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

Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 577 posts

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#431

Post by Stanish »

Pxtl wrote: post #317
TheBeardKing wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've been trying to cut our meat consumption, but the cooking complexity is exactly my issue. We're lazy but healthy eaters, meaning our regular entrees are a meat and a couple veggie sides. We also do low carb, mainly because it's just easier to limit calorie intake that way. Most of the dinner work is usually cutting and preparing vegetables. When we cut meat, it cuts the main portion of the entree, which can some…

Yeah, as a vegetarian I can do some awesome things with lentils, but I remember the days when I could rub some spice on a pork chop and throw it on the grill and then have something boxed and starchy on the side and have a pretty decent meal. Meanwhile, a good lentil stew is a much more involved project. Much less home-made veggie burger patties which have dozens of ingredients and elaborate preparation processes. Go…

I’ve been vegan for two years now, and I can unequivocally say that cooking and eating are much easier than when I was constantly having to handle meat, clean up more & cook longer because of worries about food borne illness, etc.

If you do it long enough it gets way easier as your cooking skills and methods adapt.

Some tips I follow:

-I highly recommend a CSA for great vegetables, delivered if possible

-Start a small raised bed garden for greens, cilantro, cherry tomatoes, etc.

-Batch prep veggies and store in bulk (I use cheap rectangular stackable tupperware) for super easy access. Batch prep greens and legumes, store in the freezer, take from freezer to pan.

-When batch cooking, clean veggies with a water and baking soda soak in a large mixing bowl. Just soak for a few minutes and then rinse a couple times

-Using a rice cooker to make grains is much easier than stovetop

-Use walnuts and unsalted nuts (peanuts are great, despite not actually being a nut) with moderation to make foods more substantial, while avoiding processed nut butters and oils

-Use good non stick pans to cut down on oil and cleanup time

-In general, cut back on foods and condiments rich in salt, sugar, fats, and especially processed foods, as they distort your taste palette. It’s a lot like drug addiction...”when I’m not on heroine, life just seems bland!”

-You don’t have to cook veggie meals as thoroughly as meat, experiment with varied levels of freshness and eat raw foods more...less cooking

-simple root veggies are awesome, cheap, hearty, and easy to cook (potatoes, sweet potatoes, beets, carrots...all can be boiled)

-Frozen organic blueberries, oatmeal, banana, sprinkling of walnuts, delicious :-)

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#432

Post by hoorayimhelping »

robin_reala wrote: post #32

It’s also worth pointing out that even if you don’t want to reduce the amount of meat you eat, changing the type of meat can have big effects. For example (and ignoring transport to the consumer), lamb produces about 35 kg CO₂ per kg of meat, beef 25kg CO₂ / kg, pork and farmed salmon 8kg CO₂ / kg and chicken 4kg CO₂ / kg.

Thank you. Is there a reliable place I can find this information? I have anecdotally been much healthier after incorporating more protein, particularly whole meat (rather than isolated protein) into my diet - fewer illnesses, faster recovery time, better gut health, etc.

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#433

Post by sachdevap »

andy_ppp wrote: post #415
the_gastropod wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have mixed feelings about Beyond Meat: my wife and I love the hot Italian sausage and burgers, but it is really not that healthy. I totally get this, and have similar feelings. But I try to remind my self what Beyond Meat and Impossible Burger are competing with: meat. They have similar saturated fat profiles to their "real" alternatives. I look at these meat alternatives as mostly beneficial for: 1. Meat eaters…

Why do you guys think saturated fat is bad for you? Certainly when fried it's much much healthier as it doesn't decompose into cancerous aldehydes. The science on this is very tainted so I would be very careful about assumptions here. Are there other things apart from saturated fat you are worried about? [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/3t902pqt3C7nGN99hV...

What about that article makes your point? Olive oil is low on saturated fat and stable to cook with!

Moreover, if you keep your diet low in fried foods (which I do), this is not a concern, since you don't expose the oil to high heat.

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#434

Post by shlant »

Retric wrote: post #398
dnhz wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

Men on a 2,000 calorie diet are recommended a minimum of 56 grams of protein. 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.

Is there a name for a general protein deficiency?

