this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
549 points (75.9% liked)

Memes

45689 readers
569 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Vegoon@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What exactly do you think we should plan to do with all the grass and waste product currently being used in feeding animals?

Currently 75% of the product grown is for animal food. Grass fed is less than 10% even in the USA, and all give extra feed. Grass produces way more methane in ruminants compared to starch based feed like soy for which the rain forest is burned down.

and the massive inefficiencies that would introduce.

You know you need massive amounts of feed to others before you can kill them for your pleasure? We could feed 10 billion people with the product we grow right now. Instead we feed it other animals.

I argue it’s easier to find technologies that can mitigate and reverse emissions than it is to find technologies to let the world cut out meat entirely.

Others know it is not possible and act according: https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/01/31/china-includes-cultivated-meat-in-its-plan-for-the-future-of-food

https://www.iatp.org/ipcc-report-reveals-urgency-methane-reduction-need-reduce-industrial-agriculture

Which is absolutely your right. I have become convinced that my mixed diet leads to ultimately less death than a plant-based diet would

Explain that. A plant based diet uses less resources in every way. You don't think there are no animals killed for animal feed which is just a bad conversion of food, do you?

We all have a impact on the environment and on others, but acting worse than we have to because of a nirvana fallacy is not acceptable. While our impact on the future is hard to measure it is today when we decide to support killing and abuse or not.

[–] abraxas@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

Currently 75% of the product grown is for animal food.

You're representing false data and I have already cited proof otherwise. Show me a study or reference that says more than 20% of cow food is edible, or please stop replying to me.

Grass fed is less than 10% even in the USA, and all give extra feed

Grass-fed is the implication that cow ONLY eats grass. Per my cited data, 46% of all food eaten by livestock is grass and leaves. But animals that eat 46% grass and leaves are not considered "grass-fed". The term "grass-fed" requires the cow eat 100% forage after milk-weaning.. There is an ocean between being "Grass-fed" and "eating human-edible products". A cow that eats 0% edible products is still not "grass-fed" if they consume crop-residue.

Now that I have shown you actual facts, I'm going to find out if you're spreading propaganda or actually care about saying true things. AT this point, you HAVE TO KNOW that the idea 75% of crops is grown solely for animal food is fabricated. Only 36% of TOTAL crop calories (not even just edible calories) go to livestock, and a massive majority of that is inedibles.

So please, stop repeating lies that I have shown are wrong. If you can't defend veganism with the truth, stop defending to me.