and should be done quickly and completely. It's a strange and contradictory combination of arrogance and self-hatred.

Wow, that's a stretch.

And rather, the point should be that they don't die in agony as per carbon monoxide poisoning.

What are you talking about?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Wow, that's a stretch.

regarding Monbiot's ideas? He basically thinks that everything humans have done in the last 12,000 years or so is wrong and needs to be undone. And it needs to be undone very quickly in a space of decades using high-tech human-engineered solutions. That involves both arrogance in terms of what he thinks we can achieve and self-hatred in the sense that it sees everything that has brought humans to our place of global dominance as essentially evil.