4 ms·

Got any scientific studies to back up that going Vegan is better for the environment?

KnightOfWords 8y ago
http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2018-06-01-new-estimates-environmental-cost-food http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2018-06-01-new-estimates-environmen... "High-impact beef producers create 105kg of CO2 equivalents and use 370m2 of land per 100 grams of protein, a huge 12 and 50 times greater than low-impact beef producers. Low-impact beans, peas, and other plant-based proteins can create just 0.3kg of CO2 equivalents (including all processing, packaging, and transport), and use just 1m2 of land per 100 grams of protein."
- philjohn 8y ago
  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5522483/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5522483/ Shows Vegan and Ovo-Lacto Vegetarian neck and neck. As another poster pointed out, in many areas living a pure vegan diet is far WORSE for the environment as you have to expend considerable CO2 getting the correct foodstuffs there. There's also the open question about many countries where the land is only suitable for pasture as it's not arable.
jamil7 8y ago
I think this would be pretty difficult to study since there isn't "one" vegan diet. It differs radically depending on where someone is and what they choose to eat and the complexity of food distribution. On the surface removing meat, diary and eggs from your diet is definitely better for the environment and you can easily find scientific studies to back this up. I find the problems start to arise when you take into account what kind of fats and proteins vegans are supplementing with, eg a vegan living in Scandinavia that's buying imported avocados from South America is probably having a considerable environmental impact by doing so.
- philjohn 8y ago
  Exactly - which is why I take offence to people insisting it's a panacea. For some people in some regions it may very well be, but it's not for all, and trying to sell it that way is a little disingenuous.

http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2018-06-01-new-estimates-environmental-cost-food http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2018-06-01-new-estimates-environmen... "High-impact beef producers create 105kg of CO2 equivalents and use 370m2 of land per 100 grams of protein, a huge 12 and 50 times greater than low-impact beef producers. Low-impact beans, peas, and other plant-based proteins can create just 0.3kg of CO2 equivalents (including all processing, packaging, and transport), and use just 1m2 of land per 100 grams of protein."

philjohn 8y ago
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5522483/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5522483/ Shows Vegan and Ovo-Lacto Vegetarian neck and neck. As another poster pointed out, in many areas living a pure vegan diet is far WORSE for the environment as you have to expend considerable CO2 getting the correct foodstuffs there. There's also the open question about many countries where the land is only suitable for pasture as it's not arable.

jamil7 8y ago

I think this would be pretty difficult to study since there isn't "one" vegan diet. It differs radically depending on where someone is and what they choose to eat and the complexity of food distribution. On the surface removing meat, diary and eggs from your diet is definitely better for the environment and you can easily find scientific studies to back this up. I find the problems start to arise when you take into account what kind of fats and proteins vegans are supplementing with, eg a vegan living in Scandinavia that's buying imported avocados from South America is probably having a considerable environmental impact by doing so.

philjohn 8y ago
Exactly - which is why I take offence to people insisting it's a panacea. For some people in some regions it may very well be, but it's not for all, and trying to sell it that way is a little disingenuous.