Can vegans breed?
Morally, or physically?
oldish chris
|
Just a view, but I'd rather Comrade Rob promoted his meat on the basis of its environmental credentials, which appear exemplary, rather than on an assertion that flies in the face of current medical evidence.
Just watched bits of a recording of Michael Mosely's TV prog. The bit about "factory farming" didn't convince me. Just hoping that I'm not displaying "biased assimilation" what? which in my less kinder periods (the other 99% of the time) I'd accuse Rob of.
Mosely's conclusion seems to be that people who eat too much meat end up over-weight, with high blood pressure and cancer, kind of sums me up really. (But at least I don't have the same shitty OS as Nick )
|
Rob R
|
Just a view, but I'd rather Comrade Rob promoted his meat on the basis of its environmental credentials, which appear exemplary, rather than on an assertion that flies in the face of current medical evidence.) |
It depends which evidence you take notice of though, some would argue that I am not at all environmentally friendly either.
Where is the evidence that meat *makes* us fat? Is it because cats are so fat? Or populations that eat a lot of meat? The most highly processed 'meats' are said to be least healthy yet contain less meat. As a diabetic of 27 years I recognise how difficult it is for us to avoid carbs & meat fills me up better so I eat less overall. If you'd eaten a high grassfed meat/low carb diet I'd be wrong. However I don't promote my meat as a wonder cure, it is what it is, grassfed.
Nick
|
Don't worry about my choice of OS; I have several, and am fine, thanks.
|
oldish chris
|
Don't worry about my choice of OS; I have several, and am fine, thanks. |
you don't half take the fun out of trolling!
Rob R
|
BTW, I didn't do the whole Paleo thing, but my wife did & managed to not only shift her baby weight but also got her 18 yr old figure back, so my experience is skewed by that. While this was happening I naturally ate more paleo meals & we were both congratulated on our bloods/health by medical professionals. My doctor was discussing with me today how little correlation he sees between diet & cholesterol. (unprompted he said he has vegans with massively high levels)
|
oldish chris
|
It depends which evidence you take notice of though, |
I suspect that therein lies the problem. Which is why I thought that "bias assimilation" or "cognitive bias" may be at work. Briefly, if a person is almost overloaded with information, no matter how balanced that information, they will sub-consciously pick out the bits that agree with existing beliefs and status. I like to think that I'm above this sort of thing.....
Rob R
|
I can see that, and that's why I don't always believe that the peer reviewed papers are necessarily correct, they may just be aligned to the current line of thought & not very holistic.
We've drained colossal areas of wetlands and wildflower meadows to produce grain over the last 400 years and I just want to preserve what's left & restore a little. When the existing areas are still being lost I can't help thinking that more people need to eat more grassfed meat. I can't imagine that they drained the land for health reasons.
|
Ty Gwyn
|
If meat is supposed to make us fat,there is something wrong with me,
I`ve turned 60yrs,have a blood pressure of 120 over 60,weigh 12 1/2 stone at 5ft 7in,eat on average about 1kg of bacon and 2kg of pork or beef a week,and potatoes are with most meals,as potato or chips,8lts of milk and 4 loaves of bread and 1/2 lb of cheese.
But i`m active.
|
Mistress Rose
|
Rob, they did drain them partly for health reasons, but not the way you mean. Some of them were a breeding ground for mosquitos that carried malaria, known then as ague. I agree with you about keeping the ones that are left by giving them an economic reason for remaining like grazing. There is a saying in our industry 'A wood that pays is a wood that stays'. Hence the old coppice woods of Sussex, Hampshire and Dorset tend to remain while a lot of others have disappeared.
Ty Gwyn, the important thing about you is that you are active. That helps a lot.
In the 1950s and 60s it was thought that starch was the reason for people being fat. We tended to be a bit more active because we walked more and used buses rather than cars, although they were coming along.
|
oldish chris
|
It depends which evidence you take notice of though, some would argue that I am not at all environmentally friendly either. |
Rob, are you referring to the Moseley TV prog where grass fed beef was slated 'cos of the methane, whereas factory farmed beef was way better for the environment?
I've just wasted half an hour of my life trying to get to some basic data. At the back of my mind is Prof. Pimentel's work on US grain-fed beef production (the 100,000 litres of water per kilo one) and the video you provided a link to about the "Carbon Cowboys".
A little snippet of info you might find interesting: Quote: |
Estimates of the global warming potential of the primary production of beef vary from 32.3kg CO 2 equivalent per kg beef (Ogino et al., 2004) to 15kg CO 2 eq. per kg beef in an intensive American feed lot system (Subak, 1999), a figure which was more than double that of a traditional African style pastoral system beef rearing system. The contribution to global warming potential of UK beef production is calculated as 16kg CO 2 eq. /kg by the Silsoe team (Williams et al 2006). |
I downloaded a PDF by bunging "www.ifr.ac.uk/ waste/ Reports/ DEFRA-Environmental%20Impacts%20of%20Food%20Production%20%20Consumpti on.pdf" into a search engine.
I'm interpreting that remark as meaning that the best a US beef producer can manage environmentally, is about the same as your average UK beef producer.
We should, as a society, be far more circumspect about the quantities of meat that we consume. What meat we do eat should not be imported from the USA.
Rob R
|
I've just come back from the cows, the fields look manageable when you stand at one end, but by the time you've reached halfway, carrying something heavy, you think again. We're not winning, not by a long shot, and I don't think we will if the cut back message carries on. It's very depressing to hear it.
