3 ms·

Really deep down, i.e. at the level of hunger and what looks tasty to your body, eating animals is very right. They are a fantastic source of nutrition. Howeve

Really deep down, i.e. at the level of hunger and what looks tasty to your body, eating animals is very right. They are a fantastic source of nutrition. However, we also like to domesticate animals, as companions and helpers. Hence the conflict. We eat way too much meat, but strict vegetarianism and especially veganism does not scale to the whole population of the planet - animals are simply too efficient at converting what we can grow everywhere but can't eat (grass mostly) to what we can eat. Simply, an exclusively plant based diet would require the elimination (by starvation?) of who knows, 90% of the world population? Of course, strict vegetarianism and especially veganism is not much more than social signalling for a particular and narrow demographic - the cultural preferences and tribalism you allude to.

hcarvalhoalves 4y ago
> We eat way too much meat, but strict vegetarianism and especially veganism does not scale to the whole population of the planet - animals are simply too efficient at converting what we can grow everywhere but can't eat (grass mostly) to what we can eat. Simply, an exclusively plant based diet would require the elimination (by starvation?) of who knows, 90% of the world population? Which is not true at all, most meat is cow beef, pig and poultry fed with grains. Grains that we have to grow, and take land and water away from growing other things that could feed us directly. This would only be true if everyone ate grass-fed beef - which would be premium and 10x more expensive- and a lot more goat and similar that can be fed low quality grass.
seanwilson 4y ago
> animals are simply too efficient at converting what we can grow everywhere but can't eat ... Simply, an exclusively plant based diet would require the elimination (by starvation?) of who knows, 90% of the world population? "Half of the world’s habitable land is used for agriculture, with most of this used to raise livestock for dairy and meat. Livestock are fed from two sources – lands on which the animals graze and land on which feeding crops, such as soy and cereals, are grown. How much would our agricultural land use decline if the world adopted a plant-based diet? Research suggests that if everyone shifted to a plant-based diet we would reduce global land use for agriculture by 75%. This large reduction of agricultural land use would be possible thanks to a reduction in land used for grazing and a smaller need for land to grow crops. ... In the charts here we see the energy and protein efficiency of different animal products. This tells us what percentage of the calories or grams of protein that we feed livestock are later available to consume as meat and dairy. As an example: beef has an energy efficiency of about 2%. This means that for every 100 kilocalories you feed a cow, you only get 2 kilocalories of beef back. In general we see that cows are the least efficient, followed by lamb, pigs then poultry." https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
Retric 4y ago
Most of what we eat are grasses. Rice, wheat, corn, etc. Grazing cattle on marginal land is extremely labor intensive. So most cattle calories come from potential or actual farmland. Either as highly productive pasture or crops optimized to feed cattle. Especially as grazing clause significant damage to marginal land resulting in desertification or other issues if not carefully managed.
rand0mx1 4y ago
I think 100% would be apt

hcarvalhoalves 4y ago

> We eat way too much meat, but strict vegetarianism and especially veganism does not scale to the whole population of the planet - animals are simply too efficient at converting what we can grow everywhere but can't eat (grass mostly) to what we can eat. Simply, an exclusively plant based diet would require the elimination (by starvation?) of who knows, 90% of the world population? Which is not true at all, most meat is cow beef, pig and poultry fed with grains. Grains that we have to grow, and take land and water away from growing other things that could feed us directly. This would only be true if everyone ate grass-fed beef - which would be premium and 10x more expensive- and a lot more goat and similar that can be fed low quality grass.

seanwilson 4y ago

> animals are simply too efficient at converting what we can grow everywhere but can't eat ... Simply, an exclusively plant based diet would require the elimination (by starvation?) of who knows, 90% of the world population? "Half of the world’s habitable land is used for agriculture, with most of this used to raise livestock for dairy and meat. Livestock are fed from two sources – lands on which the animals graze and land on which feeding crops, such as soy and cereals, are grown. How much would our agricultural land use decline if the world adopted a plant-based diet? Research suggests that if everyone shifted to a plant-based diet we would reduce global land use for agriculture by 75%. This large reduction of agricultural land use would be possible thanks to a reduction in land used for grazing and a smaller need for land to grow crops. ... In the charts here we see the energy and protein efficiency of different animal products. This tells us what percentage of the calories or grams of protein that we feed livestock are later available to consume as meat and dairy. As an example: beef has an energy efficiency of about 2%. This means that for every 100 kilocalories you feed a cow, you only get 2 kilocalories of beef back. In general we see that cows are the least efficient, followed by lamb, pigs then poultry." https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

Retric 4y ago

Most of what we eat are grasses. Rice, wheat, corn, etc. Grazing cattle on marginal land is extremely labor intensive. So most cattle calories come from potential or actual farmland. Either as highly productive pasture or crops optimized to feed cattle. Especially as grazing clause significant damage to marginal land resulting in desertification or other issues if not carefully managed.

rand0mx1 4y ago

I think 100% would be apt