Opinion: "The End of Meat Is Here" - NY Times

[WouldBe]

Well, it's making its way into policy discussions - here in the Welsh Senedd:

"In Finland, technological leaps are being harnessed to turn bacteria and hydrogen into proteins, which can then be used to make anything from milk and eggs through to lab-grown meat and fish, all done with no harm to animals. Tweaks to these proteins could produce lauric acid, which could bring an end to the use of highly destructive palm oil. Environmental author George Monbiot predicts that this technology will make the plant versus meat-based diets argument irrelevant, and with all manner of foods created in this cellular manner, these farm-free foods, as Monbiot calls them, could allow us to hand back vast swathes of our land to nature, massively reduce pesticide use and end deforestation".....

This particular AM then starts talking about having these in the hands of the state, but I can't see that happening....

https://record.assembly.wales/Plenary/12903#C443483

Which raises the question of where the hydrogen comes from. Proteins are also made up of at least carbon, oxygen and nitrogen so the bacteria still need a source of those to feed on.

 

[Funky_monks]

Which raises the question of where the hydrogen comes from. Proteins are also made up of at least carbon, oxygen and nitrogen so the bacteria still need a source of those to feed on.

My biggest concern is that the track record of highly processed foods being good for you is not exactly great.

That unproven tech is being already being used as a reason to take land out of production is also pretty worrying.

In other news, apparently we are trying to mitigate the effects of global warming (apparently putting a lot of blame on massive ruminants), by populating rewilding land in the UK with...... massive ruminants....

Bison set for release into British woodland to help nature and climate crises | ITV News

 

[editor]

More obscenities from a vile, indefensible, polluting industry

More than a million meat chickens are dying every week in the UK before reaching slaughter weight, according to a new report.

An analysis of government figures by the animal welfare charity Open Cages reveals about 64 million chickens die prematurely each year in the UK. The dead birds can be incinerated or rendered into usable materials such as protein meal.


Chris Packham, the broadcaster and conservationist, said: “I think consumers would be utterly disgusted to know that a million of these intelligent, sensitive birds are dying every week to get cheap chicken on to their plates.

“The utter misery these animals face on a daily basis is unnecessary and would outrage even the most ardent meat-eaters because it serves no purpose but to satisfy the profits of our major supermarkets, who refuse to help them.”

Animal welfare campaigners say the mortality rates could be significantly reduced by better welfare standards. They are urging retailers to support the Better Chicken Commitment, an initiative to phase out fast-growing breeds and reduce stocking density.

A million UK chickens ‘die needlessly each week to keep prices low’

Fast-growing breeds are dying before they reach ‘slaughter age’, new research reveals

www.theguardian.com

 

[editor]

Here's an interesting and pragmatic study. Like just about every other study it concludes that people should eat far less meat.

We looked at five common plant-rich diets and assessed their impacts on the environment (carbon footprint, land, and water use), human health, and animal welfare. We focused on food production in high-income countries.

The diets we examined were:

• Mediterranean (plant-heavy with small amounts of red meat, moderate amounts of poultry and fish)
• Flexitarian/semi-vegetarian (meat reduction)
• Pescatarian (fish, no other meat)
• Vegetarian (no meat but dairy and eggs OK)
• Vegan (no animal products)

All five of these plant-rich diets had less environmental impact than the omnivore diet, with no-meat diets (vegan and vegetarian) having the least impact.

Overall, the Mediterranean diet was deemed the healthiest for humans, while the vegan and vegetarian diets had the best outcomes for animal welfare. When we combined all three measures, vegan and vegetarian diets were found to be the most ‘sustainable’ diets based on reducing our food footprint, staying healthy, and reducing negative impacts on farm animals.

Vegetarian diets may be better for the planet – but the Mediterranean diet is the one omnivores will actually adopt

Vegetarian and vegan diets are the best for the planet. But most omivores simply won’t switch to them. It’s realistic to promote the Mediterranean diet instead.

theconversation.com

Six studies (Bryngelsson et al., 2016; Goldstein et al., 2016; Meier and Christen, 2013; Springmann et al., 2018; Ulaszewska et al., 2017; Veeramani et al., 2017) provided a breakdown of animal products (grams/day) and were included in the animal welfare scores. The Mediterranean diet was included in one study, the flexitarian/semi-vegetarian in two studies, and the pescatarian and vegetarian in two and five studies, respectively. Significant variations among studies were observed in the amount of animal products in the same diet (e.g., dairy consumption for the vegetarian diet ranged from 170 to 827 g/day). All diets scored lower (i.e., better) on the combined animal life years suffered, animal loss, and morally adjusted lives score (0–0.36) than the baseline omnivore diet, with the exception of the pescatarian diet (0.63) primarily due to a higher AL score (see Supplementary data for list of individual articles and calculations). Environment, health, and animal welfare impact scores are shown in Table 2.

