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

81–90 of 225 posts

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

#81

Post by imeron »

asterix_pano wrote: post #76
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 have looked extensively for this and there is no study that shows that vegan children will be more fragile. Often they boast healthier cholesterol levels and body fat and better nutrient levels. And then, if that were true, is it better to be bigger? Dairy and meat increase the risk of developing cancers and cardiovascular diseases. Is it worth it?

The brain contains approximately 20% of whole body cholesterol, you can't get away with not eating fats. Your brain needs fats.

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

#82

Post by waihtis »

at_compile_time wrote: post #32
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…

mTOR makes children grow faster, but everything I've heard suggests that it doesn't make them any taller as adults. Meanwhile, obesity rates in children keep growing, and atherogenesis doesn't wait until adulthood. Heart disease and cancer are still the leading causes of death in America. COVID's taken the #3 spot, which affected those with obesity and diabetes much more than those without, but I don't expect it to s…

indeed, that is a good addition / counterpoint.

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

#83

Post by kzrdude »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #53
fwungy wrote: post #49

Were these the same people who told us the glaciers would be melted and the Maldives under water by 2000? How narcissistic do you have to be to believe the world is going to end in your little eye blink of a lifetime? Look, the West can go carbon negative, but it makes no difference at all if China and India just use the West's carbon virtue to increase their own carbon consumption (that the West isn't using). We rea…

> We really should be thinking about next generation nuclear and mitigation as first tier strategies and not attempting to remake human nature in a few generations time. It's funny, because a lot of "greens" are asking for less carbon-* or carbon neutral stuff, but are immediately against anything nuclear, even though it's the only option we have, to generate enough power, even on windless nights. There are even comi…

I think greens are not alone in this - our whole culture has been part of demonizing nuclear power. Non-activist people accepted avoiding nuclear as a good compromise since it was a touchy subject. The luxury of considering no externalities (i.e allowing fossil fuel emissions) enabled this.

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

#84

Post by Sankozi »

fwungy wrote: post #49

Were these the same people who told us the glaciers would be melted and the Maldives under water by 2000? How narcissistic do you have to be to believe the world is going to end in your little eye blink of a lifetime? Look, the West can go carbon negative, but it makes no difference at all if China and India just use the West's carbon virtue to increase their own carbon consumption (that the West isn't using). We rea…

This is pure FUD.

> Were these the same people who told us the glaciers would be melted and the Maldives under water by 2000?

Were they? Please tell us.

> How narcissistic do you have to be to believe the world is going to end in your little eye blink of a lifetime?

Who says that? Where in the article have you read something like that?

> Look, the West can go carbon negative, but it makes no difference at all if China and India just use the West's carbon virtue to increase their own carbon consumption (that the West isn't using).

India emissions per capita are very low. China emissions per capita (7.61T) are lower than average of developed nations (US is almost two times bigger - 14.6T).

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?contextu...

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

#85

Post by revelio »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #65
revelio wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it would be terrible if IPCC reports were somehow to be censored or politically biased! https://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Im... Climatologist: "We have to get rid of the medieval warm period" https://www.rossmckitrick.com/uploads/4/8/0/8/4808045/climat... Climategate emails (IPCC): "It seems that a few people have a very strong say, and no matter how much talking goes on beforehand, the bi…

Now try the real climate science. https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2019/07/24/climate-epochs-... . https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/01/harvard-led-a...

But exactly? Your first link is supporting my points and the second isn't related to it, are you aware of that or is this a sort of knee jerk reaction based on keyword matching?

The first article is about how the Medieval Warm Period did indeed happen. That isn't a rebuttal, it's support for the fact that Michael Mann's "getting rid of it" from the IPCC reports was biased censorship of scientific results, the thing the OP was complaining about. The IPCC has a long and terrible track record of blocking results that don't support the worst case scenarios (i.e. which would make their research less important to fund).

The point their article makes is only that the MWP didn't happen everywhere, so it wasn't global warming. But so what? Modern "global" warming isn't global either. Temperature changes differ in different parts of the world.

Your second article has nothing to do with the IPCC, and isn't actually meaningful anyway. Go read about the details. Exxon were using the same approaches as in academia, just reproducing their models, and concluded correctly that this sort of modelling was probably unreliable and at any rate couldn't be evaluated at the time. That's being presented as that they "knew" and "hid" the results. But the models weren't right despite claims to the contrary, so their assessment was reasonable.

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

#86

Post by mft_ »

mejutoco wrote: post #74

I find it bad that scientific results get censored, and I am also wondering if there is proof that a plant-based diet is more healthy. My suspicion is it might be for the average American, but it is based on gut feeling (pun intended). I remember margarine (plant-based) was all the rage too and IIRC it was much less healthy than butter (animal-based). My guess is it depends on the specific meals.

There’s pretty good evidence that an unprocessed plant-based diet is the healthiest option.

This is a good place to start: https://nutritionfacts.org/

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

#87

Post by mnky9800n »

revelio wrote: post #85
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now try the real climate science. https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2019/07/24/climate-epochs-... . https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/01/harvard-led-a...

But exactly? Your first link is supporting my points and the second isn't related to it, are you aware of that or is this a sort of knee jerk reaction based on keyword matching? The first article is about how the Medieval Warm Period did indeed happen. That isn't a rebuttal, it's support for the fact that Michael Mann's "getting rid of it" from the IPCC reports was biased censorship of scientific results, the thing t…

i don't think you need a model to look at temperature records and see they have been increasing without a natural climate explanation. Unless there is some large igneous province spewing carbon into the atmosphere that you are aware of that the rest of us is not.

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

#88

Post by ZeroGravitas »

mejutoco wrote: post #74

I find it bad that scientific results get censored, and I am also wondering if there is proof that a plant-based diet is more healthy. My suspicion is it might be for the average American, but it is based on gut feeling (pun intended). I remember margarine (plant-based) was all the rage too and IIRC it was much less healthy than butter (animal-based). My guess is it depends on the specific meals.

The Eat Lancet report covers this from health, carbon and pollution angles:

https://eatforum.org/eat-lancet-commission/

The results are pretty much what you'd think.

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

#89

Post by waihtis »

000ooo000 wrote: post #67
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…

You concede being a layman yet lay out a conclusion as though you are not. Was there any real point to your comment beyond taking a stab at 'zealous vegans'?

The point was that black-and-white thinking / reducing decisions to be made over single variables leads to suboptimal outcomes. Please try a bit harder to be generous with your reading interpretation.

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

#90

Post by guerby »

You always have to be careful for averages kgCO2/unit of some product where there are multiple ways to produce the stuff.

To take beef for example (since it usually tops the kgCO2/unit food charts) if we just replaced the millions of bisons exterminated in the USA:

https://theconversation.com/historical-photo-of-mountain-of-...

(30-60 millions bisons to ... about 500).

By cattle, on the same grass lands (no land use change - important), the impact on climate change would be exactly zero vs pre industrial levels.

We could probable have some quantity of near CO2 neutral meat if we wanted to.

When I want beef I buy from a local farmer (grass fed 10km from my home), I don't think removing it would really help the climate vs things I've done like insulating my house, switching to heat pump, remote work, and switching to EV.

Post reply on HN