So, on top of the GHG generated by the livestock themselves, which are large, as well as the GHG to generate fertilizer and grow the feedstock for livestock, the food we store for them also significantly generates GHG emissions?
It seems more and more like we might want to collectively reduce the amount of meat we're eating. I'm no vegan, but like, maybe eating meat only sometimes is a good idea. (Also, probably leads to less CAFOs and other questionably ethical practices if we, say, halve the amount of livestock we need.)
Is not just the meat industry. Dairy cows eat silage too.
Everything I know about silage I learned from watching 10th Generation Dairyman on YouTube. As somebody who loves learning about the tedious details of other people’s professions, I highly recommend this channel.
Ruminants can eat things that humans cannot eat or should not eat. Bacteria in the ruminant stomach can bio-hydrogenate the unsaturated oils in their feed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38437204
Dairy cows are an efficient means of converting calories into a form that humans can use.
If you grow food for humans you always produce some waste that can be eaten by animals. The levels of animal husbandry you can sustain with that water are of course an order of magnitude or two lower than what we have today
It depends. Cattle grazing allows for use of land that would be otherwise unsuitable for agriculture. On the other hand, for land that would be suitable for agriculture, you're right that you'll get more output calories per area without having cows involved.
Well maybe - but what percentage of a typical "grass fed" cow's calories are from the feedlot they spend the last N months of their lives in (where they are fattened up)? If humans eating plant derived food is 5x more efficient that using it to raise meat is (from memory this is low), then for your argument to carry weight, we'd want > 80%. How common is that?
Good luck with trying to persuade farmers to apply that additive.
Unkess there’s something in it for them that they can’t get by just claiming they’re applying the additive, farmers won’t do it.
There is no industry in the world more allergic to regulation than farming, despite the fact that most of themp farmers in the developed world (and much of the developing world) are heavily subsidised by the city dwellers they complain about.
If the additive actually reduces greenhouse gas emissions, and there is a working emissions trading system anywhere in the world, and the additive costs less to use than the reduction times the current carbon price, they could get paid for applying the additive.
Next step, make it legally required to apply the additive. Like filters in chimneys, catalytic converters in cars, etc. and have fines attached to not using it.
If that doesn’t work, increase fines and/or add criminal charges and prison.
Sadly, I predict that even when faced with these facts, people will continue to increase their meat consumption over the coming years, as the current trend shows no signs of stopping.
It's also unlikely the government would touch this issue with a ten-foot pole; Imagine the nonstop, angry calls a congressperson's office would be flooded with for even suggesting the most mild of regulations for beef consumption.
The trend will continue until 100% of Earth's arable land is used for growing food for humans and their cattle (I heard it's currently around 70%) and then the poorest people will be culled so the richer people can have even more meat.
This is a tempting story to believe, but the actual trend is that global agricultural land use is almost flat over the past 30 years and land under cultivation per capita is decreasing almost everywhere due to improved yields [1].
That's actually incredible - and it has just barely grown since the 60s, when we had just 3 billion people. That means we can now feed nearly 3x the humans on virtually the same amount of land. That's fantastic, I had no idea the efficiencies had been that significant.
Back in the 1800’s people linearly extrapolated farmland usage, and concluded we’d run out in the early 1900’s.
It was about as ridiculous as the degrowth movement is today. Improving efficiency and decreasing environmental impact is almost always a better bet than embracing artificial scarcity.
I try to just buy one or two really nice porkchops or chicken legs quarters from the farmer's market now and then and cook veg most other nights at home. It's nice to eat meat rarely enough that it's a splurge and a treat when we do, and the animals do live significantly better.
The fact that you have to preface with "I'm no vegan" really sums up the entire issue of centuries-long commercial propaganda on behalf of the meat and dairy industry. Americans eat way, way too much meat and anyone who tells them to cut back is a dirty vegan. These companies don't just sell meat, but an ideology and lifestyle to boot.
