4 ms·

No, while the length of the human lifespan consuming a certain product might be reduced the environmental impact that the person's diet had remains. Meat produc

No, while the length of the human lifespan consuming a certain product might be reduced the environmental impact that the person's diet had remains. Meat production has very real environmental impacts.[1] Switching to a vegetarian diet, or even to a meat that consumes less resources to produce[3], drastically reduces one's environmental impact.[2] Meat consumption also has direct fiscal impacts by way of the increased cost of treatment for those that consume meat. If the price of grain increases because of an increased demand for meat then the world's poor will be the ones most negatively impacted.[4] Disclaimer: I currently consume all forms of meat, including beef. [1] https://woods.stanford.edu/environmental-venture-projects/consequences-increased-global-meat-consumption-global-environment https://woods.stanford.edu/environmental-venture-projects/co... [2] http://css.snre.umich.edu/css_doc/CSS09-05.pdf http://css.snre.umich.edu/css_doc/CSS09-05.pdf [3] http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/1997/08/us-could-feed-800-million-people-grain-livestock-eat http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/1997/08/us-could-feed-80... [4] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/weekinreview/27bittman.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/weekinreview/27bittman.htm...

gress 13y ago
I see that you are convinced that meat consumption is detrimental to health. Also health and lifespan are not the same thing.
- garrettgrimsley 13y ago
  My post was addressed at your claim that "Once health is aside, so is sustainability." I believe that I it made clear that this is not the case. Your view is myopic and selfish, as it ignores the very real effects that a meat-eater diet has on other humans and the environment. I did not imply that health and lifespan are the same, and I even addressed them separately. My beliefs are based in well-documented evidence. Eating meat has a strong positive correlation with increased healthcare costs.[1] Whether or not meat has a negative impact on health only has a bearing on the costs of healthcare for meat-eaters, which is a minor point that I mentioned as an aside. It does not have a bearing on the environmental impacts of a meat-eater diet. You are nitpicking minor details of my post. Perhaps instead of vaguely implying that I'm mistaken you should produce evidence that contradicts me. [1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/larryhusten/2012/03/12/bad-news-for-red-meat-lovers/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/larryhusten/2012/03/12/bad-news-...
  - gress 13y ago
    Where would you rank eating meat in the order of negative effects humans have on one another and the environment? Is it above or below overpopulation?

gress 13y ago

I see that you are convinced that meat consumption is detrimental to health. Also health and lifespan are not the same thing.

garrettgrimsley 13y ago
My post was addressed at your claim that "Once health is aside, so is sustainability." I believe that I it made clear that this is not the case. Your view is myopic and selfish, as it ignores the very real effects that a meat-eater diet has on other humans and the environment. I did not imply that health and lifespan are the same, and I even addressed them separately. My beliefs are based in well-documented evidence. Eating meat has a strong positive correlation with increased healthcare costs.[1] Whether or not meat has a negative impact on health only has a bearing on the costs of healthcare for meat-eaters, which is a minor point that I mentioned as an aside. It does not have a bearing on the environmental impacts of a meat-eater diet. You are nitpicking minor details of my post. Perhaps instead of vaguely implying that I'm mistaken you should produce evidence that contradicts me. [1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/larryhusten/2012/03/12/bad-news-for-red-meat-lovers/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/larryhusten/2012/03/12/bad-news-...
- gress 13y ago
  Where would you rank eating meat in the order of negative effects humans have on one another and the environment? Is it above or below overpopulation?