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

A world grain shortage puts tens of millions at risk

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 104 posts

Re: A world grain shortage puts tens of millions at risk

#91

Post by cupcake-unicorn »

This kind of stuff really bothers me in addition to the ridiculous "meat shortage" or "save the coal miner's jobs" stuff. Let's use this as an opportunity to move past things that were popularized that don't really make that mucuh sense anymore.

Even for those who don't have celiac/gluten intolerance, gluten is high in lectins, and the molecule size is such that it can really cause damage to a lot of tissue. Wheat and dairy are extremely rough on the body and as time has gone on we've basically mutated to tolerate it.

Sorghum is a gluten free crop that's hardy and grows with less water, in addition to having a favorable nutrient profile full of antioxidants. Getting more antioxidants in the diet can really be the tipping point for those who have a genetic predisposition to autoimmune and other disorders and that's why things have gotten so bad under the crappy western diet.

Sorry if I'm just being dense here but I really don't understand why "grain shortage" or "meat shortage" are thrown around in the media as being life and death situations. There are surely grains that are more heat tolerant and we can further cultivate and select for types of healthier grains that are instead of trying to make wheat happen because "mm bread/beer". I don't eat either of those things and I suspect that communities who suffered a shortage of either of those things would also find a way to make do, potentially to their benefit by integrating more diverse foods.

I guess if at the end of the day climate change is such that nothing can grow we're screwed but then why is this article so focused on wheat in particular? If a certain crop or export just isn't making sense sustainability wise this ends up just looking like the old "buuuttt the coal miners will lose their jobs" type story.

Re: A world grain shortage puts tens of millions at risk

#92

Post by zamadatix »

viraptor wrote: post #84

One thing I haven't noticed in the article is anything about wasted food. The common knowledge says: we've got enough food for everyone, it's just in the wrong place, so it's cheaper to throw away. If we really have global shortage, the balance of that will change and not throwing things out (or not overstocking in the first place) will become more common. I'd be interested in learning how much that affects the real…

The common knowledge says there is enough food produced for everyone to not go hungry... but people want more than to not go hungry and they want it to be efficient for their life not for the food production/consumption ratio

The global wealthy can afford convenience and excess while the global poor can't afford basic needs. As such "it's just in the wrong place, so it's cheaper to throw away" is a desired outcome for the wealthy not a problem triggering inefficiency. It's also best to not equate food usage efficiency to general efficiency as a lot of the excess is the result of more food being cheaper than efficiently consuming less food. E.g. growing 100 apples to have 100 actually consumed apples takes a lot of effort to make happen. You have to make sure none go bad in transport, all are immediately sold at the store, and that people heavily plan out their lives around eating every apple they buy before it goes bad. It's just more efficient as a whole to make more apples even if that makes food efficiency look worse.

Carrying that forward whether or not there is a "global shortage" (taken to mean not enough produced for everyone to not go hungry) is irrelevant. People are already going hungry today so "enough that everyone can be fed" can't be the controller of why the wealthy can afford excess. The ability comes from their production and purchasing power compared to the world not the overall averages of the world.

Of course simple economics still exists and less of the good will result in a raise of price, the question of course being how much not working from decreased consumptions backwards. That raise in price is only proportional to how much is needed to lower global consumption. It's not a guarantee the wealthy will notice enough of an impact to no longer be able to afford excess. In reality the poor that were already short on food will see a bigger decrease in consumption than the wealthy due to price increases. A 10% price increase in food is only inconvenient for most in wealthy countries but in poor countries many have no choice but to consume less food as they have no more money to spend on it.

If I had to guess this shortage won't be near enough for production to be less than ideal distribution coveraging hunger. That said it'll still affect prices, just probably not enough for wealthy countries decreases in excess to have a meaningful impact on the overall supply.

Re: A world grain shortage puts tens of millions at risk

#93

Post by [deleted] »

ceejayoz wrote: post #77
ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that is not what the person you're replying to said.

Sure it is. Humans don't need four stomachs to handle grain. You'd need it to eat grass , but the article doesn't say anything about humans eating grass. > With only grass-fed livestock, individual Americans would still get more than the recommended daily allowance (RDA) of meat and dairy protein, according to Pimentel's report, "Livestock Production: Energy Inputs and the Environment."