As an example, I was in Florida a few months ago and my girlfriend and I casually mention that we were making a salad for dinner after someone asked about our dinner plans. Their immediate response was defensive, saying, "Are you one of them vegans? Well, we only eat meat around these parts" and proceeded to tell us all about these great deals on meat at a local store, thinking that we'd hear those prices and be unable to resist and start eating meat.
Just because we mentioned a salad, his manufactured, mass-produced opinion was that we must be vegan. We're not. She's vegetarian, I'm pescatarion, but the difference is immaterial to a meat addict who's been sold a crusade.
It's the same story with our country's cult-like addiction to alcohol. Every time I go out and don't drink, I have to explain to people that I'm not a teetotaler, and have to explain the foreign concept of moderation. They get defensive and try to get me to drink anyway, because if I don't, they're forced to reckon with their own lifestyle choices of excess. Exact same issue with our meat consumption.
> Americans eat way, way too much meat and anyone who tells them to cut back is a dirty vegan
Its not like "greed for meat", its also cultural preference (meat was a "whenever you can, if you can afford it" food for centuries), and also the cheapness and readiness of meat as a ready-to-eat food relative to vegetables. Burgers and hot dogs require a lot fewer steps to cook them than almost anything with vegetables, and they're usually about as expensive.
Whens the last time you saw a vegetable other than lettuce at a fast food place? There's not a lot of ready veggies, and they don't keep very well.
Meat honestly sucks as a thing for the world though - way more land, have to grow massive amounts of grain. I reduced most of my meat consumption to eat better, but it does require more effort, or more money for restaurants and takeout for convenience.
> Whens the last time you saw a vegetable other than lettuce at a fast food place?
I travel a lot and the answer to that qestion is pretty much all day every day in countries outside the UK | US ( and even so the UK has a wealth of not meat options in various districts ).
FWiW I eat meat in an least one meal every week, the point being made is that eating meat, a lot of meat, daily meat, is something that's baked into certain cultures and goes a long way to explaining how it is that in your particular bubble you just don't see not meat food options as being either quick or readily available from vendors.
> Burgers and hot dogs require a lot fewer steps to cook them than almost anything with vegetables
You can take just about any vegetable, add salt and pepper and oil, and shove it in the oven, cook it on the stove, boil it, etc... and many vegetables can be eaten raw. Unless you're referring to nuking hot dogs in the microwave, meat and vegetables require the same amount of effort, whatever you're willing to put in.
When I ate steak, my vegetables would cook in the same exact pan, with the same seasonings, for the same amount of time (if you like medium-rare, though personally I ate my steaks blue)
In many cases, probably most, a vegetarian meal is easier to prepare than a burger. And from a health perspective, burgers and hotdogs should not be a daily diet anyway.
> There's not a lot of ready veggies, and they don't keep very well.
Plenty vegetables keep just as long as meat, if you keep them in the same conditions, whether refrigerated or frozen. I've been employed as a cook, waiter, organic farmer, ready-made meal prepper, you name it, I have enough experience in the industry at all verticals that I can definitively tell you that many staple vegetables keep just fine in the period of time between food deliveries.
In the case of ready-made meals, on average, our vegetarian dishes were easier and quicker to prepare, afforded us more versatility in meal designing while keeping prep simple, and they lasted just as long if not longer than meat-oriented meals in our stores.
What I'm really seeing here, and please take no offense, is projection on your part onto the culinary economics of today's world. In fact, many cultures eat primarily vegetarian dishes, and will be the first to tell you how economic and efficient their meals are.
I urge you to reconsider your views as my industry experience, and the experiences of many non-American cultures, simply does not match up with what you're saying. It's good to reduce your meat intake, but spreading this kinds of misinformation about vegetables, even if unintentional, is harmful to the overall goal of reducing our national meat consumption.
> You can take just about any vegetable, add salt and pepper and oil, and shove it in the oven
I eat a lot of vegetables and I want to encourage people to eat them, but I think you’re over-selling it.
