AP: Eating less meat would be good for the Earth

I evolved beyond meat.

I get all of my protein in powdered form. Idk where the fuck it comes from--a Pig? Peas? People? Idgaf. It tastes like chocolate and turned my muscles from tiny ass sparklers into full on thunder sticks. If you watch the time lapse of my progress pics, it's like watching a boner grow. Only there's two!

Obviously. Also healthier to eat less meat.

Error1355 posted...

I'm sure my local grocery store throws away more unsold meat in a week than I would save in a lifetime of cutting back my own meat consumption.

And that's why doing things like recycling don't matter and should be a manufacturer problem, not a consumer problem.

I was a vegetarian for ten years though

The problem with veganism and vegetarianism is the difficulty with getting lots of high quality protein. The reality is that most people don't get enough protein, and that is even with eating meat, their one great source of it. You can create a meat-like substitute, like jackfruit BBQ, but what you end up doing is giving people even less protein as a result.

The real solution to the environmental problem of meat consumption is going to be lab grown meat. It is going to drive down meat prices when it is scaled up and end the environmental catastrophe, while at the same time allowing people to improve their diets by transitioning from vegetarianism and veganism to eating cruelty free meat.

PiOverlord posted...

Is meat-eating a part of this, or does the fact that eating is something we have to do make it where it's not really as disproportionate as other things are?

the article mentions that people with a vegan lifestyle contribute ~30% less greenhouse gasses. individual contributions are small on their own but add up over a large population.

HBOSS posted...

lol wtf AP news telling us how to eat?
gtfo

not quite. read the article before you get mad over the contents.

Error1355 posted...

I'm sure my local grocery stores throws away more unsold meat in a week than I would save in a lifetime of cutting back my own meat consumption.

the stores are responding to the expected demand. they dont want to throw that stuff out because it hurts their profits. as demand dwindles, so will the supply.

CoyoteTheGreat posted...

The reality is that most people don't get enough protein

source?

https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/how-much-protein-do-you-need-every-day-201506188096

i have no problem hitting ~55g of protein in a day

Giant_Aspirin posted...

the stores are responding to the expected demand. they dont want to throw that stuff out because it hurts their profits. as demand dwindles, so will the supply.

It's moreso a keeping up with appearances thing. So much food gets wasted, like 30% of what a grocery store stocks ends up being discarded.

Giant_Aspirin posted...

sort of. but that mentality is like saying your one vote doesn't matter. if we all do a small amount, it adds up.

I mean I get what you are saying. Your logic is sound. I just don't feel the same as I do about that as I do voting. The task feels almost impossible to accomplish from an individual's perspective even if you can influence others. Before I really get into it, I do want to say that I'm slowly trying to make changes to help with this issue. I'm trying to eat less meat than I did before. I would make bigger meals by cooking Gumbo, Red Beans and Rice, etc. with a smaller amount of meat in them. Then I'll eat that over multiple days. So my consumption has dropped but it's not eliminated or anything. I don't think I ever will fully eliminate it tbh.

Now for the topic at hand. Here is the thing, when it comes to voting, no one is really trying to tell people not to vote. I'm sure there are a handful of individuals that are saying that but most people aren't. The government/corporations defiantly aren't. Don't get me wrong, some people in government are trying to make it harder to vote for certain individuals to try to gain an advantage in races but they aren't flat out telling people not to vote. That wouldn't benefit them at all. So the idea of voting is very strong and agreed on by the vast majority of people. Each individual vote as a baseline also counts the same. There is a lot of nuance in that statement that can go against that but it's true at a fundamental level.

Now for dealing with climate change. I can make a change in my life to help. You can try to get all of Gamefaqs to make that change. The first big problem is the messaging. The messaging is very clear when it comes to voting for everyone. Voting is good. "Everyone" should vote. Eating less/no meat? I bet most of the US would be heavily against you even if it is for climate change. That is if they believe in climate change to begin with because there is also counter messaging saying that doesn't exist at all. Let's say that most people in the US eat less meat/ eliminate meat from their diets. The institution still exists because there is still a demand. The demand in the US has diminished but the rest of the world hasn't changed. So the dent will be minimal.

That is just the meat industry. Let's look at another massive problem, fossil fuels. Companies are ran on this stuff as we know. Even if every individual American makes changes in the meat industry, companies aren't going to easily change to not use fossil fuels when it's the cheapest method. Grated, some are trying to make a difference but most aren't. You can't really expect that when many companies are still using damn near slave labor to make items to be sold. Not only that, it's all the cars we drive. We need to greatly cut down on that issue but that is way easier said that done. Sure big cities could just use public transportation, walking or bikes. What if none of these methods can reach your job that is out of the city? What if you live in a more rural area with minimal to no public transportation and everything is far away including your job? What can be done outside of the government making massive changes/improvements to public transportation? It's more than just adding buses and trains. You need to make a fundamental change to how cities and towns are structured. Make everything closer together from homes to businesses. That would be a monumental task to accomplish even for the government. That is if most people even want that change. Plus this is only the US perspective. All of this stuff needs to be implemented across the world including most big companies making changes to help the environment.

So yea. I'm very jaded about what we can do as individuals right now. Compared to voting, fixing the environment feels like an entirely different beast for your everyday person. The biggest changes by far can come in from companies and the government. So much so that if they don't make significant changes, then nothing the individual does will probably be enough.

