NY Times: Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler

[marmar]

Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler


By MARK BITTMAN
Published: January 27, 2008

A SEA change in the consumption of a resource that Americans take for granted may be in store — something cheap, plentiful, widely enjoyed and a part of daily life. And it isn’t oil.

It's meat.

The two commodities share a great deal: Like oil, meat is subsidized by the federal government. Like oil, meat is subject to accelerating demand as nations become wealthier, and this, in turn, sends prices higher. Finally — like oil — meat is something people are encouraged to consume less of, as the toll exacted by industrial production increases, and becomes increasingly visible.

Global demand for meat has multiplied in recent years, encouraged by growing affluence and nourished by the proliferation of huge, confined animal feeding operations. These assembly-line meat factories consume enormous amounts of energy, pollute water supplies, generate significant greenhouse gases and require ever-increasing amounts of corn, soy and other grains, a dependency that has led to the destruction of vast swaths of the world’s tropical rain forests.

Just this week, the president of Brazil announced emergency measures to halt the burning and cutting of the country’s rain forests for crop and grazing land. In the last five months alone, the government says, 1,250 square miles were lost.

The world’s total meat supply was 71 million tons in 1961. In 2007, it was estimated to be 284 million tons. Per capita consumption has more than doubled over that period. (In the developing world, it rose twice as fast, doubling in the last 20 years.) World meat consumption is expected to double again by 2050, which one expert, Henning Steinfeld of the United Nations, says is resulting in a “relentless growth in livestock production.”

Americans eat about the same amount of meat as we have for some time, about eight ounces a day, roughly twice the global average. At about 5 percent of the world’s population, we “process” (that is, grow and kill) nearly 10 billion animals a year, more than 15 percent of the world’s total. ........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/weekinreview/27bittman.html?_r=3&pagewanted=1&oref=slogin

[yewberry]

1. How incredibly shocking

...that this post would get hundreds of views and not a single response.

Okay, not really all that shocking.

Thanks for the article, though. Funny that Bittman isn't a veg*n, isn't it?

[CK_John]

2. Has the potato consumption kept pace. n/t

[Eurobabe]

3. Bottom line, it's not Killer Cows, it is TOO MANY FREAKING PEOPLE

On the PLANET!! :banghead: :banghead:

[Blue_Tires]

4. very true

it is a tough topic to get an honest discussion on...

[yewberry]

5. That's true, but did you notice per capita consumption?

More than doubled in the 'developed world' in the past 20 years?

Yes, population is a massive, terrifying concern relative to global food availability. However, the reality that is discussed here is that the rise in meat consumption per capita (especially in 'developed nations') is way out of kilter and causing real environmental damage.

No, not killer cows. Killer habits and heedless demands on shared resources.

[Eurobabe]

14. Still boils down to TOO many people

We dissected this slanted argument in class the other day. Doesn't ALL food unless it is bio/eco damage the planet?

So we should all fast and not eat? :shrug:

[slowry]

6. There's no point changing one's habits, as not enough will do likewise, to make any diference at all

(I bet you could find 100s of millions of people who think that way... bad luck!)

[RufusTFirefly]

7. Sorry, but this takes meat eaters out of their comfort zone

Sure, saving the world is swell -- as long as it includes steaks and burgers.

[slowry]

9. Well, to be perfectly fair:

Nazis were vegan atheists, who rode two-seater bicycles all over town, donating to the ACLU.

"Wenn es gelb ist, lassen Sie es mellow. Wenn es braun ist, schieben Sie es nach unten."

You can see why some would be uncomfortable with all of this.

[RufusTFirefly]

10. So you're using the Guilt By Association fallacy to defend eating meat?

Communists led the charge for labor rights and civil rights.
Therefore, all who support labor rights and civil rights are Communists. QED.

Nice one.

Enjoy your burger.

[K8-EEE]

13. Nazis were CHRISTIAN! Hitler was CATHOLIC!

I get so sick of the Fauxbots etc. saying the Nazi movement was atheist, in fact a lot of those speeches sounded Republican with all the Jesus, school prayer etc. stuff in it.

[mwb970]

25. I've heard that Hitler mentioned God in every speech.

He was no atheist, at least in public. Apparently God and the "fatherland" came up a lot.

[mwb970]

26. Self-delete, dupe. /nt

[Habibi]

16. Heh.

I think you're supposed to include the appropriate smiley for the :sarcasm: impaired.