You can literally grab a hunk of 80% ground beef, slap it on a hot skillet, smash it, flip it once, and it’s done. Sprinkle a little salt and that’s a very tasty very easy to eat very nutritionally complete food.
Same is true for eggs and a handful of other non-vegan things.
Vegetables are just not the same. I am a pretty lazy cook and still, if I want to cook broccoli I need to get out a cutting board, chop it, throw away the parts that are too tough to eat, then put oil in the hot pan, add the broccoli, turning it several times so it cooks evenly. I’m probably putting a lid on at some point, and/or adding a little water.
It actually requires quite a bit of finesse to end up with broccoli that’s as easy to eat as a burger.
And that’s not a complete meal. You could live off plain burger patties but not plain broccoli. So you’re going to have to add some other stuff: nuts and grains, rice and beans, etc.
And I wouldn’t say any of that is hard but I think we need to be honest about the effort involved. It doesn’t solve anything to pretend it’s easy and then have people give try it and get completely lost.
> You can literally grab a hunk of 80% ground beef, slap it on a hot skillet, smash it, flip it once, and it’s done. Sprinkle a little salt and that’s a very tasty very easy to eat very nutritionally complete food.
This is what I do with several vegetables, and many more after simply cutting off the stalk/hard bits on one side. That takes about two seconds, and takes as much time as forming a patty from ground beef. I'm not overselling it, I'm not selling anything, I'm describing my own experiences. For example I don't turn or otherwise manage my broccoli any more than I would an egg or steak. If anything, I spend more time tending to an egg than I do any of the vegetables I cook along with it.
> It actually requires quite a bit of finesse to end up with broccoli that’s as easy to eat as a burger.
I disagree. Cut once at the base, drop them in an oiled pan, season and cook, shaking the pan every few minutes. Bon appétit, I do this on a weekly basis. I don't even blanch. I do this with most vegetables that I cook as sides.
> And that’s not a complete meal. You could live off plain burger patties but not plain broccoli
That's a straw man. The argument has never been you should only live off of one vegetable, that's preposterous. Eat a variety of greens, and if you're a vegetarian, make sure to eat lots of legumes, hemp, etc. I personally use a mix of pea and hemp protein, both of which are complete proteins and roughly mimic the composition of whey when I mix them. It takes two seconds to dump this protein into a smoothie.
> And I wouldn’t say any of that is hard but I think we need to be honest about the effort involved
Cooking vegetables is incredibly low-effort, it just sounds like you aren't used to it. Many cultures outside the US are, however. You're also downplaying all of the downsides that come from a meat-centric diet. I don't know how we can have an honest conversation about "overselling" things when you're also overselling things in return.
Your idea of effort, being someone who has worked as a cook and as a ready to eat meal food prepper, may have you be mistaken as to the ease relative to some populations cooking ability. Most people I know never get past sheet pan roasting and rarely do much more, and many others do not cook outside convenience food at all.
I cook 2-3 meals a day. I incorporate a lot of veggies. Days that I eat meat are easier if I want a decently balanced meal. I’ve eaten vegetarian for half a year. I’ve eaten vegan for a month, done a few whole 30s. I’m no slouch in the kitchen, but I also have to cook for people with autism and a lot of texture icks. I’ve taken cooking courses in Thailand. For me, veggie based meals that are healthy and have enough protein are often more effort and time than a plate of chicken nuggets and roasted veggies and similar ilk.
Your comment comes off as extraordinarily defensive and projective.
> oh, so you are "one of those"
It starts off here, immediately from a judgemental and pompous position. You immediately generalize me, then project several ideas and behaviors onto both me and the people I interact with.
> You even have paragraphs about how vegetables and meat are basically the same in every way - except for flavor, nutrition, taste, enjoyment
Reread the comment. I and the other commenter were discussing preparation time, and only preparation time and shelf-life. Please do not project a straw man argument onto me, I said nothing regarding flavor, nutrition, taste or enjoyment or them being "the same in every way".
