I don’t think carnists are desperate, they just don’t care. They don’t view it as unethical.
You can try explaining to someone the harms of the meat industry from an environmental standpoint, an animal rights standpoint, a food security standpoint, a worker’s rights standpoint, and some may be amenable with the right amount of convincing.
But trying to bludgeon someone into compliance through shaming and demanding them to change is heavy-handed. And especially when carnists are in the majority, it’s not likely to be effective either
as a full time carnist - I’m not desperate, I don’t see it as unethical, It’s not that I don’t care about science and health but the data I’ve found does not support the plant based movement, I’m open to new data but not propaganda or low hazard ratio epidemiology
I’m curious what data you’ve found that doesn’t support the plant-based movement. Water consumption, the amount of grain it takes to produce a fraction of its weight in meat, methane emissions from factory farming, etc., all point to the need to at the very least reduce the scale at which meat is being produced
As for the other aspects - the ruminate methane cycle is a historic and carbon sequestration positive cycle. Factory farms are unsustainable but ruminants are a necessary part of soil health and in their natural pastoral setting are not a source of ecosystem harm… in factory farms I also include industrial plant agriculture too, importing fertilizer and soil destroying monocropping isn’t sustainable.
The kg of grain needed to equate a kg of meat in nutritional value comparisons are crazy! https://hackertalks.com/post/5606539 i.e. if you wanted to eat 100% of the daily recommend nutrition intake eating only Liver - you would need to eat 21g (0.7oz). But with refined grains you would need to eat over 12,000g(26lbs) per day… - These numbers are based on absorption into humans and not raw values measured in the food
The argument for reducing meat production isn’t about eliminating pastoral settings. Some people want to eliminate 100% of meat consumption, but I don’t think that’s entirely necessary. Eliminating factory farming is necessary though, and the methane produced by that method is entirely unsustainable.
Also, if you’re only eating grain, then yeah it would take a lot of it to meet nutritional requirements. But if you’re eating grains and legumes, then it’s much easier to ensure complete nutrition without any meat products.
It takes 25kg of grain to produce 1 kg of beef. If the land used to produce that grain were instead used to produce grains and legumes for human consumption, it would produce more than enough to end world hunger
That is only applicable in the factory farming context, which I’ve already said I agree with you, all industrial farming isn’t sustainable.
Seems like we mostly agree on things. Nice to meet you on lemmy, enjoy your lifestyle. I’m glad your getting the outcomes you want on a diet you found for yourself.
![[meme] choochoo](https://quokk.au/static/media/posts/8L/4e/8L4eFCNmnx9NzyK.webp){kind=link}
I don’t think carnists are desperate, they just don’t care. They don’t view it as unethical.
You can try explaining to someone the harms of the meat industry from an environmental standpoint, an animal rights standpoint, a food security standpoint, a worker’s rights standpoint, and some may be amenable with the right amount of convincing.
But trying to bludgeon someone into compliance through shaming and demanding them to change is heavy-handed. And especially when carnists are in the majority, it’s not likely to be effective either
as a full time carnist - I’m not desperate, I don’t see it as unethical, It’s not that I don’t care about science and health but the data I’ve found does not support the plant based movement, I’m open to new data but not propaganda or low hazard ratio epidemiology
I’m curious what data you’ve found that doesn’t support the plant-based movement. Water consumption, the amount of grain it takes to produce a fraction of its weight in meat, methane emissions from factory farming, etc., all point to the need to at the very least reduce the scale at which meat is being produced
I’m just coming at it from the health aspects.
As for the other aspects - the ruminate methane cycle is a historic and carbon sequestration positive cycle. Factory farms are unsustainable but ruminants are a necessary part of soil health and in their natural pastoral setting are not a source of ecosystem harm… in factory farms I also include industrial plant agriculture too, importing fertilizer and soil destroying monocropping isn’t sustainable.
The kg of grain needed to equate a kg of meat in nutritional value comparisons are crazy! https://hackertalks.com/post/5606539 i.e. if you wanted to eat 100% of the daily recommend nutrition intake eating only Liver - you would need to eat 21g (0.7oz). But with refined grains you would need to eat over 12,000g(26lbs) per day… - These numbers are based on absorption into humans and not raw values measured in the food
chart
The argument for reducing meat production isn’t about eliminating pastoral settings. Some people want to eliminate 100% of meat consumption, but I don’t think that’s entirely necessary. Eliminating factory farming is necessary though, and the methane produced by that method is entirely unsustainable.
Also, if you’re only eating grain, then yeah it would take a lot of it to meet nutritional requirements. But if you’re eating grains and legumes, then it’s much easier to ensure complete nutrition without any meat products.
It takes 25kg of grain to produce 1 kg of beef. If the land used to produce that grain were instead used to produce grains and legumes for human consumption, it would produce more than enough to end world hunger
That is only applicable in the factory farming context, which I’ve already said I agree with you, all industrial farming isn’t sustainable.
Seems like we mostly agree on things. Nice to meet you on lemmy, enjoy your lifestyle. I’m glad your getting the outcomes you want on a diet you found for yourself.