[Cant trust em]

8. Vegetables are OK

but they're just not as tasty as meat.

[El Pinko]

17. Vegetables are delicious.

Honestly, I don't eat meat as much for the taste as the protein - it's hard to get protein as concentrated and cheaply with legumes as with lean chicken breasts.

[Cant trust em]

20. Beans beans beans!

Nuts are also a great way to get protein. Probably information you already had.

My fav vegetable recipe is for broccoli. Dice some onions and garlic, toss it up with olive oil. Bake at 450 for 20 minutes or so.

[El Pinko]

24. Beans have SOME protein, but it takes a lot of beans to equal the protein in a ckn breast.

I do try to mix it up, and enjoy tofu, legumes, etc. and fresh veg are the cornerstone of my diet.

But on my budget, I could not afford to get adequate protein and stay within my calorie needs - beans have a lot of carbs

and relying too much on them throws things out of balance.

I definitely agree that most Americans consume WAY too much meat. I never have more than 4 or 5 oz. of meat at one sitting.

Those huge steaks and burgers are obscene. Then again, most Americans also consume way too much processed refined carbs, too few vegetables,

and way too many calories. I've tried to keep my calorie consumption under 1800 per day for several years now - at first to get my weight under control,

and now in the interest of longevity. If more Americans simply ate a sensible balanced diet, I imagine that would cut consumption of meat by about 1/3

right there. As for the animal cruelty problems, that can only be addressed by much stricter government regulation of the industry. I know it would add somewhat

to the cost of food, but I think it would be worth it, and we could feel more at ease with what we eat.

We also need to start addressing the severe nutrient depletion that present farming techniques are causing before all our fields are barren wasteleands incapable of producing any food without massive amounts of chemical fertilizer.

[JerseygirlCT]

23. LOL. Don't much love meat, but don't love many veggies, either

alas.

Now dairy products and bread, I could live on happily.

[alfredo]

11. Read Michael Pollan's "In defense of Food." 000.

[Jed Dilligan]

12. It's how we raise the meat, not meat itself

When people confuse their (personal) moral with (universal) environmental issues, it doesn't help sway public opinion.

[JCMach1]

15. Dead on with that statement...

you will pry the meat from my cold dead hands...!

[NorthernSpy]

18. THANK you!

When people confuse their (personal) moral with (universal) environmental issues, it doesn't help sway public opinion.

:applause:

[yewberry]

21. The author isn't vegetarian; the article isn't personal. nt

[Gormy Cuss]

27. It's both how we raise it and the level of consumption.

A change in both would do the world a lot of good. Massive pig farms raising product that will travel a thousand miles before it reaches the table isn't the best we can do. Grain-fed cattle should be eating grass for at least part of their diet. Chickens should be scratching for food with only grain supplements.

On consumption: a 20 ounce steak or half a chicken is not one serving, yet many restaurants present them as such. Half as much of each would still be a generous portion.

[trotsky]

28. Precisely.

I've been buying beef in 1/8 cow packages from a local farmer for a couple of years now. Grass-fed, anti-biotic free. Costs a bit more but it's almost negligible when you buy in bulk like that. And as an added bonus, the meat is far superior to anything in a grocery store. And healthier too.

[NorthernSpy]

19. buying only organic meat usually leads to reduced meat consumption...

... because it's more expensive.

You find yourself stretching meals with vegetables, mushrooms, beans, nuts, tofu, and/or seitan -- all of which are much cheaper per pound than organic meat.


In terms of quality protein and other nutrients, flavor, and satisfaction, there is no really good substitute for meat. Been there, done that already.

But that doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of other foods that can synergize with meat in many dishes. There are, and they're all perfectly good foods in their own right -- they just aren't convincing "substitutes" for meat.

[JerseygirlCT]

22. Seems counter-productive to subsidize the stuff.

It's not a necessity.

And I'm not a veggie. I do eat some poultry and seafood. (Red meat doesn't agree with me at all). But we would be better off in many ways if the expectation wasn't that every meal be based around meat.

[Iktomiwicasa]

29. "Vegetarian" :

Ancient native word that means "lousy hunter" :D

Seriously, though, I eat alot of meat, but 95% of it is wild game that I kill myself. It's the commercially raised crap meat that's unhealthful.