
Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single biggest way’ to reduce your impact on Earth - lnguyen
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/may/31/avoiding-meat-and-dairy-is-single-biggest-way-to-reduce-your-impact-on-earth
======
z_open
Disclaimer: I'm vegan

I really don't know how to help attitudes move towards a plant based life-
style. I don't bother bringing it up because the second the topic is
introduced, people feel attacked and that I'm just doing it to feel superior.
Amusingly enough, it's usually omnivores that bring up that topic but still
are obviously uneasy about the whole thing.

~~~
istorical
I think the key to vegan food growth is making vegan food so delicious and
cheap that people start deciding to go get dinner at By Chloe instead of Five
Guys ([https://www.eater.com/2018/4/19/17243780/by-chloe-vegan-
chai...](https://www.eater.com/2018/4/19/17243780/by-chloe-vegan-chain-guac-
burger)).

I wonder how much vegan restaurants can undercut omni restaurants due to the
lower costs of vegetables compared to meats.

Source: anecdata from an omnivore that recently decided to try vegan food and
found that there are actually some pretty delicious deals to be found.

If I could get a really great vegan meal for $6-8 rather than the $9-13 I
normally pay in NYC I would probably start replacing a lot of my eating out
with it.

~~~
blacksmith_tb
I would think the key would be removing the subsidies to the livestock
industry. If a burger at Five Guys cost $20, there'd be a lot more vegans...

~~~
hunter23
The subsidies wouldn't create more vegans in my view but it would reduce
overall meat consumption. If you look at countries with higher meat costs
(relative to income) you see that most have lower per capita meat consumption
but they don't necessarily have higher incidence of vegans.

------
passiveincomelg
To me it would be ideal if plant based food was the default and animal
products an expensive luxury. Not unaffordable, let's say a dish with meat
costs about twice as much as a vegan dish in most restaurants.

But I would already be perfectly happy and content if all the wonderful places
in the world I want to visit had vegan food at all. Of course I understand
that people struggling with hunger and poverty have more important things to
worry about.

I don't know what it takes to "save the planet". Everyone going vegan might
not be enough. But that ship has probably sailed anyway. The planet will have
plenty of time to recover and/or become something new after humans disappeared
(themselves). What bugs me is seeing animals suffer, regardless of species
(including humans ofc).

~~~
pm90
India is mostly vegetarian, grows enough food to feed all its people and still
has millions dying of starvation. In most countries that face starving
denizens, it is often (although not exclusively) the result of flawed
distribution rather than an inability to grow food. I really think we're not
focusing on the right problem, but that is my opinion.

~~~
passiveincomelg
Is it really? So this article is wrong? [http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-
india-43581122](http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-43581122)

And when you say vegetarian, do you mean vegan? I don't know what _real_
Indian food is, but the Indian food I have seen (and enjoyed tremendously)
always had dairy/butter/ghee in it (maybe with the exception of dal(sp?)).
Which is hilarious considering the whole holy cow thing.

~~~
pm90
I'm uncomfortable about taking BBC articles at face value. If you read it with
a critical eye, you can see it giving weight to unspecified surveys a lot more
than official Government surveys. There would have been a much easier way to
measure meat consumption: measure the production of meat (internal + imports)
and average daily consumption of households to see if the data is valid. Until
the article provides any kind of proof that the data is flawed, I will
continue to trust official figures.

> Which is hilarious considering the whole holy cow thing.

I genuinely don't understand what you mean by this. Milk rearing in India is
not done in the industrialized fashion that you see in the US, but by small
scale dairy farmers who sell their produce to cooperatives. In a country like
India where nutrition is scarce, milk and milk based products are an excellent
way to supplement diets. And as you mention they are already a substantial
part of Indian cuisine.

~~~
passiveincomelg
Interesting. I think it would be even easier to see whether the article is
lying or not. Just go to India, visit many different regions and have a look
what the shops and restaurants frequented by locals sell.

In my opinion, there is no point in avoiding meat without giving up dairy.
With "the whole holy cow thing" I meant that, as far as I know, in one (?)
religion that is common in India (Hinduism?), cows are considered sacred
animals. Because of that, followers of that religion don't eat them. And in
some branches of Buddhism, harming any living being is a no go. I could have
gotten all this totally wrong. I didn't even take the time to read up on it
right now. I'm not all that interested in religion, barely know anything about
Catholicism even though that's the crazy I've been baptized
in/on/with/whatever. I exited that club way too late, regrettably, but at
least I'm not giving money to child molesters any more.

Sorry, rambling. Back to cows: So eating them is bad, but somehow, perma-
raping cows and making them sad by taking their babies away is totally cool.
Maybe that not-as-bad-as-in-'murica milk production method avoids this bad
karma. That would be great. Regardless of that though, I believe dairy is not
healthy at all for adult humans. Cow milk is for cow babies. If you are
reading this, you are not a cow baby.

