3 ms·

73% of the Indian population is protein deficient [1]. [1] https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/indias-protein-deficiency-and-the-need-to-address-the-problem

• ceejayoz 2y ago
  You've argued elsewhere in the thread that "60 to 75% of the population eats meat". Now you're arguing 73% are protein deficient. These are hard stats to combine into a "it's the not-meat-eating that's the problem"; either one stat is wrong/misleading (I suspect "meat" includes fish, for example), or there are other factors than "not enough chicken".
  • nomel 2y ago
    I can't follow what you're saying. Someone mentioned that India would be surprised that removing animal protein would undo population growth. I see these "hard stats" as being in complete opposition to that idea. The data says that most of the population eats meat, and nearly of the population consumes animal proteins, but and in spite of that, most of the population is not eating enough protein. Since they're not eating enough protein, as is, removing animal protein seems like a bad idea. Suggesting that they would be ok even if animal protein were removed, when all evidence says they're having trouble even with animal protein, doesn't seem realistic. The more realistic approach would be to add more protein to India. One way to do this would be more animals (I don't know how this maths would work).
  • Jedd 2y ago
    There are clearly overlaps in those cohorts. Doubtless plenty of the 60-75% demographic that eats some amount of meat, are getting insufficient protein. I speculate that's because meat is not readily available to them - though it's likely also true that the non-meat foods they're eating are not filling the protein gap either.