But since you bring it up, I do love the flavor of many vegetables, I can get my full proteins and nutrition from plant sources, and I enjoy cooking and eating them.
> P.S. Fishing is destroying massive amounts of ecosystems, too.
Absolutely! And we should also severely limit our fish intake. I see that you're trying to justify your own lifestyle by attempting to point out hypocrisy within mine, however your assumptions about my diet are flawed.
> Might be time to bite the bullet and just do veganism. Then you can lord over the lowly cheese eaters and pescos.
And the grand stroke, in which you proved yourself to be exactly the kind of ignorant, judgemental person I just described, who gets defensive and triggered over conversations about reducing meat intake. Please keep your generalizations to yourself.
I latched on to your response to this, and pointing out your words are why people think you're "one of them vegans". the key word in that is "them", or as i used it, "those."
The interesting thing, here, is: the only thing you know about me is that i avoid alcohol. and you ascribe a lot of things to me based on the fact that i caught on to your demeanor. Yeah, i was a bit caustic. I don't know that it matters, though, it seems like you're used to it.
And you mentioned storage (in the GP), and how "we shouldn't be eating [meat] daily anyhow" (in this comment), and we should "severely limit fish intake." I'm sure if prodded you can rattle off the 15 plants that give 90% of all the nutritional value humans need (as can i, but that's neither here nor there.) And then taste and nutrition is mentioned in this comment as well. It's not like i can predict the future, i've just heard this all before.
I'm just giving back to you the same judgemental claptrap that i read in your first comment, and now subsequent one as well.
Again, you don't know anything about me or my diet or ideology. But I know yours. It's funny how that works.
> Again, you don't know anything about me or my diet or ideology
Nor did I make a claim as to any aspect of your lifestyle.
> you ascribe a lot of things to me based on the fact that i caught on to your demeanor
I'd ask you to point out examples, but you clearly have no interest in a serious discussion. You came here to derail the discussion, apply ad hominem, attempt (and fail) to point out hypocrisy, introduce straw man arguments, generalize against me and vegans, and much more. In short, you're just looking to insult a group of people.
There is no benefit for me to continue engaging with such an obvious, low-effort comment. If you had any intention of having a fruitful discussion, you would have approached this much differently. You should have more respect for this community and the values it wishes to uphold when engaging in online discussion.
1. I made no comment as to your lifestyle, only that I recognize your attempt to justify whatever it is, which again I did not specify, by attempting to zero in on a perceived hypocrisy. Whether or not you understand your behavior to be defensive is none of my concern.
2. At no time did I say that meat eaters are brainwashed. This is a straw man argument from you.
What I said was that America eats far, far too much meat, and that is objectively true based on certain indicators such as the effect of the scale of our industrial farming on the climate or animal welfare. If hearing this triggers you, it says more about yourself than anyone else. Facts don't care about your feelings, I'm sorry.
If that's all you had to cherry-pick from my last comment, then I think we're done here. Please stop trying to extend this argument.
So, on top of the GHG generated by the livestock themselves, which are large, as well as the GHG to generate fertilizer and grow the feedstock for livestock, the food we store for them also significantly generates GHG emissions?
It seems more and more like we might want to collectively reduce the amount of meat we're eating. I'm no vegan, but like, maybe eating meat only sometimes is a good idea. (Also, probably leads to less CAFOs and other questionably ethical practices if we, say, halve the amount of livestock we need.)
Is not just the meat industry. Dairy cows eat silage too.
Everything I know about silage I learned from watching 10th Generation Dairyman on YouTube. As somebody who loves learning about the tedious details of other people’s professions, I highly recommend this channel.
https://youtube.com/@10thgenerationdairyman61
Ruminants can eat things that humans cannot eat or should not eat. Bacteria in the ruminant stomach can bio-hydrogenate the unsaturated oils in their feed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38437204
Dairy cows are an efficient means of converting calories into a form that humans can use.