Conclusions​

The urgent need to shift to plant-rich diets is now considered a vital strategy in achieving a global sustainable food system and in combating an important driver of climate change

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352550922001282

 

[ElizabethofYork]

Yes, it's interesting and pragmatic. It actually suggests we should eat a little less meat, not far less, which you stated.

from your article: Vegetarian diets may be better for the planet – but the Mediterranean diet is the one omnivores will actually adopt

"As a result, it was the Mediterranean diet – which entails a small reduction in meat consumption – which had the highest likelihood of adoption. Combined with its high health benefits and moderate environmental and animal welfare impacts, we identified it as the best diet to promote.

While some of these results may seem intuitive, we believe by combining social, environmental, human health, and animal welfare elements of food consumption, we gain a more complete picture to spot pitfalls as well as realistic solutions.

For instance, it’s likely a waste of precious time and resources to promote diets like the vegan diet which, realistically, most people are not willing to eat. Yet despite the evident lack of enthusiasm from people, most research assessing the environmental impact of different diets has favoured vegan and vegetarian diets.

That’s why taking a wider view is important. If we actually want to reduce meat and dairy consumption, we must use approaches that have the best chance of working."


Interestingly, they say it's a waste of precious time and resources to promote the vegan diet.

 

[editor]

Yes, it's interesting and pragmatic. It actually suggests we should eat a little less meat, not far less, which you stated.

from your article: Vegetarian diets may be better for the planet – but the Mediterranean diet is the one omnivores will actually adopt

"As a result, it was the Mediterranean diet – which entails a small reduction in meat consumption – which had the highest likelihood of adoption. Combined with its high health benefits and moderate environmental and animal welfare impacts, we identified it as the best diet to promote.

While some of these results may seem intuitive, we believe by combining social, environmental, human health, and animal welfare elements of food consumption, we gain a more complete picture to spot pitfalls as well as realistic solutions.

For instance, it’s likely a waste of precious time and resources to promote diets like the vegan diet which, realistically, most people are not willing to eat. Yet despite the evident lack of enthusiasm from people, most research assessing the environmental impact of different diets has favoured vegan and vegetarian diets.

That’s why taking a wider view is important. If we actually want to reduce meat and dairy consumption, we must use approaches that have the best chance of working."


Interestingly, they say it's a waste of precious time and resources to promote the vegan diet.

From the study:

In contrast, a diet high in plant-based food and low in meat (particularly red and processed meat), such as traditional Mediterranean diets, has been associated with reduced all-cause mortality and lower incidence of heart failure, stroke, cognitive decline, and some cancers..

And for context:

Global meat production is predicted to increase by 76% between 2007 and 2050, associated with increasing adoption of diets high in animal-sourced products in developing countries

And, crucially:

Despite the Mediterranean diet being only moderately effective in reducing environmental/heath/animal-welfare impacts (relative to the standard omnivore diet), it had the highest overall weighted impact score, largely by virtue of its relatively high probability of adoption.

 

[WouldBe]

Very interesting. A vegan diet has a higher water usage than an omnivore diet.
And a Mediterranean diet is better than both vegetarian and vegan diets, and even a pescatarian diet is better than a vegetarian diet wrt Health impact( mortality / deaths averted).

 

[Jeff Robinson]

More obscenities from a vile, indefensible, polluting industry

A million UK chickens ‘die needlessly each week to keep prices low’

Fast-growing breeds are dying before they reach ‘slaughter age’, new research reveals

www.theguardian.com

This is just staggering. 64 million sentient beings dying in slow, agonising deaths before they've even reached the slaughterhouse in one year on this small island. And that's only the chickens. The scale of suffering this wicked, evil industry inflicts is just unimaginable, orders of magnitude greater than anything else. This industry can't be reformed, its utterly rotten to the core and the sooner its totally wiped out the better.

