40% of lost calories globally are from beef, needing 33 cal of feed per 1 cal • Hacker News Board

Re: 40% of lost calories globally are from beef, needing 33 cal of feed per 1 cal

#301

Post by kshahkshah » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 12:28 PM UTC

mhurron wrote: post #107

rayiner wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is stupid thinking indulged in by westerners who were born in the lap of luxury. The market is incredibly moral. When my dad was born in a village in Bangladesh, 1 out of 4 kids didn’t live past age 5. Thanks to market reforms and the resulting economic growth, child mortality in Bangladesh has plummeted. Bangladesh’s under-5 morality rate is better today than America’s was at the same time my dad was born. If I…

You mean the Socialism that produces higher quality of life in Scandinavia as compared to to say the US where the oh so moral market decides if you weren't born into the upper end of society you deserve to die of disease and conditions that can be treated? The market is not moral, it is amoral and it serves those with the money to direct it.

My understanding is that a large portion of Scandinavian socialism is paid for by sovereign wealth funds, ultimately backed in their oil production and reserves.

I know they’ve gotten a lot else right of course

Re: 40% of lost calories globally are from beef, needing 33 cal of feed per 1 cal

#302

Post by some_random » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 12:57 PM UTC

dcreater wrote: post #246

some_random wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry that is an insane thing to say, if this is genuinely representative of your worldview you need to step back and reevaluate some things.

I think it would be better if you shared a logic based argument as to why you disagree with him?

No I will not argue with someone who thinks that country music is a psyop to make people ok with growing corn for animal feed and fuel, it is not a productive use of my time.

Re: 40% of lost calories globally are from beef, needing 33 cal of feed per 1 cal

#303

Post by TimorousBestie » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 12:58 PM UTC

danaris wrote: post #293

rayiner wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a Civilization-game style “tech tree” for cultural and social development. Some societies are further along in that development than others. Pakistan faces the same cultural problem as Afghanistan and parts of the middle east: in large parts of the country, extended kinship groups dominate society, precluding the development of civic institutions and functioning government. That’s not true for the whole count…

> There’s a Civilization-game style “tech tree” for cultural and social development. ...I'ma stop you there. There really isn't. And you'll get a lot farther in life if you stop thinking of real people and their development and culture as video game abstractions.

> And you'll get a lot farther in life if you stop thinking of real people and their development and culture as video game abstractions.

Oh, it’s far too late for that. As the kids say, he’s cooked. He’ll be complaining about hypothetical Appalachians invading New England or New York or the United States (all actual examples, see below) in the nursing home.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

Re: 40% of lost calories globally are from beef, needing 33 cal of feed per 1 cal

#304

Post by enoint » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 2:03 PM UTC

yesfitz wrote: post #179

tracker1 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A large amount of beef is mostly grass fed and finished on a grain feed lot the last month of life.

Got a source for "last month of life"? Penn State University Extension says "...approximately 95% of the cattle in the United States continue to be finished, or fattened, on grain for the last 160 to 180 days of life (~25 to 30% of their life), on average."[1] Oklahoma State University Extension also cites a study that compares "growth and carcass attributes of calves finished for 98 to 105 days in a grass system or…

Around me, 90-120 days on max 60% field corn. If it weren't field corn, it'd be another cereal.

Re: 40% of lost calories globally are from beef, needing 33 cal of feed per 1 cal

#305

Post by enoint » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 2:07 PM UTC

jlaporte wrote: post #259

Treating protein as calories is a category error. Fat and carbs are energy, properly treated as calories. Protein is not (in a non-starving person) used for energy, and it should be measured in grams not calories. The input calories weren't lost, they were converted to protein for use building body structure instead of energetic use. If the authors wanted to make an honest argument here, they would show the relative…

I think the authors are sincere; the original title is "Only half of the calories produced on croplands are available as food for human consumption". The commenters here are talking about beef, with very little reflection on 16% of our farmed calories devoted to biofuels.

Re: 40% of lost calories globally are from beef, needing 33 cal of feed per 1 cal

#306

Post by rayiner » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 2:12 PM UTC

TimorousBestie wrote: post #303

danaris wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There’s a Civilization-game style “tech tree” for cultural and social development. ...I'ma stop you there. There really isn't. And you'll get a lot farther in life if you stop thinking of real people and their development and culture as video game abstractions.

> And you'll get a lot farther in life if you stop thinking of real people and their development and culture as video game abstractions. Oh, it’s far too late for that. As the kids say, he’s cooked. He’ll be complaining about hypothetical Appalachians invading New England or New York or the United States (all actual examples, see below) in the nursing home. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que…

I don’t understand. Do you (1) think Appalachia is great, or (2) you agree that Appalachia lags the rest of the U.S., but think that has nothing to do with how Appalachian parents socialize their children to behave what they teach their kids to value?