[deleted]

Re: A world grain shortage puts tens of millions at risk

#94

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

ceejayoz wrote: post #77
ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that is not what the person you're replying to said.

Sure it is. Humans don't need four stomachs to handle grain. You'd need it to eat grass , but the article doesn't say anything about humans eating grass. > With only grass-fed livestock, individual Americans would still get more than the recommended daily allowance (RDA) of meat and dairy protein, according to Pimentel's report, "Livestock Production: Energy Inputs and the Environment."

the poster you replied to did not say that we needed 4 stomachs to digest grain, either. you're reading way more into their post than what was said.

it seems your misunderstanding results from the phrase "we'll be set", I think you took this general phrase to mean "we'll all be able to eat grain", yes?

if so, what the term actually means is, "we will be well prepared for the future", something that being able to eat grass would hypothetically help us with, since it would theoretically open up even more food options to more people

Re: A world grain shortage puts tens of millions at risk

#96

Post by ceejayoz »

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #94
ceejayoz wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure it is. Humans don't need four stomachs to handle grain. You'd need it to eat grass , but the article doesn't say anything about humans eating grass. > With only grass-fed livestock, individual Americans would still get more than the recommended daily allowance (RDA) of meat and dairy protein, according to Pimentel's report, "Livestock Production: Energy Inputs and the Environment."

the poster you replied to did not say that we needed 4 stomachs to digest grain, either. you're reading way more into their post than what was said. it seems your misunderstanding results from the phrase "we'll be set", I think you took this general phrase to mean "we'll all be able to eat grain", yes? if so, what the term actually means is, "we will be well prepared for the future", something that being able to eat…

It was a direct reply to an article about eating less grain-fed meat and redirecting that crop production to humans, implying we'd need ruminant stomachs to do so.

I'm not sure why some HN discussions turn into a lesson on object permanence.

Re: A world grain shortage puts tens of millions at risk

#97

Post by ceejayoz »

drewm1980 wrote: post #88
ceejayoz wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure it is. Humans don't need four stomachs to handle grain. You'd need it to eat grass , but the article doesn't say anything about humans eating grass. > With only grass-fed livestock, individual Americans would still get more than the recommended daily allowance (RDA) of meat and dairy protein, according to Pimentel's report, "Livestock Production: Energy Inputs and the Environment."

Is there really a "Recommended daily allowance of meat and dairy protein"? Sounds like propaganda from the meat and dairy industry like the food pyramid. I once met someone who studied to be a professional nutritionist, but left the field entirely because it is corrupted by special interests. IIRC to get certified she had to tow the party line that nutritionists should promote animal products as part of a healthy die…

Yeah, the whole food pyramid is various industries competing against each other. The grains recommendation is even nuttier; you're supposed to have a giant pile of pasta and maybe a veggie or two.

Michelle Obama took a stab at updating it (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MyPlate) with quite a bit of wailing and gnashing of teeth from industry and right-wing groups (https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2016/03/michelle-obama...).

Re: A world grain shortage puts tens of millions at risk

#98

Post by AnonCoward4 »

oneoff786 wrote: post #30
hkpack wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> According to western media. Wow, that's a new level of denial. Take a look, this happened yesterday [0]. This is a "culture hall", pretty far away from the front lines, where kids used to learn to play music. More than ten injured including children. [0] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQnU_3ljHMQ

It’s a barely noteworthy Russian propaganda line tbh.

If it was from RT I would add "According to Russian media". Is that then a barely noteworthy western propaganda line or just the truth?

Re: A world grain shortage puts tens of millions at risk

#99

Post by trasz »

AnonCoward4 wrote: post #98
oneoff786 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a barely noteworthy Russian propaganda line tbh.

If it was from RT I would add "According to Russian media". Is that then a barely noteworthy western propaganda line or just the truth?

Russian crimes are pretty well documented at this point, see eg https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2022/04/04/russias-bucha-fac...

Re: A world grain shortage puts tens of millions at risk

#100

Post by oneoff786 »

AnonCoward4 wrote: post #98
oneoff786 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a barely noteworthy Russian propaganda line tbh.

If it was from RT I would add "According to Russian media". Is that then a barely noteworthy western propaganda line or just the truth?

Shrug. Russian news being shit is an issue on its own. What aboutism need not apply.
Post reply on HN