Skip to content
  • Register
    • Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
    We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!

    Meat only diet

    245

    Replies

    • Posts: 25,763 Member
      quiksylver296 wrote: »
      One fewer child than what?!?

      I think they thought it was a more positive way than saying "each child has this impact."
    • Posts: 28,439 Member
      pinuplove wrote: »
      show previous quotes

      I'm guessing that's just their way of saying each child uses this much in resources over the course of their lifetime? I read a news article today about a man in Canada with 24 wives and 149 children. Let's all blame him for dooming the planet :tongue:

      I saw that article, too. Crazy.
    • Posts: 2,072 Member
      TavistockToad wrote: »
      show previous quotes

      until its day 5 and you haven't pooped...

      Had a former coworker experience that, he ended up in the hospital after a week of being backed up. Needed to have it "manually extracted" and then "colon flush", did not sound like fun.
    • Posts: 9,578 Member
      @midwesterner85

      What do your splits look like @ fats & protein? How much water do you drink per day? Has your regularity improved? How many bowel movements per day?

      Reactively, I cannot delineate the fiber element in any eating plan ... So, please forgive the rather obtuse questions.
    • Posts: 463 Member
      nvmomketo wrote: »
      show previous quotes

      We're getting off topic, but it is interesting.

      I looked at the articles you mentioned. I absolutely agree that their farts are methane sources. No argument there.

      My disagreement came from when you said " we cannot graze enough cattle to match current beef production without a massive environmental toll". Did you mean that continuing the current production will lead to an environmental toll (methane farts)? Because I think grazing cattle, or other animals would be of a similar, or slightly reduced, environmental impact.

      I could be approaching this from too much of my local perspective. I live at the edge of the semi arid foothills of the Rockies. Growing much beyond canola or hay requires some sort of water system. On government land there are cattle leases where the cows wander through the foothills, eat, get fat, and occasionally eaten by wolves. Once you go east, its canola, hay then feed lots. We have a lot of beef here. I think more of it could be wandering and pasture fed. I'm not talking about clear cutting a pasture ( or for a corn crop), but having them in the grasslands and foothills works here. In other places, I imagine it would be more of an impact.

      Most of the beef we've eaten we've butchered at a family member's farm. The cows wandered the pastures and were given hay bales in the winter. The field had multiple types of grasses in it ( not monocrop). Their pasture did not take away from other food crops.

      IDK. I eat meat. I'm meant to eat meat. I am healthiest when meat makes up a large portion of my diet. I'll eat other meats if they are available and affordable. I am not going to stop eating meat to save the environment but if I could purchase more sustainable meats I would do so. My family of 5 typically eats about one cow and one pig a year. Sometimes there is deer on top of that as well as the salmon we've caught.

      On the bright side, my family helps the environment by not consuming grains and sugar. ;)

      I don't think everyone should eat meat heavy (never mind only meat) but some people do better that way, just like I don't think everyone should be vegetarian but some do better that way.

      I firmly believe dietary guidelines should be for creating good health and not due to environmental concerns.

      My point, as shown by the studies in the articles I linked to, is that even when taking carbon sequestration and the footprint of feed into account, grass-fed cattle create higher levels of greenhouse emissions than grain-fed cattle do over their lifetimes.

      Let's say that grass-fed cattle make 3 tons of methane a year, and grain-fed make 2 tons (made up numbers to illustrate point). Farmer Joe has a herd of 100 grain-fed cattle and he decides to start grass-feeding his cattle so they get to roam and graze the natural grasslands and get hay in the winter. That same 100 cow herd that was making 200 tons of methane a year is now making 300 tons of methane a year because of his decision.

      I know it's not intuitive because small scale pasture farming like what you are describing is much nicer to look at and far less cruel to the cow. But carbon emissions are invisible, and they cause major problems whether or not you can see them.

      I'm not saying anyone must change their diet. I eat poultry and cheese several times a week, I eat yogurt, heck, I still eat beef! But beef occupies the same space in my diet that lobster and chanterelle mushrooms do. Everyone makes these types of tradeoffs every single day. But it's important to be educated on what science shows is legitimately the lower impact option so your choice is informed.
    • Posts: 164 Member
      nvmomketo wrote: »
      show previous quotes

      For factory farming, I completely agree.

      If one converted all those corn and soy farms into pasture, with perennial grasses instead of agricultural monocrop farms, then beef would be more sustainable. Better yet, farm bison and other grazer's which are easier on the grass (nibble off the tops rather than rip the grass out) and let the pigs and chicken roam with them.

      Eat more lamb
    • Posts: 12,019 Member
      happytree923 wrote: »
      show previous quotes

      My point, as shown by the studies in the articles I linked to, is that even when taking carbon sequestration and the footprint of feed into account, grass-fed cattle create higher levels of greenhouse emissions than grain-fed cattle do over their lifetimes.

      Let's say that grass-fed cattle make 3 tons of methane a year, and grain-fed make 2 tons (made up numbers to illustrate point). Farmer Joe has a herd of 100 grain-fed cattle and he decides to start grass-feeding his cattle so they get to roam and graze the natural grasslands and get hay in the winter. That same 100 cow herd that was making 200 tons of methane a year is now making 300 tons of methane a year because of his decision.

      I know it's not intuitive because small scale pasture farming like what you are describing is much nicer to look at and far less cruel to the cow. But carbon emissions are invisible, and they cause major problems whether or not you can see them.

      I'm not saying anyone must change their diet. I eat poultry and cheese several times a week, I eat yogurt, heck, I still eat beef! But beef occupies the same space in my diet that lobster and chanterelle mushrooms do. Everyone makes these types of tradeoffs every single day. But it's important to be educated on what science shows is legitimately the lower impact option so your choice is informed.

      I did not get the bolded from those articles. They discussed how clear cutting to get a pasture is hard on the environment, but the places where cattle should roam don't need to be clear cut. It mentioned how the cattle would hurt the water supply but I have a hard time imagining how ponds and streams would be that affected, plus I imagine most farms would have to make a pond or provide water as most would not have a stream running through them.

      I did not see where it said a grass fed/grazing cow makes more methane than one who eats grains or corn. If I missed it, I'll re read it - I did read it quickly. I assume that if grain fed, feedlot cow makes 3 tons methane, then the grazing cow would also make 3 tons methane.
    • Posts: 11,118 Member
      Sounds vile. :s
    This discussion has been closed.

    Welcome!

    It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
    Sign In
    Register

    Quick Links

    Categories