Re: 40% of lost calories globally are from beef, needing 33 cal of feed per 1 cal

#307

Post by ndsipa_pomu » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 2:13 PM UTC

aziaziazi wrote: post #242

mcv wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. I used to be vegetarian (I eat some meat again), and I love cheese, but I'm well aware that it's almost as bad as beef. Quitting cheese feels like a bigger sacrifice to me than quitting meat. But I've been reducing my cheese consumption lately. That's something at least.

If that helps, some non-cheese that might trigger your taste buds: - Brewer/nutritional/super yeast (with a bit of oil and/or smashed cashew): in place of Parmesan - Tahini: less cheesy but equally bold taste as yeast - Lactic acid fermented Tofu: whey cheese. - Tempeh: my favorite, just oiled-panned with salt and pepper. Between chicken and soft-Camembert

I'm not convinced by some of those. I'm a pescetarian, so I still eat cheese, but I enjoy unusual foods.

I don't find tahini to taste anything like yeast/cheese, though to be fair I mainly use tahini in hummus.

I'm not familiar with lactic acid fermented Tofu - does that go by a different name?

Tempeh seems more nutty than cheese-like to me, though I rarely eat it as my wife doesn't like the flavour or texture of it.

Personally, I'd recommend Japanese Natto if you're after a cheesy flavour - it's soy beans fermented in straw/hay and ends up becoming somewhat slimy/stringy, so it's a bit of an acquired taste.

Re: 40% of lost calories globally are from beef, needing 33 cal of feed per 1 cal

#308

Post by enoint » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 2:20 PM UTC

BadBadJellyBean wrote: post #38

choilive wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. The market should decide if beef consumption is viable. Ultimately energy is the basis all food production. Cheap and plentiful energy solves the food production and distribution problem, then its just matter of preferences.

"The market" doesn't work as long as costs to the environment can be externalized. If the cost of climate change and lost living space would be added to the cost of beef it might be fair. But it isn't. Methane released by cows, cutting down rain forests for feed, and all the transporting costs us all dearly. But it doesn't cost the manufacturers anything directly so beef can be cheap.

We're more than 40 years past the first boycotts on rainforest beef. Not small boycotts, either; big ones which were effective at scale. If we translated the concerns here into Chinese, would it affect the current top importer of rainforest beef?

Re: 40% of lost calories globally are from beef, needing 33 cal of feed per 1 cal

#309

Post by rayiner » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 2:26 PM UTC

danaris wrote: post #293

rayiner wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a Civilization-game style “tech tree” for cultural and social development. Some societies are further along in that development than others. Pakistan faces the same cultural problem as Afghanistan and parts of the middle east: in large parts of the country, extended kinship groups dominate society, precluding the development of civic institutions and functioning government. That’s not true for the whole count…

> There’s a Civilization-game style “tech tree” for cultural and social development. ...I'ma stop you there. There really isn't. And you'll get a lot farther in life if you stop thinking of real people and their development and culture as video game abstractions.

The opposite is true! You’ll get farther in life when you realize that how groups of people are socialized to behave matters a lot—and that’s true whether you’re talking about corporate culture or a country’s culture.

People whose brains are as soft as their hearts sell false equality, but its harmful. It’s like telling the obese person they’re great and that their problems are due to “bad genetics” or factors outside their control. It’s a polite lie and it is damaging.

Understanding that culture is just a type of technology is how you get miracles like Lee Kuan Yew’s Singapore: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20045923. He thought culture was destiny, and he harnessed that realization to make his culture rich.

Re: 40% of lost calories globally are from beef, needing 33 cal of feed per 1 cal

#310

Post by belorn » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 2:49 PM UTC

piva00 wrote: post #211

kshahkshah wrote: post #6

Not trying to be overly flippant... who cares? The paper opens with "to feed a growing population" without asking is that what we need? want? where we are actually heading to? Is feeding the world a real problem? I've yet to see compelling evidence that it really is except as a secondary effect of logistics, energy supply, and war. edit: I understand the environmental impacts. I think we should solve our energy probl…

I recommend you visiting the Brazilian region of Pantanal, if possible travel through Mato Grosso do Sul -> Mato Grosso -> southern Pará where it transitions into the Amazon. You will see vast areas of cattle ranching, soybeans plantation used for cattle feed, and other crops that can be used as cattle feed. All that area used to be the Pantanal and Amazon, now transformed to grow beef. If we would reduce the calorie…

If you want to save the rain forest you got to make saving the rain forest more profitable than cutting it down. If its not beef, it will be the next most profitable thing which generally is corn for ethanol production, something that already has eaten a huge area of incredible nature. If not corn, it will be some form of oil. If not oil, it will be some form of rare wood to make fancy furniture for rich people.

The reason we have lost a huge area of incredible nature is not because people want to eat some steaks and burgers. It is explicitly because that land made some people money. Without that incentive the forest would still be there.