Thanks for the youtube channel link.
It is still less efficient that growing food humans can use directly
If you grow food for humans you always produce some waste that can be eaten by animals. The levels of animal husbandry you can sustain with that water are of course an order of magnitude or two lower than what we have today
It depends. Cattle grazing allows for use of land that would be otherwise unsuitable for agriculture. On the other hand, for land that would be suitable for agriculture, you're right that you'll get more output calories per area without having cows involved.
Well maybe - but what percentage of a typical "grass fed" cow's calories are from the feedlot they spend the last N months of their lives in (where they are fattened up)? If humans eating plant derived food is 5x more efficient that using it to raise meat is (from memory this is low), then for your argument to carry weight, we'd want > 80%. How common is that?
Why should this be the takeaway from the paper, as opposed to the fact that an additive to the silage can reduce N2O emissions by up to 99%?
Good luck with trying to persuade farmers to apply that additive.
Unkess there’s something in it for them that they can’t get by just claiming they’re applying the additive, farmers won’t do it.
There is no industry in the world more allergic to regulation than farming, despite the fact that most of themp farmers in the developed world (and much of the developing world) are heavily subsidised by the city dwellers they complain about.
If the additive actually reduces greenhouse gas emissions, and there is a working emissions trading system anywhere in the world, and the additive costs less to use than the reduction times the current carbon price, they could get paid for applying the additive.
They could also get paid to apply the additive and not bother.
Precisely, and a substantial fraction of farmers wouldn’t bother.
Next step, make it legally required to apply the additive. Like filters in chimneys, catalytic converters in cars, etc. and have fines attached to not using it.
If that doesn’t work, increase fines and/or add criminal charges and prison.
Why not put the additive in the feed at the factory that produces it?
Sadly, I predict that even when faced with these facts, people will continue to increase their meat consumption over the coming years, as the current trend shows no signs of stopping.
It's also unlikely the government would touch this issue with a ten-foot pole; Imagine the nonstop, angry calls a congressperson's office would be flooded with for even suggesting the most mild of regulations for beef consumption.
The trend will continue until 100% of Earth's arable land is used for growing food for humans and their cattle (I heard it's currently around 70%) and then the poorest people will be culled so the richer people can have even more meat.
This is a tempting story to believe, but the actual trend is that global agricultural land use is almost flat over the past 30 years and land under cultivation per capita is decreasing almost everywhere due to improved yields [1].
[1] https://ourworldindata.org/land-use
That's actually incredible - and it has just barely grown since the 60s, when we had just 3 billion people. That means we can now feed nearly 3x the humans on virtually the same amount of land. That's fantastic, I had no idea the efficiencies had been that significant.
Back in the 1800’s people linearly extrapolated farmland usage, and concluded we’d run out in the early 1900’s.
It was about as ridiculous as the degrowth movement is today. Improving efficiency and decreasing environmental impact is almost always a better bet than embracing artificial scarcity.
It is probably good news, but to be fair land use and GHG emissions are not the same thing, especially given that fertilizers are involved.
I try to just buy one or two really nice porkchops or chicken legs quarters from the farmer's market now and then and cook veg most other nights at home. It's nice to eat meat rarely enough that it's a splurge and a treat when we do, and the animals do live significantly better.
it certainly isn't an exercise for every meal. meat should be a delicacy, but we've turned it into a product and commodity.
The fact that you have to preface with "I'm no vegan" really sums up the entire issue of centuries-long commercial propaganda on behalf of the meat and dairy industry. Americans eat way, way too much meat and anyone who tells them to cut back is a dirty vegan. These companies don't just sell meat, but an ideology and lifestyle to boot.