On the plus side, I got a fantastic view of the owl hunting.
|
oldish chris
|
I do feel for you, honest. My views haven't been changed by the recent propaganda, we should eat less meat, however what meat we do eat should be should be produced in an environmentally benign way. (Same goes for wheat actually.)
When Michael Moseley reported on the American "factory farm" they focused on the methane production. He did slip in a little comment about antibiotics.
The elephants in the room are the fossil fuel industry and a flawed economic system. We burn vast amounts of coal and oil to produce, amongst other things, far more food than we actually need. One of the many pollutants coming from the agricultural industry is methane, which seriously amplifies the negative impact of the fossil fuel based food production system. But don't worry, by handing meat production over to a major multinational corporation, we can bring about a 50% reduction in methane emissions. And don't worry your pretty little head that most antibiotics will be rendered useless over the next 10 years.
When I saw Moseley in a US fast-food (aka junk-food) restaurant, ordering burger and fries (that particular outlet sold Pepsi rather than Coke), I observed that the beef was the only part of the meal that would also appear in a health fanatic's diet.
I'm planning another rant some other time about "Risk Factors". Parting shot - wait for a TV series about the world's fresh water crisis, which will contradict everything we've argued about!
|
Rob R
|
I'm planning another rant some other time about "Risk Factors". Parting shot - wait for a TV series about the world's fresh water crisis, which will contradict everything we've argued about! |
That's why I can't stand the whole approach of only looking at each issue in isolation. I was told recently in a debate on the subject that, in a vegan world, we could manage the wetlands with cattle but not have to kill them, only producing a sustainable number of replacements (I didn't enquire whether they were one of those vegans who were in favour of genital mutilation). The one flaw in that plan is that I don't have enough meat eaters who recognise the importance of these habitats, I can't see the vegansputting their hands in their pockets to support it.
I'm already hoarding fresh water in my carbon rich soils though, I guess that's the real reason I want more cows...
Rob R
|
The ironic thing is being called 'greedy' for farming livestock.
|
Hairyloon
|
It struck me as simplistic pro-industrial food production propaganda masquerading as fact. |
I didn't watch it, so I cannot comment, but if you feel as strongly as you appear to then you should make a complaint, perhaps to the Broadcasting Standards Commission.
Rob R
|
Linky; the real source of increased methane levels?
|
Nick
|
Lovely town, Guelph. Bars with beer taps built in for an all you can drink evening not to be forgotten.
Except, in parts.
|
Rob R
|
It depends which evidence you take notice of though, some would argue that I am not at all environmentally friendly either. |
Rob, are you referring to the Moseley TV prog where grass fed beef was slated 'cos of the methane, whereas factory farmed beef was way better for the environment?
I've just wasted half an hour of my life trying to get to some basic data. At the back of my mind is Prof. Pimentel's work on US grain-fed beef production (the 100,000 litres of water per kilo one) and the video you provided a link to about the "Carbon Cowboys".
A little snippet of info you might find interesting: Quote: |
Estimates of the global warming potential of the primary production of beef vary from 32.3kg CO 2 equivalent per kg beef (Ogino et al., 2004) to 15kg CO 2 eq. per kg beef in an intensive American feed lot system (Subak, 1999), a figure which was more than double that of a traditional African style pastoral system beef rearing system. The contribution to global warming potential of UK beef production is calculated as 16kg CO 2 eq. /kg by the Silsoe team (Williams et al 2006). |
I downloaded a PDF by bunging "www.ifr.ac.uk/ waste/ Reports/ DEFRA-Environmental%20Impacts%20of%20Food%20Production%20%20Consumpti on.pdf" into a search engine.
I'm interpreting that remark as meaning that the best a US beef producer can manage environmentally, is about the same as your average UK beef producer.
We should, as a society, be far more circumspect about the quantities of meat that we consume. What meat we do eat should not be imported from the USA.
You didn't waste that time, think of it as research
I also came across this piece of information in that pdf, which seems to go against pretty much everything I've read or experienced in the past;
Quote: |
A market analysis conducted by Mintel indicated that 301,000 tonnes of beef were sold in the UK in 2004, accounting for 51% of the red meat market. Beef sales have experienced an increase of 4.5% since 2002, a trend that is predicted to continue, with a forecast growth of 3% in the period 2004-2009. This is
in contrast to all other red meat sales that are to fall (Mintel, 2005). |
I can only assume that we are importing more beef. Perhaps the increase is from a low after the BSE scare, or perhaps it is just made up of a liking for horse.
Mistress Rose
|
I rather suspect that it is the cheaper meat such as mince that is showing the rise. Some of it may be British, but is probably from bigger farmers as sold through supermarkets. There is also the burger, ready meal and ready made pie market which uses beef, but goodness knows where some of that comes from.
You are doing the right thing environmentally Rob; lets hope that you get the sales to help you with it.
|
Rob R
|
I rather suspect that it is the cheaper meat such as mince that is showing the rise. Some of it may be British, but is probably from bigger farmers as sold through supermarkets. |
The cheaper meat has got to come from somewhere, though. You can't produce more mince without producing more steaks, unless you mince the steaks, but then it's not cheaper.
You can, of course, use more cull cows which have a higher proportion of mince, and that has been happening, which is why I keep predicting supply shortages in the future as the availability of prime beef goes down due to the combination of less physically being produced and more heifers being kept for breeding.
Few people think long term (apart from dpack) when buying their food though, so I think we just have to ride the waves.
Home Home Home Home Home