4 ms·

Of the five Guiding Principles on page 52 only about 1.5 of them are primarily concerned with the nutrition content of the food. The rest are mostly focused on

Of the five Guiding Principles on page 52 only about 1.5 of them are primarily concerned with the nutrition content of the food. The rest are mostly focused on their environmental impact. Not that there's anything wrong with that. And clearly that's aligned with the mission of the WWF. But I think you'd get a much different list if it was just about maximizing the health of the eater. E.g. meat. When I choose food at the grocery store I'm focused on which are better for me, not Earth. If I were convinced that there is a genuine discrepancy between those goals, I'd likely still choose me. Am I the bad guy?

iscrewyou 8y ago
No, you are not the bad guy but it's good to be concerned. I focus on companies when I shop. If there are two similar choices of big 2.5 gallons of water, I don't choose arrowhead. I think that's what they are trying to get at.
- fastbeef 8y ago
  I really don’t want to come off as some sort of condescending euro-snob, but is the state of tap water in the US so bad so that you have to purchase plastic bottles of water?
  - tzs 8y ago
    US consumption of bottled water in 2017 was 42 gallons per capita (160 liters) [1]. That's behind Italy (188 liters per capita) and Germany (175 liters per capita). The EU average is 117 liters per capita [2]. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/183377/per-capita-consumption-of-bottled-water-in-the-us-since-1999/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/183377/per-capita-consum... [2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/455422/bottled-water-consumption-in-europe-per-capita/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/455422/bottled-water-con...
    - fastbeef 8y ago
      That's fascinating, thank you! Excellent site as well, looking forward to dig throuhg it.
  - jandrewrogers 8y ago
    In some parts of the US, notably coastal California, the taste, smell, and color(!) of the natural water supply can be quite poor. It has more to do with geology than tap water safety and remediating the natural chemistry is cost prohibitive in extreme cases. For example, in the western volcanic regions of the US, pristine water sometimes has an unpleasant sulfur taste -- perfectly safe to use but no one wants to drink that because it tastes awful due to natural water chemistry. Many parts of the US have excellent tasting tap water, and in those places everyone drinks it. California is one exception, and many parts of it have infamously discolored and poor tasting/smelling water. When I lived in California I drank bottled water, most everywhere else I drank tap water. California water is safe, it just tastes terrible and is sometimes discolored because of where it comes from.
    - iscrewyou 8y ago
      I agree with everything. But the treatment of water in California and its safety is subjective. The amounts of salts in the tap water is very unhealthy in certain regions. Even though this water is deemed safe by local governments, I still wouldn’t drink it.
Razengan 8y ago
Is anybody the "bad guy?" Is anybody not? The Earth will fix itself, eventually, no matter what we do to it. It's seen worse. I mean it apparently went from a ball of lava pelted with meteorite-nukes to the only verdant garden we have ever known, and it has already been through at least a few cataclysms. Even if the planet disappears overnight, the universe at large will still go on as if we never existed. You choose the scale you want to care about, and some levels require some sacrifice on other levels.
- intopieces 8y ago
  >The Earth will fix itself... I suppose this depends on your definition of "fix," but this sounds suspiciously like the Gaia hypothesis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis Which is closer to wishful thinking than science. Sure, Earth will go on, because Earth doesn't care. But humans are facing a climate catastrophe if they do not course-correct their impact on the planet, and that is what we mean by "good for the Earth" -- that is, good for the maintaining the planet as a place where we want to live.
- random878 8y ago
  That's analogous to the commonly held, stupid opinion that you may as well smoke because you have to die of something.
- byteman 8y ago
  Well sure - if nothing matters, it also doesn't matter we consume a lot of animal products and ruin our tiny planet as we used to know it. If anything does matter, we should reduce our consumption and production of animal based products.
- cableshaft 8y ago
  To quote the late George Carlin: "The planet is fine! The people are fucked!"
daveFNbuck 8y ago
Aside from fad diets like Atkins, you don't see health professionals recommending meat as the core of a healthy diet. My doctor tells me to eat a plant-based diet at every visit now. If there's a discrepancy here, it's not that you should be eating lots of meat.
- otabdeveloper2 8y ago
  > you don't see health professionals recommending meat as the core of a healthy diet Yeah, this is probably why obesity and related complications is the #1 cause of death right now. (Edging out 'old age' and 'smoking'.) These "health professionals" have blood on their hands.
  - byteman 8y ago
    I don't mean to be rude, but I suspect you might have misread the comment you've replied to.
    - shlant 8y ago
      nope, he said something just as absurd in another comment. People get realllly triggered and irrational when confronted with the fact their food is harmful to themselves and the planet.
  - daveFNbuck 8y ago
    Are you saying Americans are obese because they're eating too many vegetables and not enough meat?
rb808 8y ago
Same with "Organic Food" its a label to describe the way the food was grown as low impact on the environment. Some organic foods can have fewer chemicals, or better flavor, but that is a side effect.
byteman 8y ago
I don't think we can assume meat based diet is better than plant based diet anymore. And without this assumption the "own good vs. common good" argument doesn't hold. Because in reality, "own good" and "common good" align at a lower consumption of meat. (Ignoring taste, obviously. Meat is delicious!)

