Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We’re on track to set a new record for global meat consumption

technologyreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 79 posts

Re: We’re on track to set a new record for global meat consumption

#11

Post by BelenusMordred »

choeger wrote: post #8
jschveibinz wrote: post #3

We eat way more than we used to, and there are more people doing it. Per capita meat consumption in the US (poultry, beef, pork) in 1960 was about 170 lbs per year. Now it’s closer to 220 lbs per person per year. Cheese consumption has almost tripled since 1970. https://www.nationalchickencouncil.org/about-the-industry/st... Let’s all be heroes: Eat less (including meat and cheese), buy less, save money, improve your…

Wow. 275g per day is a huge average. Do you happen to know the median? I cannot agree with the cheese part, though. I think if you replace half of that meat consumption with cheese, it would be net positive for your health and the climate. Also one should not consider poultry equivalent to beef.

> 275g per day is a huge average

Including food waste it's fairly reasonable. Commercial restaurants waste an amazing amount of food everyday.

Re: We’re on track to set a new record for global meat consumption

#12

Post by Robotbeat »

kuratkull wrote: post #6

Not sure why the author doesn't mention the known (and gaining traction) solution: rotational grazing. It's a rather simple carbon-negative solution. You have a bunch of land, you divide it into paddocks, you rotate ruminants to fresh grass. The previous paddocks regenerate and bind carbon. Repeat. A large plot of land is able to bind carbon for decades. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=rotational+grazing+carbon+negative

I sincerely doubt this fully compensated for methane emissions.

Re: We’re on track to set a new record for global meat consumption

#13

Post by chillwaves »

thisCtx wrote: post #7
chillwaves wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like the market compensates for individual action in a way that diminishes its effect.

The market compensates the future for real consumption? Or are you thinking in purely abstract models? I’m more of a physical sciences type. I feel no obligation to coddle completely made up, self re-enforcing garbage. How is the market compensating for the real impact facing the future of the species? Hint: it’s not. Everyone in power will simply be dead by the time the bill comes due. “Trickle down economics” is a…

I don't see you proposing a solution.

Individual action isn't it. It is a red herring.

Government policy is the only way forward.

Re: We’re on track to set a new record for global meat consumption

#14

Post by watwut »

jschveibinz wrote: post #3

We eat way more than we used to, and there are more people doing it. Per capita meat consumption in the US (poultry, beef, pork) in 1960 was about 170 lbs per year. Now it’s closer to 220 lbs per person per year. Cheese consumption has almost tripled since 1970. https://www.nationalchickencouncil.org/about-the-industry/st... Let’s all be heroes: Eat less (including meat and cheese), buy less, save money, improve your…

We are also healthier then average in 1960. We are more fat, but also less likely to miss one of important nutricients.

Re: We’re on track to set a new record for global meat consumption

#15

Post by jniedrauer »

BelenusMordred wrote: post #11
choeger wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. 275g per day is a huge average. Do you happen to know the median? I cannot agree with the cheese part, though. I think if you replace half of that meat consumption with cheese, it would be net positive for your health and the climate. Also one should not consider poultry equivalent to beef.

> 275g per day is a huge average Including food waste it's fairly reasonable. Commercial restaurants waste an amazing amount of food everyday.

It's really not reasonable, even if you consider 50% waste. There's no reason for a sedentary person to eat even close to that much protein.

Re: We’re on track to set a new record for global meat consumption

#16

Post by choeger »

meristohm wrote: post #2

This article is tough to read on mobile without sending to Pocket or something like that. Chimpanzees eat some meat, maybe 2-3% of their diet? We can do that, too. The long-term costs need to be included in meat production. Regulation that affects everyone seems important, so that we don’t get stuck appealing to and hoping for individual responsibility.

I am not a big fan of this "external cost" talking point. For instance, the health cost do not scale linearly with sales. Why should someone who eats a healthy amount of meat subsidize the health cost of someone who eats an unhealthy amount?

I see a different problem with climate emissions: If cattle produces a large quantity of green house gases, should the US meat eater outbid the Indian gasoline buyer? Because I think that's the likely consequence of a global market for emissions.

I think it's much more efficient (but frustratingly slow) to set global standards for sustainable production. One could demand a certain level of renewable energy or a particular grazing standard world-wide. This way, no one loses out on the global market.

Re: We’re on track to set a new record for global meat consumption

#17

Post by deepnotderp »

Jiejeing wrote: post #9
atian wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chimpanzees brains also don't have the same energy demands. We also still don't understand the mechanisms behind rare diseases that are associated with vegetarian diets but also not considered from being overt malnourishment. We are far from ready from centrally advocating for plant-based diets. Seems like the best thing we can do and are doing is introducing more plant-based options on the market.

That is true, but we (as a society) still eat way too much meat compared to what is required as part of our nutritional intake. I don’t advocate getting the "just right" amount needed (because it is not really easy to compute depending on activity, lifestyle, body type, etc…), but modern meat consumption is neither healthy nor ecologically sustainable.

No we don’t. We eat less than most Hunter gatherers did, even accounting for variability iirc

Re: We’re on track to set a new record for global meat consumption

#18

Post by sschueller »

jschveibinz wrote: post #3

We eat way more than we used to, and there are more people doing it. Per capita meat consumption in the US (poultry, beef, pork) in 1960 was about 170 lbs per year. Now it’s closer to 220 lbs per person per year. Cheese consumption has almost tripled since 1970. https://www.nationalchickencouncil.org/about-the-industry/st... Let’s all be heroes: Eat less (including meat and cheese), buy less, save money, improve your…

I say don't save money but eat a lot less meat. Buy only local organic meats. This way you can actually enjoy a good piece of meat and also appreciate it.

Re: We’re on track to set a new record for global meat consumption

#19

Post by Plastikdusche »

jniedrauer wrote: post #15
BelenusMordred wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 275g per day is a huge average Including food waste it's fairly reasonable. Commercial restaurants waste an amazing amount of food everyday.

It's really not reasonable, even if you consider 50% waste. There's no reason for a sedentary person to eat even close to that much protein.

I think he's referring to g of meat and not pure protein. I'd say that the number is pretty close or maybe even low. I mean it's not just steak /chicken /burgers, Bacon, lunch meat, sausage etc all adds up.

Re: We’re on track to set a new record for global meat consumption

#20

Post by aaronbrethorst »

watwut wrote: post #14
jschveibinz wrote: post #3

We eat way more than we used to, and there are more people doing it. Per capita meat consumption in the US (poultry, beef, pork) in 1960 was about 170 lbs per year. Now it’s closer to 220 lbs per person per year. Cheese consumption has almost tripled since 1970. https://www.nationalchickencouncil.org/about-the-industry/st... Let’s all be heroes: Eat less (including meat and cheese), buy less, save money, improve your…

We are also healthier then average in 1960. We are more fat, but also less likely to miss one of important nutricients.

I'd love to see how you characterize Americans being healthier today than they were in 1960. Maybe you mean that life expectancy has increased from about 70 years to 78 years. However it looks like a lot of that is attributable to reduced infant mortality.

In 1960, 0.91% of Americans had Type II Diabetes. In 2015, 7.40% of Americans had Type II Diabetes: https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics/slides/long_term_tre...

Obesity has also skyrocketed: https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-statisti...

Post reply on HN