3 ms·
seems fairly intuitive if you just think of fat and protein calories all being densely packed in a piece of meat vs a literal pound of lettuce? Just like peopl
by bryceacc 5y ago
seems fairly intuitive if you just think of fat and protein calories all being densely packed in a piece of meat vs a literal pound of lettuce? Just like people joke with celery being net negative calories, you would lose a good amount of calories just chewing all that lettuce. Almost that entire pound would be water.
- adrianN 5y agoLettuce is not consumed for its calories. Grains, legumes, and oils are the vegetarian sources of calories.
- iammisc 5y agoGrains are incredibly inefficient. Legumes are good, but not very good at calorie density. The idea that oil seed is more efficient than meat is funny, and really shows how the vegetarian-industrial complex has gaslighted the world. Oil seeds are incredibly inefficient, extremely environmentally harmful, and incredibly resource intensive. Not to mention a good portion of modern oil seed relies on petrochemicals to extract the oil... In terms of calorie density, tubers like Potatos, Sweet Potato, Yam, Cassava, etc, are better calorie stores on microfarms. You're not going to grow enough grain on an acre to feed anyone.
- adrianN 5y agoA good chunk of the grains and legumes we grow is fed to livestock. I had to laugh at "vegetarian-industrial complex" :D.