I'll note that it's good to approach any literature on contentious subjects with some skepticism. I'm generally skepticism of claims from those who advocate vegan diets and those who advocate for meat. I've added some of my own comments below, bolded key words for many claims, as well as identifying BI's source where they listed it. (They did a decent job of citing their claims.) I don't have time to investigate potential biases in some of these claims (which I'm sure there are a few) but a lot of it seems logical and reasonable to start with.
I think I might try to list more data points that I encounter here for future reference, as I have a terrible memory, and don't like parroting the gist of something I've learned when speaking to someone very skeptical. Much of the language below is theirs, just concise.
- concerns on land, water scarcity; health; animal welfare (FAO: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations)
- 870 million chronically undernourished (FAO, worldhunger.org)
- 5 million adults, 10.9 million children die from malnutrition annually
- (food production or distribution problem?)
- global food prices at "near record highs" and are volatile (FAO)
- India has "dangerous inflation" (BI)
- African continent has greatest hunger, least arable land
- using land for cabbage instead of beef feeds 22x more people
- (what type of land?)
- cabbage 0.3g protein/23g, meat 3.2g protein/23g
- cabbage "high" in Vitamin C, fiber
- protein available through other legumes, leafy greens
- (I'm told that the amount of protein in a typical vegan diet is still safely above the level of protein deficiency)
- water scarcity
- growing problem (BI)
- 2.7 billion (40% of people) affected for 1+ months per year (waterfootprint.org)
- meat as inefficient use of water in food production
- 1kg beef requires 77x the water used for 1kg potatoes (International Water Management Institute)
- pork uses 0.3x as much as beef, chicken 0.15x as much
- (so, 23x and 11.5x as much as potatoes, then?)
- carbon (and CO2-equivalents)
- CO2-equivalent footprint as much higher
- (lots of people don't care, as they don't believe in climate change)
- 1kg of lamb 40x as much CO2e as 1kg of tomatoes
- (example for the two extremes, if you look at the chart, lamb is the worst meat and tomatoes the 2nd best non-meat; beef and chicken are 10x and 2.5x as much as rice (2nd worst non-meat), 13.5x and 3.5x as much as tofu)
- methane produced by livestock on farm
- legumes (inc. soybeans) as most energy-efficient source of protein compared to vegetables and meat (American Journal of Clinical Nutrition)
- however, vegetables require pesticides and fertilisers that harm the environment too
- factory farming
- common (across USA) (Food & Water Watch)
- accusations of animal cruelty
- e.g. chicken beak removal (peta)
- (I get told "You have to or they'll hurt each other!", but then again, you've trapped them in tight cages or crowded barns with no way to exist but grow fat and die; I'm not sure of removing their means of expressing themselves is the ideal solution there)
- sources of pollution for air and water; disease
- (were cattle the source of the e. coli in Walkerton?)
- e.g. a large pig farm contributing to human illness (?) (dailymail.co.uk)
- overuse of hormones and antibiotics (Food & Water Watch)
- contribute to antibiotic-resistant bacteria (treehugger.com; hey, Hank Green's site!)
- can pass to humans through meat consumption (really? irradiate it all!)
- excessive pollution cases (organicconsumers.org)
- animal density on farms increasing
- nutrition, health
- shows Aggregate Nutrient Density Index (Dr. Joel Fuhrman, drfuhrman.com) for foods (wholefoodsmarket.com), which considers range of micronutrients including vitamins, minerals, phytochemicals, antioxidant capacities, etc. (also protein and fiber, apparently)
- shows vegetables, legumes, fruit, whole grains as more nutrient-rich than fish, dairy, meat, eggs, cheese, which are more nutrient rich than refined grains, oils, and sweets.
- (potential for bias in scale's definition, perhaps?)
- animal products as high in protein, iron, but lacking other vital nutrients
- higher longevity for those with low meat consumption in cohort study of NAs and EUs (American Society of Clinical Nutrition)
- long-term (17+ years) vegetarians as living 3.6 years more than short-term vegetarians
- (I'd like to see more granularity in such a study!)
No comments:
Post a Comment