As an example, I was in Florida a few months ago and my girlfriend and I casually mention that we were making a salad for dinner after someone asked about our dinner plans. Their immediate response was defensive, saying, "Are you one of them vegans? Well, we only eat meat around these parts" and proceeded to tell us all about these great deals on meat at a local store, thinking that we'd hear those prices and be unable to resist and start eating meat.
Just because we mentioned a salad, his manufactured, mass-produced opinion was that we must be vegan. We're not. She's vegetarian, I'm pescatarion, but the difference is immaterial to a meat addict who's been sold a crusade.
It's the same story with our country's cult-like addiction to alcohol. Every time I go out and don't drink, I have to explain to people that I'm not a teetotaler, and have to explain the foreign concept of moderation. They get defensive and try to get me to drink anyway, because if I don't, they're forced to reckon with their own lifestyle choices of excess. Exact same issue with our meat consumption.
> Americans eat way, way too much meat and anyone who tells them to cut back is a dirty vegan
Its not like "greed for meat", its also cultural preference (meat was a "whenever you can, if you can afford it" food for centuries), and also the cheapness and readiness of meat as a ready-to-eat food relative to vegetables. Burgers and hot dogs require a lot fewer steps to cook them than almost anything with vegetables, and they're usually about as expensive.
Whens the last time you saw a vegetable other than lettuce at a fast food place? There's not a lot of ready veggies, and they don't keep very well.
Meat honestly sucks as a thing for the world though - way more land, have to grow massive amounts of grain. I reduced most of my meat consumption to eat better, but it does require more effort, or more money for restaurants and takeout for convenience.
> Whens the last time you saw a vegetable other than lettuce at a fast food place?
I travel a lot and the answer to that qestion is pretty much all day every day in countries outside the UK | US ( and even so the UK has a wealth of not meat options in various districts ).
FWiW I eat meat in an least one meal every week, the point being made is that eating meat, a lot of meat, daily meat, is something that's baked into certain cultures and goes a long way to explaining how it is that in your particular bubble you just don't see not meat food options as being either quick or readily available from vendors.
> Burgers and hot dogs require a lot fewer steps to cook them than almost anything with vegetables
LOL maybe for ready-to cook meat / raw vegetable, but let’s compare:
frozzen broccolis, canned beans, dry nuts, seeds, ready-cut-carrot-sticks…
With: whole chicken, lamb full leg, fresh fish with organs and bones, beefs parts that need 90min cooking…
> Burgers and hot dogs require a lot fewer steps to cook them than almost anything with vegetables
You can take just about any vegetable, add salt and pepper and oil, and shove it in the oven, cook it on the stove, boil it, etc... and many vegetables can be eaten raw. Unless you're referring to nuking hot dogs in the microwave, meat and vegetables require the same amount of effort, whatever you're willing to put in.
When I ate steak, my vegetables would cook in the same exact pan, with the same seasonings, for the same amount of time (if you like medium-rare, though personally I ate my steaks blue)
In many cases, probably most, a vegetarian meal is easier to prepare than a burger. And from a health perspective, burgers and hotdogs should not be a daily diet anyway.
> There's not a lot of ready veggies, and they don't keep very well.
Plenty vegetables keep just as long as meat, if you keep them in the same conditions, whether refrigerated or frozen. I've been employed as a cook, waiter, organic farmer, ready-made meal prepper, you name it, I have enough experience in the industry at all verticals that I can definitively tell you that many staple vegetables keep just fine in the period of time between food deliveries.
In the case of ready-made meals, on average, our vegetarian dishes were easier and quicker to prepare, afforded us more versatility in meal designing while keeping prep simple, and they lasted just as long if not longer than meat-oriented meals in our stores.
What I'm really seeing here, and please take no offense, is projection on your part onto the culinary economics of today's world. In fact, many cultures eat primarily vegetarian dishes, and will be the first to tell you how economic and efficient their meals are.
