SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The last decade or so has brought ample evidence that Americans are gradually changing their diets, driven by health concerns and other factors.
But a new study points to one change that is starker than many have thought: Americans cut their beef consumption by 19 percent — nearly one-fifth — in the years from 2005 to 2014, according to research to be released on Wednesday by the Natural Resources Defense Council.
The environmental group found that consumption of chicken and pork fell as well, though less drastically, as Americans ate more cheese, butter and leafy greens.
The council is hailing the plummeting popularity of beef as a victory in the fight against climate change, because greenhouse gases are produced when cattle are raised. The group estimates that the resulting reduction in pollution would equal the emissions of 39 million cars, or about one-sixth of the number of cars registered in the United States in 2015. (Some of those environmental benefits, the group says, were erased by increased consumption of other foods that also create emissions.)
The research, which is based on data from the Agriculture Department and calculations using the same methodology as the Environmental Protection Agency, found that changes in the overall American diet reduced emissions by the equivalent of pollution from 57 million cars — despite population growth of about 9 percent.
I switched to eating people. Mmm, tasty.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Thursday March 23 2017, @05:54PM (5 children)
At least 2 people. And I have to say, it makes a lot more sense to quit meat for environmental reasons than for "oh the poor animals" reasons. Domesticated animals basically made a deal with humans: The humans help keep them alive, in exchange for being able to eat them later.
And the health benefits are nice too: No beef means no "pink slime" in hamburgers for me!
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Thursday March 23 2017, @06:42PM
I mean, the environmental issues are about the only reason (other than price) I could think of that would be why I'd consider changing. And I don't doubt there are people like you and CoolHand, I just really doubt they're any sort of significant majority.
I have cut back on beef as well. I have a steak and ground beef maybe once a month or so when cooking, and maybe go out for a burger (somewhere like Five Guys) maybe twice in that span of time. The rest of the time I'm eating chicken, mostly, with some pork mixed in for fun. Most of the dishes I prefer really work best with chicken, but, man, beef is just silly expensive right now compared with 10 years ago, even.
Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 23 2017, @07:51PM (1 child)
I'm pretty sure the original deal was "Feed and shelter me. Let me live a happy animal life, and then you can eat me". Now it seems to be "Keep me in a cage that is too small for me to turn around in. Torture me every day of my life, and then sell my diseased carcass to someone else so they can eat me."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 24 2017, @05:58AM
http://robotchicken.wikia.com/wiki/Transcription:This_Deal's_Getting_Worse_All_The_Time [wikia.com]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 24 2017, @01:31AM (1 child)
Actually, no such deal has ever been made, metaphorically or otherwise. A "deal" implies that the animals actually have a more or less equal footing in making this negotiation. In fact, they have no say at all. They don't have collective bargaining rights; and they don't get to walk away from the deal if they find it unsatisfactory. Almost certainly, they don't even know that they are in any kind of a contractual relationship at all. As usual, you are talking out of your ass. You really need to work on that.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday March 24 2017, @10:31AM