 

[ElizabethofYork]

From the study:

In contrast, a diet high in plant-based food and low in meat (particularly red and processed meat), such as traditional Mediterranean diets, has been associated with reduced all-cause mortality and lower incidence of heart failure, stroke, cognitive decline, and some cancers..

And for context:


And, crucially:

I quoted directly from the study you linked to, which said: "As a result, it was the Mediterranean diet – which entails a small reduction in meat consumption – which had the highest likelihood of adoption. Combined with its high health benefits and moderate environmental and animal welfare impacts, we identified it as the best diet to promote."

 

[editor]

Very interesting. A vegan diet has a higher water usage than an omnivore diet.
And a Mediterranean diet is better than both vegetarian and vegan diets, and even a pescatarian diet is better than a vegetarian diet wrt Health impact( mortality / deaths averted).

And the industrial strength whataboutery starts! Jeez.

Do you agree that a substantial reduction in meat consumption would be positive for the environment? And if so, what are you doing about it?

 

[ElizabethofYork]

And the industrial strength whataboutery starts! Jeez.

Do you agree that a substantial reduction in meat consumption would be positive for the environment? And if so, what are you doing about it?

It's not Whataboutery! It's information given in the article you linked to!

 

[editor]

It's not Whataboutery! It's information given in the article you linked to!

Err, I wasn't talking to you. but it might be worth your while reading the whole thing rather than focussing on the one bit that makes you feel netter

Overall, the Mediterranean diet was deemed the healthiest for humans, while the vegan and vegetarian diets had the best outcomes for animal welfare. When we combined all three measures, vegan and vegetarian diets were found to be the most ‘sustainable’ diets based on reducing our food footprint, staying healthy, and reducing negative impacts on farm animals.

And from the same article

• Mediterranean (plant-heavy with small amounts of red meat, moderate amounts of poultry and fish)

And from the actual report

So, plant-rich diets—vegan, vegetarian, pescatarian, Mediterranean, or flexitarian/semi-vegetarian—are expected to have reduced impacts on the environment, as these diets reduce or eliminate reliance on livestock. Dietary shift will have the greatest environmental benefits in countries with a high intake of meat and other animal-sourced products

And the problem:

To date, efforts to reduce meat consumption (e.g., Meatless Monday; Laestadius et al., 2013) have not delivered significant behavioural change (Tapsell, 2017). Many people in Western countries continue to over-consume animal-sourced products and under-consume plant-based products

 

[Pickman's model]

Very interesting. A vegan diet has a higher water usage than an omnivore diet.
And a Mediterranean diet is better than both vegetarian and vegan diets, and even a pescatarian diet is better than a vegetarian diet wrt Health impact( mortality / deaths averted).

No deaths will be averted, only delayed. No one gets out of here alive.

 

[WouldBe]

And the industrial strength whataboutery starts! Jeez.

Do you agree that a substantial reduction in meat consumption would be positive for the environment? And if so, what are you doing about it?

Nothing I've seen so far suggests that in a concrete way as far as the environment is concerned.

Your own post above clearly shows that meat uses less water than a vegan diet which is the opposite of what you have been in about for the duration of this thread. The articles also day a Mediterranean diet is the most beneficial and the most likely to be adopted which won't mean the end of meat as you have claimed from the start.

 

[TopCat]

Not into processed food. Got a nice bit of Lidl fillet steak tonight.

 

[Pickman's model]

From the study:

In contrast, a diet high in plant-based food and low in meat (particularly red and processed meat), such as traditional Mediterranean diets, has been associated with reduced all-cause mortality and lower incidence of heart failure, stroke, cognitive decline, and some cancers..

And for context:


And, crucially:

Yes, everyone loves pizzas

 

[bcuster]

This is just staggering. 64 million sentient beings dying in slow, agonising deaths before they've even reached the slaughterhouse in one year on this small island. And that's only the chickens. The scale of suffering this wicked, evil industry inflicts is just unimaginable, orders of magnitude greater than anything else. This industry can't be reformed, its utterly rotten to the core and the sooner its totally wiped out the better.

Excellent post! The needless cruelty involved in animal consumption is extremely hard to ignore. I read the post that one of the carnivores in this thread made that stated he or she is "personally satisfied" that, based on his slanted POV, there is minimal (not none) suffering on the part of the slaughtered...

 

[WouldBe]

Err, I wasn't talking to you.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

The needless cruelty involved in animal consumption is extremely hard to ignore.

Alas I wish this was true, but its clear that the meat apologists on this thread just don't give a shit about it.

