Is it better for the environment if I choose to be a vegetarian?

[munkyforce]

First of all, humans actually aren't meant to eat animals, our body doesn't even digest meat, it literally rots in out stomach for about a week before it breaks down enough for our system to handle it. The average human body has an extra 7-10 pounds of rotting meat in our systems at any given time.
Secondly, what SmilingKitsune said is correct, killing cows produces a LOT of Methane into our air, the top methane producers are slaughter farms and garbage dumps.
Raising cows is also difficult, they pollute the land win their excess (poop and peepee, kiddies) and if it is not properly cared for, then it seeps through the ground and into water sources. Now, that takes alot of excretion to happen, but thankfully, mass cow farms have more then enough cattle to speed up the process. This isn't a problem, if only the farmers could properly clean up the farmland, but it is just too hard with so many cows and land, so it is often done not to standard, or not at all.
Just a random fact, if every one had 1 day a week that they didn't eat meat products, it would be the same as if around 15 million cars weren't running for that day.

I'm not a vegetarian, so please don't start saying I am, I just eat organically grown food. Less pollution, no chemicals used, and I never liked the fact that my cows were beefed up on steroids anyways.

I agree with you that the production of meat products do have an impact on the environment, however organically grown food also has the potential for detrimental environmental impact as well. As long as the organic food industry is small in scale it is better for the environment, the problem is that organic crops are low yield. Because of the low yield, to be able to match the output of intensive farming methods large areas of land would have to be cleared destroying habitats in the process.

When it comes to agriculture it's a bit of a catch 22. You wind up having an adverse impact on the environment no matter what you do. I guess the best we can do at the moment is try to find ways to minimise the impact.

 

[Biek]

First of all, humans actually aren't meant to eat animals,

There are estimate 30,000 year old ancient cave drawings that prove your statement wrong.

 

[tenny20ca]

No, can't see any obvious benefits

Food chain and eating animals is a natural thing. Unless you are eating humans, then it's not a natural thing.

Why wouldn't that be natural? Quite a few animals eat their own species, even some apes do.

The problem with canibalism (besides the moral issues) is Creutzfeldt?Jakob disease, and many others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creutzfeldt-Jakob_disease#Causes

But meat in general is part of a healthy lifestyle. You can be a vegetarian and be healthy, over 2/3rds of the worlds population can't afford to eat meat.

I'm not sure of the enviromental impacts, most live stock produce greenhouse gasses (as we all do) but the land the graze on normally requires no pesticides.

 

[Hawgh]

Well, all in all it takes a vastly greater amount of time and resources to produce meat compared to produce such as wheat and potatoes. Of course, cattle leavings contains a lot of stuff which improves plant growth, I don't know the degree to which this nullifies the extra food used to raise the cattle in the first place.
As such, it'd put less of a strain on the system as a whole if no meat was produced for consumption.
On the other hand, bacon tastes frickin' fantastic.
There is also the matter of the number of species' that'd be exterminated if farmers couldn't make money raising them.

 

[Jandau]

1. The amount of square kilometers needed to feed livestock in sufficient amount to feed X number of people is far greater than the amount of square kilometers needed to grow sufficient plant-based food to feed the same X number of people. As the number of people on the planet grows, we will have less and less space and require more and more food. Meat will have to become a smaller part of the average diet as time passes simply because it's inefficient to produce it.

2. Greenhouse gasses from massive amounts of livestock is also a consideration as others have pointed out.

3. Cruelty deserves a mention, even if many people don't consider it worth a thought.

4. As for the nutritionistic side of the argument, there is NOTHING in meat that can't be found elsewhere. The common example are essential aminoacids that most people ingest through meat, but they are also found in plants. However, meat is in many parts of the world the most readily available source of certain nutrients, and there are also cultural considerations to take into account.

Personally, I'm partially vegetarian. My regular daily diet includes no meat of any kind. Occasionally (about once or twice a week) I eat fish or chicken. I avoid red meat since it's not worth the health downsides.

As for the human population as a whole, it will become neccessary to reduce the intake of meat and replace it with plant-based food. I'm not saying meat should be removed completely, but it will need to be reduced, mostly for reasons 1. & 2. that I listed earlier.

 

[jakkuss]

What about the issue of feeding a cow? In order to come up with a pound of cow you would need to feed said cow many times more pounds of veg or grain. It takes roughly ten acres of grain to produce the same amount of food in beef as one acre of grain would produce in bread. Not necessarily 'bad' for the environment but extremely inefficient. Now there are areas where terrain and vegetation make ranching the more efficient method, but in reality the great majority of beef is not free range but rather fed from crops grown specifically for the feedlot. We could feed a lot more people if we took meat off the menu.

 

[bikeninja]

Okay, I don't want to get into another huge argument on the internet about really stupid things, so I'm just going to post some facts if anyone is interested in learning a little, and call it a day. My girlfriend remembered these as I wasposting here
-It takes 15 times more water to produce 1kg of beef then it does 1kg of grain
-Agriculture is one of the leading causes of greenhouse gasses
-eating meatless and dairyless for one day reduces your carbon footprint more than eating organic and local for a month
-the amount of energy consumed to produce 1 pound of beef is the same amount of energy consumed by a family of four in a month
-there have been inconclusive studies on the part of soy industries to try to prove that soy can lower risk of cancer, there have also been inconclusive studies on the part of dairy industries to try to prove that soy increases risk of cancer
-all in all, soy is simply better than dairy because it has the same amount of protein and none of the cholesterol
-it's better for the soil, not just the environment, to grow foods organically, and studies have shown that organic foods nowadays do have enough yield to be able to sustain our population

And finally, to Biek:
"There are estimate 30,000 year old ancient cave drawings that prove your statement wrong." in this day and age where humanity has grown to such advancements in technology and global awareness, to argue that we should take example from our neanderthal ancestors is also suggesting that we go back to wearing loinclothes and flinging shit at each other

 

[mr mcshiznit]

Its actually very good for the envr. See if you dont eat meat you dont lose energy from the trophic lvles. energy transfer is crazy inefficient, you lose 90% of your energy when you go from say grasses to herbivores, then from those to animals who consume meat.