iscrewyou 8y ago

No, you are not the bad guy but it's good to be concerned. I focus on companies when I shop. If there are two similar choices of big 2.5 gallons of water, I don't choose arrowhead. I think that's what they are trying to get at.

fastbeef 8y ago
I really don’t want to come off as some sort of condescending euro-snob, but is the state of tap water in the US so bad so that you have to purchase plastic bottles of water?
- tzs 8y ago
  US consumption of bottled water in 2017 was 42 gallons per capita (160 liters) [1]. That's behind Italy (188 liters per capita) and Germany (175 liters per capita). The EU average is 117 liters per capita [2]. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/183377/per-capita-consumption-of-bottled-water-in-the-us-since-1999/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/183377/per-capita-consum... [2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/455422/bottled-water-consumption-in-europe-per-capita/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/455422/bottled-water-con...
  - fastbeef 8y ago
    That's fascinating, thank you! Excellent site as well, looking forward to dig throuhg it.
- jandrewrogers 8y ago
  In some parts of the US, notably coastal California, the taste, smell, and color(!) of the natural water supply can be quite poor. It has more to do with geology than tap water safety and remediating the natural chemistry is cost prohibitive in extreme cases. For example, in the western volcanic regions of the US, pristine water sometimes has an unpleasant sulfur taste -- perfectly safe to use but no one wants to drink that because it tastes awful due to natural water chemistry. Many parts of the US have excellent tasting tap water, and in those places everyone drinks it. California is one exception, and many parts of it have infamously discolored and poor tasting/smelling water. When I lived in California I drank bottled water, most everywhere else I drank tap water. California water is safe, it just tastes terrible and is sometimes discolored because of where it comes from.
  - iscrewyou 8y ago
    I agree with everything. But the treatment of water in California and its safety is subjective. The amounts of salts in the tap water is very unhealthy in certain regions. Even though this water is deemed safe by local governments, I still wouldn’t drink it.

Razengan 8y ago

Is anybody the "bad guy?" Is anybody not? The Earth will fix itself, eventually, no matter what we do to it. It's seen worse. I mean it apparently went from a ball of lava pelted with meteorite-nukes to the only verdant garden we have ever known, and it has already been through at least a few cataclysms. Even if the planet disappears overnight, the universe at large will still go on as if we never existed. You choose the scale you want to care about, and some levels require some sacrifice on other levels.

intopieces 8y ago
>The Earth will fix itself... I suppose this depends on your definition of "fix," but this sounds suspiciously like the Gaia hypothesis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis Which is closer to wishful thinking than science. Sure, Earth will go on, because Earth doesn't care. But humans are facing a climate catastrophe if they do not course-correct their impact on the planet, and that is what we mean by "good for the Earth" -- that is, good for the maintaining the planet as a place where we want to live.
random878 8y ago
That's analogous to the commonly held, stupid opinion that you may as well smoke because you have to die of something.
byteman 8y ago
Well sure - if nothing matters, it also doesn't matter we consume a lot of animal products and ruin our tiny planet as we used to know it. If anything does matter, we should reduce our consumption and production of animal based products.
cableshaft 8y ago
To quote the late George Carlin: "The planet is fine! The people are fucked!"

daveFNbuck 8y ago

Aside from fad diets like Atkins, you don't see health professionals recommending meat as the core of a healthy diet. My doctor tells me to eat a plant-based diet at every visit now. If there's a discrepancy here, it's not that you should be eating lots of meat.

otabdeveloper2 8y ago
> you don't see health professionals recommending meat as the core of a healthy diet Yeah, this is probably why obesity and related complications is the #1 cause of death right now. (Edging out 'old age' and 'smoking'.) These "health professionals" have blood on their hands.
- byteman 8y ago
  I don't mean to be rude, but I suspect you might have misread the comment you've replied to.
  - shlant 8y ago
    nope, he said something just as absurd in another comment. People get realllly triggered and irrational when confronted with the fact their food is harmful to themselves and the planet.
- daveFNbuck 8y ago
  Are you saying Americans are obese because they're eating too many vegetables and not enough meat?

rb808 8y ago

Same with "Organic Food" its a label to describe the way the food was grown as low impact on the environment. Some organic foods can have fewer chemicals, or better flavor, but that is a side effect.

byteman 8y ago

I don't think we can assume meat based diet is better than plant based diet anymore. And without this assumption the "own good vs. common good" argument doesn't hold. Because in reality, "own good" and "common good" align at a lower consumption of meat. (Ignoring taste, obviously. Meat is delicious!)