I urge you to reconsider your views as my industry experience, and the experiences of many non-American cultures, simply does not match up with what you're saying. It's good to reduce your meat intake, but spreading this kinds of misinformation about vegetables, even if unintentional, is harmful to the overall goal of reducing our national meat consumption.
> You can take just about any vegetable, add salt and pepper and oil, and shove it in the oven
I eat a lot of vegetables and I want to encourage people to eat them, but I think you’re over-selling it.
You can literally grab a hunk of 80% ground beef, slap it on a hot skillet, smash it, flip it once, and it’s done. Sprinkle a little salt and that’s a very tasty very easy to eat very nutritionally complete food.
Same is true for eggs and a handful of other non-vegan things.
Vegetables are just not the same. I am a pretty lazy cook and still, if I want to cook broccoli I need to get out a cutting board, chop it, throw away the parts that are too tough to eat, then put oil in the hot pan, add the broccoli, turning it several times so it cooks evenly. I’m probably putting a lid on at some point, and/or adding a little water.
It actually requires quite a bit of finesse to end up with broccoli that’s as easy to eat as a burger.
And that’s not a complete meal. You could live off plain burger patties but not plain broccoli. So you’re going to have to add some other stuff: nuts and grains, rice and beans, etc.
And I wouldn’t say any of that is hard but I think we need to be honest about the effort involved. It doesn’t solve anything to pretend it’s easy and then have people give try it and get completely lost.
> You can literally grab a hunk of 80% ground beef, slap it on a hot skillet, smash it, flip it once, and it’s done. Sprinkle a little salt and that’s a very tasty very easy to eat very nutritionally complete food.
This is what I do with several vegetables, and many more after simply cutting off the stalk/hard bits on one side. That takes about two seconds, and takes as much time as forming a patty from ground beef. I'm not overselling it, I'm not selling anything, I'm describing my own experiences. For example I don't turn or otherwise manage my broccoli any more than I would an egg or steak. If anything, I spend more time tending to an egg than I do any of the vegetables I cook along with it.
> It actually requires quite a bit of finesse to end up with broccoli that’s as easy to eat as a burger.
I disagree. Cut once at the base, drop them in an oiled pan, season and cook, shaking the pan every few minutes. Bon appétit, I do this on a weekly basis. I don't even blanch. I do this with most vegetables that I cook as sides.
> And that’s not a complete meal. You could live off plain burger patties but not plain broccoli
That's a straw man. The argument has never been you should only live off of one vegetable, that's preposterous. Eat a variety of greens, and if you're a vegetarian, make sure to eat lots of legumes, hemp, etc. I personally use a mix of pea and hemp protein, both of which are complete proteins and roughly mimic the composition of whey when I mix them. It takes two seconds to dump this protein into a smoothie.
> And I wouldn’t say any of that is hard but I think we need to be honest about the effort involved
Cooking vegetables is incredibly low-effort, it just sounds like you aren't used to it. Many cultures outside the US are, however. You're also downplaying all of the downsides that come from a meat-centric diet. I don't know how we can have an honest conversation about "overselling" things when you're also overselling things in return.
Your idea of effort, being someone who has worked as a cook and as a ready to eat meal food prepper, may have you be mistaken as to the ease relative to some populations cooking ability. Most people I know never get past sheet pan roasting and rarely do much more, and many others do not cook outside convenience food at all.
I cook 2-3 meals a day. I incorporate a lot of veggies. Days that I eat meat are easier if I want a decently balanced meal. I’ve eaten vegetarian for half a year. I’ve eaten vegan for a month, done a few whole 30s. I’m no slouch in the kitchen, but I also have to cook for people with autism and a lot of texture icks. I’ve taken cooking courses in Thailand. For me, veggie based meals that are healthy and have enough protein are often more effort and time than a plate of chicken nuggets and roasted veggies and similar ilk.
[flagged]
> You exude this pompous ideological facade
Your comment comes off as extraordinarily defensive and projective.
