2 ms·

Vegetables aren’t necessary either. Historically, humans (at least in Europe) consumed much more more milk than vegetables, deriving probably an order of magnit

by xyzzyz 8y ago

Vegetables aren’t necessary either. Historically, humans (at least in Europe) consumed much more more milk than vegetables, deriving probably an order of magnitude more calories from dairy than from vegetables, because you could get more calories from an acre of cattle pasture than from an acre of grains fiels, and an order of magnitude more than from vegetables. Milk is also more nutritionally valuable, containing carbs, protein, and fat in very good proportion compared to vegetables. This is no surprise, since milk literally is produced by cows to be consumed by calves as their sole food. I don’t think basic milk vouchers is a good idea, but basic veggies is even worse.

Terretta 8y ago
“Orders of magnitude” sprinkled generously make this sound more factual than it is. Even though modern fruit and vegetable farming systems are highly industrialized, relying on vast monocultures, fertilizers, pesticides, and tillage practices that require heavy machinery and plenty of fuel, they still produce more calories per input than beef and pork. Most views are 2x - 4x people fed per acre from plants versus meats, with milk and eggs splitting the middle. That said, even our current ‘lacto ovo vegetarian’ compromise diet is likely not sustainable. https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/78/3/660S/4690010 https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/78/3/660S/4690010
- xyzzyz 8y ago
  > they still produce more calories per input than beef and pork. True, but irrelevant. I never said anything about meat. Since the advent of agriculture until modernity, most humans ate very little meat, this is definitely true. > Most views are 2x - 4x people fed per acre from plants versus meats, with milk and eggs splitting the middle. True, but irrelevant as well. Not only I never said anything about meat, but the discussion here is about milk vs. vegetables. Plants today are better yields in terms of calories per acre due to fertilizers being abundant, pesticides being available, and cultivars having been improved for better yields. However, it is irrelevant for the discussion at hand, because the plants that are better than milk are corn, soy, etc., not vegetables.
Latteland 8y ago
maybe in parts of europe they got more from milk. i think veggies were more important everywhere else. Other people can't even eat milk!
- xyzzyz 8y ago
  No, grains and tubers were more important everywhere where agriculture was a thing. Vegetables were relatively insignificant as source of calories.

by xyzzyz 8y ago

Terretta 8y ago

“Orders of magnitude” sprinkled generously make this sound more factual than it is. Even though modern fruit and vegetable farming systems are highly industrialized, relying on vast monocultures, fertilizers, pesticides, and tillage practices that require heavy machinery and plenty of fuel, they still produce more calories per input than beef and pork. Most views are 2x - 4x people fed per acre from plants versus meats, with milk and eggs splitting the middle. That said, even our current ‘lacto ovo vegetarian’ compromise diet is likely not sustainable. https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/78/3/660S/4690010 https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/78/3/660S/4690010

xyzzyz 8y ago
> they still produce more calories per input than beef and pork. True, but irrelevant. I never said anything about meat. Since the advent of agriculture until modernity, most humans ate very little meat, this is definitely true. > Most views are 2x - 4x people fed per acre from plants versus meats, with milk and eggs splitting the middle. True, but irrelevant as well. Not only I never said anything about meat, but the discussion here is about milk vs. vegetables. Plants today are better yields in terms of calories per acre due to fertilizers being abundant, pesticides being available, and cultivars having been improved for better yields. However, it is irrelevant for the discussion at hand, because the plants that are better than milk are corn, soy, etc., not vegetables.

Latteland 8y ago

maybe in parts of europe they got more from milk. i think veggies were more important everywhere else. Other people can't even eat milk!

xyzzyz 8y ago
No, grains and tubers were more important everywhere where agriculture was a thing. Vegetables were relatively insignificant as source of calories.