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#435

Post by whiddershins »

This is irresponsible advice because nutrition is not a solved problem.

As long as we fail to solve it, as in, correctly predict the short, medium, and long term effects on heath and well being for people across all variations of genome and microbiome, not to mention activity level and medical conditions, people need to evaluate their food intake individually.

Guilting people away from “taking care” of themselves based on a subset of the medical and nutritional literature to achieve some global carbon emissions target is not a reasonable strategy, in my opinion.

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#436

Post by throwaway3957 »

_Microft wrote: post #147
throwaway3957 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I look at climate change heroes like Al Gore, jetting around the world and spending his resources graciously. If he can do it, why not me? EDIT: also note that he has 3 rich kids. Is this more eco friendly than eating meat?

Don't get me wrong but I assume your influence is negligible compared to Al Gore's. His work or actions might cause more emissions directly than the average person's but because of his reach and mission, it will be offset at other places (e.g. because three people think twice if they really want to visit their unpopular in-laws over Christmas)

That’s okay. So if he serves as a bad example for me and inspires three others for me to behave well then I can expect to be forgiven too. Overall his effect is still positive and I’m not responsible for my actions. Al Gore is. Or does only his positive contribution get counted?

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#437

Post by tomp »

adamsvystun wrote: post #186

I think people in this thread suggest policies that are not centered around the problem that we are trying to solve. Do we want to reduce meat production or do we want to reduce the negative climate impact of meat production? It matters because the correlation is not straight forward. Different types of meats produce different environmental harm. Each meat type can be produced with different climate impact depending…

What's more, by targeting the effects, not the cause, you're helping create a better, free-er world, where governments aren't dictating how people live their lives. If the desired effect is "less global warming" (and you implement that via a fair CO2 / CH4 tax), then people can choose how they're going to reduce their CO2 impact. Maybe I prefer to eat 1 steak per week and cycle to work, whereas my neighbor eats soybeans whole year round and drives around in a car.

Finally, by taxing (not banning) undesirable externalities governments spur technological development - people/companies can invest money into figuring out how to get the same result ("eat steak") with less of a climate impact (e.g. by feeding seaweed to cows), resulting in a win-win.

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#438

Post by efiecho »

It's funny how HN is an echo chamber sometimes. Every time I'm reading a thread like this, it's flooded with post from people who have turned vegans or almost reduced meat to zero, and one could think that this is the norm.

Like a few years back when HN was going on about how the whole world would now stop eating regular food, and consume some powder mixed with water, I think it was called Soylent or something. That didn't happen.

If anything, I will only be eating more meat, better quality, but not less and this is probably also the case for millions of other people.

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#439

Post by mklarmann »

whiddershins wrote: post #435

This is irresponsible advice because nutrition is not a solved problem. As long as we fail to solve it, as in, correctly predict the short, medium, and long term effects on heath and well being for people across all variations of genome and microbiome, not to mention activity level and medical conditions, people need to evaluate their food intake individually. Guilting people away from “taking care” of themselves bas…

This sounds rather short sighted to me. Changing our diet towards lower meat consumption (like we had 50 years ago - max. 1 portion of meat per week), has been shown to come with substantial health benefits. It is a no brainer that we should go there. Because the alternative is so much more detrimental for the human race. Being struck by climate change means we would have around 500 million people who need to migrate, besides other catastrophic effects.

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#440

Post by saagarjha »

corodra wrote: post #268
LegitShady wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what was the life expectancy? what was the standard of living? trying to call back to 1930s belarus as an example to live from is crazy. It doesn't even logically follow that we should avoid meat because poor farmers in belarus didn't each much. Where's the logical argument?

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…

> You know that lifestyle where everyone was poor, sickly and died at a younger age, that's a totally better lifestyle!

That’s not because of lack of meat.

> 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 food for longer. You save the bones and make soups out of them. Oh and you ate a lot of fat. Like smearing pig fat on bread. Technically pork was the cheapest meat. Only one purpose animal. Hens give eggs and fertilizer. Cows give milk, fertilizer and pull carts/plows. Kill them only when they're useless. Plus you may get meat from a butcher on special occasions.

This sounds like eating less meat?

Post reply on HN