 

[Seldon2639]

Not saying i intend to, but the topic came up in school but we never really got around to discussing it, so i would like to know what you guys think, and also if i could get some sources that would be cool too, because i have a feeling this might end up being a project.

There are two parts of the possible benefit, neither of which are particularly reasonable. The first is that you could reduce the amount of effort and resources (and hence pollution) that go into your food. If you eat locally grown produce, rather than meat, there'd be less transportation.

Admittedly, organic farming is actually unsustainable (it could only support about 4 billion people, out of the 6 billion we have on the planet). But, you could try to reduce the emissions from trucks. But, not really, and more on this in a second.

The other choice would be that you could reduce the number of cows raised. Less demand should mean less supply, meaning fewer cows.

Now, it's time for me to do the "fungible commodity" dance. The steps are that I refuse to pay for something, so someone else buys it. Even if you buy local produce, the produce from other states will be transported. Same thing with meat. Whether *you* eat meat or not, the meat that's already going to be made has already been born, and is being raised. Those cows will die either way, and will be made into meat. That meat will be shipped to stores. Either you buy it, someone else does, or it goes to waste. It will not effect how many cows exist, or are slaughtered.

 

[asinann]

We have large herds of cattle that create a ton of environmental problems and unless a massive percentage of people stop eating meat, you aren't going to help the environment at all.

Plus, meat tastes like murder, and murder is damn tasty.

4. As for the nutritionistic side of the argument, there is NOTHING in meat that can't be found elsewhere. The common example are essential aminoacids that most people ingest through meat, but they are also found in plants. However, meat is in many parts of the world the most readily available source of certain nutrients, and there are also cultural considerations to take into account.

And as to that, most amino acids are called (see omega-3, they can add it to things, but it has to be gotten from somewhere)fatty acids for a reason: they are found in the fatty tissues of animals.

Honestly, it doesn't matter whether or not you go veggie (and you will look very sickly if you do it, I've never seen a healthy or healthy looking vegetarian)to the environment. Most people will continue eating meat, so the space needed for livestock is still there.
I say if you enjoy meat, eat it, if not, then don't.

And don't rub vegetarian lifestyles in people's faces or try to convert people: we might decide to turn cannibal, you are grain fed.

 

[sprout]

Yes. Takes a lot of resources to grow livestock for their meat. Wild fish are an exception of course. But you don't have to go all out vegetarian to help. Just reduce how much meat you eat and maybe go meatless on one or two days a week.

exactly.

 

[KeiraZodiac]

I read somewhere that being a vegetarian would be more conservative and better for the environment then all the recycling stuff we're trying to do

if only I could remember which website I read that piece of news fluff...

 

[Doomdiver]

I read somewhere that being a vegetarian would be more conservative and better for the environment then all the recycling stuff we're trying to do

if only I could remember which website I read that piece of news fluff...

I'm guessing that would be referring to energy conservation... Basicaly energy from food is at its peak in plants. Once these plants get eaten the energy is used by the animal to move, respire etc. So in turn eating the meat from this animal you would be getting less energy than if you ate the plant in the first place. Sorry if I didn't explain that too well, twas all learnt back in GCSE biology.

Anyway just to be clear I'm not vegetarian, I see nothing wrong with it unless the decision is forced upon the person, however I do eat meat much less than the average person.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

It might be, but I have my doubts. I have to ask how any (potential) minor environmental benefits make a compelling case for radically altering one's diet. I would have to imagine such life altering decisions are generally based on a sturdier foundation if they are to last.

 

[Biek]

Okay, I don't want to get into another huge argument on the internet about really stupid things, so I'm just going to post some facts if anyone is interested in learning a little, and call it a day. My girlfriend remembered these as I wasposting here
-It takes 15 times more water to produce 1kg of beef then it does 1kg of grain
-Agriculture is one of the leading causes of greenhouse gasses
-eating meatless and dairyless for one day reduces your carbon footprint more than eating organic and local for a month
-the amount of energy consumed to produce 1 pound of beef is the same amount of energy consumed by a family of four in a month
-there have been inconclusive studies on the part of soy industries to try to prove that soy can lower risk of cancer, there have also been inconclusive studies on the part of dairy industries to try to prove that soy increases risk of cancer
-all in all, soy is simply better than dairy because it has the same amount of protein and none of the cholesterol
-it's better for the soil, not just the environment, to grow foods organically, and studies have shown that organic foods nowadays do have enough yield to be able to sustain our population

And finally, to Biek:
"There are estimate 30,000 year old ancient cave drawings that prove your statement wrong." in this day and age where humanity has grown to such advancements in technology and global awareness, to argue that we should take example from our neanderthal ancestors is also suggesting that we go back to wearing loinclothes and flinging shit at each other

Im not saying that we should carry clubs and wear loincloths. My example simply meant that that is the oldest possible proof of your ignorant statement being false.

 

[Lord_Ascendant]

i see no reason why not, go for it!

 

[CrazyBerk]

No because you are eating all the fucking plants.

 

[setsunafseiei]

No, despite the pro's and con's the supplements you would have to take to adjust for the lack of proteins, vitamins and minerals you get from eating meat. My friend became a vegetarian, her hair thinned out, her skin dried, nails became brittle, constantly getting colds, suffered with pimples and lack of energy. Been an exam year she gave up and went back to meat all because she didn't adjust her dietary needs properly.