Giant_Aspirin posted...

source?

https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/how-much-protein-do-you-need-every-day-201506188096

i have no problem hitting ~55g of protein in a day

https://www.uclahealth.org/news/are-you-getting-enough-protein-heres-what-happens-if-you-dont

55g of protein is an incredibly small amount. That's like the bare minimum needed if you don't do any kind of real exercise unless you weigh like 100 lbs, which I guarantee you most of the people here do not.

CoyoteTheGreat posted...

https://www.uclahealth.org/news/are-you-getting-enough-protein-heres-what-happens-if-you-dont

55g of protein is an incredibly small amount. That's like the bare minimum needed if you don't do any kind of real exercise unless you weigh like 100 lbs, which I guarantee you most of the people here do not.

according to that Harvard article, I need 53g based on my weight of 147lbs. i've been on this diet for two years and both of my physicals (including blood work) have came back looking great.

DepreceV2 posted...

So yea. I'm very jaded about what we can do as individuals right now. Compared to voting, fixing the environment feels like an entirely different beast for your everyday person. The biggest changes by far can come in from companies and the government. So much so that if they don't make significant changes, then nothing the individual does will probably be enough.

i dont really know what to say other than i do what i can within reason to help reduce my footprint on the planet.

Giant_Aspirin posted...

i dont really know what to say other than i do what i can within reason to help reduce my footprint on the planet.

That's good. I'm not saying don't do that. I'm trying to do that myself. I'm just explaining why I'm so jaded on the subject currently.

Giant_Aspirin posted...

according to that Harvard article, I need 53g based on my weight of 147lbs. i've been on this diet for two years and both of my physicals (including blood work) have came back looking great.

Like, I think that's a small amount regardless of what the Harvard article says. They aren't bodybuilders. They aren't calculating protein for people who actually exercise and are trying to build muscle, which you should because it will keep you healthy as you age. And regardless, the proteins in vegetarian and vegan diets are often not the high quality ones in normal diets. That isn't to say there aren't options for vegan and vegetarian diets, but its hard mode, and most people aren't eating correctly even with all options available to them.

A normal person's diet can only have so many restrictions in it before they stop being able to adhere to it. Its better for any person to restrict on the basis of eating what is optimally healthy where they can than on other reasons, because most people are incredibly unhealthy. Its a problem to think that everyone has to take on all the world's problems as individuals. The environmental catastrophe we are facing isn't because people eat meat, it is because of exploitative companies that will create all kinds of external costs on everyone else by ruining the environment for their own profit. Its something that needs to be fixed legislatively or technologically, you aren't going to be able to alter human behavior on an individual scale to actually matter in fixing it. That being said though, I do think that if people like the vegetarian or vegan option for something as much as the regular one and its equally or more healthy, they should absolutely take that option. I eat lots of these foods myself, where they fit that.

Conservative media: Liberals suggest BANNING meat and ARRESTING anyone who says hamburgers are delicious.

BoomerKuwanger posted...

Speaking as someone who wishes I could put on more muscle, "not getting enough protein is bad" is kind of a status quo-centric take. What about possible health benefits of eating veg? It's all just what you think is a good cost for whatever benefit you get. But I'm not sure this idea that we must have a lot of high quality animal protein has any better intrinsic value, people just spout it because it's what they know.

It isn't the animal protein itself, its the idea of a "complete" protein. You can get these through vegetarian and vegan sources too, its just less common and more restrictive for your diet to do so. Soy is a good example of a non-animal complete protein. There may be other health reasons to prefer soy to steak or vice versa.

PiOverlord posted...

Just out of curiosity, there seems to be a case where the top 1% tend to make up the majority of the problems when it comes to these issues, where they expect us to make up for it so they can keep up their lifestyles.

Is meat-eating a part of this, or does the fact that eating is something we have to do make it where it's not really as disproportionate as other things are? Only reason I ask is I could see events for rich people having a large amount of wasted meat for no purpose than to flaunt food that people could never hope to actually eat.

Meat eating is a part of this. The whole point of that narrative is distract you from the need for large, structural change.

If you want to do something to help, actual direct action is much more effective than stuff like eating less meat in the hopes it somehow creates widescale change. If you are going to eat less meat, you should do it because you actually want to eat less meat, not because it'll make you feel good about "helping the earth"

I'm curious where all this accountability and top-down reform is supposed to come from. The government and the companies they're in bed with aren't just going to spontaneously develop a conscience and they're definitely not going to change anything if we keep rewarding them. Where's the incentive for them to act?

But whats the environmental impact for beef vs chicken vs pork? Chicken is already much better health-wise.

I won't, though.

More impossible meat or fuck off.

I already completely removed red meat from my diet, and even then I don't eat as much white meat and seafood as I used to. But I also have several health problems now that forced the change. It's amazing what changes you'll make when your health is at a real risk.

if ground beef wasn't on sale right now. it would be taco night every tuesday with just beans, rice and cheese with taco bell chipotle sauce. (really good and filling) enough for 2 hearty burritos.

unfortunately i got 8 weeks of the beef.

No, that's nonsense.

Not a problem for me

had to quit eating meat, sadly

So would tearing down all of our structures saved living in the mud.

No thank you, mud goblin.

My diet is already less meat and more vegetables but tbh I don't really see what people mean by benefits. I'm still broke and unhealthy.

I don't see myself going vegan, but vegetarian is doable simply because I love eggs too much to give them up.

If only the alternative stuff is cheaper or at least comparable in price. Like I'm switching to oat milk for my coffee now but I have to wait for a sale or food fairs to stock up because it costs almost 3x the price of dairy!