> oh, so you are "one of those"
It starts off here, immediately from a judgemental and pompous position. You immediately generalize me, then project several ideas and behaviors onto both me and the people I interact with.
> You even have paragraphs about how vegetables and meat are basically the same in every way - except for flavor, nutrition, taste, enjoyment
Reread the comment. I and the other commenter were discussing preparation time, and only preparation time and shelf-life. Please do not project a straw man argument onto me, I said nothing regarding flavor, nutrition, taste or enjoyment or them being "the same in every way".
But since you bring it up, I do love the flavor of many vegetables, I can get my full proteins and nutrition from plant sources, and I enjoy cooking and eating them.
> P.S. Fishing is destroying massive amounts of ecosystems, too.
Absolutely! And we should also severely limit our fish intake. I see that you're trying to justify your own lifestyle by attempting to point out hypocrisy within mine, however your assumptions about my diet are flawed.
> Might be time to bite the bullet and just do veganism. Then you can lord over the lowly cheese eaters and pescos.
And the grand stroke, in which you proved yourself to be exactly the kind of ignorant, judgemental person I just described, who gets defensive and triggered over conversations about reducing meat intake. Please keep your generalizations to yourself.
What a disgusting comment.
> "Are you one of them vegans?"
I latched on to your response to this, and pointing out your words are why people think you're "one of them vegans". the key word in that is "them", or as i used it, "those."
The interesting thing, here, is: the only thing you know about me is that i avoid alcohol. and you ascribe a lot of things to me based on the fact that i caught on to your demeanor. Yeah, i was a bit caustic. I don't know that it matters, though, it seems like you're used to it.
And you mentioned storage (in the GP), and how "we shouldn't be eating [meat] daily anyhow" (in this comment), and we should "severely limit fish intake." I'm sure if prodded you can rattle off the 15 plants that give 90% of all the nutritional value humans need (as can i, but that's neither here nor there.) And then taste and nutrition is mentioned in this comment as well. It's not like i can predict the future, i've just heard this all before.
I'm just giving back to you the same judgemental claptrap that i read in your first comment, and now subsequent one as well.
Again, you don't know anything about me or my diet or ideology. But I know yours. It's funny how that works.
> Again, you don't know anything about me or my diet or ideology
Nor did I make a claim as to any aspect of your lifestyle.
> you ascribe a lot of things to me based on the fact that i caught on to your demeanor
I'd ask you to point out examples, but you clearly have no interest in a serious discussion. You came here to derail the discussion, apply ad hominem, attempt (and fail) to point out hypocrisy, introduce straw man arguments, generalize against me and vegans, and much more. In short, you're just looking to insult a group of people.
There is no benefit for me to continue engaging with such an obvious, low-effort comment. If you had any intention of having a fruitful discussion, you would have approached this much differently. You should have more respect for this community and the values it wishes to uphold when engaging in online discussion.
> Nor did I make a claim as to any aspect of your lifestyle.
>> I see that you're trying to justify your own lifestyle by attempting to point out hypocrisy within mine
/shrug
p.s. the "demeanor" includes playing victim to all the nasty brainwashed meat-eaters.
1. I made no comment as to your lifestyle, only that I recognize your attempt to justify whatever it is, which again I did not specify, by attempting to zero in on a perceived hypocrisy. Whether or not you understand your behavior to be defensive is none of my concern.
2. At no time did I say that meat eaters are brainwashed. This is a straw man argument from you.
What I said was that America eats far, far too much meat, and that is objectively true based on certain indicators such as the effect of the scale of our industrial farming on the climate or animal welfare. If hearing this triggers you, it says more about yourself than anyone else. Facts don't care about your feelings, I'm sorry.
If that's all you had to cherry-pick from my last comment, then I think we're done here. Please stop trying to extend this argument.
I will not live in the pod. I will not eat the bugs.
i know a few hippies who would take care of any nitrous oxide problem the world can throw at them lickety split
[dead]
[dead]
[flagged]
[flagged]