Earlier quoted context omitted.
You and it sucks you're being downvoted. You know that lifestyle where everyone was poor, sickly and died at a younger age, that's a totally better lifestyle! Here's some stuff they conveniently left out that my Polish grandparents told me. In that lifestyle you may eat the clean meats on special occasions, but you eat the less desirable parts on a regular basis. Mostly in soups and stews because it stretches the foo…
> Vegan diets are being proved by lots of studies at being pretty shitty for you. As far as I can tell, this is completely false. Vegan diets do a lot of things well: reduce salt, saturated fat, and cholesterol intake, for example. Vegetarian / vegan diets improve cholesterol, blood sugar levels, and other things. Here's some citations of studies and papers that demonstrate vegan diets are better for you: https://www…
Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet
391–400 of 577 posts
Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet
#392Biggest issue for me, imo.
Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet
#393Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet
#394Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet
#395From https://skepticalscience.com/animal-agriculture-meat-global-... "Animal agriculture is responsible for 13–18% of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions globally, and less in developed countries (e.g. 3% in the USA). Fossil fuel combustion for energy and transportation is responsible for approximately 64% of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions globally, and more in developed countries (e.g. 80% in the USA)." I t…
It's not the first time that I'm seeing reactions about this report to focus on veganism. I don't understand where it comes from: the word "vegan" is absent from the article and the IPCC report doesn't recommend a any diet.
I understand debate about this report and the impact of agriculture and breeding, but I don't understand why the debate is centered around veganism.
Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet
#396It calls for the termination of the UNO.
Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet
#397From https://skepticalscience.com/animal-agriculture-meat-global-... "Animal agriculture is responsible for 13–18% of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions globally, and less in developed countries (e.g. 3% in the USA). Fossil fuel combustion for energy and transportation is responsible for approximately 64% of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions globally, and more in developed countries (e.g. 80% in the USA)." I t…
one would need to calculate both the carbon output of animal agriculture and - crucially - the carbon that will /permanently/ not be captured via loss of land that serves as a carbon sink (Amazon rain forest is the big one) that results as demand for additional animal agriculture increases.
Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet
#398Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your body can’t live on carbohydrates alone. You need ~0.8 grams of protein per kg of body weight edit: with a sedentary lifestyle. Legumes tend to have a surprisingly balanced macronutrients at 21g carbs, 8g protein, 0.6g fat, vs a baked potatoes 37 g carbs, 4.3g protein, 0.2 fat.
Do the math for a potato-only diet. 1 baked potato is 171 calories. 2000/171 is 11.7 potatoes. 11.7*4.3 = 50.3. That's sufficient for a 62.5 kg individual by your 0.8 g/kg standard. Potatoes are also lower protein than a variety of grains and vegetables (which are low in macronutrients in general).
0.8 per kg is for a generic sedentary lifestyle, with increased activity your needs go up. 2000 calories on a 62.5 kg person is a non sedentary lifestyle.
Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet
#399Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that 3% number associated with meat production in the USA or with meat consumption in the USA? If it's the former, then 3% would be an underestimate of the impact of reducing meat consumption, since the 3% doesn't include the emissions impact of feed and livestock that is imported.
That is true, but I think the point stands. As (mostly) programmers we're quick to understand and make use of practical rules like Ahmdal's law[1] for optimizing software, and know that you always start by looking at the parts that take the longest. Yet in real life we're sometimes tempted to optimize at the fringes first and ignore the obvious biggest contributing factors first. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amd…
Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet
#400From https://skepticalscience.com/animal-agriculture-meat-global-... "Animal agriculture is responsible for 13–18% of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions globally, and less in developed countries (e.g. 3% in the USA). Fossil fuel combustion for energy and transportation is responsible for approximately 64% of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions globally, and more in developed countries (e.g. 80% in the USA)." I t…