 

[WouldBe]

If a Mediterranean diet is the way to go I'm not sure we can grow olives over here or tomatoes so shed loads more food miles screwing up the environment.

 

[souljacker]

If a Mediterranean diet is the way to go I'm not sure we can grow olives over here or tomatoes so shed loads more food miles screwing up the environment.

We can grow olives in the UK but probably not enough to feed everyone. We can do tomatoes though.

 

[WouldBe]

We can grow olives in the UK but probably not enough to feed everyone. We can do tomatoes though.

We import loads of tomatoes from poly tunnels in Spain.

 

[ElizabethofYork]

Err, I wasn't talking to you. but it might be worth your while reading the whole thing rather than focussing on the one bit that makes you feel netter

It doesn't make me feel better! I'm just pointing out that the article you linked to says that the Mediterranean diet is a better option than vegan, and that promoting the vegan diet is a waste of time and resources. If you don't like the conclusion, you shouldn't have cited that article!

 

[JimW]

Interestingly, they say it's a waste of precious time and resources to promote the vegan diet.

Reminds me of the arguments against Greenpeace back in the day as being too extreme with their direct action, but if they hadn't done that, BP wouldn't be desperately greenwashing. Similarly, if people hadn't pushed vegetarianism and veganism we probably wouldn't have studies where any sort of reduction in meat eating is accepted as necessary. So in fact it wasn't just time well spent, it was essential.

 

[DaphneM]

Reminds me of the arguments against Greenpeace back in the day as being too extreme with their direct action, but if they hadn't done that, BP wouldn't be desperately greenwashing. Similarly, if people hadn't pushed vegetarianism and veganism we probably wouldn't have studies where any sort of reduction in meat eating is accepted as necessary. So in fact it wasn't just time well spent, it was essential.

We would have more nuclear power stations if it wasn’t for greenpeace.

 

[ddraig]

Excellent post! The needless cruelty involved in animal consumption is extremely hard to ignore. I read the post that one of the carnivores in this thread made that stated he or she is "personally satisfied" that, based on his slanted POV, there is minimal (not none) suffering on the part of the slaughtered...

The wrigglers will go to great lengths to cover the fragility of their "justifications" and attack anyone choosing not to do as they do

 

[bcuster]

it seems to me that the posters who are, at least, willing to consider reducing or eliminating meat consumption are far less strident than those promoting the (unsustainable) status quo in regards to the way humanity's food supply is managed.

I think the carnivores protest too much...

 

[Spymaster]

Alas I wish this was true, but its clear that the meat apologists on this thread just don't give a shit about it.

It's not that we don't give a shit, it's just that we don't give as much of a shit as hypocritical chumps like you and your veg-headed side-kicks. Look at who you're getting likes from, ffs!

 

[editor]

Reminds me of the arguments against Greenpeace back in the day as being too extreme with their direct action, but if they hadn't done that, BP wouldn't be desperately greenwashing. Similarly, if people hadn't pushed vegetarianism and veganism we probably wouldn't have studies where any sort of reduction in meat eating is accepted as necessary. So in fact it wasn't just time well spent, it was essential.

Absolutely.

 

[editor]

If a Mediterranean diet is the way to go I'm not sure we can grow olives over here or tomatoes so shed loads more food miles screwing up the environment.

You're actually presenting this as some sort of sensible counter argument to reducing meat consumption?

Here. have a go at this. Choose beef and then tomatoes. And then feel stupid.

Climate change food calculator: What's your diet's carbon footprint?

Check the environmental impact of what you eat and drink.

www.bbc.co.uk

Eating local only slightly reduces your emissions​

Eating local beef or lamb has many times the carbon footprint of most other foods. Whether they are grown locally or shipped from the other side of the world matters very little for total emissions.
Transport typically accounts for less than 1% of beef’s GHG emissions: choosing to eat local has very minimal effects on its total footprint. You might think this figure is strongly dependent on where in the world you live, and how far your beef will have to travel, but in the ‘dropdown box’ below I work through an example to show why it doesn’t make a lot of difference.
Whether you buy it from the farmer next door or from far away, it is not the location that makes the carbon footprint of your dinner large, but the fact that it is beef.

You want to reduce the carbon footprint of your food? Focus on what you eat, not whether your food is local

“Eat local” is a common recommendation to reduce the carbon footprint of your diet. How does the impact of what you eat compare to where it's come from?

ourworldindata.org