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

The meat industry blocked the IPCC’s attempt to recommend a plant-based diet

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 225 posts

Re: The meat industry blocked the IPCC’s attempt to recommend a plant-based diet

#21

Post by shortcake27 »

exfatloss wrote: post #4
hdhrufjdi wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think this is good?

I think animal foods are very healthy and the CO2 emissions/environmental effects of cattle are usually overblown. One "study" I saw claimed cattle used 1000000x more water than grains. But they counted the rainfall on the entire grazing area as consumed by the cattle, which is obviously nonsense. It goes back into the cycle. (As does the water the cattle consume, of course.)

> I think animal foods are very healthy

There are countless studies showing a link between red meat and negative health effects, and there is probably no safe amount. Are you saying all the studies are wrong? What evidence do you have to support your claim?

Re: The meat industry blocked the IPCC’s attempt to recommend a plant-based diet

#22

Post by cinntaile »

choeger wrote: post #15
alphabetatheta wrote: post #5

I'm actually surprised how much dairy products contribute to global warming. It's only veganism that really cuts down on carbon emissions.

I often wonder, how much double counting goes into these stats. Of course, dairy currently relies on fossile energy often. But how much of it is attributed elsewhere as well? Diesel, for instance, is often also attributed to big oil companies like shell. Cows are slaughtered and sold as meat at some point - is the dairy CO2 emission subtracted here? I don't think so.

Since you often wonder, I suggest you spend some time reading some relevant papers and their methodology. You won't have to guess and assume if you do that.

Re: The meat industry blocked the IPCC’s attempt to recommend a plant-based diet

#23

Post by choeger »

shortcake27 wrote: post #19
choeger wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. There needs to be a pyramid in top of the food pyramid. Beef is not bad per se, it just shouldn't be your weekly meat.

I’m not sure if you responded to the wrong comment or what because the parent is referencing environment impact but you’re referencing health impacts. From an environmental point of view, there’s a linear relationship between your consumption of beef and environmental impact. There is no amount of beef that is good for the environment. From a health point of view, it’s debated, however there are more studies that sho…

> There is no amount of beef that is good for the environment.

That's a tautology. In that strict sense, there's no amount of you that's good for the environment, either. Unless we all commit suicide, we have to accept the fact that our behavior changes the environment. So, yes, quantities matter a lot.

Re: The meat industry blocked the IPCC’s attempt to recommend a plant-based diet

#24

Post by cinntaile »

waihtis wrote: post #9

The discussion around plants, meat and dairy need to become much more nuanced. Let's take dairy as an example - has a great effect in boosting mTORC1 activity which causes better growth in children. Now, a non-insignificant set of people who have bought into zealous veganry are raising children who will be physically more fragile just because they've been marketed with the idea that dairy == bad. On the other hand, o…

> I am a layman on this topic; feel free to correct any errors in my claims.

This isn't how this works. You should back up your own claims with sources.

Re: The meat industry blocked the IPCC’s attempt to recommend a plant-based diet

#26

Post by himinlomax »

Tade0 wrote: post #8
alphabetatheta wrote: post #5

I'm actually surprised how much dairy products contribute to global warming. It's only veganism that really cuts down on carbon emissions.

Not really. I looked at the different scenarios and we would probably do fine on chicken and cheese in terms of water consumption, CO2 and land use. Pork is where it starts being risky. Beef, lamb etc. are the most problematic parts.

The water use claim regarding beef has been debunked, it was based on the weird accounting trick where you count rainfall on pasture as wasted water for some reason.

Also speaking of pasture, afaik the equation for cattle is completely different whether they're fed corn vs grazing on marginal land as they're supposed to.

Re: The meat industry blocked the IPCC’s attempt to recommend a plant-based diet

#27

Post by Tade0 »

klipt wrote: post #18
Tade0 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. I looked at the different scenarios and we would probably do fine on chicken and cheese in terms of water consumption, CO2 and land use. Pork is where it starts being risky. Beef, lamb etc. are the most problematic parts.

Isn't beef bad because cows release methane, but feeding cows seaweed can mitigate that?

It's largely (heh) about their size and that they're not really as optimized for meat as e.g. pigs. They breed comparatively slowly and take longer to grow.

Moreover the weight of a cow carcass is no higher than 60% that of the animal, while for pigs the lower bound is ~78%. Poultry is also very efficient in this regard, especially turkey yielding 80%+.

Where I'm from domestically consumed beef comes mostly from dairy cows so it's not particularly good, but it appears to be the more environmentally sound choice than growing them just for the meat(not that this was the aim - it's just cheaper).

Re: The meat industry blocked the IPCC’s attempt to recommend a plant-based diet

#28

Post by em500 »

klipt wrote: post #18
Tade0 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. I looked at the different scenarios and we would probably do fine on chicken and cheese in terms of water consumption, CO2 and land use. Pork is where it starts being risky. Beef, lamb etc. are the most problematic parts.

Isn't beef bad because cows release methane, but feeding cows seaweed can mitigate that?

Maybe beef is bad largely due to their sheer volume (c.f. China's per capita emission is much lower than North America or Europe, but their aggregate impact is still enormous due to their large population).

There was this eye opening old XKCD that showed that by aggregate weight cattle dwarf every other land mammal: https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1338:_Land_Mammal...

(Not a subject expert, do your own research, check the sources, etc.)

Re: The meat industry blocked the IPCC’s attempt to recommend a plant-based diet

#29

Post by himinlomax »

klipt wrote: post #18
Tade0 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. I looked at the different scenarios and we would probably do fine on chicken and cheese in terms of water consumption, CO2 and land use. Pork is where it starts being risky. Beef, lamb etc. are the most problematic parts.

Isn't beef bad because cows release methane, but feeding cows seaweed can mitigate that?

I find the methane issue quite dubious: as it gets oxidized over time, the quantity of methane from cattle in the atmosphere is more or less proportional to the number of heads. The problem with CO2 otoh is that it keeps increasing because we create it from fossil sources.

Re: The meat industry blocked the IPCC’s attempt to recommend a plant-based diet

#30

Post by wiz21c »

himinlomax wrote: post #26
Tade0 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. I looked at the different scenarios and we would probably do fine on chicken and cheese in terms of water consumption, CO2 and land use. Pork is where it starts being risky. Beef, lamb etc. are the most problematic parts.

The water use claim regarding beef has been debunked, it was based on the weird accounting trick where you count rainfall on pasture as wasted water for some reason. Also speaking of pasture, afaik the equation for cattle is completely different whether they're fed corn vs grazing on marginal land as they're supposed to.

> they're fed corn

and where does the corn grow ?

Post reply on HN