Rattle your pitchforks and say #yes2meat


#101

I mean are vegans/vegetarians not going to bring up their carbon footprint from flying in their year-round access to fruits and veggies from overseas? Or the consequences done to the local economies and environments so they can get their “super food” quinoa and açaí fix? So Earth friendly. So humane.


(ianrobo) #102

BTW I have no issue with keto vegans as they get it and are vegan for ethical reasons …

no your right so many costs available, I know my meat is local BTW from a local butcher soured within 50 miles (or so he claims !!)

the best example sadly to pick are advocado’s in CA produced there using just millions of litre of water and CA is a dry state and only survives thanks to the mountain snow


#103

Kenya put a temporary ban last year on their avocado exports (don’t know if they’ve lifted it for nations outside Africa), and I honestly don’t blame them.

With Cali I’m still angry that Nestle is allowed to bottle water there. They should be sued.


(Chris - carnivoremuscle.com) #104

These foods are monocropped on lands that can’t support it. The soil is continuously depleted and never re-fertilized properly.

These lands could instead be reverted to GRASS as they were originally and used for ruminants (like buffalo…you know that animal that used to roam those plains wildly until we actually massacred them).


(Amanda) #105

I hope this will happen sooner rather than later! :heart:


(Adam Kirby) #106

Let’s cross that bridge when even a fraction of the population adopts keto.

But put quite simply, grass-finished cattle is the way to go because pastured animals improve soil fertility, and obscene amounts of grains are not required to feed them.

By contrast, the plant-based diet that will “save the planet” continually depletes soil nutrients instead of building them up.


(Claire ) #107

I heard this BBC report too and was very frustrated by it. For those of you concerned about the environmental impacts of humanity moving towards a Keto diet, have you watch the documentary The Magic Pill on Amazon Prime? There is a section that addresses this very issue. They say that only 4% of the plant can sustain cultivate d crops while something like 20% has grasslands - ideal for grazing animals such as cattle. If everyone went vegan, we could literally not grow enough food to feed the world. However, if we had more grass-fed cattle, we could have a significant positive impact on greenhouse gasses. According to the expert in the documentary, grasses that grow in prairies have very deep roots which help fight erosion and maintain the quality of the soil. Cows grazed on the top 3 of the plants, turning energy into food. As they move across a prairie, the grasses start to grow again. collecting and trapping carbon. The expert said we could literally reverse global warming within 10 years if we switched over to all grass-fed animals used for human consumption. I was so happy to learn that paying more for grass-fed beef is not only better for my health, but it is literally better for the health of our planet too!


(Gabe “No Dogma, Only Science Please!” ) #108

I see no evidence for this. I’ve seen the attacks on Willett and they seem well-deserved, but if this is industry-funded, then they’ve very cleverly disguised their funding behind the non-profits that make up the commission.

Nestle is listed as a partner, but there’s no other suspicious names on the website, at least not after a few minutes of digging.


(Scott) #109

I notice that only animals raised for meat consumption pass gas. All the other animals get a pass. I have been on a farm and trust me grass fed horses & cows have gas. I’ll bet buffalo rhinos and elephants do too.


(ianrobo) #110

I did see the names listed on a tweet from friends of ours, can not find it now, however here - https://eatforum.org/partnerships/strategic-partners/ they have Novo Nordisk mentioned and they thrive on making people sick through diabetes …


(ianrobo) #111

ah this was it


(Jacqueline Porter) #112

Wow! Thank you for this Claire and all others. You have restored my faith. I have learnt so much this past 8 months and still learn more each day.
You guys are amazing!


(charlie3) #113

I read the claim that current agriculture is “unstainable” therefore we should all eat plants, no animal products.

  1. Show me the science. Look back as far in human history as you care to. All the food systems would fail to address current needs. As mentioned earlier, most airable land on the planet is only suitable for growing feed for animals. We won’t stop using that land for growing animal feed. Methane is not nearly as persistant in the atmosphere as carbon. When the grasses die off they rot down and emit carbon dioxide. Grass eaters extract some energy before it goes back to the soil and rots down. (A forest emits the same amount of carbon dioxide in the long run whether the tree tops rot on the ground or are burned in a wood stove.) Farmers produce more when market prices allow them to afford more inputs. Anyone who makes the ‘unstainable’ claim should be asked to show their evidence.

  2. The sustainability argument has nothing to do with my health. I’m going to eat what I believe contributes the most to my health. Anyone who interferes with that should expect trouble. Occaisionally I try listening to plant based speakers on youtube. I hear insufferable liars, obsessed with politics, not health. I hope the low carb people avoid going down the same rat whole.


(bulkbiker) #114

oops sorry @ianrobo you already posted it…


(ianrobo) #115

That’s ok ! The more the merrier ! This really has kicked up a storm on the food sphere and even some vegans state it is nonsense as they eat double it themselves !


(Charlie Kathopoulis) #116

I am pretty certain the Dudes interviewed a scientist who advocates this exact principle ie that the Earths’ land masses are more suited to rudiments than the crop culture of farming we have. Let me see if I can find it.


(Charlie Kathopoulis) #117

woo hoo found it :smiley:


(ianrobo) #118

And if news orgs were doing their job properly they should be inviting Peter on every tine to counter these arguments


(Charlie Kathopoulis) #119

I agree … But I guess if it goes against the ‘grain’ (pun intended) …


(Running from stupidity) #120

No, that’s not how it works, you don’t have to have diametrically opposed sides presented in every news story.