this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

science

26560 readers
225 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

dart board;; science bs

rule #1: be kind

lemmy.world rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Unless you count grass and non-human consumables and non-potable water...sure...until then that's bullshit.

[–] oce@jlai.lu 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

How is that bullshit? I am not vegan, but that's just a scientific consensus and a major reason why plant diet is way lower carbon than a meat diet. If you need to grow plant food for your animal food, eventually you have to grow way more plant food.
Most animals raised for meat consumption are fed with crops, notably soy, not wild grass.
Thinking animals raised for meat only consume resources (land (first cause of biodiversity loss), plants, water, energy) that would not be useful to humans anyway is undoubtedly wrong.

Researchers Poore and Nemecek are a great source of meta-analysis information about those subjects. Check this summary here for example: http://environmath.org/2018/06/17/paper-of-the-day-poore-nemecek-2018-reducing-foods-environmental-impacts/

Let me know if I misunderstood your point.

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

https://www.ars.usda.gov/ARSUserFiles/50901500/px-based_v3.2/educ-matrls/pdfs/HO_what-cows-eat.pdf

We do not feed them food we can eat, it would be such a waste to do so. We literally feed them shit we cannot consume. Feeds are made from roots/stalks/inedible plants.

The vegan industry doesn't like this, so they say well that land could be used for other things, when in reality it's already being used for the food that we eat.

[–] oce@jlai.lu 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They are also fed grains and soy in varying percentage depending on regions and countries.
There is also still the use of land, energy, fresh water and the methane emissions typical of cows.

This is another break down of the above-mentioned study: https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets

You can see that indeed, the USA does better than other countries on not dedicating crops to animal feed, but it is still about 14%, while the world average is around 40%. Isn't that a lot that could be earned back?

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The majority of the land used for cattle grazing is not suitable for farmland. It's either to hilly or rocky or just plain doesn't have great soil. Not to mention the level of crops it would require to feed people and the amount of people who just cannot sustain on a all vegan diet. There is a reason we are omnivores and not herbivores.

[–] oce@jlai.lu 1 points 1 year ago

This is also covered by the study and the article I shared above. It would require using more lands for crops that feed people, but that's ridiculously small compared to the land that would be regained from stopping animal agriculture, which is 75%. Just removing cows would do the vast majority of that.

Crops for feed can be regained and if most pasture land is inappropriate for crops, some are, so we would gain from freeing those too. Furthermore, this land can be given back to biodiversity, which will also benefit us in the long term, if just protecting biodiversity for the sake of it is not a good argument for you.

Again, I am not vegan, I mostly advocate for reducing, not forbidding, consumption proportionally to ecological impact. If some people for medical reason require meat, I'm completely fine with it, this would likely be a small percentage of the current consumption.

Omnivore, not obligate carnivore except for a few exceptions maybe, so we could use a low meat diet or a fully plant based diet fine.

[–] NFord@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Are you saying grass aren't plants? Why would it matter if the plant is consumable by humans if vegans are trying to minimize suffering?

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because they're not about minimizing suffering, it's about being morally superior to meat eaters and letting everyone know about it. The post I replied to, literally made that a point.