~~~
pm90
> Interesting. I think it would be even easier to see whether the article is
> lying or not. Just go to India, visit many different regions and have a look
> what the shops and restaurants frequented by locals sell.

That is called anecdotal evidence and cannot be taken as the basis to making
informed conclusions about the whole country. India is a HUGE country and
incredibly diverse. How many neighborhoods in India will you go to make a spot
check? Statistics is your friend, not anecdotes.

> Sorry, rambling. Back to cows: So eating them is bad, but somehow, perma-
> raping cows and making them sad by taking their babies away is totally cool.
> Maybe that not-as-bad-as-in-'murica milk production method avoids this bad
> karma. That would be great. Regardless of that though, I believe dairy is
> not healthy at all for adult humans. Cow milk is for cow babies. If you are
> reading this, you are not a cow baby.

What the fuck? Whatever pain the cows may face is infinitely less than the
absolutely disgusting conditions under which cattle are grown and slaughtered
in the US (including cow babies as you so cutely refer to them).

Milk is ABSOLUTELY a good source of nutrition for human beings. Especially in
a country like India where a significant fraction of the population faces
malnutrition, it is a very effective way to provide nutrition. It also has the
side effect of financially enriching farmers who are one of the most
vulnerable segments of Indian society.

~~~
passiveincomelg
Thank you for responding and putting up with me. :)

You are right, visiting India and having a look would not provide data to base
policy decisions on or anything like that. I didn't mean to imply that. It
would be enough for me to form an opinion based on experience, is all.

As I said, I don't know how milk is obtained by Indian dairy farmers. I
believe you straight away that it is way better than in "efficient" factories.
I assume they leave the babies with the mothers and let them have the milk and
take whatever is left over. That'd be dope.

However don't you need even more cows then with the "efficient" method? And do
those cows not emit the same amount of greenhouse gases as the poor creatures
in factories? Not if they eat seaweed, apparently
([https://foodtank.com/news/2017/06/seaweed-reduce-cow-
methane...](https://foodtank.com/news/2017/06/seaweed-reduce-cow-methane-
emission/)). Do they? Is that their natural diet? If not, is it fine anyway?

If they are treated properly, they won't eat food that humans could use, so
that's good.

How much water do they need? Is water scarce around Indian dairy farms?

It's all so complicated. Just eating a plant-based diet is so much simpler. It
would also be much easier if all sufficiently wealthy and developed parts of
the world finally got the memo that some people want this. Where are you
capitalism? Serve the market. Shut up and take my money. Pretty please.

I have no doubt that most of India is not sufficiently wealthy and developed.
Obviously I undestand that consuming dairy is better than starving and I would
never ever tell someone in that situation what to do. That would be absolutely
insane and devoid of any compassion. However, "better than starving" is also a
very low bar and not quite the same as "healthy food for adult humans".

It is not just about nutrients. If I mix vitamin C and rat poison, is the
result healthy?

------
cwkoss
Killing yourself reduces your impact on the Earth by 100% - that doesn't mean
it is a productive thing to do. Individual action isn't going to fix this.
Each person's contribution is too small. Systemic change is the only way to
address this.

Modern industrialized agriculture has a lot of issues. Other methods of
agriculture can have net-negative emissions: grow all of your feedstock onsite
and use waste products to produce more feedstock. If all the carbon you emit
was previously captured onsite, you're only 'borrowing' carbon, not really
producing it. Slightly net-negative carbon as soil is built as a byproduct.
See Joel Salatin for further reading.

I think writing articles about how "You, individual, can do something to save
the Earth" is ineffective moralizing not unlike Facebook posts asking to
"Share this if you want to end human trafficking!" \- the only tangible effect
is self-promotion of the author and inflating the self-esteem of the readers
who go along with it.

