shhhh, don't tell the vegans. they go ape shit over this stuff. how many studies do we have to read before this becomes accepted wisdom? maybe it's because our brains are so fat starved we can't think. thanks for the post. many lives will be saved.
shhhh, don't tell the vegans. they go ape shit over this stuff. how many studies do we have to read before this becomes accepted wisdom? maybe it's because our brains are so fat starved we can't think. thanks for the post. many lives will be saved.
Hurting the feelings of vegans is beside the point. What should concern us is the environmental implications of eating high-meat diets; they're devastating. Low carb, yes, perhaps, but it has to be done in an environmentally sensitive manner. Nuts, avocados, coconut fat, green leaves.
i'd do a little more research if i were you. i used to believe that nonsense. i'm not talking about turning the earth into a feed lot. this is not exhaustive but, is a good start. https://steemit.com/health/@projecthor/veganism-negative-impact-for-the-environment
lifeworship: your link 404s. But regardless, the facts are clear enough. No doubt the radical vegans have overstated the facts, but no matter. The facts are clear. Flesh foods are MUCH more environmentally stressful than vegetable foods. There is no intellectually honest alternative to this point of view.
I should add: flesh foods as actually produced in the real world in which we live are much more environmentally stressful. It is possible to dream up a world in which all beef (say) is produced by pasturing on land utterly unfit for any other purpose, and thus is environmentally benign. But that world is a DREAM, as opposed to the real world in which we live. There is at this moment zero possibility of providing a high flesh-food diet to 7 billion people without environmental disaster. That is, shy of synthetic/lab meat production -- which I understand is coming right along, but is still far from prime time.
this should fix the 404 it will be difficult but not impossible. if we stay the course with our current plant farming methods it won't matter. we have 50 years worth of topsoil left, unless we go to herding large numbers of ruminants. calling them flesh foods to stir up emotion does not change the actual facts.
https://steemit.com/health/@projecthor/veganism-negative-impact-for-the-environment
You say we have "50 years worth of topsoil left"; you don't discuss the significance of this or explain why it is relevant to our conversation. Are you saying that we only have 50 years left, so we're all doomed anyway, so nothing matters? It is unclear.
The phrase "flesh foods" is not intended to be emotionally evocative. It is just a description. It refers to all animal flesh, that's all.
https://steemit.com/health/@projecthor/veganism-negative-impact-for-the-environment
I read it. It was amusing. "Satanical cult of veganism"! Good for laughs. Yes, those terrible satanic devil-worshipers, the vegans! Talk about emotion-rousing.
He writes: "So what is the solution? Local, Permaculture, Pasture Raising, Polyface farming". Yep. He is right. That IS the solution -- over the next couple centuries. We live in the world that we live in. It will take a LONG time to undertake the transition that he favors. I favor it too. But for now, we live in the world we live in. And THIS world (the one we live in) cannot possibly support billions of beef-eaters.
i didn't write the article. i didn't care about the article. the point was the lecture with Allan Savory.