~~~
passiveincomelg
I read The Omnivores Dilemma and share your believe that this kind of farming
seems fine. I don't know whether this would work for feeding the entire
planet. Right now, farms like this are an exception anyway.

In my experience, only consuming animal products from these farms is a bigger
hassle than finding vegan food.

~~~
cwkoss
Highly recommend Joel Salatin's works - he has a really interesting
perspective.

Here's a talk of his on Cows and Climate Change
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z75A_JMBx4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z75A_JMBx4)

From my recollected (watched that ~6 mo ago), the amount of land needed to
grow food for his herd is less than the amount of land that would be needed to
purchase it elsewhere, because the rotation of the animals keeps his fields
fertilized and trimmed to the optimum length for fast growth. Plus, by
rotating in chickens, he's double dipping a bit.

There are some people doing some interesting research into using herd animals
to prep beds for annual vegetables: they let the animal graze as the seeds are
starting to germinate, animals eat everything green. The germinating seeds are
then able to fill the void left behind faster than anything else, because the
farmer timed it properly.

~~~
passiveincomelg
Thank you for that link, very interesting! For some reason it hasn't occurred
to me to Google the guy who Pollan admires so much in the book.

------
teachrdan
In addition to having fewer children (or none at all), I wonder how much of a
difference it makes to have children later in life?

What's the math on starting to have kids at 30 years of age instead of 20,
especially if that pattern is repeated by your progeny?

~~~
tagh
All else being equal including the number of children, I think this would
increase the age gap between generations and therefore decrease the average
number of people alive at any given time. But unless the number of children
being born changes, it won't change the trend.

------
parliament32
Suicide is, absolutely, the single biggest way to reduce your impact on Earth,
period.

That doesn't make it a good idea. Likewise, it's not a good idea to pretend
you're not an omnivore.

~~~
mnem
One could argue that there's somewhat of a difference between a vegan diet and
suicide.

------
remir
Are there any studies regarding the body's absorption of animal protein versus
plant-based protein?

I feel like this subject is often very emotional for some people, but what
about science?

~~~
passiveincomelg
The problem with healthy eating is that you get five opinions when you ask two
experts.

However, you can't find a ton of videos on YouTube with plausible sounding
explanations why a plant-based diet is healthiest. Just watch those and decide
to believe them. Whatever you do, _do not_ read "The Plant Paradox". That book
will ruin eating for you if you even so much as consider to ponder the
possibility that it might not be total BS.

~~~
passiveincomelg
Damn auto complete. That should be "you _can_ find a ton of videos".

------
pier25
Having fewer kids, or no kids at all, is actually the single biggest way to
reduce impact on Earth.

Also, as can be seen on the graph of the article, the major problem is
actually beef, and not meat in general.

Something the article doesn't mention, and maybe the paper doesn't take into
account, is distribution. Fruits and vegetables can have a bigger footprint
than certain meats because these can be transported off season from very long
distances.

[http://the-ecotarian.com/stories/2016/2/26/environmental-imp...](http://the-
ecotarian.com/stories/2016/2/26/environmental-impacts-of-food-2-transport)

~~~
mkempe
Even more radically than having "no kids at all", one could also commit
suicide in order to immediately and more completely "reduce impact" \-- as the
end-goal seems to be.

Can you explain how that is not the logical conclusion? Along those lines,
some radical environmentalists have been advocating mass slaughter of the
human species.

~~~
pm90
Killing oneself is not nearly the same as deciding to not have children. The
latter is a choice which will not harm you or your health.

~~~
mkempe
The stated purpose is "reduce impact", not "avoid harm to myself".

~~~
tagh
Your logic is correct when we exclude all context and reasonable assumptions.

We could also end poverty by killing the poor.

~~~
mkempe
Your analogy would be valid if someone had previously claimed that the single
most effective way to end poverty is to prevent the poor from having children.
Then one could explore the logical conclusions of their advice.

------
trevyn
Hm, personally I’d prefer to have an impact on Earth.

Having no impact sounds terrible.

